Question

Read this excerpt from "A Letter from Birmingham Jail" by Martin Luther King Jr.: You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. How does King's use of rhetoric best advance his viewpoint? It causes the reader to consider alternate viewpoints to King's. It forces the reader to think about why King is recommending action over negotiation. It provides a sense of confusion for the reader and makes his viewpoint obscure. It creates an overwhelming tone for the

Answer 1

It forces the reader to think about why King is recommending action over negotiation.

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer 2

It forces the reader to think about why King is recommending action over negotiation.

King is very clear with his intentions in this excerpt from his piece. He is answering the question many people will ask (and have already asked): why not focus on negotiation? He forces the reader to see it from his perspective and understand why direct action is so important, and also how that will eventually lead to negotiation.