Monday, January 27, 2014

King, Kolvenbach and Twain: The Justice League

  Kolvenbach’s essay provides detail to the make-up of Jesuit education. Simulating Ignacio Ellacuria’s vision for higher Jesuit education denotes that, “every university to be a social force, and it is the calling of a Jesuit university to take conscious responsibility for being such a force for faith and justice.” I couldn’t be certain if reading Kolvenbach’s essay was a form of propaganda provided by the professor to sway her students into the path of service learning…just kidding. But, as a student of a Jesuit University, this should be reason enough to reevaluate one’s academic career.
  I once tried at Loyola to embrace service into my life. I applied back in 2010 for the Jamaican Experience, a faith-based immersion trip, but I wasn’t accepted into the program. I was devastated. My reason for applying was onset by a family vacation the summer before my Sophomore year. I was looking forward to sunny days sprawled on the beach without much worry other than sun poisoning. Passports in tow, my family and I hopped on a plane and landed hours later at the Montego Bay airport. The bus from our all-inclusive resort was ready and waiting for arrival. Take note that this is the first time I have ever been outside the U.S. It took about forty minutes to travel from the airport to the hotel, but within that time, I had become numb. As soon as the bus departed the airport grounds, nothing but evidence of poverty ensured my surroundings, unlike anything I had ever seen before. The rolling green hills were full of tiny huts, of naked children and malnourished mothers, of trash and pollution. A young boy kicked a soccer ball around in the dirt and trash, with an even younger girl, both shoeless. The bus took a sharp, sudden left. And there we were, faced with an enormous wall. The resort was completely surrounded by this large, domineering wall and completely segregated from the outside. Jamaica went away inside the wall, we became part of this new realm: an Americanized version of Jamaica. Loyola’s own Sr. Missy Gugerty once said, “She (or he) who sees is responsible.” I saw, I know the difference, and I am responsible.
     Martin Luther King, Jr.’s, “Letter from Birmingham Jail” broke my heart, filled me with rage and taught me compassion. King said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. What ever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.” The Jesuits teach to serve for the greater glory of God, that “solidarity is learned through ‘context’ rather than through ‘concepts’” and through this solidarity the purpose is to create “moral concern” on how the world ought to coexist (Kolvenbach 34-36). It is difficult to argue such an ethical standard for living: “men and women for others.” I find the motto generally uplifting except for the use of the word, “others.” The word “others” reminds me of something different, something or someone that doesn’t belong. It reminds me of the wall in Jamaica in it’s attempt to avoid or ignore something so natural. The idea of the “others” needs to be demolished because with this attitude of difference, justice can never be attained. 
     The word “nigger” in Huckleberry Finn depicts this wall, this thing that divides the “we” and the “they,” the black and the white. King describes “nigger” and other deregulatory terms as “nagging signs” and humiliating. Twain is a man of words and understands his use of “nigger” is vital to the novel: it creates an automatic barrier between Jim and Huck. It helps the reader to understand the world of Huck. When he becomes emotionally attached to Jim he begins to break the law in order to save his life. King said, “an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.” Huck is revolutionary character: a lying, cheating, fourteen-year old menace but one that certainly does not commit to the social norm. Although we find Huck having internal dilemmas, he continues to break the rules in order for justice to be rendered and I think this is just the type of courage King is talking about.

