final draft research paper

Jessica Crockett
12-05-09





“ I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all.” Who could say it better then Martin Luther King Jr. in the “Letter from Birmingham Jail”? He is know throughout history as the man who sparked the major civil right’s movements in the 1960’s. Martin Luther King was a law abiding citizen, but when necessary he greatly promoted civil disobedience to his followers. Civil disobedience has been used throughout history by many influential men such as Thoreau, Gandhi and King Jr. It has been used very creatively with many different tactics and outcomes. Civil disobedience is successful when trying to change a law or rule. It should be used today as we have seen through out history great changes being made when civil disobedience is used as a tactic.
Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey certain laws, demands and commands of a government, and willingly accepting responsibility of the consequences. It does not promote violence as a way of getting the desired outcome.
The man most famous for establishing civil disobedience is Henry David Thoreau. Thoreau was a New Englander who liked to read and write. While writing his famous book Walden he decided to isolate himself from society and move to a small cabin by a pond. While at the cabin a tax collector knocks on his door and declares that he must pay 6 years of back taxes. Thoreau had no intention of paying the taxes. He refused to pay because he knew the money would go to support slavery as well as the Mexican-American war, both of which he was opposed to. Since he would not pay, he was sent to jail. “He willingly accepted the consequence of his actions.” Said James J. Donahue in “Hardly the Voice of the Same Man: Civil Disobedience and Thoreau’s response to John Brown.” His aunt posted bail a few days later. He was very disappointed that he was released and his bail money would be aiding a cause he did not support. He would have preferred to serve his time in jail, how ever long that may be, than give support to something he so greatly opposed. Henry David Thoreau sent the perfect example of civil disobedience, and later wrote about his experience in his book, Walden, which is how so many others learned of him.
Mahatma Gandhi first read Walden in 1903 while working as a civil rights activist. His hope was to be free from British rule and make India a free country. He recommended Thoreau’s teaching to everyone involved in the cause of Indian Independence. The British were firm on keeping India as their territory, but the Indians were convinced that they would obtain their freedom, and with Gandhi’s support of civil disobedience, that was how they went about it.
The Indians had been purchasing their clothing from the British, so their first step was to start making their own clothing. Although Gandhi was a successful lawyer, he too made his own clothes, setting the example for the rest of the county to follow. It was not necessarily the law to purchase clothes from the British, but when they stopped they got the attention they were seeking. Unfortunately it was negative attention, as the British would not give them independence so easily.
The British passes a salt tax in India. Salt is naturally produced on the coast of India, but the Indians could no longer gather and sell the salt to one another. The salt tax forced the Indians to purchase salt from British merchants only. They completely monopolized the salt industry in India. Since salt is a necessary mineral in a diet, the Indians had no other choice then to buy the over priced, naturally produced salt from the British. Gandhi would not stand for this. He lead a group of men on a Salt March in 1930, to declare to the British that they would no longer be purchasing the salt from them, and that they would be collecting it and selling it amongst themselves. Upon reaching the coast of India, the men started gathering the salt, since this was against the law the British attacked the Indians. Arrests were made, and several men were killed. In the article “Gandhi, salt and freedom” Gandhi’s purpose is described perfectly, “Yet, more than any other event, the salt march, exemplifying his tactic of non-violence, gave India's struggle for liberation its Gandhian stamp. His idea was to expose injustice, and shame the unjust into ending it, by shifting the perils of resistance on to the victim; his hope was to ennoble both.” The Indians held their ground and eventually the salt tax was lifted. During the course of Gandhi’s life, many different forms of civil disobedience were demonstrated by him and those who followed him. Eventually, India gained its freedom from the British and Gandhi’s legacy continues to influence many people around the world.
Marin Luther King Jr. is famous for his relentless fight for civil rights for the blacks. He believe that people should do what ever was necessary to gain their freedoms as long as it was non violent, which is why he led so many marches, protest and demonstrations. King first heard of Thoreau’s concept of civil disobedience while studding at Morehouse College. While there King said,
“ I have become convinced that noncooperation with evil is as
much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other
person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this
idea across then Henry David Thoreau. As a result of his writings and personal witness, we are heirs of a legacy of creative protest. The
teachings of Thoreau came alive in our civil rights movement, indeed,
they are more alive then ever before. Whether expressed in a sit-in
at lunch counters, a freedom ride into Mississippi, a peaceful protest in Albany, Georgia, a bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama, these are out growths of Thoreau’s insistence that evil must be resisted and that no
moral man can patiently adjust to injustice” Hale, Sheffield " I Have a Dream: The Morehouse College Martin Luther King, Jr. Collection.
