Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Speech against the Vietnam War

An article by Benjamin Heden in the New Yorker reminds us that this is the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s speech in New York's Riverside Church opposing the Vietnam War. King filled the speech with his usual passionate and eloquent language. Unlike some of his more famous speeches, however, the Riverside Church speech was organized as a logical sequence of arguments.

He began the speech by giving broader context about his moral attitudes, and then stated his controversial thesis right off: he quoted the Riverside Church's statement that "'A time comes when silence is betrayal.' That time has come for us in relation to Vietnam." He reminded the audience of the danger of "conformist thought." He then listed and discussed at great length "seven major reasons for bringing Vietnam into the field of my moral vision." Thus, common ground with his audience led him to a broader principle.

For the first of his seven reasons, he said that the war had diverted attention from the nation's efforts to help the poor.

Second, he pointed out that the poor were disproportionately "sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands" to the war in disproportionate numbers.

Third, since his civil rights movement was founded on nonviolence, so, he said, the government should help Vietnam without violence.

Fourth, he warned that the war ran a moral risk: "If America's soul becomes totally poisoned, part of the autopsy must read 'Vietnam.'"

Fifth, he mentioned the moral obligation placed on him by winning the Nobel Peace Prize, devoted to "the brotherhood of man."

Sixth, he continued that "even if it [the prize\ were not present, I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ." He said that Jesus loved his enemies.

Seventh, he reminded the church that "We are called to speak for the weak,for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation, for those it calls 'enemy,' for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers."

That seventh argument just got this very long speech started. King continued with a long discussion of how the war actually countered its own ends, as the violence in Vietnam, he said, only served to turn the population against the United States.

King gave a five-step plan for ending the war, including an end to the bombing and a cease-fire. King quoted poet James Russell Lowell and ended by quoting the Bible: "when justice will roll down like waters."

From a policy standpoint, King said during the speech that:

"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."

That issue is still with us today, as government debates whether social programs should be cut to make room for a military buildup. Which is the better route to security? Justice or strength? Or both? Perhaps history will be the final judge.

Finally, I note that communication scholars have largely neglected the study of this impressive speech. There is, however, an excellent 1992 article in the Western Journal of  Communication by George N. Dionisopoulos, Victoria J. Gallaher, Steven R. Goldzwig, and David Zarefsky. 

We can learn much about public speaking from this speech. King was willing to cause controversy. He backed his controversial comments with moral, religious, practical, and poetic arguments. He understood that reasoning was vital to the speech's success.