Chapter 1(The non violent political philosophy of Martin Luther King Jnr:A critical Analysis

The introduction explores the non-violent political philosophy of Martin Luther King Jr., emphasizing the
significance of understanding his life, teachings, and legacy. It highlights King's dedication to racial and
social justice, focusing on his efforts to promote the dignity of Black people and equality for all. His
philosophy of non-violence is presented as a powerful strategy against injustice, lifting society from
despair to justice and human dignity. The chapter aims to examine King's life, clarify his concept of non-
violence as a political tool, and critically analyze his political philosophy.

The man Martin Luther King Jr:His life and times

Martin Luther King Jr. was born on January 15, 1929, in Atlanta, Georgia, to Martin Luther King Sr., a
pastor, and Alberta King Williams, a former school teacher. He was the eldest of three children and grew
up as an active and talented child, known for his intellectual curiosity, speaking skills, and singing voice.
Excelling academically, he attended public school where he was consistently a top student and later
enrolled in a school for exceptionally bright children, though it closed after two years.

Due to racial segregation, Martin attended an all-Black high school near his home. At the age of 15, he
was accepted into Morehouse College in 1944, where his experiences with racial injustice deepened his
awareness of social inequality. A defining moment occurred during a train trip to Atlanta when he was
forced to sit behind a curtain separating Black and white passengers, an experience that profoundly
impacted his sense of self and fueled his desire to help his people. These experiences played a crucial
role in shaping his lifelong commitment to fighting racial injustice.

While still uncertain about his career path, Martin Luther King Jr. chose sociology as his major and
English as his minor at Morehouse College. Though he excelled in subjects like English, history,
philosophy, and sociology, he felt dissatisfied with the abstract focus in sociology. However, he was
intellectually shaped by several influential professors.

His sociology advisor, Prof. Walter Chivers, taught him about capitalism's exploitation of Black people,
emphasizing money as the root of racism. Prof. Gladstone Lewis Chandler, his English professor, inspired
King deeply, and under his guidance, King won second place in the Web Oratorical Contest.
The most influential was Prof. George D. Kelsey, Director of the Department of Religion, who
transformed King's views on religion. Initially skeptical due to contradictions between his fundamentalist
upbringing and philosophical teachings, Kelsey taught that a modern minister should address both social
and spiritual issues. This concept profoundly shaped King’s future.

Dr. Benjamin Mays, a prominent theologian and preacher, also deeply inspired King, further solidifying
his evolving perspective on ministry as a tool for social justice.

Dr. Benjamin Mays continued to influence Martin Luther King Jr., emphasizing the need for the Black
church to renew its mission and avoid promoting socially irrelevant sermons. Mays inspired his students
with messages of stewardship, responsibility, and excellence, urging them to strive for unmatched
greatness in whatever they pursued.

King was deeply impressed by Mays, seeing him as a model of the ideal minister—intellectually and
spiritually engaging, morally upright, and socially conscious. This inspiration led King, at seventeen, to
commit to becoming a Baptist minister, following in the footsteps of his father and grandfather. He later
expressed feeling a divine responsibility, saying, “God had placed a responsibility upon my shoulders,
and the more I tried to escape it, the more frustrated I would become.” In 1947, he was ordained and
became Assistant Pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church.

In 1948, at nineteen, King graduated from Morehouse College with a degree in sociology and enrolled at
Crozer Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania to pursue a B.A. in Divinity. There, he studied subjects like
Biblical criticism, church history, ethics, and social philosophy. He even attended special philosophy
classes at the University of Pennsylvania and began exploring philosophical approaches to address social
and political injustice. His studies led him to the works of great thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle,
Rousseau, Hobbes, Bentham, Mill, and Locke. King also encountered Nietzsche’s The Genealogy of
Morals and The Will to Power, which challenged his belief in love more than any other work.

Martin Luther King Jr. was deeply challenged by Nietzsche's The Genealogy of Morals and The Will to
Power, which questioned the effectiveness of Christian love in the face of social and racial conflict.
Nietzsche’s critique left King momentarily disillusioned, making him question whether principles like
loving one’s enemies and turning the other cheek were practical in the context of national and racial
struggles. He wrestled with finding a realistic method to address injustice without resorting to violence.

A pivotal shift occurred when King encountered the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi through a lecture by
Dr. Mordecai W. Johnson, President of Howard University. Johnson, recently returned from a 50-day trip
to India, passionately described Gandhi’s philosophy of satyagraha or "soul force"—the power of love
and truth used as a tool for non-violent resistance. Gandhi’s approach deeply moved King, especially his
march to the sea and his simple, self-disciplined life. King saw in Gandhi’s philosophy a powerful way to
channel his anger and frustration into a constructive, positive force for social change.These
transformative experiences shaped King's developing philosophy of non-violence. He graduated from
Crozer Theological Seminary in June 1951 with a Bachelor of Divinity degree, finishing at the top of his
class. His academic excellence earned him a $1,300 scholarship, which he used to enroll in Boston
University's School of Theology to pursue a Ph.D. in Systematic Theology.

