offered from a piece at The Nation titled What I Learned From Breaking the Law. The author is John Raines, one of those who burglarized the FBI office in Media PA in 1971 and exposed the Bureau's then very-unsecured files. Raines is now a very distinguished, honored and respected professor at Temple University in Philadelphia.
Let me quote his five lesson:
1) Law is not to be trusted without interrogating its complicity with privilege and power.
2) Identity is morally problematic, especially if you get yourself born a white male of class privilege.
3) A nation that lets itself be governed by fear will become a poorly governed nation.
4) The arrogance of power contributes to its own demise when confronted by persistent resistance, and finally….
5) I learned that the anger called hope can overcome despair, create a community of resistance and build a future that seemed impossible.
All of these lessons seem very revelant today, and Raines demonstrates that in this well-written piece, which I strongly urge you to read and to ponder.
What I want to do is to offer some reflection on these five lessons, or if you prefer, five principles of a citizen dedicated to the ideals on which this nation is supposed to rest.
Other than the words in bold which are those from the article by Raines, all words and thoughts below are my responsibility.
1) Law is not to be trusted without interrogating its complicity with privilege and power. We should start with recognizing that this nation was born through the breaking of law. Consider such things as the Stamp Act Congress, the Committees of Correspondence, the notion of unilaterally dissolving the legal structures governing the colonies, the waging of war against what many, including here in the New World, considered the lawful authority. The privilege against which we pushed back, clearly in the ringing words of the Declaration, was the notion some other got to decide for us about our rights and our economic future. Too many in this nation seem to have forgotten how often the color of law was used to maintain privilege and power. That includes the many aspects of Jim Crow, enacted through law. That includes FDR allowing discrimination in some New Deal programs as the price of getting Southern Democratic support for his programs. That includes the destruction of reputations in the various anti-communist spasms through which this nation has gone, from the Palmer Red Raids under Wilson through the period of McCarthyism to which unfortunately some might have us return. Oh, and that includes the current spasms of voter-id laws, barring of felons while making it easier to strip people's rights through abusive use of law. It certainly includes the hostility to various groups identified as "other" whether they be college students wanting to participate politically in the communities in which they spend the bulk of their time or people whose skin color, religion or lack of religion, sexual orientation, or economic status make them increasingly the target of discriminatory law. We need to remember that law has often been used to maintain privilege and power, and responsible persons will, as Raines says, question its complicity with those two items.
2) Identity is morally problematic, especially if you get yourself born a white male of class privilege. I qualify as a white male of class privilege, with two parents born in the 2nd decade of the last century, each of whom had a degree from Cornell, never minding the fact that each had one parent born in Eastern Europe. Of course, with the last name of Bernstein I grew up in a period where it was still acceptable to discriminate against my people, and I recognize that there are still clubs, organizations and even some companies willing to perpetuate that kind of discrimination, if they can get away with it. Perhaps that is why I have always been sympathetic to those designated as "other" because I have had some experience of the impact of such designation, although I would fully acknowledge that my white skins and elite education (starting with a degree from elite Haverford College) does privilege me. I can remember telling several of my great-aunts, sisters of my grandmother, some born here some born in Poland, why their statements in opposition to the Civil Rights Movement were flawed. I pointed out they could change their names and lose their accents and mannerisms and people would not necessarily immediately know that they were of Eastern European immigrant Jewish background, but a Black man or woman would still always be Black.
At the same time, I would hope that those who are not white males of class privilege recognize that there are many of us who are their allies, who are equally inspired by the actions of a Rosa Parks, a John Lewis, a Martin Luther King Jr; who admire the directness and the personal growth of a Malcolm X; who honor the non-violent work of Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta. Some of us were in NYC at the time of Stonewall, and have spent years standing up for full equality. In some cases we use what privilege we have on behalf of others. As did John Raines, starting with his arrests for civil rights.
3) A nation that lets itself be governed by fear will become a poorly governed nation. It seems sad to realize that we have not yet learned this lesson as a nation, that too many of those who aspire to and/or achieve positions of political and economic leadership and power are either themselves motivated by fear and/or cynically manipulate the fears of others. I have already mentioned the spasm of anti-Communism. We saw it in the labeling of those doing civil rights as communists, as outside agitators. We saw it in the shameful internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. We have seen it in the Islamophobia that has become so prevalent since September of 2001. We see it in the rationalization of the abuses by the national security apparatus. We certainly see it in the rise of often lethal violence by police especially towards those of color or those who challenge the predominant economic-political power structure.
