Tag: martin luther king

Posted on

The Right to Peaceful Assembly

Fresno Bee, October 19, 2025

Trump’s federal crackdowns risk eroding peaceful assembly rights

Now is a crucial time to think about our basic rights. Among the rights listed in the First Amendment are the rights to peacefully assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The right to petition and assemble allows us to gather in protests, marches and demonstrations.

It is antithetical to the idea of liberty to prevent people from gathering in public. But the right to assembly has often been at risk. Recent crackdowns against protest and dissent risk violating that right, as well as freedom of speech.

At a recent roundtable discussion of “antifa” and anti-U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement protests, President Donald Trump celebrated his ban on flag burning, saying, “we took the freedom of speech away.” A Supreme Court precedent from the 1980s, however, allows flag burning. Trump’s policy is justified by appealing to an issue involving the right to assemble. He explained, “When they burn a flag, it agitates and irritates crowds, I’ve never seen anything like it, on both sides, and you end up with riots. So, we’re going on that basis.”

The right of peaceful assembly is not a right to rampage. The government can stop riots as a matter of public safety. But the threat of a riot can be used as a pretext for violating people’s rights.

The tension between liberty and public safety is real. We saw this during the COVID pandemic, when public gatherings were limited. National guard deployments could be justified in terms of public safety. If there really were riots, the right to assembly could be curtailed.

But this depends on the facts on the ground. And as a federal judge recently ruled, the president’s claims about protecting what he calls “war ravaged” cities is “untethered to the facts.”

Legal authorities should protect both protesters and counter-protesters, who each have a right to protest. But the presence of troops and the threat of arrest can have a chilling effect on ordinary citizens who are scared away from assembling. Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union National Security Project, said of these deployments: “It risks chilling the rights to speak and to assemble. In other words, that very fundamental American right to protest.”

The right to peacefully assemble has been called a “forgotten freedom.” This right may seem so obvious that it is almost not worth thinking about. The right to assembly is about what we do with our bodies, where we gather and how we associate with other people. To limit this fundamental right to move our bodies and occupy space without good reason is tyrannical.

The American founders understood this, which was why they ratified the First Amendment. In the background was the case of William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania. As a young man, Penn was arrested in England for meeting in public with other Quakers. England had banned such “conventicles” in an attempt to harass dissenters.

This reminds us that the right to assemble is related to religious liberty (religion is a communal practice that involves public gatherings). The right to assemble is also important for political parties, social clubs, labor unions, and other gatherings of people.

This right has often been understood in relation to freedom of association, thought and expression. Freedom of assembly and association are linked with science and education. The advance of knowledge depends upon freedom of speech and of the press. Knowledge also develops socially. To learn wisdom, we must be able to meet and argue with other people. In the digital era, it is not only bodies that gather in public but also minds who should be free to meet together in cyberspace.

In his last speech, Martin Luther King Jr. addressed the attempt by the government to prevent protests during the Civil Rights movement. He remarked that liberty is routinely stifled in China, Russia and other totalitarian countries. But in the U.S., we have freedom of speech, press and assembly. King said, “the greatness of America is the right to protest for right.” The rights to assemble, speak and petition are an important part of what makes American great.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article312530253.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on

The Problem of Violence

Fresno Bee, September 21, 2025

Violence usually stems from the mistaken idea that human problems can be solved by inhumane means. This helps explain wars in Ukraine, Gaza, and elsewhere. It also explains why the “Department of War” is blowing up Venezuelan drug boats. Our cultural fascination with violence helps explain assassinations, school shootings and why the National Guard is deployed on city streets.

The prevailing presumption is that destructive force can quickly and easily make things better. History shows that this is false. And morality condemns the use of immoral means in pursuit of moral ends.

Despite ugly outbreaks, violence remains rare. We notice violence and war because they are aberrations that surprise and appall. And despite its persistence, we have become wise to war’s stupidity.

Scholars like John Mueller and Steven Pinker have argued that humanity is becoming more civilized. Husbands no longer beat their wives with impunity. We no longer celebrate dueling. Slavery is illegal, as is corporal punishment.

The civilizing process echoes the wisdom of advocates of nonviolence, like Martin Luther King Jr. In 1967, King warned against a “descending spiral” of violence. He said, “Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate.”

Violence is not creative or constructive. It does not persuade the rational mind. Nor does it recognize the complexity of the human condition. Rather, it provokes anger, hatred and reprisals.

Violence offers deceptively simple solutions to complex human problems. If a mosquito bites you, you swat it. But humans are not mosquitoes. We are precious beings with intrinsic value. Violence is immoral because it treats human beings as vermin to be destroyed. Unlike the mosquito, human beings demand respect and recognition. That’s why violence provokes resentment, retaliation and escalation.

The human problems that provoke violence demand that we think, rather than swat. Killing people you disagree with does not destroy their ideas. Blowing up boats does not stop the demand for drugs. And war does not address the human desire for stability, sovereignty and respect.

Primitive cultures celebrate brash ferocity and the spectacle of violence. Warrior kings ruled ancient empires using gruesome punishments like crucifixion. We have evolved to be better than that. Unfortunately, contemporary pop culture remains fixated on violent drivel in the form of superheroes and superspies. Those who marinate in a culture of violence may think that killing enemies also eliminates enmity. But this is not true. Rather, harshness creates hostility and cruelty causes further carnage.

Human spiritual development aims beyond violence. We are thinking beings who respond to persuasive arguments. We demand recognition of our humanity. And we desire justice and love. Physical force does not address those fundamental features of our humanity.

Human problems are not easily solved. We are not widgets waiting to be manipulated. Nor are we herd animals whose behavior can be modified by the application of pleasure and pain. Rather, we are free and creative beings. Our rational minds discover mysteries and wonders. Our emotional lives include unexplainable moods, loyalties and affections. Our freedom inclines us to rebel. And our creative energies lead us to invent and discover.

No human thing is simple or complete. We are complex and changeable. Love, for example, is a lifelong challenge. Lust and sex are animal problems, whose solutions are physical and obvious. But human love is an elaborate dance that depends upon the deliberate choice to orient your life toward the well-being of another. The same complexity is found in the pursuit of justice, which requires much more than physical force.

For our culture to improve, we need to continually affirm the complexity of our humanity while rejecting the stupidity of violence. We need to recall that “returning violence for violence multiplies violence,” as King said. We should study the sages of nonviolence, including Jesus, who even encourages us to love our enemies.

That proposal will sound absurd in a world of vermin. To say that enemies are worthy of love only makes sense if those enemies are human beings like ourselves, possessing intrinsic value. For human persons, love, justice, and truth are more powerful than violence.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article312164049.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on

Hope and Courage in Tough Times

Fresno Bee, October 13, 2024

In these tumultuous times, it is easy to become fearful and lose hope. Wars are spreading. Hurricanes and heat waves show that climate change is happening. The vitriol of the fall election season portends an ugly winter to come. People seem angry, grumpy and mean.

In dark times, it is tempting to abandon hope and retreat in fear to a bunker. But if we do that, things will surely get worse. When the world turns nasty, good people need to remain engaged, hopeful and courageous.

Hope alone is not sufficient. In a recent column in the LA Times, Anna Jane Joyner pointed out that hope is not a strategy for dealing with climate change — hope won’t reduce emissions or heal the atmosphere, nor will it bring back lives lost in wars and hurricanes. Joyner concluded her piece with a quote from climate scientist Kate Marvel: “We need courage, not hope, to face climate change.”

But rather than saying we need courage instead of hope, we should emphasize their interconnection. Courageous people hope that their bravery will pay off. And hope can help us discover the courage to struggle on.

This point is well known. In the 19th century, the British critic Matthew Arnold said: “Wise men everywhere know that we must keep up our courage and our hope.” And Martin Luther King, Jr. explained: “If you lose hope, you lose that vitality that keeps life moving, you lose that courage to be, that quality that helps you go on in spite of all.”

Without courage and other virtues, hope is feckless and naïve — it can imply a kind of passivity. An optimist who relies entirely on hope may do nothing to make the world better. Too much hope can undermine agency and responsible action.

But if an overabundance of hope is problematic, so, too, is hopelessness. Hopeless people also fail to work responsibly for the future. Gloomy pessimists mope about expecting things to fall apart. And since the pessimist does nothing to make things better, the world usually does end up worse.

Virtuous hope lies somewhere in the middle, occurring at the right time, and in the right amount. Some of this depends on the world. Virtuous hope should respond to the facts. False hope denies the facts. False hope can be dangerously disconnected from reality. But the same is true of false despair, which fails to see opportunities for change in the world of facts.

Rather than letting the facts be a drag on the spirit, virtuous and hopeful people imagine what is possible.

Virtues do not occur in isolation. Rather, they are part of a complex web of habits, attitudes and values. In an emergency you need courage, strength and quick wit in addition to hope. In life as a whole, you also need honesty, moderation, compassion, good humor and a sense of justice.

The virtuous duo of courage and hope are essential in business, sports and education. They are crucial for social movements and important for human health and well-being.

