Notes on Civil Disobedience and Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Philosophy

Definition of Civil Disobedience

• John Rawls's Definition: Civil Disobedience =df A public, nonviolent, conscientious yet political act, contrary to the law, usually done with the aim of bringing about a change in the laws or policies of the government.

  • This definition implies that any act of civil disobedience must meet all these conditions, and anything meeting these conditions qualifies as civil disobedience.

• Paradigm Cases: Examples include Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on a bus and trespassers protesting a war.

• What is NOT Civil Disobedience (according to Rawls's definition):

  • Boycotts: Not CD if they are not contrary to law.

  • Terrorist bombings: Not CD because they are violent (uncivil).

  • Secret acts: Not CD because they do not aim at changing the law (require publicity).

  • Conscientious objectors (unlawful refusal to go to war): Not CD if their intent was not to change the law, but merely to avoid personal participation.

• Moral Justification vs. Definition: The definition of civil disobedience is separate from its moral justification. "Is this civil disobedience?" and "Is this morally justified?" are independent questions.

Debates Regarding Civil Disobedience

• Destruction or Theft of Property: Some regard these actions as uncivil and therefore incompatible with civil disobedience. Others disagree.

  • Actions Ruled Out by Strict Interpretation: Animal rights activists releasing animals, the Boston Tea Party, certain hacktivists, and people throwing red paint on fur wearers.

    • These actions are subject to debate: they could be civil or uncivil, justified or unjustified. Violent resistance, for instance, might be justified even if it doesn't qualify as civil disobedience.

• Willingness to Accept Legal Punishment: A common question is whether engaging in CD requires willingness to accept legal punishment as a way to highlight injustice.

  • Rosa Parks Example: We might hesitate to call her civilly disobedient if she had fled from the police.

  • Political Goal vs. Punishment: Being arrested and punished is not always essential to achieving the political goal of changing laws, though it is often helpful.

  • Hacktivists: If hacktivists anonymously hack a government website to post a political message and are not caught, it might still be considered CD.

  • Justification and Punishment Acceptance: Some argue that CD is easier to justify if the individual is willing to accept legal punishment.

  • Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s View (from "Letter from Birmingham Jail"): King stated that an individual who breaks an unjust law openly, lovingly, and willingly accepts the penalty (like imprisonment) to arouse community conscience, is actually expressing the highest respect for law.

Types of Civil Disobedience

• Direct Civil Disobedience: Involves breaking the specific law being protested or opposed.

  • Examples: Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat; Gandhi collecting salt from the ocean (illegal under British law).

• Indirect Civil Disobedience: Involves breaking a different law from what is being protested.

  • Examples: Black Lives Matter (BLM) blocking traffic to protest police abuses; trespassing in a government building to protest a government policy.

  • This type is often necessary when the protested law or policy cannot be directly broken by protestors.

Influential Thinkers on Civil Disobedience

• Henry David Thoreau ($1817-1862$): Famous for his essays; refused to pay taxes supporting slavery and the Mexican-American War.

• Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ($1929-1968$): His "Letter from Birmingham Jail" ($1963$) is a cornerstone text.

Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail"

• Context: King and others were arrested for marching without permission against racial segregation in Birmingham, Alabama. The letter was an open response to white southern religious leaders who criticized his tactics, advocating waiting for the democratic process and labeling him an extremist.

• King's Justification for Being in Birmingham:

  • He was invited by the local Southern Christian Leadership Conference chapter.

  • He felt compelled, like Apostle Paul, to bring the "gospel of freedom" where it was needed.

  • He believed that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere," and injustice was prevalent in Birmingham.

• Four Steps in a Nonviolent Campaign:
  $1$. Ascertain whether injustice exists.
  $2$. Negotiation (lawbreaking as a last resort).
  $3$. Self-purification (preparing participants to non-violently endure violence and imprisonment).
  $4$. Direct action.

• Application of the Steps in Birmingham:

  • $1$. Injustices (segregation, unfair treatment) were evident.

  • $2$. King's group negotiated with store owners to remove racist signs, but owners broke their promises.

  • $3$. Participants ensured they would not retaliate with violence and were prepared for jail.

  • $4$. Protests were delayed until after local elections to avoid "clouding the issues." Direct action was understood as anything that pressured politicians, merchants, and citizens to change.

• Justification for Direct Action over Negotiation: King argued that direct action was necessary to create tension and pressure those who refused to negotiate, thereby forcing negotiation.

  • Socrates Comparison: King drew a parallel between his actions and Socrates, who created mental tension to help people move past myths. King sought to create social tension to overcome prejudice.

• Rejection of "Wait":

  • "Justice delayed is justice denied."

  • "Wait" has historically meant "never" for racial justice.

  • King rejected the "myth of time," arguing that progress requires active effort, not just the passage of time.

• Justification for Breaking the Law:

  • Importance of Law: King emphasized obeying just laws, citing Brown vs. Board of Education, which outlawed school segregation.

  • Futility of Political Methods: Black citizens in many parts of the South were effectively denied the right to vote, making conventional political methods useless for changing laws.

  • Natural Law Credo (St. Augustine): "An unjust law is no law at all." Unjust laws are man-made laws that conflict with moral or God's law and thus lack validity.

    • King's Engagement: King's civil disobedience, particularly regarding a permit law applied unjustly to deny $1^{st}$ Amendment rights, appears to align with direct CD justified by natural law, as the law, in his view, ceases to be a true law.

    • Limitations of Natural Law Theory: While useful for justifying direct CD (by arguing the broken law isn't a real law), it cannot justify indirect CD (breaking a just law to protest an unjust one). Therefore, alternative justifications are needed for all forms of CD.

  • Consequence-Based Justification: An alternative approach involves comparing the harms and benefits of CD against other options.

    • Factors to Consider: Severity of injustice, likelihood of CD rectifying injustice, harshness of punishment for protestors (and potential backlash), and potential harm to others or businesses.

    • The difficulty lies in accurately answering the second question (likelihood of rectification).

• Blame for Counter-Violence: King argued that peaceful protestors are not responsible for the counter-violence their protests spark.

  • Socrates Paradox: He again cited Socrates, stating that Socrates could not be blamed for Athens executing him. However, this is somewhat ironic, as Socrates, in Crito, argued for always obeying the law.

Was King an Extremist?

• Initial Argument Against: King initially argued he was not an extremist, positioning his non-violent group as moderate between apathetic Blacks and militant, violent Black nationalist groups (e.g., Malcolm X, Nation of Islam, Black Panthers).

• Subsequent Embrace: King later expressed pleasure in being labeled an extremist, if it meant being an "extremist for the sake of good."

  • Examples of "Good Extremists": Jesus, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther, Thomas Jefferson, Apostle Paul, Prophet Amos, and preacher John Bunyan.

  • Echoed Sentiment: Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater (ironically, a conservative opposed to the Civil Rights Act) famously stated in the following year ($1964$): "**Extremism