Mary Elizabeth King
Published: Sunday 15 January 2012
“That the U.S. civil rights movement of the 1960s would be based on Gandhian strategic nonviolent action partly resulted from the success of the Alabama city’s exquisitely unified black community.”

How to Learn Nonviolent Resistance as King Did

Article image

How does one learn nonviolent resistance? The same way that Martin Luther King Jr. did—by study, reading and interrogating seasoned tutors. King would eventually become the person most responsible for advancing and popularizing Gandhi’s ideas in the United States, by persuading black Americans to adapt the strategies used against British imperialism in India to their own struggles. Yet he was not the first to bring this knowledge from the subcontinent.

By the 1930s and 1940s, via ocean voyages and propeller airplanes, a constant flow of prominent black leaders were traveling to India. College presidents, professors, pastors and journalists journeyed to India to meet Gandhi and study how to forge mass struggle with nonviolent means. Returning to the United States, they wrote articles, preached, lectured and passed key documents from hand to hand for study by other black leaders. Historian Sudarshan Kapur has shown that the ideas of Gandhi were moving vigorously from India to the United States at that time, and the African   American news media reported on the Indian independence struggle. Leaders in the black community talked about a “black Gandhi” for the United States. One woman called it “raising up a prophet,” which Kapur used as the title of his book.

While a student at Crozer Theological Seminary in Chester, Pennsylvania, King was intrigued by reading Thoreau and Gandhi, yet had not actually studied Gandhi in depth. A friend, J. Pius Barbour, remembered the young seminarian arguing on behalf of Gandhian methods with a reckoning based on arithmetic—that any minority would be outnumbered if it turned to a policy of violence—rather than on principle.

The more that King read Gandhi, though, the less he doubted the validity of a philosophy based on “Love,” which in turn was central to his preparation for the Christian ministry. “As I delved deeper into the philosophy of Gandhi,” he later wrote, “my skepticism concerning the power of Love gradually diminished, and I came to see for the first time its potency in the area of social reform.” His serious contemplation of Gandhi’s fundamental approaches for organizing a movement began in Montgomery, soon after becoming pastor at the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in April of 1954.

When Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to yield her seat on a public bus to a white man on December 1, 1955, JoAnn Robinson, a leader in the Women’s Political Council, worked through the night to organize an action of mass economic noncooperation. King was unanimously elected to lead the Montgomery Improvement Association, which would sustain the boycott of city buses.

With the start of the Montgomery boycott, a number of activists, pacifists, reformers, radical Christians and socialists arrived in town. Elated by King, they believed that he could take the fight for justice to a new order of magnitude unlike anything the United States had seen since the abolition of slavery. Among them was 44-year-old Bayard Rustin, 17 years King’s senior, who went on to help King build the Montgomery boycott into a mature campaign. The War Resisters League let Rustin work for King full-time for this assignment.

The black community in Montgomery, as elsewhere in the South, was armed, and there was concern that it could turn to violence in the struggle. Rustin was worried that King himself might falter without deeper foundations. Plying him with books at night, he helped him to analyze Gandhi, and was the first tutor to teach King the essentials of nonviolent struggle systematically.

The boycott’s success—recognized when the Supreme Court ruled on November 13, 1956, that local laws obliging segregation on buses were unconstitutional—raised hopes for comparable abolition of other discriminatory practices in the South. That the U.S. civil rights movement of the 1960s would be based on Gandhian strategic nonviolent action partly resulted from the success of the Alabama city’s exquisitely unified black community. “While the Montgomery boycott was going on,” King said, “India’s Gandhi was the guiding light of our technique of nonviolent social change.”

In February 1957, at Oberlin College in Ohio, King met a black Methodist minister named James M. Lawson, Jr. Lawson had served 13 months in U.S. federal prison for refusing to cooperate with conscription during the Korean War. While locked up, the Board of Missions of the Methodist Church successfully petitioned the court for Lawson to be handed over to them. They assigned him to teach at Hislop College in Nagpur, India. Arriving there four years after Gandhi’s death, he spent the next three years teaching. He also met numerous individuals who had worked with Gandhi and learned of the Indian campaigns firsthand from participants. King was impressed by Lawson’s background and experience, especially considering they were both just 28 years old. He asked Lawson not to wait to finish his studies to come South: “Come now! You’re badly needed. We don’t have anyone like you!” As I have documented elsewhere, Lawson became a human bridge, connecting knowledge from India to the fledgling U.S. civil rights movement and contemporary struggles.

