Interracial relationship, Christianity and social
change in Martin Luther King Jr’s philosophy
By Daniel OZOUKOU
Independent
journalist
Founding director
of the Martin Luther king Center for peace and social justice, abidjan
Introduction
Under the leadership
of Martin Luther King Jr. the Civil Rights movement of 1950s, shook the whole
American conscience about the problem of racial equality, justice and freedom.
Indeed the relations between Black and White since the 16th century up
to the twentieth century were conflictual made up with violence, riots,
uprisings etc. Dr. King uttered constantly for social change. As a minister he
believed that the Christian Church must play a leading role in that changing
process. Therefore, the topic understudy entitled “Interracial relationship
Christianity and social change” stands as the corner stone of Dr. King’s
philosophy. In sense that, most of his speeches, letters, and books revolve
around this content. Our aim by reflecting on that topic is to try to understand
the true political philosophy of Martin Luther King. However our paper should
be seen as an attempt to seize Dr. King thought and belief. Through the topic we
want to enlighten Dr. King views and visions about the relations between whites
and Blacks. And how, he envisioned Christianity
role in social change achieving. But actually what is “social change”? The
scientific study principles urges us to “understand first certain terms and
concepts to make sense of the subject”[1].
Therefore, we will first try to catch up the concept of “social change” secondly
we will deal with King’s reflections on White and Black relations and finally
his proposal to achieve social change in America.
I- SOCIAL CHANGE: CONCEPTUAL APPROACH
“The notion of
social change is complex“[2]
it covers a broad range of social structures: Technological, economic, political,
agricultural, industrial etc. In the field of “technology” for instance “the
change occurs from simple and traditional techniques towards application of
scientific knowledge” In agriculture the transformation in seen through the
shift operating through “evolution from subsistence farming toward commercial
production of agricultural goods” The industrial aspect is the “transition from
the use of human and animal power toward industrialization proper or “men
aggregated at power driven machines working for monetary returns with product
manufacturing process ‘’ In the ecological field change is the movement from
farm and village toward urban centers[3]-
Stephen Opoku defining social change write ‘’social change depend on what we
take society to be, and we take society to be what our purpose and position
dictate” in this regards opoku establishes
two kind of changes: “natural
change and planned one’’ in his conceptual approach of social change Ghanaian
Scholar puts into relief the theories advocated by philosophers, such as Thomas
Hobbes, Marx Weber. Opoku noticed the
theory of social change in the idea of Thomas Hobbes when he believes that
“State of nature need a strong ruler to serve men from destruction “This
hobbesian idea implies that violence is needed to restore peace stability. Marx Weber analysis according to Opoku is
that “the calvinist philosophy produced capitalism for it preached hard work,
postponement of pleasure and thereby accumulation of capital “. In addition
Opoku point out social scientists ideas. He writes that recent theorist like Wilbert move (1963) and Neil
Smelser (1959) have attributed much of the changes going on to the industrial
revolution and industrialization.” For clarification purpose Stephen Opoku
stresses the theory of Wilber Moore stating that industrialization brings about
two kinds of change, first order changes and second order changes. The first
order changes are which universal as a consequence of industrialization such
money system, market exchange, money economic distribution etc. The second
orders changes imply changes in social institutions consequent upon the factory
system.[4]
From these theories we clearly understand that change by essence is the result
of crisis in the sense that it is the negation of status quo for the
implementation of new dynamic order. The idea of change produces a clash
between conservative and progresist ideologies. This is why some one wrote that
there is an inherent “conflict” or contradiction within any social change
[idea] whenever change occurs some will lose ground and other will gain ground”
on contrary Ivo K. Feierabend thinks that “if social change is perceived as bringing
gratification, if it fulfils aspirations, there is no reason to expect social
crisis in its wake”[5].
African-Americans since
the 17th century struggled for change in terms of peace and justice and
racial equality. Dr. King took the floor of that struggle in 1950s and wrote
and spoke a lot about the unbearable relations between Blacks and Whites.
