| Home > Community Forum > Why Civil Disobedience? « Previous Entry | Next Entry » |
January 19, 2007
Why Civil Disobedience?
by Public Theologian
A response to my former seminary classmate Marvin Lindsay
Dear Marvin,
I read with interest your blog comments on the civil disobedience actions planned for March 16th called the Christian Peace Witness for Iraq in Washington, DC.
Specifically I wanted to address your comments relating to the relevance of civil disobedience in the present instance relating to the Iraq war to which you compared similar actions in the Civil Rights Movement. I want to challenge your comparison on factual grounds, as I do not think you have fairly represented the historical evidence. According to you, civil disobedience in that era was directed at violating unjust laws--you don't say what but I assume that you are referring to examples such as Rosa Parks who sat where she wanted in contravention of the laws of her time and the lunch counter sit-ins in places like Greensboro where African-Americans began brazenly sitting wherever they wanted. You contrast this kind of CD, which you appear to approve of, with what the Christian Peace Witness for Iraq is planning, which you question. The comparison is inadequate, however, because it only accounts for a small part of the larger history of CD in the Civil Rights Movement. Most of the CD actions were very different than you describe. A few examples:
1. One of the most common tactics of the Civil Rights Movement were its mass meetings, out of which came frequent marches, many of which had little or no permitting. At times the movement sent literally thousands of people into the downtown streets blocking traffic and bringing commerce to a halt. Now these African-Americans, who would be variously charged with trespassing, unlawful assembly or disturbing the peace were not aiming at these laws in their actions, but rather much bigger items, such as voting rights. The laws they violated were perfectly legitimate and reasonable--people ought not be allowed to indiscriminately block traffic or impede commerce--but the marchers used these legal violations symbolically to attack the laws they could not get at to violate directly.
2. MLK and many others of the movement's leaders, once jailed, refused to post bond or pay fines that would have caused them to be released, sometimes staying in jail for weeks on end. Again, they were not protesting the fact that they were being fined for having broken the law--such fines are legitimate means for the public to seek redress from offenders and they would have generally supported the imposition of such fines. Rather they were still engaged in protesting the larger societal issues, but simply using the fine as the focal point for such.
3. Another strategy the movement used was the employment of children in mass meetings and demonstrations. The CD that the children undertook was to violate the truancy laws of states and municipalities. As with the case in the previous two examples I gave, the truancy laws were perfectly reasonable and widely accepted within the African-American community. But those were the laws they broke. Moreover. they were not going to be allowed to vote anyway, since they were underage, so in this case the symbolism of their actions was particularly acute, since there is not normally an explicit connection between truancy in children and voting rights. Yet who can deny the clear message their symbolic actions sent, or the effect they had on the national consciousness?
I am not presuming to wrap our projected CD in action in March against the war in the mantle of the Civil Rights Movement. That was a special moment in our nation;s history to which all other protest movements must aspire. I am, however, suggesting that, as in the case of the Civil Rights Movement, protests which use CD in a symbolic fashion have the capacity to capture the public imagination and bring about social transformation. It would be great if there was a way in which we could invite Christians to DC to violate publicly a law which directly related to the prosecution of the war, but the laws and presidential directives relating to the movement of troops and funds which are guiding the present conflict provide no avenue for anything like this.
We are convinced that Christians must do SOMETHING rather than simply sit at home on our sofas and grouse. As I read your column, I understand that you don't agree with CD, but even you, by your own admission don't have any other ready suggestions which would give public witness to Christian lament at the course our country has chosen to follow. Nonviolent CD is a way of accomplishing this, by demonstrating a willingness to risk arrest and thus potential punishment or public humiliation, and by showing that one can, without using force or hurting people with whom one disagrees. Particularly at the season of Lent (which it will be come March), when Christians have traditionally engaged in acts of self-renunciaton and denial, CD takes on an even greater symbolism, which we hope will spread throughout the larger American church. We have much for which to repent in terms of our silence and complicity in allowing this war to continue and a public expression of contrition and penance, which this worship and CD is designed to be, is precisely the kind of action to which our tradition has historically turned when in need of righting itself.
It is my sincere hope that, not only will you be persuaded of the reasonableness of this course of action, but that you will also join us for it on March 16th. Perhaps we can catch up while waitng to get processed through the DC jail!
Your friend,
Tim Simpson
aka Public Theologian
Posted by Public Theologian at January 19, 2007 02:26 PM
Comments
Thanks, Tim. It's not that I'm opposed to civil disobedience. My post was something along the lines of thinking out loud about its helpfulness in the current situation, and hoping someone would respond. So I'm glad that you did! I now have a better understanding of its potential.
Yours,
Marvin
Posted by: Marvin at January 19, 2007 04:50 PM
Because of the insults and offenses caused by fundamentalist preachers (and the like), most progressive college students think that Christianity is supportive of the current regime and everything it does. This act of civil disobedience (if it ever makes the press) will help in the struggle against fundamentalism, and the backlash against Christianity initiated by the fundies.
The people in this area for the most part still support Bush (although the support is admittedly waning). People generally equate supporting Bush (and the evil he's done) with Christianity- and it would be good to have evidence that there are Christians who do NOT support the evil this country has done.
Posted by: Bob Bowers at February 2, 2007 04:05 PM
hpebsjqn http://vmmxrwlc.com oglduiid yvcpdnrh dvvdddiu [URL=http://fgtmeaze.com]mzeyqwut[/URL]
Posted by: gpkjilvv at August 29, 2007 10:49 PM
[URL=http://qoxzjkga.com]zdcruxxx[/URL] srzmedna ehgxwzwv http://frfcvtxq.com bytzwilq lajjfigu
Posted by: trixluzg at August 29, 2007 10:52 PM
oxxlighf http://xxyhosrx.com uuqkzocx xrjuibyt [URL=http://thnwtzjv.com]moznhqfy[/URL] kmfhlbay
Posted by: zovqsvda at March 25, 2008 10:21 AM
bcgbskoc http://dmrzoisq.com ubkafgyu hjeoqlpr vfezbntb [URL=http://tqhtwrmu.com]jogakecs[/URL]
Posted by: iuearadl at March 25, 2008 10:24 AM










