Martin Luther King Jr.’s Social Justice Vision

There are few better things to do on Martin Luther King Jr. Day than to look over his famous and influential works. Everyone knows his “I Have a Dream Speech,” which is of course powerful, but there is so much more to be plumbed. For those especially interested in his sermons, you can download many of his sermons at the King Center. (I assigned grad students in my American Religious History class to scour those digital archives, to much success.) King was the prophet that America needed but didn’t deserve, and his words still condemn us today.

Like many, I consider his “Letter From Birmingham Jail” to be American scripture. But his words seem even more relevant in the Age of Trump. In the wake of Trump’s election, thousands across the nation protested under the #notmypresident battle cry. This drew the sadly-expected backlash from people who denounced such “rowdy” behavior. Why not work within the political system? But as King declared decades ago, protests, especially on social justice measures, are intricate parts of democracy.

You may well ask, “Why direct action, why sit-ins, marches, and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are exactly right in your call for negotiation. Indeed, this is the purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has consistently refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. I just referred to the creation of tension as a part of the work of the nonviolent resister. This may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly worked and preached against violent tension, but there is a type of constructive nonviolent tension that is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, we must see the need of having nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men to rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. So, the purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. We therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in the tragic attempt to live in monologue rather than dialogue.

Denouncing protests is, in most cases, an appeal to preserve the status quo—in other words, a clarion call to retain certain privileges. Conservative revisionists today falsely juxtapose MLK to today’s protesters: “King was always peaceful,” they insist. But this re-appropriation of King’s message from “non-violent” to “non-confrontational” domesticates his message. He was all about forcing change through direct action.

Further, King’s message is missed because he emphasizes the role of the church in promoting social justice:

There was a time when the church was very powerful. It was during that period that the early Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was the thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Wherever the early Christians entered a town the power structure got disturbed and immediately sought to convict them for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.” But they went on with the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven” and had to obey God rather than man. They were small in number but big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” They brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contest.

I could share a dozen more block quotes, but I’ll just urge you to read the whole letter itself.

And finally, King’s message is prophetic because he, perhaps more than many others, understood that race, economy, and community were all connected. You can’t fight for equal rights without attacking the unregulated capitalistic system. This mature, total vision from King’s later orations—that blend racial, religious, and economic messages— are perhaps the texts that still need to be mined today. As one example, here is a recording from his “Where Do We Go From Here?” oration less than a year before his martyrdom. (Make sure to last through the last five minutes.)

King’s ability to recognize all the progress they made, all the reverses they’ve faced, and all the work still yet to be done—this came at the climax of his career when support seemed to be waning—makes his message seem even more prescient for today. We don’t have to wantonly wish that we had King around to denounce Trump, because I doubt he’d say much different than what he did during his lifetime.

It is perhaps from this archive—this scriptural corpus—that progressives in the twenty-first century can find their voice.

Laurel Ulrich Week in Utah

If you are in Utah and interested in Mormon history, there are several events this week you’ll want to note. Laurel Ulrich’s newest book, A Household of Females (Knopf), was officially released last week at AHA. (I highlighted it here.) She is now on her release tour in Deseret, and you won’t want to miss it. She was interviewed on RadioWest this morning, and that podcast should be available soon. But she also has two public appearances:

  • Tomorrow, January 10th, she’ll be at the indispensable Benchmark Books. She’ll be signing copies from 5:30 to 7:30, and speaking at 6pm. The official details are here, and the facebook page is here.
  • On Wednesday, January 11th, Ulrich will be speaking at the Salt Lake Public Library at 7pm. The event is sponsored by the Mormon Women’s History Initiative. Seats will go quickly, so show up early. More details are here.

This is a phenomenal book. You don’t want to miss it.

My Papers for #AHA17 and #ASCH17

Yesterday was a beautiful 71 degrees here in Conroe, but I’m packing my warm clothes because tomorrow I’m headed out to Denver, which is apparently pretty cold right now. (However, it gives me the chance to wear my full-length wool coat that I bought last winter and have only worn once.) There are plenty of gripes about AHA conferences—they are too big, often too expensive, and a sense of existential angst settles on the entire city as job candidates prepare for their interviews—but I really like them. I love catching up with so many good friends, meeting people who I know digitally, and hearing some very smart papers. And given this will be my first time attending in four years where I don’t have to worry about the job market, I’m prepared to like it even more.

The only downside is I have to pretend I’m a serious scholar not once but twice, as I somehow had papers accepted to both the AHA and ASCH schedules. I’m honored, however, to be on panels with some very smart people. My ASCH panel, “Sacred Answers to Secular Questions: Religious Critiques of Democratic Politics in Antebellum America,” also includes papers from Tara Strauch and Spencer McBride, as well as a response from the indomitable Michael Pasquier. My AHA panel, “God’s Kingdom in the American Republic: New Studies in Region, Religion, and Revolution,” features papers by Sara Georgini and Roy Rogers, with the smart Sam Haselby playing respondent. The time, location, title, and abstract for my papers are below. I look forward to seeing many over-specialized history nerds in Denver!

ASCH 25, Friday, January 6, 3:30pm, Convention Center Room 704: “The Theology of Democracy: Theodore Parker’s Transcendentalist Critique of America’s Political Tradition”

The intellectual and literary movement commonly referred to as the Transcendentalists are often understood in ways that emphasize, on the one hand, their disrupture from America’s cultural tradition and, on the other, their irrelevancy to America’s political history. Yet many participants within the group understood their ideas as interconnected to the political culture of their day and, even more importantly, their intellectual innovations led to profound implications when considering how to address the nation’s fundamental constitutional crisis: slavery. When understood as merely an aesthetic and philosophical movement, Transcendentalism fragments into dozens of pieces; when seen as a religious critique of democratic theory, the movement gains both coherency and relevance.