II- Black and White Relationship
In most of his books and speeches; Martin
Luther King Jr. showed his discontent and grievances against white oppression
and systematic domination on Black people. For instance in Where Do We Go from
Here, Dr. King “piercingly revealed the cause of [the] national discord,
placing it squately on the ingrained white racism of American society’’ (Coreta
scott King). In this book, Dr. King recalls the nightmarish period of slavery.
“At beginning it is important to X-ray our history and reveal the full extent
of the disease”[6]. Indeed
during the seventeenth century black people shored in the new land (America) as
slaves to work in farms and plantations. Slavery, that peculiar institution established the principle of “masters” and the
“slaves”. Therefore, the “natural” relationship between these two individual is
actually that of domination and oppression and prejudice. “The prejudice has been nourished by the doctrine of race inferiority
(…) The Negro alone as the inferior race“[7].
In that historical evocation Dr. King did not avoid the plight of Native
Americans: The Indians. “Our nation was
born in genocide when it embraces the doctrine that the original American, the
Indian was an inferior race “(idem p.120)
“The summer of our
discontent “chapter 7 of his work why we can’t wait from which the above
statements are extracted, Dr. King clearly opposed himself to the status quo
and advocates social change. In the first chapter of the same book, Dr. King
put into relief the unchangeable situation of black since the emancipation
proclamation “One hundred had passed
since emancipation with no profound effect (…) the Negro (…) still wasn’t free”[8].
The introductory part of his work is more explicit “Abraham Lincoln had signed (…) the emancipation proclamation [but]
equality had never arrived. Equality was a hundred years late.’’ Both in “The
negro Revolution” (chapter 1) and ‘’the summer of our discontent’’ (chapter 7),
Dr. King wrote that racism was the basic problem of White and Black conflict.
And the theme of racism is well debated and presented in “Racism and white
Blacklash” The third chapter of his famous Where Do we go from Here chaos or
community?
“The roots of racism are very deep in America”
(P.68). But actually what is racism? Dr. King shed light on the concept by
recalling some theories; he quoted Dr. Georges Kelsey’s Racism and the
Christian understanding of man. He extracted “Racism is a faith. It is a
form of idolatry’’. In the same perspective, Dr. King mentioned Ruth Benedict
conceptual approach of racism. Indeed she defines racism as “The dogma that one ethnic group is condemned
by nature to hereditary inferior and another group is destined to hereditary
superiority. It is the dogma that one race has carried progress throughout
human history and can alone ensure future progress.” Therefore Dr. King
concluded that ‘’racism ultimate” logic is genocide’’ (p 69-70). Taking the
example of Hitler Dr. King wrote “Hitler in his mad ruthless attempt to
exterminate the Jews, carried the logic of racism into it ultimate conclusion.”
Hence, he denoted that “ ‘’racism is a philosophy based one a contempt for life
(…) an arrogant assertion that one race is the center of value and object of
devotion , before which , other races must kneel in submission”(idem) the racist
behaviour carried out by white people according to Dr. King was justified by misinterpretations
the bible “ It was argued that negro was inferior by nature because Noah’s
Curse upon the children of Ham [and ] the apostle Paul’s dictum “ servant , be
obedient to you master. In the same idea Dr. King revealed a popular syllogism
in western world that denegated Black people humanity: “All men are made in image of God; God, as everybody knows, is not a
Negro therefore the Negro is not a man” (P.73)
A part from these
assertions, Martin Luther King jr. stressed also the theories attempting to
affirm white race supremacy. For example, The Teutonic theory which argued that
all Anglo Saxon institutions of any worth had their historical roots in Teutonic
tribal institution of ancient Germany and furthermore that “only the Teutonic
race had been imbued with the ability to build stable governments’’ There is
also Dr. Samuel G. Morton leading figure of the “head size theory which
affirmed that the larger the skull, the superior the individual. Dr. Josiah C. Not , count Arthur de Gobineau in
his book The inequality of the Human races vigorously defended the theory of the inferiority of the black man .” Dr. King concludes that
these fabricated theories carried out by pseudo scientists pervaded the
atmosphere” (P. 74). We clearly understand that at the beginning of American
Society the racism was and that supremacist ideology carried out by
intellectuals explains sufficiently the distortion and opened conflict between
White men and Black men since ages. “Being a negro in America means being
herded in ghettos or reservations, being constantly ignored and made to feel
invisible (…) being a negro in America is not a comfortable existence’’ Through
that Statements Martin Luther King Jr.
shed light on the problematic of White and Black coexistence. That fearsome
situation made up with humiliation, deprivation, dehumanization according to
Dr. King should and must change. But how social change could be achieved?