Necessary Tension

Catlin Castan
Dr. Ellis
Banned Books
27 September 2014
Necessary Tension
            While reading Adventures of Huckleberry Finn we assessed Huck as a character who is grounded by a moral center. We observe Huck constantly consulting his moral compass as he searches for truth amidst the confusion of deep-rooted societal conventions. Here, Twain is suggesting that, as humans, we all inherently possess a moral compass. In this same regard, he is also saying that because the things that we may have been taught or not been taught are no longer significant, we are obligated to live moral lives. Interestingly, in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” King talks about this sense of internal conflict and confusion that Huck experiences. King explains, “there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth…Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal”(King 2). Both Twain and King are encouraging us to rely on our “gut feelings” in order to decipher right from wrong, regardless of what society might impose.
            Similarly, in Peter-Hans Kolvenbach’s essay, “The Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice in American Jesuit Higher Education”, Kolvenbach identifies the human heart as our vehicle for change explaining that we must travel deep within ourselves in order to find the capacity and willingness to generate universal love. Through isolating the human heart, Kolvenbach--once again--is indicating that as humans we are innately capable of both recognizing and preventing social injustices. Kolvenbach asserts, “We can no longer pretend that the inequalities and injustices of our world must be…part of the inevitable order of things,”(Kolvenbach 32) but rather suggests that we question conventional understandings of society and work towards changing them.
            In addition, by the end of Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, we notice that Twain redefines the conventional sense of the word “freedom”. Twain, instead, suggests that freedom is only achieved through recognizing the humanity in others and through treating others with compassion. More specifically, Jim’s selfless act, the compassion he shows towards Tom, despite Tom’s cruelty allows him to remain free. While on the other hand, Tom’s conniving and deceptive ways—his disregard for others—ultimately leave him a slave: a man denied of his freedom. In this sense, then, Kolvenbach and Twain are saying very similar things. Kolvenbach also emphasizes a need for recognition of humanity and compassion, he explains, “[we] all aspire to live life, to use [our] talents, to support [our] families and care for [our] children and elders, to enjoy peace and security, and to make tomorrow better”(32). Here, Kolvenbach is establishing the commonalities that exist between all humans—despite racial (and other social) differences.
            After reading both essays (for a third time) in addition to reading Huck Finn, I feel that the most important question that is addressed by all three of the authors is: how can we advocate breaking some laws and obeying others? Although this question is overwhelmingly complex, it is most clearly answered in King’s text.  King answers this question by explaining the difference between just and unjust laws. He explains that we must practice discernment wisely and joyfully by use of our moral compasses in order to achieve social justice. In addition, he explains that as humans we all have a moral responsibility and therefore we are obligated to disobey the laws that we believe to be unjust; we are obligated to create (necessary) tension.  In doing so, we are working towards achieving universal love and compassion, which-- according to Twain--ultimately grants us the gift of freedom.  


In “The Service of Faith and Promotion of Justice in Jesuit Higher Education,” Kolvenbach states that, “Students, in the course of their formation, must let the gritty reality of this world into their lives, so they can learn to feel it, think about it critically, respond to its suffering and engage in it constructively” (35). This is a tenet of education that I, too, hold a very strong belief in. Throughout his piece, Kolvenbach expresses the importance of direct experience and thoughtful analysis of situations in order to create solidarity and then, from there, a passion for justice and movement toward a better world.
I learned the word empathy in my sixth grade theology class and I remember the lesson vividly. My teacher explained over and over again the difference between sympathy and empathy; according to her, sympathy is “feeling bad for someone” and empathy is “sharing somebody’s pain because you have felt it before.” Now, I understand these terms as much more than those basic definitions, but for a group of 11-12 year-olds, those definitions worked. Perhaps empathy is too big of a concept for a child that age to entirely understand, but pretty much everybody in my class did, because we were asked to go out and experience it.
I did not really have to deal too much with the definition of empathy again until my Junior year of high school when I my theology teacher taught us about justice and brought up the word “solidarity,” making us define it as best we could. Solidarity carries empathy with it and from these extreme emotional connections and understanding, justice and the passion for it arises.
That year, we were all asked to do a service project for our final. We could pick anything we wanted to do as long as we carried it out throughout the entire semester and could speak about it and spread interest to the class. At first, everyone dreaded it, but when it came time for the presentations at the end of the school year, the passion each student felt for their cause was astonishing. I could hear the sense of purpose and commitment in my classmates’ voices as they explained their organization and what they did and it was incredible. Some of these same classmates are still carrying out their projects today.
If it had not been for this pushing of my teachers to think about such importance concepts, I do not think I would be as critical of or responsive to suffering as I am today. It is easy for a student to read a book or learn about some historical event and think that the events were “bad” or “not okay,” but it takes real thought and attempts at putting yourself into the events that create a real idea of the problems at hand. I also understand how maybe teachers and parents might want to shelter students in order to keep them aiming toward “good” or away from bad habits or experiences, but if students are not faced with the reality of the world, how will they face it when school is over?
Much of what Kolvenbach says ties directly to my feelings on allowing Huckleberry Finn in schools. Yes, there are themes and words that might be uncomfortable or difficult to handle, but then it is up to the teacher to point that out to the student and make them think. School is for thinking and developing ideas, is it not? So present the ideas, make the students think and guide them through it, because eventually they’re going to have to do it on their own and going out into the world with a sense of understanding about its workings and past transgressions will make it much easier and more productive than being entirely blind to the sufferings, past and present, of others.

