For present purposes, however, King serves as a source of useful lessons in both positive and negative ways. Absolute arbitrary power, Locke maintained, is equivalent to governing without settled standing laws, and to be subject to it is to be exposed to the worst evils of a state of war with another. [REF], It is meaningful, if unsurprising, that the SCLC required of protesters a commitment suffused with the moral spirit of Christianity. Like Gandhi, King believed that citizens have a duty to engage in . Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. On what ground could he locate the natural rights of persons, given his denigration of the property righta right affirmed in classical natural-rights philosophy as a direct corollary of the liberty of the person? The orthodox definition of civil disobedience notes that civil disobedience is both illegal and civil, takes place in public, involves an act of protest, is nonviolent, is conscientiously-motivated, and involves both acceptance of the legitimacy of the system and submission to arrest and punishment. [REF] Acutely aware of the turbulent history of republics,[REF] Americas revolutionary Founders hoped that Americans would prove exceptional in our lawfulness: lawful both in our obedience and, where need be, in our disobedience. He then turned to their specific objection to the tactic of civil disobedience. Kings distinction between disobedience that is evasive or defiant and disobedience marked by acceptance of the authority of law is vividly meaningful in context. Finally, it is clear that civil disobedience is not in any way disrespect for the law, because unjust laws are not bad laws, but no laws at all. In its most concrete manifestation, however, the precept of obeying law so far as possible appears in his insistence on submitting to the legally prescribed punishment for disobedience. If civil disobedience is a political exercise, there are good normative and pragmatic reasons for adhering to non-violence. American civil disobedience in the theory and practice of Martin Luther King, is mainlybut not perfectlyin accord with those founding principles. To read his Letter from Birmingham Jail with particular attention to this conservative dimension of his argument may therefore serve to initiate a renewed and enhanced public appreciation of the rule of law, both of its basis and its centrality to the health of Americas constitutional republic. The Problem of Civil Disobedience Subject: Politics & Government Study Level: College Words: 1375. A consideration of Americas first principles, as explicated in the political thought informing the American Founding, corroborates Kings view. Because, as Madison put it, the latent causes of faction are sown in the nature of man,. Recent protesters have been generally heedless of the obligation to compose well-reasoned, empirically careful, rights-based arguments to support the justice of their cause, and their protests have consisted largely in efforts at disruption and coercion rather than persuasion. Moreover, all should consider the degree to which the successful practice of civil disobedience in the early 1960s, by virtue of its very success, has functioned in the post-Civil Rights era to normalize the practice of lawbreaking as an element of protest and commensurately to erode popular respect for law. Fascinated by the idea of refusing to co-operate with an evil system, I was so deeply moved that I reread the work several times. Beginning in the mid-20th century, however, a significant modification of the idea has gained legitimacy and prestige in this country and around the world, as many Americans and others have become persuaded that organized disobedience can be not only rightful and, in a higher sense, lawful, but also civilit can effect a popular uprising against injustice even as it remains in conformity with the requirements of civility and social stability. Acknowledging the seriousness of any act of lawbreaking, King recognized his responsibility to explain the criteria for judging the injustice of law and the rightfulness of disobedience. Gandhi's civil disobedience campaigns of the 1920's and 1930's were pivotal factors in attaining independence. In his first Massey Lecture, he declared: Nonviolent protest must now mature to a new level to correspond to heightened black impatience and stiffened white resistance. When the civil disobedient says that he is above the law, he is saying that democracy is beneath him. Anger at the brutality inflicted upon King and the southern protesters was, however, widespread among northern blacks. Moreover, a broad national consensus now glorifies the Civil Rights movement as a 20th century American revolution, conferring moral prestige on its signature methods of direct-action protest and civil disobedience. Indicative of the moral qualities required are the tenets of the Commitment Card the leadership of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) required volunteers to sign: I hereby pledge myselfmy person and bodyto the nonviolent movement. 4720 Boston Way, Lanham, MD 20706, United States. Legitimate, constitutional government can possess only those powers delegated to it by the people who are its constituents, and the people in turn can delegate only powers they rightfully possess under the law of nature. The conclusion seems inescapable that in his desperate zeal to add rapid socioeconomic uplift to his movements previous victories in securing civil and political rights, King again neglected a piece of wise counsel from Rustin, who observed: There is a strong moralistic strain in the civil rights movement which would remind us that power corrupts, forgetting that absence of power also corrupts.[REF] Especially in his final two years, King overestimated his ability to govern the anger of the urban poor that he purposely assisted in arousing. In a 1960 televised debate with King, the segregationist James J. Kilpatrick, editor of the, Reduced to its essence, Kings response appears in a simple, if paradoxical formulation: Civil disobedience is not lawlessness but instead a higher form of lawfulness. An aggrieved minority also has a right to take actions necessary and proper to prevent or correct governmental or societal transgressions.[REF]. However, from an outside perspective, the justifications are analyzed through the values of the individual, organization or government. While it is plausible to think that unlawful acts of civil disobedience should not, as a moral matter, be punished because of their potential contributions to political debate, it does not follow that those acts are . 