III- Dr. King’s philosophy to achieve social change
“Constructive
social change will bring certain tranquillity, evasion will merely encourage
turmoil” Dr. King believed that social change could be achieved if some tactics
and strategies were implemented. Among these tactics and strategies we have
social Gospel Christianity, integration nonviolent direct actions.
Social Gospel Christianity
During his crusade for freedom and social
justice Martin Luther Jr. was constantly confronted to his fellow clergymen
both White and Black. Should a Christian involve in social issues? Some
ministers of king’s days believed that Christianity had noting to do with
social issues. Therefore Dr. King nonviolent direct actions were unsustainable
Biblically speaking. The pastor Martin Luther king jr. totally disagreed with
his fellow clergymen. And, advocated social gospel Christianity: The true
mission of Christian church. “Any religion which professes to be concerned
about the souls of men and is not concerned about social and economic
conditions that scar the soul is a spiritual moribund religion only waiting for
the day [of God] be buried.” That statement of Dr. King, clearly establish a
parallel with Marc 6:3 where Jesus Christ seeing the hungry people who have heard
the good news recommended to his disciples to feed them. “Feed them by
yourselves” that social attitude of
the holy son of God rung a bell. It clearly shows that the social dimension in
the theology education should not be neglected. And Dr. King as a Minister had
certainly understood that important aspect of the Christ teachings. Therefore
Martin Luther King Jr argued that ‘’religion must not seek only to change the
soul of individuals, but also change the environmental conditions so that, the
soul can have chance once it is changed.
This is why he called upon ‘’Christians not only to think about streets of
heaven but also about millions of
people who go to bed hungry’’. It is in that same real that John Marron said “only
Christianity in which people are committed to one another is true
Christianity.” (Manteau Militaire). Dr. King’s social gospel
Christianity philosophy for social change is also shared many Christian
thinkers. Among them stands Rauschenbush. In fact, Rauschenbush believed that the
primary task of the church must be to lead individuals to seek their own
personal salvation. But his prophetic passion for social reform came though his
personal experience with poverty. Therefore he realizes or discovered that the
prophet Jesus-Christ and the primitive church not only concerned themselves
with the salvation of people but also systematically condemned the evil rooted
in the structures of society. Finally Rauschenbush concludes in his famous Christianity
and the social crisis work that ‘’all human goodness must be social goodness;
[consequently] a man is moral when he is social; he is immoral when he is
antisocial’’ Professor Jose Fonseca academic Dean of a Baptist theological seminary
undertook also a reflection on the social gospel Christianity. In his article
entitled “Mission and social dimension of Theological Education,’ José shed
light on that important debate. In reference to Dr. Gresham Machen he writes “that
the church is dying for lack of thoughtfulness (…) the church is not impacting
all aspects of social reality with the power of God, and also because it is not
training its leaders to produce true transformation in society. “[9]
Dr. Samuel Escobar, a Peruvian missiologist quoted by Jose Fonseca firmly
believes that “the true mission of the Christian church is to serve the needy
people not as a matter of preference, nor something we do because we want. [Clearly]
The church has to serve the world because service is a sign of the new life in
the Gospel of Christ.[10]
All these theories clearly show that Dr. King
was not the only clergyman who believed that “Christian mission includes social
transformation” (Lausanne convenant). Therefore the Christian church “should
not be afraid to denounce evil and injustices wherever they exist”. It should
freed it self from the status quo and speak up against injustices. “The church must
incessantly raise its voice in a prophetic warning against social evil”. Besides
social Gospel Christianity, Dr. Luther King Jr, evocated the principles of
integration and unity to achieve social change.