After Lawson met King in 1957, he contacted A. J. Muste, a foremost Christian pacifist still at the helm of the Fellowship of Reconciliation. Muste offered Lawson the position of southern field secretary of FOR, and by January 1958, Lawson was settled in Nashville. Upon arrival, he discovered that the Reverend Glenn Smiley, another of King’s tutors and national field director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to conduct a full schedule of workshops—including one arranged for early that year at the first annual meeting of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) in Columbia, South Carolina. There, King enthusiastically introduced Lawson. “Be back promptly at 2:00 p.m.,” he declared, “for Brother Lawson’s workshop on nonviolence!” Before the agreed time, King seated himself in the first pew, waiting attentively for the three-hour session to start. Lawson once recalled in an interview with me:

Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask me to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he would arrange for it to be “at-large” so that everyone could attend, with nothing else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself.  A few minutes early, he would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row.

In Nashville, throughout the autumn of 1959, Lawson led weekly Monday-evening meetings in which he and interested students analyzed the theories and techniques that he had encountered in India. His workshops scrutinized the Bible, and writings of Gandhi, King and Thoreau. They practiced test-cases, including small sit-ins. Lawson’s workshops lasted for several months before news broke on February 1, 1960, of the Greensboro sit-ins. Hearing of the Greensboro actions, seventy-five Nashville students followed suit, creating the largest, most disciplined and influential of the 1960 sit-in campaigns. In working with Lawson—who was always calm and self-effacing—the Nashville students were not only being trained by one of King’s own instructors, but they were benefitting from direct acquaintance with Gandhi’s experiments. The sit-ins would give the overall movement its regional reach, and the Nashville students would become a cornerstone of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, of which I was a part.

In commemorating Dr. King’s birthday, it is worth remembering that everyone can learn nonviolent action as he did. King may not have invented the nonviolent strategies that he advanced, but he was an apt student, and his understanding of them would in the decades to come encourage other movements on the world stage. He became one of history’s most influential agents for propagating knowledge of the potential for constructive social change without resorting to violence. How he himself learned the theory and practice of civil resistance is a reminder to each of us that these methods are neither intuitive nor spontaneous; they’re a system of logic, skills and techniques that must be learned.

FEATURE A

Connect with your friends

Find new content you might like and see what your friends are sharing!

Top Stories

11 comments on "How to Learn Nonviolent Resistance as King Did"

Connie Baxter Marlow's picture
Connie Baxter Marlow

January 17, 2012 12:13pm

Read Henry David Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" which inspired Gandhi and MLK, Jr. It's a road map to living from the higher conscience in society. America's founders, Thoreau, Gandhi, MLK, Jr all saw the possibility and each took humanity up a notch. John Lennon saw it too.It's an evolutionary upward spiral. "No problem was ever solved in the same consciousness in which it was created" Albert Einstein.
The only way out is UP!

bladtheimpailer

January 16, 2012 1:23pm

I've often thought the big if. What if MLK had lived his natural aloted years? Where would the nation be today in terms of natural justice? MLK though not alone was the spokesperson; and though surrounded by many capable minds, none were able to fill the space he left with his passing. The movement towards justice for all fractured and lost momentum. Today we have the rise of OWS to finally carry forward where MLK left off. OWS seems to be all inclusive and all importantly non violent.However as OWS moves forward we must insure that the entire population, black, brown, red, yellow, white, female, male, and of all ages universally benefit the justices we seek. This means extra measures must be taken in areas where the disenfranchisement is greater. If we don't then OWS will been seen in history as a failure to extend it's message of the 99%; and the chance of creating MLK's "dream" of universal justice and acceptance will still be unfulfilled. So remember to non violently smash the status quo and include every last person in the new America about to be born. For those still in the clutches of hate and intolerance this movement will either free them to know love or marginalize them so that they only mutter their incapabilities to themselves until they fade away and are only remembered as some sub form of deranged humanity. As we move towards the the promise we must be aware of the dis-information and division the 1% will try to soe amoung us, and their efforts to draw some of us offside into the use of violence. We must all stay on message together or our voices will fracture into an incoherant noise affecting nothing in the way of the changes we all desire to see in reality.

G.E.R.R.Y.

January 16, 2012 8:52am

Messy has it right. You can win non-violently only if the power at the top is tacitly behind you. At the moment however, the US government is happily ensconced in the pockets of the Corporatocracy.

bladtheimpailer

January 16, 2012 1:11pm

I truly believe that the government is hoping the 99% will free them from what has evolved naturally under the current form of capitalism; and are therefore "on our side."