King was especially concerned with breaking law that were unjust or oppressed the blacks. While in Birmingham jail for protesting, King addresses some concerns other clergyman have about his stance for civil disobedience and what constitutes breaking the law. “How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquanis: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality...” he continues his explanation with “…A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting of devising the law…Sometimes a law is just in its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong with having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege to peaceful assembly and protest. “ (Letter from Birmingham Jail) He goes on in his letter with a request that they will see the distinction he is making, and emphasizes the fact that he and others who are fighting for civil rights must be and are willing to accept the consequences of their actions when they break any law. Their willingness to accept the natural consequences is what sets them apart from regular outlaws. Through the use of civil disobedience, Martin Luther King Jr. was able to lead those who followed him on many successful marches, protests and demonstrations.
Martin Luther King Jr. was a big supporter of Rosas Parks and the Montgomery bus boycotts that soon followed Rosa’s arrest. Rosa gives a perfect example of civil disobedience. It was against the law for a black person to sit in the front of the bus. All blacks were shunned to the back when riding pubic transportation. Rosa Parks had just gotten off work after a long day. She sat down in the front of the bus, too exhausted to walk to the back. As she sat there a young white man told her to move to the back of the bus where she belonged. She would not budge. She knew it was against the law for her to be sitting in the front of the bus, especially when a white person needed her seat, but still she would not move from the front of the bus. Her actions eventually lead to her arrest. She purposefully and non violently broke the law and willingly accepted the consequences of her actions by allowing the officers to arrest her and escort her to jail. At her trial she was found guilty and fined 10 dollars plus 4 dollars in court fees. This was exactly the kind of demonstrations that Martin Luther King Jr. was looking for. This simple act of Rosa Parks fueled a complete boycott of the Montgomery, Alabama bus systems. Because the boycott lasted so long, it eventually led to the law being changed. People could no longer be segregated on the buses based on the color of their skin. Although Rose did not get on the bus thinking to herself that she was going to change the segregation laws, that is essentially what happened. “I did not get on the bus to get arrested; I got on the bus to go home.... I had no idea that history was being made. I was just tired of giving in.“ Rosa Parks said in an interview following the event in “The Montgomery Bus Boycott: Interviews With Rosa Parks, E. D. Nixon, Johnny Carr And Virginia Durr.". A similar event happened around the same time in Oklahoma City. A similar segregation law had been passed. Blacks and whites could not be served in the same restaurant. The fight to end the segregation had been going for about six years. Clara Luper and 13 other black children sat down at Katz Drugstore and requested to be served. This was not the first sit-in to ever happen, so eventually they were served. The NAACP actually directed sit-ins and promoted non-violence, to end the segregations in restaurants as is mentioned in the article "The Right To Be Served: Oklahoma City's Lunch Counter Sit-Ins, 1958-1964." Eventually after many sit ins and protests, the blacks were allowed to eat with the whites. Once again, persistence and standing up for what is right, can change the law for the better.
The infamous Boston Tea Party is also considered an act of civil disobedience. This was a direct act from the people of Boston toward the British. In 1773, while the colonist had been seeking their independence from Great Britain, a group of colonist refused to return 3 shiploads of taxed tea, as a form of rebellion. “Whopping war chants, the crowd marched two-by-two to the wharf, descended upon the three ships and dumped their offending cargos of tea into the harbor waters.” http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/teaparty.htm
. This showed the British that they were not happy with the way they were being treated and were not going to stand by and take it anymore. The incident remains an iconic event of American history, and reference is often made to it in other political protests.
Many great leaders through out history have used civil disobedience to make changes for the better, themselves and those who follow them. Although Thoreau is most commonly associated with having “started” civil disobedience, he is certainly not the first to talk of this great idea. The great philosopher, Socrates, also talked of civil disobedience as a good and moral act. King points out that civil disobedience is found in the Bible in the “Letter From Birmingham Jail” He recounts the story as Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego refuse to obey the new law of their ruler Nebuchadnezzar. The law stated that no one could pray out loud, or they would be put to death. These 3 men continued to pray out loud and willingly accepted the consequences of their prayers. They were forced to face the den of hungry lions. When the king found them still alive the next morning, he removed the law and allowed the people once again, to pray out loud.
Time and time again, throughout history it is easy to see that civil disobedience is a successful way to protest and fight for something that is unjust. It is effective because it proves a point but spares the lives of many who could die if war were to erupt. Civil disobedience should be used today and often times it is. There are numerous protests done on a weekly basis through out this country. Is protesting enough? Often times no, it is not enough. Breaking unjust laws and willingly accepting the consequence is the best way to make a change for the better. Changes that will have a lasting effect on the present as well as the future.













