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

King is using logic and arguments in order to prove his point. He states that negotiation is indeed what is ultimately necessary. However, in order for negotiation to occur, a crisis has to take place in order to convince leaders to do so. This is why nonviolent action is useful. King's use of rhetoric forces the reader to think about the reasons why King recommends action over negotiation.

there is an explationation of this on a site called crash   course world history 1

i do believe the correct answer is the spread of chinese culture throughout asia and africa.good luck

explanation: