1 Non-violence in the Civil Rights Movement in the United States of America Dissertation Freie Universität Berlin JFK Institut 2008 Fachbereich Philosophie und Geisteswissenschaften Disputationsdatum 18.02.2009 Wissenschaftlicher Betreuer: Prof. Sieglinde Lemke Eingereicht von Sherif Abdel Samad 2 Outline Introduction 6 1.) Non-violence and African-American Culture 17 1.1. Introduction of Non-violence 17 1.2.) Necessity of Success of Non-violence 24 1.3.) Non-violence in America 28 1.3.1.) African-American Non-violence before the Civil Rights Movement 29 1.3.2.) Non-violence and African-American Intellectuals and Leaders 29 1.3.3.) Gandhi and the African-American Civil Rights Movement 32 1.4.) The Difference between Non-violence, Non-cooperation and Civil Disobedience 37 1.5.) Self-defense and Non-violence in the Civil Rights Movement 42 1.6.) Non-violence: Pragmatic Means or a Way of Life? 45 1.7.) Non-violence is not a Weak Philosophy 52 1.7.1.) The Difference between Non-violence, Pacifism and Militant Non-violence 52 1.8.) A Rhetoric of Non-violence and Black Pride 58 1.8.1.) Black Power and Non-violence 58 1.8.2.) Black Pride and Non-violence 61 1.9.) Black Mission 71 1.10.) Passivity of the South, Church and Religion 73 1.10.1.) Passivity of the South 74 1.10.2.) Redefinition of the Church and the Social Gospel 77 1.10.3.) Religion and Protest 85 1.10.4.) A Non-violent God 91 1.11.) Songs 98 1.12.) Conclusion 101 2.) Conversion of Public Opinion through Non-violent Rhetoric and Dramatization 103 2.1.) A Change of Perception of African-American Civil Rights 104 2.2.) Conversion of Public Opinion 106 2.2.1.) Challenges of Affecting Third Groups and Public Opinion 109 2.2.2.) Conversion of Public Opinion and not of Segregationists 111 2.2.3.) Influence of King’s Non-violent Rhetoric on Pubic Opinion 116 2.2.4.) Justification of Non-violent Protest and Public Opinion 120 2.2.5.) Alliances with White Activists and Liberals 122 2.3.) King’s Non-violent Rhetoric 129 2.3.1.) Introduction of Christian Love 129 2.3.2.) Relevance of Christian Love during the Civil Rights Movement 133 2.3.3.) Christian Love in the Civil Rights Movement 137 2.3.4.) Beloved Community 141 2.3.5.) Depersonalization of Conflict 144 2.3.6.) King and Public Opinion 149 2.3.7.) Conclusion of Non-violent Rhetoric 155 2.4.) Non-violent Provocation and Dramatization 157 2.4.1.) Suffering and Dramatization 158 2.4.2.) Necessity of Suffering in Non-violent Protest 159 2.4.3.) Interpretation and Glorification of Suffering in Non-violent Protest 161 2.4.4.) Effect of Non-violent Suffering on the Opponent and on Public Opinion 164 2.5.) Dramatization and Segregationist Violence 167 2.5.1.) Segregationist Violence Strengthens African-American Protest 168 3 2.5.2.) Provoking the Opponent 170 2.5.3.) Disadvantages of Segregationist Violence to the Civil Rights Movement 180 2.6.) Conclusion of Non-violent Dramatization 182 2.7.) Conclusion of Chapter Two 183 3.) Coercive Mechanisms of Non-violence 184 3.1.) Definition of Non-violent Coercion 186 3.2.) Political Coercion and Non-violence 190 3.2.1.) Coercive Legislation 190 3.2.2.) Political Coercion on the President of the United States 192 3.3.) Violent Coercion and Non-violence 198 3.3.1) Effective and Ineffective Violence 201 3.3.2) King and Malcolm X – Rhetorical Coercion 205 3.4.) Coercion through the Involvement of Various Organizations 208 3.4.1.) CORE 209 3.4.2.) SNCC 210 3.4.3.) NAACP 211 3.4.4.) Competitiveness and Cooperation between Various Civil Rights Organizations 213 3.5.) Non-violent Strategies and Methods 216 3.5.1.- 3.5.6) Sufficient Number of Protesters, The Right Location,The right person 218 to Spark a Campaign, Targeting Specific Objectives, Non-violent Preparation, Action and Inaction & Non-violent Escalation of Protest 3.6.) Non-violent Methods 237 3.6.1.-3.6.4.1.) Marches, Boycotts, Jail-ins, Sit-ins, Reactions of the Sit-ins 239 3.7.) The Birmingham campaign 255 3.7.1.-3.7.4.) Escalation of Protest, The Right Location, Drama and Personalization 257 of Evil, Boycott, Media 4.) Conclusion 263 Bibliography 268 Synopse 280 4 Gutachter: Prof. Sieglinde Lemke Freie Universität Berlin - Universität Freiburg Dr. Andreas Etges Freie Universität Berlin PD Dr. Reinhard Isensee Humboldt Universität Berlin Prof. Dr. Winfried Fluck Freie Universität Berlin Dr. phil. Frank Mehring Freie Universität Berlin 5 Non-violent dynamics of the civil rights movement Political actors: President of the United States of America and the federal government Coercive non-violent protest Affecting public opinion and the through application of non- media through non-violent violent methods and rhetoric and by provoking strategies, rhetorical Non-violence segregationist violence in order to coercion (Malcolm X) and influ ence the political structure. the decentralization of the protest movement. Protester’s culture and non- violence 6 Introduction What are the cultural, political and strategic factors that enabled non-violent protest during the civil rights movement to achieve political gains, culminating in the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965? Three hypotheses form the analytical frame of this study: 1.) Non-violent protest provoked political change during the civil rights movement because southern African-American culture facilitated the acceptance of non-violence. 