4) The arrogance of power contributes to its own demise when confronted by persistent resistance - it can take a long time, but often the willingness of people to sacrifice their own liberty, their own economic security, even their bodies and their lives, has a persuasive power on many, because many have consciences that are provoked when they see power being used abusively, and are further motivated by the willingness of people to suffer on behalf of justice causes, sometimes causes whose impact upon them is at best indirect - after all, to use myself as an example, I am not female, Muslim, gay, transgendered. atheist, communist, or immigrant, yet the rights of all of these are supposed to be protected as persons (note that the Bill of Rights does NOT refer to citizens, but to persons, which is how corporations have managed to be subsumed under its protections even as those who want that for corporate entities seek to deny it to non-citizens, and to find ways of stripping full citizenship (eg, making it difficult to vote) from those who would oppose their positions of power and privilege). We even have those on the highest Court who distort the original meaning of due process of law to argue that executing an innocent person does not offend that constitutional protection. We should remember that insofar as we prevent people from participating in the making of the laws intended to govern them, by the principles by which our Founders declared their independence from Britain those persons might rightly feel they should not be subject to those laws.
5) I learned that the anger called hope can overcome despair, create a community of resistance and build a future that seemed impossible. Anger can take many forms. When it seeks retribution it does not advance the cause. When it seeks justice and righteousness in the truest sense of those words, it motivates people to actions which might not serve to benefit them immediately but begin to change what is wrong by the increasing number of people who become motivated to participate in the struggle.
Think how quickly in our own day attitudes in this nation about marriage equality have changed.
If you prefer, the Dred Scott opinion by Chief Justice Taney might have been enough to discourage any hope of those of color being fully accepted by American society. While there may be those who refuse to accept reality, Barack Obama, a man of color, has twice been elected by a majority of those voting in the Presidential election.
Neither Raines nor I would argue that the struggles are as yet all won. As I wrote elsewhere recently, we know that the Founders understood the long process of attempting to perfect our society. After all, the Preamble states that the Constitution was written "in order to form a more Perfect union." More perfect than what existed, but not yet fully perfect, which is why it includes means of amending it.
There are unjust laws, even in our society. Sometimes they are unconstitutional, and the Courts overturn them. Sometimes the change the nation needs only comes about because there are those willing to put themselves in serious jeopardy in order to challenge what is wrong.
Please note that my understanding of this does not thereby justify violence against other persons, except to protect - that is, even though I am a Quaker who has chosen to foreswear violence to protect myself, I will not hesitate to kill to protect the schoolchildren in my care if that is necessary to protect them. For me that is the sole exception I am willing to make, and I am far more likely to merely interpose myself between the children and anyone threatening them.
I realize even this standard is problematic for some here, because that rationale is used by those opposing abortion. And thus it is not a major part of my argument, but I acknowledge that my own reasoning has flaws that others might attack.
I am not arguing, nor would Raines, that the end justifies the means. I believe that to claim a liberty for oneself that one is willing to deny others is to exercise privilege. That is why the position of those who would advocate civil disobedience or even more to oppose marriage equality have not grasped what it is that Raines has expressed. The students I have had with two mothers who can now be married in Maryland in no way restrict the ability of heterosexual conservative Christians to marry within their religious belief.
I am far from perfect as an advocate of these positions. I suspect that Raines would say the same of himself.
One of those who participated in the break-in in Media was a well-beloved Physics professor at Haverford, Bill Davidon. I was not surprised to learn that he had been a key player in that event - it was part and parcel of how he lead his life.
I returned to Haverford as a 25 year old junior the Fall after that break-in. I was one of the few on campus who had military service, and Vietnam was still underway. Being in an institution of Quaker foundation we could not avoid reflecting upon the meaning of law and of civil disobedience. The Vice-President of the college at the time, the late Steve Cary, had been a conscientious objector during World War II. He had an impact upon many of us who got to know him.
I think my experiences dating from when I first experienced segregration as a ten-year-old in Miami in 1956 probably contributed to why I wound up at a place like Haverford, why I returned there to finish my undergraduate education. There were many men who had lived by principles, and I saw in the community people of different viewpoints working together. Perhaps that is the Quaker sense of answering that of God in every person. I know that has shaped me.
I am glad to have encountered the essay by Raines, because it provided this opportunity for my own reflection.
I hope that either his words and/or mine might contribute to your reflection.
And remember these lessons:
1) Law is not to be trusted without interrogating its complicity with privilege and power.
2) Identity is morally problematic, especially if you get yourself born a white male of class privilege.
3) A nation that lets itself be governed by fear will become a poorly governed nation.
4) The arrogance of power contributes to its own demise when confronted by persistent resistance, and finally….
5) I learned that the anger called hope can overcome despair, create a community of resistance and build a future that seemed impossible.
Peace.