Intolerable Injustice

Intolerable Injustice
            In both the work by Dr. King and Peter Hans-Kolvenbach there is an emphasis on injustice and how it must be dealt with. Both go about tackling the idea of injustice in similar but yet different ways. What is most important though is that injustice cannot be tolerated.
            Dr. King was a proponent of direct action. He knew that one could not sit back or just talk about injustice and get anything done. King knew that if anything was to be achieved action had to be taken. Though King promoted direct action, he was strongly against the use of violence. King knew the use of violence would hurt his cause more than it would help. Two of Kings most poignant points were: “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (King 1), and that defying an unjust law is, in fact, giving the highest respect to the law. King knew action had to taken but, it had to be calculated.
            Kolvenbach was also an advocate of direct action but in a different way. In his article Kolvenbach writes about fighting for justice through the use of service. When one sees injustice it is his/her duty to fight against it. Jesuits Universities teach their students to do just that. They are taught to see injustice in the world and find ways to serve. The agenda of Jesuits Universities can best be explained as, "The dignity of human life, the promotion of
justice for all, the quality of personal and family life, the protection of nature, the search for peace and political stability, a more just sharing in the world's resources, and a new economic and political order that will better serve the human community at a national and international level" (Kolvenbach 12).

            Though they approach it in different ways, both King and Kolvenbach advocate against injustice. They both agree that injustice cannot and should not be tolerated in society. It is the duty of people to fight against the injustice in the world and be the change they want to see.

"Different But Not Less"

"Different But Not Less"