While studying at Boston University, Martin Luther King Jr. took courses in the Philosophy of Religion
and explored Hegel’s Phenomenology of Mind, Philosophy of History, and Philosophy of Right. Hegel's
dialectical process, which emphasized growth through pain and struggle, reinforced King’s belief that
history progressed toward universal justice. He also engaged with existentialist thinkers like Jaspers,
Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and Sartre, examining their insights on personal and social conflict arising from
human existence's complex nature.During his time at Boston, King met Coretta Scott, a student at the
New England Conservatory of Music. They married on June 18, 1953, in a ceremony performed by his
father. Their happy marriage resulted in four children before King’s life was tragically cut short by
assassination.

In 1955, King earned his doctorate in Systematic Theology from Boston University. Throughout his life,
he wrote extensively and delivered powerful speeches that reflected his ideas on justice, non-violence,
and civil rights. His notable works include Stride Towards Freedom: The Montgomery Story (1958),
Strength to Love (1963), Why We Can't Wait (1964), and The Trumpet of Conscience (1968). His famous
speeches include "I Have a Dream" and "I See the Promised Land." These writings and speeches remain
foundational to his legacy in law, justice, and political thought.

THE CONCEPT OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

Civil disobedience aligns closely with Rawls' definition, emphasizing it as a deliberate, public, and non-
violent defiance of certain laws or policies. According to Adeigbo, civil disobedience is not an act of
lawlessness but a morally motivated protest against perceived injustices within a legal framework. The
objective is to draw public attention to unjust laws and press for reforms through peaceful means rather
than violence or chaos.

Both Rawls and Adeigbo highlight key characteristics of civil disobedience:

1. Publicity – The act is openly performed to raise awareness of injustice.

2. Non-violence – It rejects the use of physical harm or destruction.

3. Moral Justification – It is rooted in ethical concerns about justice and fairness.

4. Political Motivation – The goal is to influence policy changes or legal reforms.

The concept of civil disobedience, as described here, emphasizes non-violent protest through the
deliberate and public violation of laws or policies perceived as unjust, even when those laws are
generally considered valid. It involves conscientious defiance, driven by moral and political motivations.

This idea forms the foundation of Martin Luther King Jr.'s non-violent political philosophy. For King, civil
disobedience was not merely a political tool but also a legitimate legal mechanism for challenging
injustice. He believed that unjust laws, which hinder societal progress and equality, should be resisted
through peaceful protest to inspire positive changes in governmental policies and promote justice within
the political system.

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR'S NON-VIOLENT POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

Martin Luther King Jr.'s political philosophy centered on achieving socio-political and economic justice as
essential for creating a "beloved community." He sought to address the systemic segregation and
discrimination against Black people in American society by calling for changes in the social, economic,
and political structures that marginalized them. His activism was a demand for legal reforms that would
dismantle these unjust systems. King's ideas emphasized the unity of morality, power, and social
change, with a focus on the Black community's role in its own upliftment. His philosophy aligns with
major political thinkers like Rousseau, Plato, Hobbes, Locke, and St. Augustine, who explored concepts
of justice, leadership, and social contracts.

Martin Luther King Jr.'s concept of the "black saving mission," akin to the Ghandian philosophy of
satyagraha or "truth force," was central to his non-violent civil disobedience strategy. Gandhi
demonstrated in India that inner struggles, anger, and hatred could be transformed into a positive,
creative force for social change through soul force. King adopted this idea, believing that to liberate
Black Americans from systemic racism and injustice, there was a need for a moral catalyst—akin to a
Socratic gadfly—to challenge the oppressive status quo and elevate society to one of respect, freedom,
and justice.

King's approach of non-violent direct action aimed to create a crisis that would force a community,
resistant to negotiation, to confront and address the injustices it perpetuated. He argued that while
violent tension should be opposed, constructive, non-violent conflict was essential for societal growth.
As King explained, non-violent direct action was necessary to push for change, particularly when laws
and systems upheld discrimination and segregation.
In the context of American society during King’s time, social, political, economic, and religious
institutions were intertwined with laws that institutionalized segregation and racial inequality. The
structural operations and effects of these institutions were directly shaped by the discriminatory laws of
the time, and King’s philosophy of non-violent civil disobedience sought to expose and challenge these
systems in order to create a more just and equitable society.how will it lead to social change? Martin
Luther King Jr. addressed these questions by arguing that unjust laws, which perpetuate inequality and
discrimination, must be opposed through non-violent civil disobedience. His conviction was that such
laws, although legal by the letter, were morally corrupt and must be resisted in order to restore justice
and dignity to those oppressed by them.

King believed that it was more honorable to align oneself with moral conscience than to blindly follow
laws that were institutionally unjust. For him, laws that enforced racial segregation and discrimination
were a direct affront to human dignity and must be challenged through peaceful resistance. In his view,
the primary objective was not merely to break the law, but to engage in actions that would force society
to confront the inherent injustice of these laws and change the underlying attitudes that supported
them.

