When I think of Martin Luther King, there is one thing that always impresses me. I always think about how different the American landscape would look today if he had taken up violence instead of nonviolent resistance.
Without Dr. King, I imagine America would be more like what Iraq is today. Look at the Sunnis and Shiites. Do you think they will ever be able to get along knowing how much pain and torture they have caused each other? Lesser leaders always take the violent approach. Civil disobedience is more difficult and takes a longer time. But how long do you think it will take the Sunnis and Shiites to be able to sit in the same restaurant together? To talk to each other? It may never happen.
A civil rights movement has all the signs of being worthy of a violent uprising. The minority is being subjected to unjust laws. The minority is being tortured and killed. If George Bush was in Dr. King’s shoes, what do you think he would have done?
Dr. King could have taken any one of numerous approaches to all of his stances. But every time he always stood by using nonviolent resistance. He believed that violence bread resentment and animosity for generations. Because of this approach, I believe that while there is still a long distance to go for equality in America, we do not hate each other. Had another leader risen up, had nonviolence not been an important part of the strategy, I feel hatred and resentment could be a much greater part of the American ethnic divide.
Civil disobedience is never the easy route. To make it effective, as a leader, you must be able to mobilize large numbers of people, and ask them to sacrifice very deeply and over a long period of time. The Montgomery Bus Boycott is an excellent example of that. For over a year, large numbers of people boycotted the Montgomery Bus system, effectively impacting the system economically. The Montgomery Bus system was hurting so much that eventually that had to give into the demands of the boycotters.
Wouldn’t it have been much easier to simply vandalize and destroy the buses until their demands were met? It would have been easier, taken fewer people and probably taken much less time. But the residual effects of such a movement would have always been looked upon negatively. Such a movement would, to this day, be spoken about under the breath of many people. The violent approach to the civil rights movement would have polarized our nation.
Because Dr. King was able to command the year long boycott of the Montgomery Bus System, there is no resentment. There is only admiration at best and apathy at worst. A “so what” attitude of people today, while sad, is not nearly as deleterious to what the worst attitude could be that would have come from a violent uprising.
Every boycott, sit-in and march was met with this same nonviolent approach. I imagine he must have had followers that would think how much easier things would be with a little violence. Nonviolence requires so much energy, dedication and commitment. We have no idea how fortunate we are that a man such as Dr. King gave his undying, unending energy and commitment to creating, building and implementing a nonviolent civil rights movement.
I know there is a long way to go for true equality in America. I often think of how I can be a more useful tool in helping with that equality. There is a long way to go. But I also think of how far we have come. I think that because of Martin Luther King we are given the opportunity to continue to bridge that gap. Without him and his civil disobedience we likely would be dealing with scars that would take generations to heal.
At least we can talk to each other.
Thank you Dr. King. You are the greatest leader in American history.