Unity and integration
Black must regard themselves and Americans and that the solution to their
problems will not come through the creation of separate black nation (…) their
goal must be full participation in the of this.” This statement summarise the
idea of Dr. King. Indeed Dr. King believed that Black and White should join
hands and live together. The Chapter 6 of his why we can’t wait entitle “Black
and White Together” Clarifies Dr. King Philosophy. Dr. King famous “I’ve a
dream” speech sustains ever more that idea of unity and cooperation. “(…) for
many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have
come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny and their
freedom in inextricable bound to our freedom. We can not walk alone” For Dr.
King white “liberals” support was very important for social change achieving. This
is why he urged the Black community should not to reject White people. In that
same perspective Dr. King sustained in his where do we go from here chaos or
community? That social change can only be achieved both by Black men and
White men commitment. Otherwise social transformation, peace and justice restoration
cannot only be the fact of Negroes. This why he wrote “Negroes hold only one
key to the double lock of peaceful change. The other is in the hand of the White[11].”
Dr. King believed in both unity and
integration for social change. Therefore Dr. King criticized Black power principles of none association with white “ the
weakness of Black power is its failure to see that Black man needs the White
man and the White man needs the Black man” [ vice-versa] (p. 52). In addition
Dr. King shed light in his philosophy by criticizing the Garveryism of “Back to
Africa”, separatism of Blacks Muslims. “ what is most needed is a coalition of
Negro and liberal white that will work to make both major parties truly
responsive to the need of power” (P. 49). Peace and freedom achieving relied
according to Dr. King in alliance with the majority group ‘’to succeed in a
pluralistic society and often hostile one at that, the Negro obviously needs organized strength , but that strength
will only be effective when it is consolidated through constructed alliances
with the majority group” (p. 50). In consideration
that “there is no theoretical or sociological divorce between liberation and
integration” Dr. King Jr, urged his fellow Black men the involvement in politics. “In
the future we must become intensive political activists.” Voting right is a
citizenship right so by involving in politics Black people would take part to
public affairs and decision. This would be the ultimate expression of
integration for change implementation.
The final and most
important prescription for social change achieving according to Dr. King is nonviolence.
“What is needed is a strategy for change (…) this only been offered by (…)
non-violence” (P. 59)
Nonviolence
Martin Luther King
Jr. the Indian Mohandas Gandhi advocated non-violent resistance to overcome
injustice and racism occurring in American society in the 1950s. But the
relevant questions to be asked are why non-violence? When Black are killed (as animal)
why nonviolence when Black are illtreated? Why nonviolence when the oppressor
undertake violence? Dr. King answered these relevant questions by saying that
the minority cannot combat the majority group using the same methods and means.
Otherwise Black people would commit a collective suicide. That is to say, if
Black men used guns and violence to respond to White men violence they would be
smashed. Consequently Dr. King prescribed non-violence to put an end to
violence; for violence cannot end violence “hate cannot drive out hate: only love
can do that”. ‘’The Negro turned back on force because he knew (…) he could not
win freedom (…) through physical force.’’[12]
Martin Luther King Jr. advocated nonviolence because that philosophy was “the most
practically sound and morally excellent way for the Negro to achieve freedom”[13]
In King’s ideas nonviolence is not passive but active. He used what he called
“Non-violent direct actions which were mass movement protest. Made up with, demonstrations,
sit-ins, jail-ins kneel-ins etc. For Dr. King social change can only be achieved
if it is demanded by Black people through non-violent direct actions. “Freedom
is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”
(p. 80) one of the most important things that pastor King revealed and
sustained is that nonviolence works as an agent of both personal and society transformation.
Indeed ‘’nonviolence philosophy breaks with the old ingrained concept of our
society: the eye for an eye; it enabled [the activist] to transmute hatred into
constructive energy, to seek not only to free [himself] but also to free his oppressor from his sins’’. Therefore Dr.