Work Cited

http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

Donahue, James J. "'HARDLY THE VOICE OF THE SAME MAN': 'CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE' AND THOREAU'S RESPONSE TO JOHN BROWN." Midwest Quarterly 48.2 (2007): 247-265. America: History & Life. EBSCO. Web. 27 Nov. 2009.

"Gandhi, salt and freedom. (cover story)." Economist 353.8151 (1999): 65. Religion and Philosophy Collection. EBSCO. Web. 27 Nov. 2009.

Gardner, Tom, and Cynthia Stokes Brown "THE MONTGOMERY BUS BOYCOTT: INTERVIEWS WITH ROSA PARKS, E. D. NIXON, JOHNNY CARR AND VIRGINIA DURR." Southern Exposure 9.1 (1981): 12-21. America: History & Life. EBSCO. Web. 26 Nov. 2009.

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/teaparty.htm

Graves, Carl R. "THE RIGHT TO BE SERVED: OKLAHOMA CITY'S LUNCH COUNTER SIT-INS, 1958-1964." Chronicles of Oklahoma 59.2 (1981): 152-166. America: History & Life. EBSCO. Web. 5 Dec. 2009

research journal

Topic Choice

Civil Disobedience
1. Who uses it?
2. Was it successful?
3. Why or why not was it successful?
4. Who is/was most influencial?
5. Instances where things did not go as planned? violence?
6. How did the hippies use it? benefit from it?
7. Rapper m&m...
8. Should it be used today in our current political situations? i.e. gay rights, health care etc.

Research Guide

1. I know that civil disobedience has been used in the past by several popular leaders. What I need to know is specific instances it was used.
2. How did civil disobedience affect the civil rights movement? as far as I know it was good, but I also know there was a lot of back lash to the hippies and the blacks...
3. Anyone who would like to make a change with out engaging in violent means would be interested. Also someone who likes history, as it seems most examples of cd are coming from quite a few years back.
4. People could read about this cd in history books. Anything pertaining to Martin Luther King Jr.
5. On line, also it would be cool to find someone who experienced the civil rights movement first hand...or at least was alive and saw the happenings on the news.
6. yes, Ebsco will be my main source.
7. uhm...I don't know how to answer this question considering I have pretty much finished the paper all ready.

Student choice
1. http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

this is a web site that has the full Letter From Birmingham Jail. King talks about the need for civil disobedience if they want to see a change in the way the blacks are being treated. He gives several example as to what is just and unjust so there is no question that he believes in obeying just laws but will not sit back and continue to be treated so unfairly.

This will be great for my paper. King is probably the main person I will be talking about, so quoting him often will be good. He was such an articulate speaker, I think his quotes will really strengthen my paper.