2.) African-American non-violent leaders led a successful public relations campaign that caused American public opinion to support civil rights gains for African Americans. 3.) Non-violent protesters developed coercive mechanisms that enabled them to exert pressure on their opponents, therefore enhancing their ability to negotiate with their opponents and the federal government. 1.) Non-violence and African-American Culture The dissertation discusses the concept of non-violence as defined by scholars such as Gene Sharp, Harrop A. Freeman and also Martin Luther King, Jr. There is a difference between non- violence, non-cooperation and civil disobedience, which this study illustrates through the example of the civil rights movement. King, for example, eschewed from applying civil disobedience. Civil rights leaders did not also apply non-cooperation as practiced by Gandhi against British occupation. The study illustrates that non-violence had not been an alien concept to African-American intellectuals. Howard Thurman, Mordecai Johnson, and James Weldon Johnson had considered the application of non-violence and other African-American intellectuals had advocated the tactics of the Indian leader Mohandes Karamchand Gandhi. The author argues that southern African-American culture facilitated the acceptance of non- violent protest and non-violent philosophy. In his book, Black Liberation , George Fredrickson argues that one of the reasons the African National Congress in South Africa could not imitate Gandhi’s example of non-violence was that that there was nothing in the cultural traditions of the ١ .Zulus, Xhosa, Sotho, or Tswana that could make a virtue out of refraining from violent resistance This example underlines the necessity of the convergence of non-violent ideology with cultural values and beliefs, particularly in a long-term conflict. Fredrickson writes: “Mass nonviolence 1 Fredrickson, George M. Black liberation - a comparative history of black ideologies in the United States and South Africa. New York, NY: Oxford Univ. Press, 1995. 230. 7 needs to express the culture of a community, and its leaders must be in tune with the basic beliefs ٢ ”.and values of the masses The southern African-American church, black theology and the status of preachers in African- American culture played a central role in generating the acceptance of non-violence in southern African-American communities. The African-American church had always been central to the lives of southern African-Americans. Aldon Morris writes: “The church provided black people with a moral outlook, social status, entertainment, and political organization, and it served as the main reservoir of black culture.” 3 It does not therefore come as a surprise that African-American ministers and activists used the church as the basis of their campaigns. In Montgomery, Birmingham and Selma the church provided a meeting location for protesters, and a place where protest leaders were able to gather funds, discuss strategic plans, vote on important decisions and provide the protesters with psychological support. Fredrickson contends that a large number of preachers, possibly a majority, did not lend their support to the movement. 4 Nevertheless their presence provided the movement with a “legitimization”, which the study elaborates on in chapter one. African-American preachers had a respectable and influential position in southern culture and had more influence on African- Americans than politicians. William E. B. Du Bois described the African-American preacher as: “one who rudely but picturesquely expressed the longing, disappointment, and resentment of a stolen and oppressed people.” 5 The black church and black theology played a passive role before the beginning of the movement, which the author argues facilitated the acceptance of non-violence. James W. Zanden describes the minority status of southern African-Americans as creating an accommodating behavior on the part of African Americans toward injustice. 6 In an environment more accepting of violence, on the other hand, oppressed groups might become inclined to reject non-violence. After African-American riots occurred in New York, for example, King sent a team led by activists of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) to talk with the youth and convince them to adopt non-violence. However the hostility among African-Americans was so immense, particularly 7 towards non-violence, that SCLC staff members considered it wise not to mention the word.