In his book, “Man’s Search for Meaning,” Viktor Frankl recounted how, after losing hope, his fellow concentration camp inmates fell sick and died. Frankl explained that “those who know how close the connection is between the state of mind of a man — his courage and hope, or lack of them — and the state of immunity of his body will understand that the sudden loss of hope and courage can have a deadly effect.”

Hope and courage don’t come easy in trying times. To develop them is a lifelong task. It helps to learn from role models like King and Frankl, and it to surround yourself with courageous and hopeful people. Remember that, ultimately, your virtue is up to you. The world is responsive to hopeful, courageous and creative energy. This does not mean that hope magically makes things better, but reality can be changed by intelligent and responsible people who apply their agency with courage and hope.

Retreating to the bunker won’t make things better. For things to improve, we must confront the facts courageously, and get to work creating the kind of world we hope for.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article293773979.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on

Revenge is wrong

Fresno Bee, June 16, 2024

Donald Trump recently said, “Sometimes revenge can be justified.” He was responding to a prompt from Dr. Phil, who had quoted Pope Francis on the importance of forgiveness and overcoming resentment. Despite this prompting, Trump opted for revenge.

Some Trumpians may agree that Trump would be justified in seeking revenge against his enemies. And of course, there is an open question about what Trump’s vengeance would look like. In the Dr. Phil interview, Trump said he was hoping for “revenge through success.” Maybe he merely means that electoral victory would be a kind of revenge.

But left-wing pundits have pounced on Trump’s remarks, warning that Trumpism has devolved into a cult of personal vendettas. And in fact, revenge has long been essential to the Trump brand. Long before he ran for president, Trump said, “Always get even. When somebody screws you, you screw them back in spades.”

This idea is immoral. Most adults agree that “two wrongs don’t make a right.” The world’s religious and philosophical traditions counsel against revenge. And many agree with the Pope’s plea for forgiveness and love.

Some go so far as to agree with Jesus about the need to evolve beyond retribution and vengeance. Jesus said, “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

The retributive idea of eye for eye, tooth for tooth, may appear to have something in common with revenge. But revenge is wildly emotional and often exceeds the limits of retaliation. Retributive justice imposes strict limits on what can be done in return for wrongdoing. Only one eye for one eye—and no more.

The excessiveness of revenge is one of the reasons that criminal justice has nothing to do with it. Criminal justice is not meant to carry out personal vendettas. Rather, it is enacted by legitimate public authorities by due process. Punishments established by law are not intended to satisfy a victim’s desire for vengeance. Rather, these punishments are limited, rational, and calmly and deliberately imposed.

These limits are essential for overcoming cycles of violence and revenge. Revenge is emotional and often disproportionate. The desire for revenge quickly escalates violence. And let’s admit it, revenge fantasies can be fun. The Greek poet Homer said that the desire for revenge was like honey for the soul. This is why revenge may also be addictive, as Dr. Phil said in his interview with Trump. Resentful people seem to enjoy brooding over their injuries and plotting vengeance.

The unreasonable and emotionally excessive nature of revenge leads most philosophers to condemn it. Plato distinguished justice from the “unreasoning vengeance of a wild beast.” Four hundred years ago, Francis Bacon described revenge in similar terms as “wild justice.” He thought civilized law ought to “weed out” revenge.

Among the arguments against revenge is the idea that revenge harms those who seek it. This is the meaning of an old proverb that says, “When you seek revenge, dig two graves.” The Dalai Lama has said something similar, “Indulgence in resentment and vengeance will only further and increase miseries for oneself and others.”

The idea that revenge rebounds and hurts the one seeking it is a common theme in literature. Captain Ahab’s desire for revenge against Moby Dick leads to his doom. And Hamlet ends up dead at the end of his mad quest for revenge.

Another problem is that the spirit of revenge dwells on the pain of the wrongful deed. Bacon said, “A man that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green, which otherwise would heal.” Revenge broods over the past wrong. It prevents us from healing, reconciling, and moving forward.

Forgiveness and love work otherwise. Martin Luther King explained, “Man must evolve a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.” This does not mean that we give up on justice. Wrongs must be redressed. But enlightenment is found beyond the noxious spirit of vengeance and the idea that revenge can be justified.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/article289246125.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on

Finding Hope Beyond the Political

Or Why We Need Philosophy, Religion, and Art

Political life is limited and ultimately unsatisfying.  When we focus on the external and horizontal dimension of political life, we are bound to be frustrated.  But there are other dimensions and sources of meaning, beyond the political.