Just last week I went to the Ear, Nose, and Throat Doctor to get help to deal with a persisting ear infection. As way of casual conversation, the doctor asked me where I went to college. I replied, “Loyola,” and his quick response was, “That is a good school.” He then asked me what I intended to do after college, to which I said, “Occupational Therapy.” He then said, rudely I might add, that I had made the wrong choice in colleges because the amount I was paying and the amount I would be earning in my intended job were not compatible. I was completely taken aback; I had not expected this virtual stranger to make such a seemingly harsh statement about my life choices. At the time I just politely nodded, with no clue on how to respond to him. After reading “The Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice in American Jesuit Higher Education,” I want to go back and tell him exactly why Loyola is more than just monetary value. This doctor was subscribing to the view Kolvenbach describes as the need to “secure one the relatively scarce fulfilling and lucrative jobs available” (34). This doctor did not grasp that Loyola, and all of Jesuit education, attempts to “educate ‘the whole person’ intellectually and professionally, psychologically, morally and spiritually” (34).
As most of the students in this class are English majors, I am sure they have all heard the comments about how lucrative an English major is. Yet my English course last semester has taught me more about what I want to do in life than any other class has been able to. In this class, titled “Neurodiversity,” we analyzed works dealing with people who are mentally challenged or different. In the great classic “The Sound and the Fury,” we looked at how badly Benjy was treated. We also read books about autism, some from the viewpoint of the individual, some from the viewpoint of the family. In the final segment, we looked at illness such as Capgras and Alzheimer’s. It was in this class that I watched two movie that made me absolutely positive Occupational Therapy was what I wanted to do with my life: “The Black Balloon” and “Autism: The Musical.”
As an Occupational Therapist, I truly hope to make a difference in people’s lives. I hope to truly be a “[woman] for others” (29). As King wrote in his letter, I believe that “we are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.” To forget about people because society considers them to be lesser is a grave mistake. People who have handicaps or disabilities can offer just as much, if not more to the world. When I worked at a Therapeutic Riding Center, there was a person who rode the horses named Ben. He was an amazing person. He worked hard every day and enjoyed his time in the spotlight. Sometimes people would underestimate him because he was autistic, but he was extremely intelligent. He had a knack for making people like him. He was extremely clever, and every session I could see him actually grow in the skills he was learning. Every session he would practice saying the volunteers’ names. When he finally memorized mine (no matter where I was standing), I knew I had made an amazing friend. Someone else at the Center was extremely influential to me. His name was Danny and he was a volunteer. He was dealing with PSTD and had a service animal, but he still made time every day to help others. Not only did he embody what I wanted to with my life (animal-assisted therapy in terms of Occupational Therapy) but he went out of his way to help others, even when dealing with his own issues.
King discusses how “inferiority [can begin] to form” in a person. I hope that through Occupational Therapy I can give people life experiences and tools so that they never have to feel inferior, even if they are dealing with something difficult. I hope to teach the people I work with something that Kolvenbach wrote that resonates with me: “Each [person is] a unique individual” (32) and that each person “can use their talents” (32). Our motto in my previous class was very similar: each person is different but not less. I hope to use the amazing opportunity that I have had at Loyola to use my abilities to help people who are not fortunate enough to have the same opportunity.

Danger in the Bystander

To dehumanize someone does not actually change this person’s status as human. In fact, dehumanization can happen without someone’s knowledge or consent. When a person marginalizes someone, it provides this person with an internal excuse or justification to continue such behavior. To Martin Luther King Jr. this was the root of the problem during the civil rights movement. The majority of white Americans who could sympathize with the plight of African Americans placed themselves as bystanders and saw African Americans as separate from themselves. To the bystanders, this was a problem that would eventually work itself out. Kolvenbach, however, urges against these feelings. Under the Jesuit tradition, all humans are seen with dignity. In this way, Kolvenbach urging Jesuits to promote the service of all people speaks to King’s mission. Regardless of distance, race, or social standing, every person deserves to be treated with dignity.
 Although the equal treatment of all humans seems like a reasonable idea to promote, Kolvenbach and King are both considered radical. They are radical in that they challenge long-standing traditions and social norms. Even Kolvenbach, who addresses other Jesuits, was met with contention. Once set in their ways, people can be hard to move. It is here that seeing victims of injustice as separate from us or unworthy of just treatment is particularly dangerous. Traditions of injustice leave the oppressors in the majority.  In this way, inactivity can be excused. Change is seen as trouble as opposed to solution and those who stand on the sidelines can neither be blamed for acting in malice nor for rousing conflict.
King and Kolvenbach clearly state that such passive behavior will not be tolerated. King powerfully writes, “Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.” Such “lukewarm acceptance” is exactly what we see from Huck Finn in his interactions with Jim. In comparison to the other white characters in the story, Huck treats Jim with a respect that others would never consider. In reality, however, Huck never really sees or treats Jim as a human being. Huck certainly enjoys Jim, but Jim’s desire for freedom, as Jane Smiley points out in “Say It Ain’t So, Huck”, is never taken seriously by Huck. Huck never does any explicit harm to Jim, but he also does not strive to bring justice to Jim. Huck turns into a bystander, bearing witness to the injustice done unto Jim. While Tom turns the freeing of Jim into a game, Huck does not quite agree, but does not go so far as to stop Tom’s careless use of a man’s life as a game. Huck believes that Jim should not be sent to New Orleans, but is unwilling to act in rebellion to free him.
Both Huck and Tom are much like the “white moderates” that King condemns for their inaction. They both essentially agree with Jim’s plight, but shy away from truly helping him, which would stir up trouble. They stop short of being radically humane. They, like the “white moderates”, believe that Jim’s time will eventually come. They do not know and cannot understand what it is like to be owned as Jim is. In denying Jim’s qualification as human, the inactivity of Huck and Tom, however, is excused.

