How shall we protest
Martin Luther King Jr.’s non-violent protest philosophy is vital for ethical activism. Unlike modern movements like Black Lives Matter or the Israel-Palestine protests, King emphasised strategic planning, non-violence, and voluntary conversion.
M artin Luther King Jr. said, “The true greatness of America is the right to protest for rights”. The Black Lives Matter protests, the January 6th Capitol Hill insurrection protests, and the current Israel-Palestine protests have all raised questions, for the same reason, about how or if the free exercise of this basic, fundamental, and constitutional American citizenship right should continue to exist.
Invoking Dr. King in any conversation about the act of protesting is gospel because he is the Henry Ford of protesting. Like Henry Ford did not invent the automobile, Dr. King did not invent the act of protesting, but like Henry Ford invented the standard way to build an automobile, Dr. King invented the standard way to protest. Henry Ford taught the world how to build a car by applying his assembly line idea to the process of building a car, Dr. King taught the world how to protest by applying his Kingian Non-violence philosophy to the process of protesting.
Most Black Lives Matter (BLM) protestors, most Capitol Hill Insurrection (CHI) protestors, and most Israel-Palestine (IP) protestors would claim to be and appear to be, to those who don’t know better, protesting in the great spirit and grand tradition of Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement, but for those of us that know better the only great spirit and grand tradition BLM, CHI, and IP protestors have in common with Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement, protest wise, is that they all have gathered a crowd of people together.
BLM, CHI, and IP protest demonstrations lack the 3 protest components the Civil Rights Movement lived by, the Kingian Non-violence philosophy, the exclusive use of only Kingian Non-violence protest tactics, and Kingian pre-protest strategic planning. When BLM protestors shut down a street or department store, CHI protestors temporarily shut down certifying the 2020 election results or college IP protestors shut down a pro-Israel rally on college campuses, they are all committing a rule 1 violation of Kingian non-violent protesting.
The core principle of Kingian non-violent protesting is voluntary conversion not compulsion or arm-twisting. Any physical attack, destruction of property, loss of freedom to speak, or imprisonment by law enforcement caused by a Kingian non-violent protest, is all endured by the protestor as a demonstration of the protestors’ commitment to the protest cause, it is never endured by the people or institution who are the protest targets. Based on how BLM, CHI, and IP conduct their protest demonstrations the core principle is involuntary coercion, forcing others to adopt their perspective by inflicting physical attack, destruction of property, loss of freedom of movement, and loss of freedom to speak on their protest targets.
Kingian non-violent protesting is never about shutting down any program, or speech, and if the protest goal legitimately demands that protestors deny access to or occupy an area or building, the protestors commit no property destruction and offer no resistance when the Police attempt to physically remove them. Kingian non-violent protesting is about showing up at a public space or an opponent’s private space and communicating the protest message in a way that will be received, giving the protest message an untainted opportunity to convert the person or institution. According to the philosophy of Kingian non-violent protesting any protestor preventing or disrupting anyone’s program, speaking hate speech to a person, or committing property damage is considered a violent protestor committing violent acts.
Kingian non-violent protesting seeks for its protest message to coexist with the protest target’s program, speech, or activity never to replace or prevent it. The Kingian non-violent protestor’s objective is to create curiosity about their protest cause and goal, not to defeat the protest purpose by engendering anger or alienation towards the protest cause due to violent or disruptive protest tactics.
A Kingian non-violent protestor’s willingness to plant themselves in an opponent’s space for hours while communicating their protest message, but simultaneously not in any way preventing access to or disruption to an opponent’s space, a non-violent protestor’s discipline in committing no damage to person or property while protesting, and a non-violent protestor’s willingness to accept and not resist arrest for their refusal to cease protesting, are three of the ways a non-violent protestor can create protest cause curiosity but not engender protest cause alienation.
Shutting down access to a highway, blocking access to a street, and disrupting the flow of business at a department store, even if done non-violently, are considered atomic bomb-level tactics and, like the atomic bomb, should only be applied when all hope is lost. One because it inconveniences, violates, and possibly endangers the life of innocent bystanders not responsible for the problem that created the protest, a clear violation of Kingian Beloved Community human relations, and two because instead of converting people to the protest cause it can motivate people to oppose the protest cause simply due to frustration with protest tactics.
While it’s unconstitutional for the government and unscholarly for colleges to regulate speech, be it love or hate speech, and regardless of how uncomfortable it might make some citizens or students feel, BLM, CHI, and IP protestors all violate Kingian non-violent protest rules by using constitutionally-protected violent protest language. Never would you have seen a civil rights protest sign read “Death to the Klu Klux Klan”, even when it came to two of America’s most notorious racists, never would you have heard a civil rights protest speaker say “George Wallace and Bull Connor should both be condemned to Hell”, on the contrary, Dr. King was heard to say many times at many protests “Let us pray for our sick white brethren”. The only messages printed on signs and heard from speeches at civil rights protests were positive affirmative messages about the protest cause such as, “I too am a human being” or “I am an American citizen entitled to equal rights”, never any violent speech directed at the protest targets.
