The Case for Civil Disobedience in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”

In “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” written in 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. answers his critics who critique King’s methods of protesting segregation in Birmingham, Alabama. Among their criticisms, King’s detractors are alarmed by his willingness to break laws in order to conduct protests against racial discrimination in the city. In answer to his critics, King cites the Greek philosopher Socrates to build a case for civil disobedience. In comparing Socrates to MLK, King’s reference of Socrates legitimizes his actions by establishing civil disobedience as a Western tradition, establishing the unjust nature of segregation, and establishing disobedience to unjust laws as an acceptable course of action in accordance with Western tradition.

In his jailhouse letter, King responds to the assertion that his aggressive methods of demonstration are socially disruptive and creating needless tensions in Birmingham by citing Socrates. King invokes Socrates, asserting that Socrates deliberately created tensions in society in order to liberate society from “myths and half truths” (King 2). The myths and half truths that King refers to is the belief that segregation can be tolerated in a just society. Further, King justifies activities that challenge or defy the law as he notes: To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practices civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represents a massive act of civil disobedience (4).

In this passage, King makes a connection between socially disruptive methods of protest and esteemed social and political traditions in American society. An evaluation of Socrates’s position on civil disobedience reveals how King’s actions were an extension upon the traditions of civil disobedience. In Crito, Socrates resists the pleas of his supporters to escape his death sentence for violating the laws of Athens. As Socrates asserts, the state supported him and educated him throughout his life, so he is obligated not to take actions that would lead to the disruption of Athens society, even if he were in disagreement with a particular law (Plato). Thus initially, Socrates appears to display an acceptance of the law that counters King’s commitment to disobedience.

However, Socrates’s final statements provide a nuanced framework for civil disobedience. Though Socrates’s statements to his supporters seem complacent of unjust laws, political scientist Curtis Johnson notes that Socrates set the conditions for civil disobedience that future figures in Western society would follow (Johnson 729). Though Socrates decided to accept his death sentence, he also establishes conditions where disobedience may be tolerated. For example, Socrates does not dispute that he should ultimately obey Athenian law because he believes that the laws coincide with reason, which he is compelled to follow above anything else (731). However, Johnson notes that Socrates’s actions set the precedence of questioning whether laws are compliant with higher principles of justice (729). Because unjust laws are inconsistent with the integrity of society, it can be asserted that they should be disobeyed (729). King further highlighted this theme in his criticisms of segregation.

Following Socrates’s distinctions between just and unjust laws, King establishes God as the final appeal for determining the justness of a law. As King wrote, “An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law” (King 4). Similar to Socrates’s reliance upon reason to determine the validity of the law, King appealed to a divine law that supersedes human rationalization. He asserted that segregation could be determined to be unjust because it is a law that the majority forces upon the minority without their consent (4). Additionally, King notes that it is unjust for authorities to enforce laws that interfere with his protests, such as permit laws, because in spirit these laws are intended to protect unjust segregation laws (4). Thus, many of the peripheral laws that King violates during his protests are held to be equally unacceptable.

Upon establishing that segregation should be considered unjust by Western tradition, King asserts through Socratic tradition that he is entitled to break these laws in protest. As Socrates notes, he is bound to preserve the order of his society (Plato). Yet, the case can also be made that permitting an unjust law to remain in place unchallenged undermines the order of the very society one is obligated to preserve. Describing the rights that segregation denied African Americans as “constitutional” and “God given (3),” King establishes the internal hypocrisy that is allowed to exist if these laws remain unchallenged. King describes the threat that segregation in Birmingham poses to the rest of society when he writes, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (1). Thus, King establishes that civil disobedience that defies unjust laws is the duty of the citizen who is committed to preserving justice throughout society.

In “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King defends his decisions to engage in protests that create social disruption and break the local laws in Birmingham, Alabama. Responding to the charge that his actions are too extreme, King borrows from Socrates to establish that civil disobedience is a hallmark of Western political tradition. Through his writings, Socrates established a case for disobeying unjust laws that could be utilized by future reformers. In agreement with Socratic tradition, King establishes that segregation is unjust because it contradicts divine moral law. Thus, acts of civil disobedience that break these immoral laws are justified because they enable individuals to challenge laws that threaten justice for society as a whole.

Works Cited

Johnson, Curtis. “Socrates and Justice.” The Western Political Quarterly, vol. 43, no. 4, 1990, pp. 719-740.

King, Martin L. “Letter fro a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.].” African Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania. n.d., http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

Plato. Crito. Trans. Benjamin Jowett. 1994.