2. "Gandhi, salt and freedom. (cover story)." Economist 353.8151 (1999): 65. Religion and Philosophy Collection. EBSCO. Web. 27 Nov. 2009.

This artical sums up the salt march that Gandhi lead. It explains why he did it and the after math of his actions.

Since I am talking about Gandhi in my paper this article is great. It gives me the historical context I need and I think quotes from the article will benefit my paper since Gandhi is known so well throughout the world as using civil disobedience.

3. I really had a hard time narrowing this down because there was so much I wanted to talk about that goes along with civil disobedience. But once I got going I was grateful for the suggestion to get rid of a few things. I liked doing this research because I love history, so this was a history lesson as well as a research paper. While reading the article's on civil disobedience I kept saying to myself Americans need to embrace this concept. We kind of get it...I guess. Protest are still done, but I don't think anyone is willing to break the law to stand up for what they believe in. What would America and Americans be like if they did?

4. Graves, Carl R. "THE RIGHT TO BE SERVED: OKLAHOMA CITY'S LUNCH COUNTER SIT-INS, 1958-1964." Chronicles of Oklahoma 59.2 (1981): 152-166. America: History & Life. EBSCO. Web. 5 Dec. 2009

This article is about the blacks fight to be served the same as the whites. They were not allowed to eat in the same restaurants as the white and they eventually got so sick of the segregation that they would have sit in's. They would sit at a lunch counter and prove the point that they should be able to eat where they want.

This article is good for my paper because I just need a few more examples to finish up the paper. The blacks having the sit in's is a perfect example of what Martin Luther King Jr. is promoting in the Letter From Birmingham Jail, so this will just emphasis what has all ready been said.

Multiple Perspectives Free Write

Civil Disobedience is a good way to get things accomplished and it should be used in today's society. It is so good because it is non violent. It is just simply standing up for and doing what you thing is right. So many times we let society persuade us in believing what they want us to think is right and we just go with the flow. We aren't individuals often times. Civil disobedience promotes individualism but also a sense of community, as people unite to fight for the good cause they believe in. So many times people are injured or killed for standing up for the things they believe in because things get violent when people disagree. That is why cd is so great because those who practice it promote non violence.

Civil disobedience is not an effective way of getting things done around here. That is was law and the constitution are for. What good is all the work our fore fathers did if we are going to go against the law? We have a system for getting things done. We vote, right to our senator, go to town councils or what ever but we just can not simply refuse to obey the law because we don't agree with it or because we think the law is unjust. That would create total chaos if everyone only obeyed the laws they agreed with. It should be done away with.

Martin Luther King Jr should have been more like Malcom X in his quest to get freedom from oppression for the blacks. Malcom X believe that in eye for an eye was fair and if the KKK and others were going to attack them, then they had every right to attack back. His idea was to let the whites know what it felt like to be attacked or have a family member killed for no reason. He got alot of attention and really created a stir. Martin Luther King Jr. should have used his tactics on the American public. This would have been bloody and ugly but the blacks would have gotten their freedom a lot quick because the whites would have gotten tired of having their family killed and they would have given in.

civil disobedience rough draft

Jessica Crockett

12-05-09

“ I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all.’”(1) Who could say it better then Martin Luther King Jr.? He is know throughout history as the man who sparked the major civil right’s movements in the 1960’s. Martin Luther King was a law abiding citizen, but when necessary he greatly promoted civil disobedience to his followers. Civil disobedience has been used through out history by many and it often times proves successful. (Civil disobedience has been used throughout history by many influential men, it has been used very creatively with many different tactics and outcomes, and more often then not, it is successful in achieving the desired result and should be used today when trying to change a law or rule.

Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey certain laws, demands and commands of a government, and willing accepting responsibility of the consequences. It does not promote violence as a way of getting the desired outcome. (2)

The man most famous for establishing civil disobedience is Henry David Thoreau. Thoreau was a New Englander who liked to read and write. While writing his famous book Walden he decided to isolate himself from society and move to a small cabin by a pond. While at the cabin a tax collector knocks on his door and declares that he must pay 6 years of back taxes. Thoreau had no intention of paying the taxes. He refused to pay because he knew the money would go to support slavery as well as the Mexican-American war, both of which he was opposed to. Since he would not pay, he was sent to jail. He willingly accepted the consequence of his actions. His aunt posted bail a few days later. He was very disappointed that he was released and his bail money would be aiding a cause he did not support. He would have preferred to serve his time in jail, how ever long that may be, than give support to something he so greatly opposed. Henry David Thoreau sent the perfect example of civil disobedience, and later wrote about his experience in his book, Walden, which is how so many others learned of his

Mahatma Gandhi first read Walden in 1903 while working as a civil rights activist. His hope was to be free from British rule and make India a free country. He recommended Thoreau’s teaching to everyone involved in the cause of Indian Independence. The British were firm on keeping India as their territory, but the Indians were convinced that they would obtain their freedom, and with Gandhi’s support of civil disobedience, that was how they went about it.

The Indians had been purchasing their clothing from the British, so their first step was to start making their own clothing. Although Gandhi was a successful lawyer, he too made his own clothes, setting the example for the rest of the county to follow. It was not necessarily the law to purchase clothes from the British, but when they stopped they got the attention they were seeking, unfortunately it was negative attention as the British would not give them independence so easily.

The British passes a salt tax in India. Salt is naturally produced on the coast of India, but the Indians could no longer gather and sell the salt to one another. The salt tax forced the Indians to purchase salt from British merchants only. They completely monopolized the salt industry in India. Since salt is a necessary mineral in a diet, the Indians had no other choice then to buy the over priced, naturally produced salt from the British. Gandhi would not stand for this. He lead a group of men on a Salt March in 1930, to declare to the British that they would no longer be purchasing the salt from them, and that they would be collecting it and selling it amongst themselves. Upon reaching the coast of India, the men started gathering the salt, since this was against the law the British attached the Indians. Attests were make, and several men were killed. The Indians held their ground and eventually the salt tax was lifted. (4) During the course of Gandhi’s life, many different forms of civil disobedience were demonstrated by him and those how followed him. Eventually, India gained its freedom from the British and Gandhi’s legacy continues to influence many people around the world.

Marin Luther King Jr. is famous for his relentless fight for civil rights for the blacks. He believe that people should do what ever was necessary to gain their freedoms as long as it was non violent, which is why he led so many marches, protest and demonstrations. King first heard of Thoreau’s concept of civil disobedience while studding at Morehouse College(5). King said, “ I have become convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this idea across then Henry David Thoreau. As a result of his writings and personal witness, we are heirs of a legacy of creative protest. The teachings of Thoreau came alive in our civil rights movement, indeed, they are more alive then ever before. Whether expressed in a sit-in at lunch counters, a freedom ride into Mississippi, a peaceful protest in Albany, Georgia, a bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama, these are out growths of Thoreau’s insistence that evil must be resisted and that no moral man can patiently adjust to injustice” (5 or 6 depending on the source). King was especially concerned with breaking law that were unjust or oppressed the blacks. While in Birmingham jail for protesting, King addresses some concerns other clergyman have about his stance for civil disobedience and what constitutes breaking the law. “How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquanis: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality...” he continues his explanation with “…A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting of devising the law…Sometimes a law is just in its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong with having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege to peaceful assembly and protest. “ (1) He goes on in his letter with a request that they will see the distinction he is making, and emphasizes the fact that he and others who are fighting for civil rights must be and are willing to accept the consequences of their actions when they break any law. Their willingness to accept the natural consequences is what sets them apart from regular outlaws. Through the use of civil disobedience, Martin Luther King Jr. was able to lead those who followed him on many successful marches, protests and demonstrations.