— The core principle of Kingian non-violent protesting is voluntary conversion not compulsion or arm-twisting.
True Kingian non-violent protestors draw the stop line at using violent or hate speech, the government and colleges should draw the stop line at protestors committing acts of violence or hate, someone speaking something that makes someone else feel uncomfortable cannot ever be the standard for prohibiting any speech love or hate, racist or anti-Semitic, because the American Constitution guarantees all Americans the freedom to speak any type of speech, but does not guarantee any American the freedom to do whatever they speak. A legitimate non-violent protestor’s goal is to create a minimum degree of discomfort or inconvenience to draw attention to the protest cause, but the discomfort or inconvenience should never exist to the point of preventing a college class, speech, an election vote certification process or program from occurring.
The only way to conduct a successful non-violent protest that draws the type of attention that generates empathy for the protest cause, but prevents the protest from degenerating into a violent spectacle, is for the protest to include an element that BLM, CHI, and IP protest demonstrations lack, an adequate amount of pre-protest strategic planning. Dr. King never led a protest march, organized a protest sit-in, an economic boycott, or convened a protest rally without first developing a protest plan that addressed all necessary logistics and contingencies. Logistics like proper protest site selection or, if necessary, applying to appropriate authorities for protest permits, contingencies like what to do if people opposed to the protest show up and attempt to interfere with the protest, or how to deal with law enforcement if and when they show up.
As with Dr. King’s protest practices, denial of a protest permit does not mean a protest should not or will not happen, because an act of civil disobedience or disobeying a denied protest permit can be a legitimate non-violent protest tactic, but always attempting to obtain permission to protest is a necessary step of Kingian non-violent protesting, because seeking permission to protest, even if the protest eventually takes place in defiance of a denied protest permit, sends the message from the protestor to the protest target that although the protest may be disobedient and in defiance of a denied permit, the intention is for the protest demonstration to be civilized and non-violent disobedience, a message which most likely will determine if the Police or security forces show up to the protest wearing riot gear or their normal uniforms.
Most importantly, seeking a permit or permission to protest establishes a bridge of communication between the protestor and the protest target, which is the necessary first step to addressing, possibly resolving, or not resolving the protest cause and moving to the next step of non-violent civil disobedience. True Kingian non-violent protesting requires adequate pre-protest planning creativity to keep all aspects of the protest activity non-violent. For instance, when pro-Palestinian Columbia University students took over a building on Columbia’s campus, proper pre-protest planning would have avoided it becoming the violent spectacle that drew more attention to the protest violence than to the pro-Palestinian protest cause.
Proper pre-protest planning to take over the building could have prevented the students from committing their first act of protest violence, protestors busting out windows to enter the building. Pre-protest planning would have determined that a protestor should hide out in the building in advance of the protest, to let protestors in the building after it closes so no property destruction was required to enter it. Pre-protest planning would have also avoided the second act of protest violence, students inflicting wear, tear, and some destruction to the building’s furniture and fixtures by using them to both barricade protestors inside the building and prevent entry to the building by non-protestors.
The intention to occupy and take control of a campus building and not have authorities retake control of the building in a manner of minutes, but instead occupy and maintain control of the campus building for hours to days to focus attention on a protest cause is a legitimate protest tactic. However, for it to be a legitimate Kingian non-violent protest tactic, there must be a pre-protest plan developed that dictates how protestors will either bring whatever is needed to create an obstacle that prevents doors to the building from opening, while simultaneously inflicting no damage to the doors, or have rows of protestors use only their bodies to block access to building doors, or nonviolently protest by using a combination of both tactics.
College students occupying a campus building based on Kingian non-violent protest principles means that no physical destruction is done to the building to facilitate the protest, and if protestors use their body as a protest obstacle to entering or occupying the building, no resistance to removal or arrest of their body is offered as a demonstration of the protestor’s commitment to the protest cause.
Protesting the way college students occupied the Columbia University campus building, the way some BLM protests were conducted, and the way insurrection protestors invaded Capitol Hill on January 6th is the equivalent companion to tyranny and autocracy. Protesting the way Dr. King and civil rights activists protested in the 1950s and 1960s, in the Kingian non-violent way, is the equivalent companion to an American citizen exercising their right to vote and democracy. American democracy as the Founding Fathers envisioned it and as we know it today cannot survive without the right to protest, and the only way the right to protest can survive in the 21st century is that protesting be done the Kingian non-violent way!!!
[Read our Comments Guidelines]