The bystander effect is not a distant concept for modern society. People easily distance themselves from contentious situations, therefore removing victims from their plane of responsibility. This is, in some ways, a dehumanization of the victim. By choosing to stand back and refuse action, the bystander, in any scenario, claims that the victim is unworthy of justice. 

On a Mission for Knowledge

            When I was in elementary school, one of the things that I looked forward to doing in the near future was going on a mission trip to Mexico with my parish’s high school youth group.  Whenever I entered the youth group room at my school, I couldn’t help but stare at all of the pictures from past mission trips that plastered the walls and knew that going on a mission trip was something that I was called to do.  I felt called to be a part of the youth group’s, as Kolvenbach states in “The Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice in American Higher Education,” “…action-orientated commitment to the poor…” (27).  Unfortunately, by the time I entered high school and could join my parish’s youth group, the previous director took a job at another school, leaving the group and the mission trip in an odd state of transition.  My high school didn’t offer the same experience that I was looking for, one that was “…expressed not only in words but also in deeds…” (Kolvenbach 27), so my desire to go on a mission trip was pushed to the back of my mind.
            But then I graduated high school and began going to Loyola.  My oldest brother went to a Jesuit high school and college, so I knew what I was getting myself into regarding the Jesuits’ passion for service, faith, and justice when I decided to go to Loyola.  Needless to say, I was ecstatic to learn about Project Mexico, Loyola’s international service immersion program.  It was exactly the type of mission trip experience that I was looking for – I would not be simply learning about topics such as immigration, the environment, human rights, and political and economic issues, but I would be learning through physical, hands-on projects.  Once the time came my sophomore year, I submitted my application as soon as I possibly could and was overjoyed that I was accepted as a Project Mexico team member.  Weekly meetings began immediately, and I was plunging head first deep into this project after years of waiting for the opportunity.
            After weeks of team building, preparation, education, and fundraising, the new year rolled around, bringing our departure date to Mexico with it.  I flew back to Baltimore from Cleveland on January 2nd, and the very next day, I was right back on a plane with the rest of the team on our way to Mexico.  Despite the six-hour-long plane ride, I could not fall asleep nor could I concentrate on the book that I brought along.  I was far too excited to gain “…an educated awareness of society and culture with which to contribute socially, generously, in the real world” (Kolvenbach 34).  I was ready to formulate my own opinions about these “[m]any countries [that] become yet poorer, especially where corruption and exploitation prevail over civil society and where violent conflict keeps erupting,” (Kolvenbach 32) such as Mexico, rather than simply agreeing and going along with my conservative family.  And, immediately upon landing in the San Diego International Airport, I knew I was about to experience a lot more than I originally anticipated.
            Although I thought that I was prepared to face Mexico’s socio-economic state and the situation of Mexican immigrants traveling to and living in the United States, I was still in awe during the duration of my time in Mexicali and San Diego.  I saw that it was true that thousands of immigrants arrive from everywhere, especially Mexico, “[e]ach one a unique individual, they all aspire to live life, to use their talents, to support their families and care for their children and elders, to enjoy peace and security, and to make tomorrow better” (Kolvenbach 32) – to essentially live the American dream.  What was even more shocking was how difficult it is for these immigrants to even have a chance to work toward this dream.  What many people there consider monumental, such as the first promotora of the community graduating college this past December, Americans consider typical.  Through Project Mexico, I feel as though I experienced what Kolvenbach was hoping when he states, “Students, in the course of their formation, must let the gritty reality of this world into their lives, so they can learn to feel it, think about it critically, respond to its suffering and engage it constructively.  They should learn to perceive, think, judge, choose and act for the rights of others, especially the disadvantaged and the oppressed” (35).  My Project Mexico experience was everything I hoped for and much, much more than I expected.  The knowledge that I gained and the opinions that I formed are something that I do not regret nor would trade for anything in the world, something that I think both Kolvenbach and King would be proud of.