Deborah Barnes

January 16, 2012 5:41am

MLK was okay but the women that started the whole civil rights movement really deserve the credit. According to "Freedoms Daughters" by Lynne Olsen; the late MLK was a hesitant sign on, and was approached because of his standing in the community and oration skills. Giving him this "one man standing alone and brave" image is part of divisive tactics, as it sets up a false reality when in fact it took many hard working black and white men and women to set the scene ahead of and around, his one man band. See the Amazon reviews for more info. Transparent America needs a lot of in house teaching/learning/sharing discourse in order for us to really understand the "way it is."

Crow Kling

January 15, 2012 7:54pm

Nonviolence, is a mistake, the cops and government are acting like protesters are terrorists anyway might as well act like terrorists, directly on the bad guys who are the 0.1% plus vote only for people who will increase taxes and fees for political contributions at 99.99% for every political donation over $1 a year.

Progressive

January 16, 2012 4:18am

"the cops and government are acting like protesters are terrorists anyway might as well act like terrorists"

Because the 1st Amendment guarantees "the right of the people peaceably to assemble," police action against nonviolent protesters is unconstitutional. The police will be liable for any injuries they inflict, and any resulting charges will usually be dropped when the prosecutor realizes that the case will be lost on appeal if not at trial. Those protections don't apply to violent protests.

Even if nonviolent protest is met with a violent police response, there will be a big difference in public perception. Many will consider a violent police response justified, if they think it was provoked by a violent protest.

Crow Kling

January 15, 2012 7:51pm

Nonviolence, is a mistake, the cops and government are acting like protesters are terrorists anyway might as well act like terrorists, directly on the bad guys who are the 0.1% plus vote only for people who will increase taxes and fees for political contributions at 99.99% for every political donation over $1 a year.

priceless22

January 15, 2012 2:38pm

It was the Democrats who fought NOT To give equal rights to the Blacks. Anyone can name those Democrat Governors and Mayors and US Representatives and Senators who fought not to give full FREEDOM to the Blacks.

You know what changed MY young White mind....seeing those children about my age being hosed down, with fire hoses in Atlanta! That changed MY mind!! I refused to use the "N" word again. We were generally taught in the South that the "N" word was their natural name.

It still confuses me to this day why Black Men and Women call themselves the "N" word! How demeaning!!!

I miss MLK,Jr! I believe if he were still around..this would be a different country! I believe there would be more LOVE instead of HATE in the USA.
How soon, so many, forgot his teachings! The main one being...it is not the Color of one's skin that counts...but his/her character..that counts....not the proper phrase....but it is what is in my heart.
Another phrase I use is...If you peeled back the skin on your hand...What do you see? Is it not the same as mine?

Messy

January 15, 2012 1:46pm

King had the support of the Federal Government. He had the courts and the Presidency at his back. The British were giving Gandhi tacit support although it were differences, a form of Indian independence were the goal of both sides.

Nonviolence only works with the support of the "enemy.

Arachne646

January 18, 2012 11:32am

Kennedy was much more interested in foreign policy and his legacy as a statesman than in petty disagreements in the South about who sat where on buses, in diners, or whether black kids went to school in shacks or real equipped schools. Courts decided separate could not be equal, legislators passed laws requiring equity, but without any will for actual enaction of the letter of the law, let alone the concept of racial integration, nothing would have changed.

What it took to get Federal enforcement and troops, where necessary to physically protect even little children who were brave enough to walk through crowds of white adults screaming horrible things, was the courage to face death or perhaps worse by those non-violent activists. When journalists in that time were able to take photographs and film of non-violent marches of huge numbers of African-American women, men and children, and them being beaten, hit by violent water cannons or set upon by dogs, the whole world's eyes were on the Southern United States. It's not the shame or reluctance to use force against the non-violent by power that Christians and others rely upon--one reason non-violence works is that it is extremely shocking to those elsewhere (maybe just across the tracks?) to see how violent, desperate, and threatened the power over those activists really is. Kennedy sent troops into the South to enforce the Interstate Bus non-segregation laws because the scandal of the Freedom Riders' beatings and imprisonments at hard labor were embarassing America internationally.

Non-violence is the only option when faced with an adversary as well-armed and with as many "troops" and other assets as the United States. You can launch a guerilla attack, against both government and civilian targets, kidnapping as a way of getting publicity and obtaining money, but it hasn't worked yet for the Palestinians, and they've been at it since before 1967. They've had more support from everywhere than Ghandi supposedly had from the Empire; they supported his approach when they finally handed over India to try and prevent religious and cultural bloodshed. Against the US/Israel bloc, non-violent civil disobedience is increasingly used by Israeli and Palestinian, as well as international workers for peace through diplomacy. Boycott, divestment and sanctions are working.