The despair of the political

The world is unjust.  Good people often suffer in misery and obscurity.  And bad folks become rich and powerful.  The social and political world is messy and frustrating.  Our imagined ideals fail to become real.  And although progress can be made, there is backlash and unfulfilled expectations. 

We inherit a broken world that conflicts with our idealism.  The dream of justice runs aground on the shards of these fragments.  The more we want to repair these ruins, the more hopeless things appear.  We also disagree about who ruined this world, why it is broken, and how it ought to be fixed. 

This sense of grievance and longing explains why the passion of the political can become shrill, dogmatic, and polarizing.  Political intensity feeds off dissatisfaction.  And when these deep emotions are frustrated long enough, there is the risk of despair.  The passion of the political dwells in the thought that if these ruins cannot be repaired, all is lost. 

Clinging to hope

To fight the despair that haunts politics, political rhetoric is often infused with what Barack Obama called “the audacity of hope.”  The best and most inspiring political speech reminds us of an imagined future in which the ideal will be actualized.

Martin Luther King, Jr. provides a well-known example.  He was aware of the problem of political despair.  In response to the disappointments of the civil rights movement, King said, , “The only healthy answer lies in one’s honest recognition of disappointment even as he still clings to hope, one’s acceptance of finite disappointment even while clinging to infinite hope.”  And: “Our most fruitful course is to stand firm, move forward nonviolently, accept disappointments and cling to hope.”

King warned that disappointment in the face of injustice can lead to bitterness, self-pity, cynicism, nihilism, and other “poisons” of the soul.  His remedy was to “cling to hope.”  This phrase is interesting.  To cling is to hold on, to try to remain committed, even as the storm rages.

Thinking in more than one dimension

As a Christian, King found a source of hope beyond the storm.  King’s hope was oriented toward another dimension, a source of meaning that exists in a realm beyond the political.  This is what Rev. Jeremiah Wright (who inspired Obama’s idea of the audacity of hope) called “the vertical dimension.”

Politics is one dimensional.  It views the self and the other on a merely horizontal dimension, failing to take into account other dimensions of life and experience.   This is bound to be dissatisfying because human beings live in more than one dimension. 

The vertical dimension is often understood in religious terms, as an axis oriented toward the divine.  But secular folks can also discover an inner dimension connected with love, beauty, or other sources of meaning found in the human experience.  The most important of these non-political axes are called art, religion, and philosophy (borrowing a set of concepts from Hegel). 

Now there is a tendency among some thoroughly political (or politicized) folks to reduce art, religion, and philosophy to politics.  Marxists explain the “ideological” in terms of material and economic conditions.  Feminists and race-conscious theorists also sometimes interpret art, religion, and philosophy from a liberatory framework.  Conservatives do this as well, when they think that art, religion, and philosophy ought to support some preferred nationalistic ideal. 

But the wonder of art, religion, and philosophy is that they burst the bounds of any politicized and reductive account of human reality.  The artist, the mystic, and the sage exist in a different dimension, oriented toward values and ideas that are not reducible to questions of justice or power. 

The example of comedy and tragedy

This may sound abstract.  So let’s consider two familiar artforms: the comedic and the tragic.  Comedy can be political.  It can be used both to liberate and to oppress.  But sometimes the comedic reveals the absurdity of existence.  And laughter can be an end-in-itself. 

Tragedy can also be employed for political purposes: to tell a story about oppression or the “triumph of the will.”  But tragedy also transcends the political.  It makes us shudder to wonder about death, evil, pride, murder, and betrayal.  Sophocles has the chorus say in Antigone (line 332): There are terrors and wonders on earth, and none is more terrible or wonderful than we humans. 

When a comedic artist reveals absurdity, we are directed beyond the political dimension toward broader reflection on the human condition.  When we laugh, and play along, we are engaged in a world of imagination, on a dimension apart from the political. The same is true, when we are moved by tragedy to see the terror and the wonder of human existence.  This act of imagination gives us a glimpse of a dimension of experience that is beyond the political. 

This act of imagination can be a source of hope, repair, and reconciliation.  It can also renew the spirit and gives us the energy to return to our struggles with better perspective, and a clearer sense of self. 

Hope beyond politics

Now a critic may suggest that this experience of transcendence comes from a position of “privilege” that is conveniently able to ignore the challenges of political reality.  But the move beyond the political is not an excuse for political indifference.  We are political animals, as Aristotle said.  And we cannot simply ignore injustice and the struggles of political life. 

But we all possess the power of human imagination.  And we can all find consolation and hope when we open our minds to those other dimensions of human experience that transcend the political.