Martin Luther King Jr. was a big supporter of Rosas Parks and the Montgomery bus boycotts that soon followed Rosa’s arrest. Rosa gives a perfect example of civil disobedience. It was against the law for a black person to sit in the front of the bus. All blacks were shunned to the back when riding pubic transportation. Rosa Parks had just gotten off work after a long day. She sat down in the front of the bus, too exhausted to walk to the back. As she sat there a young white man told her to move to the back of the bus where she belonged. She would not budge. She knew it was against the law for her to be sitting in the front of the bus, especially when a white person needed her seat, but still she would not move from the front of the bus. Her actions eventually lead to her arrest. She purposefully and non violently broke the law and willingly accepted the consequences of her actions by allowing the officers to arrest her and escort her to jail. At her trial she was found guilty and fined 10 dollars plus 4 dollars in court fees. This was exactly the kind of demonstrations that Martin Luther King Jr. was looking for. This simple act of Rosa Parks fueled a complete boycott of the Montgomery, Alabama bus systems. Because the boycott lasted so long, it eventually led to the law being changed. People could no longer be segregated on the buses based on the color of their skin. Although Rose did not get on the bus thinking to herself that she was going to change the segregation laws, that is essentially what happened. “I did not get on the bus to get arrested; I got on the bus to go home.... I had no idea that history was being made. I was just tired of giving in.“ Rosa Parks said in an interview following the event. A similar event happened around the same time in Oklahoma City. A similar segregation law had been passed. Blacks and whites could not be served in the same restaurant. The fight to end the segregation had been going for about six years. Clara Luper and 13 other black children sat down at Katz Drugstore and requested to be served. This was not the first sit-in to ever happen, so eventually they were served. The NAACP actually directed sit-ins and promoted non-violence, to end the segregations in restaurants. Eventually after many sit ins and protests, the blacks were allowed to eat with the whites. Once again, persistence and standing up for what is right, can change the law for the better.

The infamous Boston Tea Party is also considered an act of civil disobedience. This was a direct act from the people of Boston toward the British. In 1773, while the colonist had been seeking their independence from Great Britain, a group of colonist refused to return 3 shiploads of taxed tea. As a form of rebellion, the colonist climbed aboard the ships and threw the taxed tea overboard. This showed the British that they were not happy with the way they were being treated and were not going to stand by and take it anymore. The incident remains an iconic event of American history, and reference is often made to it in other political protests.(9)

Many great leaders through out history have used civil disobedience to make changes for the better, themselves and those who follow them. Although Thoreau is most commonly associated with having “started” civil disobedience, he is certainly not the first to talk of this great idea. The great philosopher, Socraties, also talked of civil disobedience as a good and moral act. Civil disobedience is found in the Bible as Shadrac, Meshak and Abindigo refused to obey the new law of their ruler Nebicanezer. The law stated that no one could pray out loud, or they would be put to death. These 3 men continued to pray out loud and willingly accepted the consequences of their prayers. They were forced to face the den of hungry lions. When the king found them still alive the next morning, he removed the law and allowed the people once again to pray out loud.

Time and time again, through out history it is easy to see that civil disobedience is a successful way to protest and fight for something that is unjust. It is effective because it proves a point but spares the lives of many who could die if war were to erupt. Civil disobedience should be used today and often times it is. There are numerous protests done on a weekly basis through out this country. Is protesting enough? Often times no, it is not enough. Breaking unjust laws and willingly accepting the consequence is the best way to make a change for the better. Changes that will have a lasting effect on the present as well as the future.

7. Greenhaw, Wayne "ROSA PARKS: 'ONE OF MANY WHO WOULD FIGHT FOR FREEDOM'." Alabama Heritage 85 (2007): 8-15. America: History & Life. EBSCO. Web. 5 Dec. 2009

8. Wilson, Kirt H. "INTERPRETING THE DISCURSIVE FIELD OF THE MONTGOMERY BUS BOYCOTT: MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.'S HOLT STREET ADDRESS." Rhetoric & Public Affairs 8.2 (2005): 299-326. America: History & Life. EBSCO. Web. 5 Dec. 2009.

9. boston tea party something or another