2. This analysis of the nature and moral justification of civil disobedience notes that the term has been used in varying ways and proposes a wider definition than the one that is often used. Kings Classic Exposition of Civil Disobedience: The Letter from Birmingham Jail, On Friday, April 10, 1963Good FridayKing marched purposefully to a Birmingham jail cell, where he was confined for leading a protest march in violation of a local ordinance. Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The discussion that follows is meant to provide such a reconsideration. What be important for present purposes a that this ground is sufficient for justified civil disobedience. Meditate daily on the teachings and life of Jesus. Civil disobedience has been widely used to challenge injustice in the United States, most visibly in the second half of the 20th century, with the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights movement. Here is the key point: Kings actions in Birmingham and elsewhere were born of a deep impatience, informed, as he wrote in the Letter, by a centuries-long history of injustice, including promises made and unfulfilled, that had taught him to equate slow or partial progress with no progress: Half a loaf is no bread.[REF] Despite his generally gracious recognition of NAACP efforts, King held that the courtroom victories won by that senior organization, along with the other apparent successes achieved in the electoral branches to that point, would prove practically worthless unless reinforced by further, stronger measures that would be enacted only in response to sustained, intensified pressure. Civil disobedience should not be our first remedy to an unjust situation. In that specific application, his explanation of just cause for civil disobedience may be judged successful. The correction of unjust government may not require radical, thoroughgoing regime changeand in the Declarations teaching of prudence, where such revolutionary change is not required, it is not permitted: Actions to alter unjust government are to be preferred, where possible, to actions taken to abolish it. The former described the practice of rabid segregationist[s], while the orderly disobedience of freedom movement protesters exemplified the latter. It is permissible, on those principles, only where necessary and, in a context of functioning constitutional, republican government, only in exceptional cases. This framing is evident in the classical liberal definition that one can find in the work of the most influential theorists of civil disobedience such as John Rawls (1971), Ronald Dworkin (1985), and, to a lesser extent, Jrgen Habermas (1985): civil disobedience occurs when citizens break the law in public, nonviolent, morally justified, and . In sum, at the present moment in American public life, the practice of purportedly civil disobedience is becoming increasingly normalized even as its proper basis, tactics, and objectives are subject to increasing confusion. To dislocate the functioning of a city without destroying it can be more effective than a riot because it can be longer-lasting, costly to the larger society, but not wantonly destructive. Kings second main regulating condition, that civil disobedience must be undertaken in the right spirit, means foremost that civil disobedience must convey a proper respect for law. Such behavior would only hurt the system. In the Letter, King contended that as applied to his direct-action campaign, the ordinance that the injunction was issued to enforce was a violation of the U.S. Constitution, in particular of the First Amendments guarantee of rights of peaceful assembly and protest. Their letter, entitled An Appeal to Law and Order and Common Sense, urged the protesters to desist, arguing that direct-action street protests, especially those involving lawbreaking, were unhelpful as means for repairing race relations in Birmingham. Civil disobedience is the opposite notion to the morality and duty in society. To gain a full, sympathetic understanding of Kings position, it is necessary, as King scholar Jonathan Rieder has commented, to think concretely about the distinction: In Birmingham, the lawbreakers [castrated] a black man; they bomb[ed] ordinary families . On Friday, April 10, 1963Good FridayKing marched purposefully to a Birmingham jail cell, where he was confined for leading a protest march in violation of a local ordinance. It may involve violence, but most forms of civil disobedience involve non-violent protests and actions. Americans trust in government has fallen to historic lows as our partisan divisions and animosities have intensified; In the recent wave of protests and calls for protest one can find semblances of the first approach, but those more closely resembling the second model have predominated. Kings Defense: The Right Reasons. At the heart of the American character is a seeming paradox: America is a republic of laws, yet it has a long tradition of civil disobedience. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS That same day, the local newspaper published a public letter addressed to King and his fellow protesters, written by a group of eight Birmingham clergy (seven Christian pastors and one rabbi). Such exposure is a condition to be avoided at all costs; to escape or avoid it is the primary objective in the formation of political society. In more recent times, the riots in Baltimore saw the death . It is plainly at odds with his insistence on the correspondence of moral ends and moral means. Civil disobedience in a democracy is not morally justified. There is, consequently, no moral obligation to obey them. Kings later conception departs, too, from his earlier insistence that civil disobedience must be practiced in a spirit of respect for law, respect for democratic governance, and redemptive good will, manifesting a desire for reconciliation with ones erstwhile adversaries. Broadly defined, "civil disobedience" denotes "a public, non-violent and conscientious breach of law undertaken with the aim of bringing about a change in laws or government policies."4 The. As I delved deeper into the philosophy of Gandhi, King reported, my skepticism concerning the power of love gradually diminished, and I came to see for the first time its potency in the area of social reform . If it conflicts with the higher law, it cannot be binding as law. In this respect, his dissatisfaction with the half a loaf gained in previous decades applied also to his movements accomplishments, which marked, in his view, not the end of its work but only the end of the beginning, as President Lyndon Johnson said in anticipation of the Voting Rights Act. Above all, because the right to civil disobedience is intelligible only as a corrective of rulers lawlessness, it must not itself foster lawlessness. Two years later, a riot in Detroit wrought even greater destruction.