Martin Luther King Jr. on Democratic Propaganda, Shame, and Moral Transformation

• Author: Meena Krishnamurthy
• DOI: 10.1177/00905917211021796
• Published date: 01 April 2022
• Date: 01 April 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917211021796

Political Theory

2022, Vol. 50(2) 305 –336

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00905917211021796

journals.sagepub.com/home/ptx

Article

Martin Luther King Jr. on

Democratic Propaganda,

Shame, and Moral

Transformation

Meena Krishnamurthy1

Abstract

This essay develops an account of Martin Luther King Jr.’s justification for

and use of what I will call “democratic propaganda”—truthful propaganda

that is aimed at promoting and fostering democratic political action

by stirring readers’ emotions. I interpret King’s famous “Letter from

Birmingham Jail” in the broader context of his work and argue that it is

a piece of democratic propaganda. I give an account of what led King to

support the use of democratic propaganda and why he hoped it would

help to overcome a central problem in the civil rights movement: the

political inaction of the white moderates. King emphasizes shame in the

Letter, and I argue that this concept offers us a new way of thinking about

the efficacy of democratic propaganda. I close by considering the relevance

of King’s approach for today’s Black Lives Matter movement. Despite the

innovativeness of King’s use of shame, I suggest it may be time for a new

approach to Black politics and activism.

Keywords

political philosophy, civil disobedience, non-violence, racial segregation,

Martin Luther King Jr., moral psychology, moral motivation, shame, empathy

1Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada

Corresponding Author:

Meena Krishnamurthy, Queen’s University, 325 Watson Hall, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6,

Canada.

Email: meena.krishnamurthy@queensu.ca

1021796PTXXXX10.1177/00905917211021796Political TheoryKrishnamurthy

research-article2021

306 Political Theory 50(2)

On April 12, 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. was arrested in Birmingham,

Alabama, for violating an injunction against “mass street parades or mass

processions or like demonstrations without a permit.” During his time in jail,

King wrote his famous “Letter from Birmingham Jail” (2000b)1 in response

to the recent “Call for Unity” made by eight clergymen (“White Clergymen”

1963). However, the Letter was also aimed at a second audience: “white

moderates” outside the church, including members of the Kennedy adminis-

tration and the editorial boards of major newspapers and magazines, such as

the New York Times and Time magazine.2 Although this group of white mod-

erates explicitly agreed that racial segregation was wrong, they had not

themselves joined the movement, and they preached moderation and gradual

progress, advising King and his supporters not to demonstrate but to engage

in “open and honest” discussion and wait patiently for the courts to end

racial segregation (“White Clergymen” 1963). King rightly saw this as ask-

ing him to continue to accept injustice, exploitation, and indignity (1997b).

The political inaction of the white moderates was an ongoing problem for

King. He knew he needed the support of at least some of the more powerful

white moderates to create political change. He also knew that reasoning with

them was, in itself, unlikely to convince them to join the movement; they

already knew that racism was wrong. What he needed was something that

would spur them to act on this knowledge. He, therefore, used a series of

rhetorical strategies to convince them of the need for direct action and to

motivate them to actually participate in the movement. These strategies had

long included appealing to Biblical stories, invoking the Declaration of

Independence, encouraging his readers to imagine and hope for a better

world, appealing to moral truth and the potential for moral progress, and

reminding readers of the moral necessity of keeping one’s promises.

In the Letter, King added another technique to his arsenal: shame. Consider

this memorable passage:

I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed

with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that

the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White

Citizens’ Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is

more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is

the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who

constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with

your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the

timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time

and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.”

Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than

Krishnamurthy 307

absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is

much more bewildering than outright rejection (2000b, 96–97).

Here, King articulates his disappointment in white moderates, inviting them

to recognize their moral failings and to do better. The Letter aimed to evoke

white moderates’ sense of shame to make them feel “the fierce urgency of

now” and to lead them to join the movement (King 1991, 217–218).

This essay develops an account of Martin Luther King Jr.’s justification

for and use of what I call “democratic propaganda”—truthful propaganda

aimed at promoting and fostering democratic political action by stirring the

emotions. I position the Letter in the context of King’s broader oeuvre and

argue that it is a piece of democratic propaganda. I also offer an account of

why King believed that democratic propaganda would help to overcome a

central problem in the civil rights movement: the political inaction of the

white moderates. As we will see, King’s version of democratic propaganda

relies heavily on moral shame.

This essay is particularly significant for those who are interested in

King’s philosophical thought. Currently, many scholars view the Letter as a

rational argument meant to persuade the white moderates of the justness of

civil disobedience.3 This is certainly true, but I argue that the Letter is more

than that. It is also a “sensible sermon,” blending both intellectual and emo-

tional appeals; it seeks to show white moderates how urgent the need for

political action is and to move them to take that necessary action. King used

the Letter to hold up a mirror to white moderates’ betrayal of their stated

principles in order to stimulate a sense of shame in his readers. He hoped

this experience of shame would spur the “best” of them to make a moral

transformation, to root out the rationalizations, biases, and prejudices that

were preventing many white moderates from supporting and joining in the

civil rights movement. While others have noted that King’s Letter is a form

of sermon,4 no previous scholarship has examined his views about the ser-

mon alongside his views on propaganda. When read together, we can see

that the Letter, as a sensible sermon, is in fact a piece of (democratic)

propaganda.5

My argument here is also relevant to debates about propaganda within

mainstream philosophy. Much of the current philosophical discussion of propa-

ganda focuses only on its problems, particularly its use by totalitarian and

authoritarian regimes. For example, while Jason Stanley’s recent and well-

known work on the topic in How Propaganda Works does consider the demo-

cratic potential of propaganda, it explicitly focuses on its role in supporting

demagoguery (2015). However, there is a longstanding tradition in Black polit-

ical thought that emphasizes propaganda’s democratic potential. As Melvin