King saw nonviolence as an expression of love. In this sense he taught to his
followers the necessity to love “all men and instructed them that doing so they
could (…) creatively transform society. That important duty prescribed by Christianity
and sustained by Martin Luther king and had been criticized by the philosopher
Nietzsche. He saw the principle “love
all men” as a glorification of weakness and argued that pity is none sense
attitude for it deprives us of the strength. Furthermore the philosopher
protested that while human species demands the suppression of the weak,
Christianity through its emphasis on love favours only the solidarity of the
weak. Turn the other cheek, love your
enemies. Dr. King criticized Nietzsche theories. “Nietzsche
mistakenly identified love with resignation of power and power the denial of
love’’ King sustained that ‘’power not rooted in love is reckless and abusive”[14]
.
According to Mahatma
Gandhi ‘’we do not practice nonviolence if we love only those who love us’’.
Dr. King explained in the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” that ‘’the very purpose
of nonviolent direct actions is to create such a crisis and foster such a
tension that a community which constantly refused to negotiate is forced to
confront the issue’’ non-violence, thus breaks the status quo and hand down
progress and change. Hence, it is clear that “nonviolence does not mean meek
submission to the will of oppressor” (M. Gandhi), It is a pacific protest for social
change.
Conclusion
At that step of our analysis it clearly
appears that Martin Luther King Jr. was actually committed to foster
brotherhood, peace and solidarity in America. For him racial, ethnic and religious
barriers should felt down. Because racism that characterized the new land was
the cause of American turmoil, violence and disorder. The philosophy advocated
by Dr. King to achieve social change was social gospel Christianity, unity and
integration and nonviolence. The outcomes of Dr. King’s philosophy
implementation are self-evident: the 1960 sit-in desecrated lunch counter in
more than 150 cities a year. The 1961 Freedom rides put an end to segregation
in interstate travel. The 1956 bus boycott in Montgomery (Alabama) ended
segregation on buses not only of that city; but in practically every city of south.
The 1963 Birmingham movement and the historical March on Washington won passage
of the most powerful civil right law in a century. The 1965 Selma movement
brought enactment of the voting Right law. In addition Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr. was dedicated peace Nobel Prize in 1964. That distinction clearly showed or
acknowledged the relevance of Dr. King’s philosophy about peace building.
“Together we must learn to live as brothers
or together we will be forced to perish as fools” Dr. King final warning to mankind.
political analyst
+22522443604
+225 05919795
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Martin
Luther King Jr. why we can’t wait?
/ A Mentor Book New American Library 1964
Martin
Luther king jr where do we go from
here chaos or community 1968 Beacon press: Boston
Jason L. Finkle and Richard Gable political
Development and social change second edition 1966, 1971
- J Gresham Machen; Christianity and
culture Quoted by Jose Fonseca Madrid:
FELIRE; 198.
Research Review, Institute of African Studies
University of Ghana Legon New series vol. in Nos.122 1995
Martin Luther King Jr. a Making of Mind
Bible
Papers
Martin Luther King Jr. And the African – American social gospel in
African-American Christianity Claborne Carson www.kinginstitute.info
Mission and social dimensions of theological
Education Jose Fonseca www.wocati.org
Christianity and Society
Ozoukou Daniel
Christianisme et société (conférence)
Samuel Escobar, Evangelization and human
search for justice Lausanne conference for world Evangelization, July 1974
.Quoted by Jose Fonseca
[4] Read social change and its
implications for social work in research review (NS) vol 11 N° 122 1995
Institute of Africa studies ,University of
Ghana
[5] political instability, violence and revolution p.570 in social change
and development
[6] why we can’t wait p119
[7] Idem p120
[8] The summer of our discontent in why
we can’t wait p.22 -23
[9] [J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and
culture Madrid; 1980. Translated by Francis Schaeffer www.wocah.org
[10] Samuel Escobar, in Evangelization and human search for justice, Lausanne conference for world Evangelization, July 1974. P 88
[11] Where are we? chapter 1 P. 22 in
where do we go from here
[12] The sword that heals in why we can' wait P 35
[13] Where do we go from here chaos or
community? P 63
[14] Martin Luther king the making
of mind the Making of Mind)