Justice through action

When discussing the call to action, the writings by Rev. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach and Martin Luther King, Jr. describe the reasons for the importance of the enforcement of justice through action in modern times.  In both the Kolvenbach and King essays the common themes of social justice and interconnections play key roles in understanding one’s relations to others. For the two men the concept of action enables the individual to strive forward and go beyond current bounds or expected bounds of society to exert real change in the world. Both men feel that this call to social justice via action helps to turn the tide in the education of individuals to the issues that exist in their world. Dr. King expresses this idea when he writes:
First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. (King 3).
Indeed, here King argues that the worst option to take during the call to social justice is that which ignores the problems that continue to exist around us, or being ignorant to the pleas of those in trouble. For King order can exist as a structure of justice, however if maintaining the status quo and continuing social inequality fall under order, then order itself is unjust and uprooted. Although there remain numerous activities that are available for individuals in the pursuit of social justice, Kolvenbach highlights the importance of personal understanding in regards to the power it yields on the ability to change those individuals. He explains this more when states:
We must therefore raise our Jesuit educational standard to "educate the whole person of
solidarity for the real world." Solidarity is learned through "contact" rather than through
"concepts," as the Holy Father said recently at an Italian university conference.24 When
the heart is touched by direct experience, the mind may be challenged to change. Personal
involvement with innocent suffering, with the injustice others suffer, is the catalyst for
solidarity which then gives rise to intellectual inquiry and moral reflection. (Kolvenbach 8).
Therefore, social justice and action not only aid with the struggles of a people or issue, but the personal experience of contact also helps with the development of the person.
When thinking about Kolvenbach and King’s writings in my everyday life, one of the most important issues for me deals with my involvement with knowing myself. Because of the importance of interconnections in everyday life, I feel as though my commitment to others via service acts almost as an emptying out of myself. This emptying of myself mixes within the space between myself and another, the space that is itself empty. I feel as though the empty space between us only points to, or rather acts as the potentiality that I feel as though exists for the interaction to become anything over the course of any relationship. For this reason I believe that individuals and communities are necessary for each other so that both can actually “know themselves.” In this regard, individuals can not exist without communities, and communities can not exist without individuals, highlighting the importance of interconnection for the formation of one’s identity. Therefore, over the course of engaging in the call to action through social justice via community service, I am not existing as my own entity but rather being continually shaped by my experiences and my relationships as they evolve over time.
In the same sense, I feel as though the call to social justice takes on a similar appearance when talking about the recognition of justice. Just as individuals need the community in order to know themselves, I feel as though good needs evil in order to recognize what good actually is. In this same sense, evil is a necessary construction for the ultimate potentiality that can be expressed by both humans and in experience. In the same regard that the emptiness between two people expresses the potentiality of the directions that the relationship can form, the experience of evil expresses the unfolding potentiality that good has in regards to its ability to be experienced or expressed. Therefore, a perfect world would be the horrifying one. In the perfect world there would be no change, and the absence of change is death. The perfect world is the world where concepts like good have no potential to be expressed. Therefore, the world we live in, with all of its imperfections, is the beautiful world because of the unfolding potentiality that continues to exist here.