[REF]. Attempting to find virtue in the difference, King offered a troubling description of the prospective participants in his second-phase project, highlighting not their moral discipline but their social desperation: The only real revolutionary, people say, is a man who has nothing to lose., In a similar vein, King attempted to find even in the riots themselves support for his contention that the disaffected urban poor constituted a promising new class of potential pilgrims to nonviolence. Executive Order 8802, issued in 1941 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt under pressure from A. Philip Randolph, mandating antidiscrimination provisions in government defense contracts; Executive Order 9981, issued in 1948 by President Harry S. Truman, mandating the desegregation of the U.S. armed services; the U.S. Congresss enactment of the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960; and, above all, the U.S. Supreme Courts landmark, In Birmingham, the very citadel of southern segregation, the movement would either revitalize itself, King believed, or it would fail and all previous gains would come to naught. [REF] Its present legitimacy and prestige, however, reflect the influence of the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, a movement characterized by its leader, Martin Luther King, Jr., as the greatest mass-action crusade for freedom that has ever occurred in American history.[REF] Prompted by that movement, America has undergone sea changes in law and in public sentiment regarding race relations and the antidiscrimination idea, and Kings Letter from Birmingham Jail, containing his most elaborate justification of the practice of civil disobedience, has become a widely anthologized writing and a fixture in U.S. secondary and collegiate civics education. In his very first public speech (as a prizewinner in his high schools oratory contest), King protested that decades after Emancipation, Black America still lives in chains. For the remainder of his secondary and advanced education, he searched for the proper means, as he put it in that initial speech, to cast down the last barrier to perfect freedom., I know this well, that if one thousand, if one hundred, if ten men whom I could nameif ten, During my student days at Morehouse, King wrote, I read Thoreaus essay Civil Disobedience for the first time. Bull Connor, the chief lawman, colluded with the Klan so they could carry out bloody mayhem on Freedom Riders. Given the context, it would seem a gross distortion of perspective to see in Kings and his fellow protesters actions a danger to law and order comparable to that posed by pro-segregation extremists.[REF]. It was in this Gandhian emphasis on love and nonviolence that I discovered the method for social reform that I had been seeking.. In circumstances justifying greater forms of disobedience, it is reasonable to infer that lesser forms are permissible. 51, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.[REF] Madison followed the teaching of John Locke, who explained in his Second Treatise of Government that the first and fundamental positive law of all commonwealths is the establishing of the legislative power, which stands as the supreme power of the common-wealth.[REF], The constitutional primacy of the legislative power is the institutional corollary of the rule of law. In the fourth of his Massey Lectures,[REF] delivered in late 1967 and published under the title, The Trumpet of Conscience, he stated: There is nothing wrong with a traffic law which says you have to stop for a red light. 91 reference notes. In a democracy, minority groups have basic rights and alternatives to civil disobedience. 8. Martin Luther King, Jr.s Discovery of Civil Disobedience, From his adolescence to the end of his life, Martin Luther King, Jr., found inspiration in the promise inherent in the Declaration of Independence, although he was acutely aware that for black Americans, that promise had gone unfulfilled. You are in a real way depriving him of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, denying in his case the very creed of his society. In addition to being nonviolent, it must proceed from a devotion to the ideal of moral community. In Kings account, therefore, justice entails the principle of equality under law, and legitimate government derives from the consent of the governed. To ward off such disorders, it is necessary to sort out the virtues and vices of Kings arguments and to use the virtues in those arguments to light the way back to the sounder understanding of civil disobedience and the rule of law that is implicit in Americas first principles. [REF], The dangers were sufficiently great that the average person, naturally concerned for the preservation of life and limb, could not be presumed willing or able to brave them. The difficulty appears first in the fact that, as King at times acknowledged, his expansive, second-phase conception of rights was rooted in principles outside Americas constitutional tradition: We have left the realm of constitutional rights, he remarked in, A corollary of Kings earlier position that civil disobedience may be practiced only where necessary is that such disobedience should cease as soon as possiblei.e., as soon as the necessary reforms are achieved or lawful, political avenues to their achievement become available. The practice of civil disobedience must preserve or enhance respect for law and therewith for constitutional republicanism. For both Locke and the Founders, however, the ultimate law to which human government is subjectincluding the fundamental legislative authority of constitution-framers and ratifiersis a law beyond human making, the law of nature. [REF] It reached its full fruition in the pivotal campaign of the entire movement, the Birmingham campaign in the spring of 1963, which occasioned his most extended and influential reflection on the subject. For his own, very different reasons, King, too, judged the first phase of his movement as only a partial and mixed success. But this is not all: many theorists argue that civil disobedience is compatible with the moral duty to obey.