2022-06-14 05:31:14
"I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city's white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.
In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action."
From Dr. King's Letter From Birmingham
http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articl.../Letter_Birmingham.html
In which he discusses the tactics enbroiled by the civil rights movement in response to the slow action of "white power" and how his, so called by his peers, "violent movement" is justified.
"My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension.""
When you are directly attacking the current power dynamic, nonviolence will often be hijacked by violence. And as the naysayers cry out "Don't you see, they just want to incite violence!!" You must remain steadfast in your ideals and continue to reject the labels those who stand against you claim you are. Even Dr. King recognized the value of "violence" in the face of rejected negotiations:
"The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation."
Even discussing the breaking of laws, in a way that would make Emerson and Thoreau proud:
"One may well ask: "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all.""
He even covered that which is currently happening, the wavering admonishment and dereliction of the movement by "the white moderate":
"Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
So ultimately, a movement, however nonviolent, will be either hijacked by violent actors or declared violent, with both instances allowing the naysayers to reject the notions set forth by the movement, no matter the decree.
"Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals."
To claim a movement is immoral because of their tactics is claiming an argument is de facto wrong because an actor doesn't have the resources to argue efficiently.
"Although King was hesitant to criticize Black Power openly, he told his staff on 14 November 1966 that Black Power ‘‘was born from the wombs of despair and disappointment. Black Power is a cry of pain. It is in fact a reaction to the failure of White Power to deliver the promises and to do it in a hurry.… The cry of Black Power is really a cry of hurt’’ (King, 14 November 1966)."
http://kingencyclopedia.stanford.edu/.../enc_black_power/
172 viewsSetharoonie, 02:31
T