His call for the abolition of laws that segregated and discriminated against African Americans in every
aspect of life, from education and housing to transportation and public facilities, was a central tenet of
his activism. King demanded an end to policies like Jim Crow that perpetuated systemic racism, not just
as a legal battle, but as a moral imperative for the nation's identity and integrity. His vision was to
eradicate racial distinctions and bring about a society where all people were treated equally regardless
of race, creed, color, or national origin.

Thus, King’s political thought sought to answer the difficult question of how to confront unjust laws. His
strategy of non-violent direct action, including protests, sit-ins, and marches, was designed not only to
disobey the law but to do so in a way that would draw national and international attention to the
injustice, ultimately forcing society to re-evaluate its legal and moral stance on segregation and
discrimination.negotiate is compelled to confront the issue at hand. This strategy, as King outlined, is
not meant to incite violence or chaos but to serve as a catalyst for dialogue, reflection, and ultimately,
systemic change. By willingly accepting the consequences of breaking unjust laws, the individual not
only exposes the moral failings of the law but also demonstrates a deep respect for justice and the rule
of law as it should be.

King's philosophy of civil disobedience, therefore, has profound implications for the political system and
society. Politically, it challenges the status quo by exposing the inherent injustices within the legal and
institutional frameworks. By doing so, it forces lawmakers, policymakers, and leaders to address these
inequities and consider reforms to align the laws with moral and ethical principles. It also empowers
marginalized groups to assert their rights and demand inclusion in the political process, thereby
strengthening democratic ideals.
Socially, non-violent civil disobedience fosters a greater sense of collective responsibility and moral
awareness among citizens. It encourages individuals and communities to critically evaluate the justice of
existing laws and practices and to stand in solidarity with those who suffer under oppressive systems.
This approach promotes the ideals of empathy, understanding, and unity, which are essential for the
creation of the "beloved community" that King envisioned—a society rooted in equality, justice, and
mutual respect.

In summary, King's strategy of civil disobedience aims to transform both the political and social
landscapes by confronting injustice with moral courage, fostering dialogue, and inspiring collective
action toward a more equitable and just society. It is a method that not only seeks to correct immediate
wrongs but also to lay the foundation for lasting societal progress.Martin Luther King Jr.'s philosophy of
non-violent civil disobedience underscores the transformative power of moral resistance against unjust
laws and systems. His approach was not one of passivity but of active engagement with injustice, aimed
at exposing and correcting the moral failings of the political system.

King's assertion that civil disobedience can "prick the conscience" of lawmakers reflects his belief that
unjust laws can only be overturned when the public is made fully aware of their moral and ethical
contradictions. By refusing to comply with such laws, non-violent resisters create a tension that forces
society to confront the injustice, compelling political leaders to reconsider their policies and practices.

His strategy emphasizes the distinction between opposing injustice itself, rather than the individuals
enforcing it. This principle makes non-violent resistance a powerful tool for social change, as it
challenges the legitimacy of the system without resorting to personal attacks or violence. King's belief in
the moral authority of civil disobedience reveals a deep respect for the true purpose of law—ensuring
justice, equality, and the protection of human rights.

Ultimately, King's non-violent resistance aimed to reform the political system by holding it accountable
to its foundational principles. His advocacy was rooted in the belief that laws must be aligned with moral
truth and justice, and when they fail in this duty, it becomes a citizen's responsibility to resist them
peacefully. This perspective not only critiques the inadequacy of oppressive laws but also inspires the
pursuit of a more just and equitable society.

CRITICAL CONCLUSION

Martin Luther King Jr. not only theorized non-violent civil disobedience but actively applied it to fight
racial injustice in the U.S. He believed in resisting unjust laws through peaceful means to expose moral
failings and bring about social change. His leadership during events like the Montgomery Bus Boycott
(1955-1956) and the Birmingham Campaign (1963) demonstrated how non-violent protests could Martin
Luther King Jr. not only theorized non-violent civil disobedience but actively applied it to fight racial
injustice in the U.S. He believed in resisting unjust laws through peaceful means to expose moral failings
and bring about social change. His leadership during events like the Montgomery Bus Boycott (1955-
1956) and the Birmingham Campaign (1963) demonstrated how non-violent protests could challenge
systemic racism effectively. King's strategies, including sit-ins and marches, inspired legislative changes
like the Civil Rights Act of 1964, proving that moral resistance could transform oppressive legal systems.

challenge systemic racism effectively. King's strategies, including sit-ins and marches, inspired legislative
changes like the Civil Rights Act of 1964, proving that moral resistance could transform oppressive legal
systems.Moreover, King's reliance on non-violent civil disobedience raises concerns about its practical
limitations in deeply oppressive societies. Critics argue that such strategies might be ineffective against
regimes unwilling to engage in moral reflection or dialogue, as seen in instances where non-violent
protesters were met with extreme violence.

Despite these criticisms, King's political thought remains influential. His non-violent civil disobedience
successfully challenged systemic racism and segregation in the U.S., inspiring global movements for
justice and equality. His belief in moral resistance and peaceful protest redefined the struggle for civil
rights and continues to serve as a powerful model for social change worldwide.