This paper traces how Theodore Parker and several of his collaborators transformed their Transcendentalist theologies into political critiques. By basing their ideas of “rights” and “truths” on an idealist tradition inherited from German and French theologians, Parker and his contemporaries strove to present a new picture of American political thought that would embrace the sanctity of the human soul and reject the monstrosity of the slave institution. And more than just offering an important chapter within the debates that led to the Civil War, this tale emphasizes the centrality of religion to crucial moments within America’s democratic tradition.

AHA 277, Saturday, Jan 7, 3:30pm, Sheraton Governor’s Square 15: Redeeming a Nation: Religious Conceptions of Union in the Atlantic World in the Wake of the American Revolution

The Age of Revolutions posed as many problems as it did solutions. The unsettling of traditional political allegiances, the reaffirmation of other forms of political sovereignty, and the realignment of political understandings brought immense change to diverse elements of cultural practices, especially in America. Scholars have successfully demonstrated the impact of these changes on the religious climate of the newly United States, and it is common to refer to the “democratization” of Christianity in particular and Christianity in general. Faced with a new world, religionists were forced to adapt their messages in accordance to new expectations.

Yet what is often overlooked is the role that religion played in these political transitions. How did religious thought influence the democratization of politics, the centralization of federal power, or the unification of civic allegiance? This paper examines how religious contexts structured the debates that both led to and descended from the Constitutional Convention, and places them within a broader Atlantic context. For many, these political transformations were driven by a religious impulse regarding how societies functioned and rights were enacted. This presentation examines how that dynamic played in in particular locations concerning a particular constitutional moment.

This study will utilize a number of different individuals and genres, including Fast and Thanksgiving sermons along with more wide-ranging pamphlets and books written to explicate the role of religion in conceptualizing new forms of citizenship and exploring novel concepts of political belonging. At the heart of these texts was a tension over how populations from different backgrounds possessing divergent ideas imagined a united community worthy of divine approval and applicable in an age of democratic transformation.

BOOK NOTICE: Laurel Ulrich: A House Full of Females

At AHA this weekend, Knopf is launching Laurel Ulrich’s newest book, A House Full of Females: Plural Marriage and Women’s Rights in Early Mormonism, 1835-1870. I imagine bookstores and Amazon will start selling copies shortly afterward. Anybody familiar with early American history knows and respects Ulrich’s work. Her A Midwife’s Tale: The Life of Martha Ballard, Based on Her Diary, 1785-1812 (Knopf, 1990), which won Ulrich the Bancroft, Pulitzer, and a MacArthur Grant, is one of the best books ever written in the field. I’ve assigned it both times I taught a course on the early American republic, as it beautifully captures the lived reality of common citizens and the invisible networks of American women. Her other work has been similarly influential. One phrase from a 1976 article, “Well-behaved women seldom make history,” later went viral, a surprising development that encapsulates both Ulrich’s devotion to transforming historical memory in order to incorporate unheard voices as well as a general public eager for that very intervention. (She later wrote a book that, in part, discussed this quote and its impact.)

screen-shot-2017-01-03-at-7-31-49-am

Just the latest popular appropriation of Ulrich’s scholarship.

People were understandably excited when Ulrich turned her attention to Mormon women and polygamy. Interest was further piqued with an article in American Historical Review  that exemplified her approach: she teased out the broad cultural and contextual implications of a single quilt created by a Utah Relief Society group during the tumultuous year of 1857. Plenary addresses at the Mormon Historical Association (where she was president in the society’s fiftieth year) and other symposia constantly reminded us of what was to come.

I’m happy to report that the book exceeded my already-high expectations. I received an advanced copy to review for Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, which should appear sometime this year. I’ll save most of my words for that, but I wanted to share at least a paragraph:

The subtitle for the book, “Plural Marriage and Women’s Rights in Early Mormonism,” is somewhat misleading, however. Though the introduction and final chapter that frame the text indeed focus on Mormon women arguing for “women’s rights,” that particular theme is subtle and, at times, subservient throughout the story…And while the jolting paradox of the title—how could women who participated in polygamy simultaneously believe in women’s rights?—is readily apparent, “rights” seems a bit too restrictive for what Ulrich is doing. Further, plural marriage is not always the sole focus of the volume: the early chapters that precede Joseph Smith’s introduction of the practice, as well as the later chapters that focuses on male missionaries abroad and missionary wives at home, are as interested in monogamous relationships as they are polygamous. This is to say, the subtitle of A House Full of Females sells short the volume’s importance: more than a history of polygamy and women’s rights, this is nothing less than a new, revisionist social history of Mormonism between Kirtland and territorial Utah, as seen through the eyes of the women who lived it. Ulrich is asking a provocative question: what would the history of Mormonism during the tenure of its first two prophets, Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, look like if its leading men were re-cast as supporting actors?

I can’t recommend the volume enough–it’s an instant classic in the fields of American, social, gender, religious, and Mormon history.

What I Wrote Online, 2016

This is an index for what I wrote online this year, mostly for my own future reference. This does not include my writing for print publications. (Those are on my CV.)

Most of these appeared on my blog. If they appeared somewhere else, I include the site’s name in parentheses.

Featured Essays for Online Magazines

Historiographical Issues

Book Reviews

2016 Book Lists

Interviews and Quotes

Pedagogy

Historical Insights to Contemporary Issues

Original Research

Highlighting Recent Scholarship

Personal Essays