Taking Freedom

World Analysis
       In Kolvenbach’s “The Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice in American Jesuit Higher Education” the goal of Jesuit commitment of faith and justice were very poignant. He states that faith is not about a pushing but rather a proposal of a relationship with God. Where a proposal is more passive, the ideals on justice are not. Justice must be an active pursuit and not a thought or an imaginary concept. 
Kolvenbach says the Jesuit commitment of faith is, “Not to impose our religion on others, but rather propose Jesus and his message of God’s kingdom in a spirit of love to everyone.” When a man proposes there is a pregnant silence in which his fate can turn in the direction of life commitment, or a broken heart. Kolvenbach seems to represent that the Jesuits are in a constant balance with that frozen moment, not taking someone’s ability to choose, but revealing themselves wholly and hoping people accept them. 
While in attendance at a Jesuit college in Washington the idea of acceptance of Jesus had a interesting history. The school was built with the express allowance of the Spokane Tribe that inhabited the land. The Jesuits built the school to educate and hopefully one day convert the Native Americans to their way of life. Their seduction of the tribe was not one of traditional conquering, though as history usually goes some advantage was taken of the tribe, it still goes with Jesuit ideal of faith as a allurement rather than forceful.
The college also had a Native American house and club. Many people did not know it was even there. Dr. King’s “Letter from Birmingham jail” made a point that freedom will not be given to those who do not take it. And awareness of the Native American population would not be made known without the determination of one girl who took me under her wing. With her determination and leadership she took the opportunity to raise awareness of the Native American history and continual treatment in the world. She was given the opportunity to find justice by the Jesuit campus but nothing was being done with the power the group was given without any action being taken. 

Literary Analysis 
       The voice is very interesting that Dr. King uses in “Birmingham Jail”. King writes as if he is having a direct conversation with the naysayers of his movement, it is just as if a letter had would be written. It is very similar to “The Adventures of Huck Finn” Mark Twain uses the vernacular of the day to make some interesting commentary on societies view on race. King opens the dialogue with his current position, sitting in a jail for his nonviolent demonstrations against segregation, and goes on to defend his position. He then closes again with a humble admission that his simple, yet lengthy letter might take up too much time, but his attitude and seemingly sarcastic remarks show evidence that his casual writing is effective in demonstrating how poignant his points are. 
Two claims made against him were that his demonstrations were “unwise and untimely.” He paints a picture of African Americans being degraded to objects rather than humans. With his words he draws men and women growing more vocally discomforted by the conditions in which they live. His claims of a willing audience he has tried to appease from growing violently unrestful with negotiations and hope of change. But all promises of a politically charged change have been betrayed by the white men in charge. He explains to his doubters that he is not unwise in his actions, his lengthy patience has just come to an end. He writes plainly, “..but I would say in more emphatic terms that it is even more unfortunate that the white power structure of this city has left Negro community with no other alternative.” He knows that the African American freedom will not be willingly handed to them, that they must take actions upon themselves to achieve their goals.
With a call to action it seems that King would move his followers immediately, yet he explains that great precision was taken in the choosing of the date for the demonstration; in fact the date was moved several times. But it did have to occur, they waited until after the elections and moved before the new administration could enact any of their plans. His reasoning was that he was there for a pre-emptive strike. People could not just wait for change to happen, “Justice too long delayed is justice denied.” King gives valid reasoning for his choices of the demonstration. 
King may seem relatively unrelated to a children’s tale of adventure by Twain, but it is the simplicity and frankness which King speaks connects the two. King speaks directly to his audience, wanting to reasonably explain his actions. Twain uses plain language to express a real condition of the idea of freedom. King writes in a prison while Twain places Jim in a prison, but it is revealed that both men live in a society that is in fact the real prison. King cannot overcome the social injustices in which he lives. And though Jim is considered free he is chained by society. He could have escaped the shack he was being held in several times over, and in fact left it to help Huck and Tom move a rock, but he always had to return. They are both placed in prisons they cannot escape. It is not until Jim takes his own freedom and gives it up to help Tom Sawyer, it is the moment where he is in complete control of his freedom. The same goes for Dr. King, he will not be free until he makes the decision to take his own life and give up his freedom, to be jailed, for the pursuit of a true freedom.