Final answer:
Martin Luther King Jr. justified his opposition to the Vietnam War by aligning it with his principle of nonviolence and citing the detrimental impact on funding for anti-poverty programs.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the last year of his life, Martin Luther King Jr. took a bold stance against the Vietnam War, diverging from his usual cautious approach. King's explicit opposition to the war was rooted in the belief that it contradicted his principle of nonviolence. He also highlighted that the war drained resources from crucial domestic programs, particularly those aimed at combating poverty. King famously stated that The Great Society was being destroyed due to the war, indicating a redirection of focus from internal issues to external conflict. His stance was part of a broader antiwar movement that was increasingly inclusive, bringing together union leaders, Mexican American activists, white factory workers, and conservative clergy.
King's radical shift in public discourse around national policy also underscored the disproportionate impact of the war on minority communities, which bore a heavier casualty rate. This outspoken criticism of the U.S. military policy was part of a larger divide in American sentiment regarding the war. While many Americans still supported the war effort, or were at least unsure of the protests, the antiwar movement gained traction as the realities and revelations about the conflict—such as secret bombings and the draft—came to light. King's stance on Vietnam demonstrated a convergence of civil rights advocacy and antiwar activism, which shaped the broader context of the opposition to the war.