Political Views of Martin Luther King and Friedrich A.Hayek - Essay Example

Task Martin Luther King and Friedrich A. Hayek Philosopher, orator, theologian, essayist and prophet were all adjectives that could be used to describe the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. The American Civil rights Hero became the youngest Nobel Peace prize winner at just 35 yrs. He inspired and sustained the struggle for racial freedom, non violence in agitation and interracial unity. His actions and words still shape people’s lives and destinies across the globe. Arguing that violence was an exercise in futility, and that had no place in the solution of societal problems, Martin Luther was of the view that the fight against injustices and oppression forces should be nonviolent. He argued that violence was only bound to further complicate the problems. The method of resistance that Martin gave was non violent resistant. He gave an example of how Mohandas K. Gandhi had used it to free India from the British domination. He observed that true peace required the presence of positive forces such as justice, goodwill and brotherhood (King, 7). The non-violent method is not for cowards and though it is passive physically, it is strongly active spiritually. It is not used for defeating or humiliating the opponent, but for winning his understanding and friendship. To Martin, non corporation and boycotts were not ends, but means to awaken a sense of moral shame to the opponent. To him, the end target should be redemption and reconciliation, as well as the creation of a loving community, rather than the tragic bitterness that is followed by violence. The attack should also not be directed towards a person, but to the forces of evil; hence, the struggle against racial injustice is not really between races (King, 8). Non violence also avoids both external violence and internal violence of the spirit as it stands on the principle of love. It is based on the conviction that the universe is on justice’s side. The deep faith in the future was what non-violent resistance relied on, and what made the resistors suffer without retaliation. Prejudice, as Martin declared, was the greatest quandary for America. He said that the manner in which the condition was handled could shape the cultural, moral and political health of people, as individuals and a nation. People needed to be actively democratic especially then, since the barriers of racial segregation were being broken down. Desegregation to him was shallow and empty, and integration was the ultimate goal. To him, “Integration is a genuine intergroup, an interpersonal doing” (King, 118). Therefore, desegregation is a means towards integration. Integration to him was everyone’s right by the nature of him being human. According to Martin, life demanded freedom. Denial of freedom was denial of life itself. This is first the capacity to weigh and deliberate alternatives, make one’s own decisions and be responsible for one’s own action. He argued that a person’s nature of life is altered when he is denied his freedom, because freedom is a basis for a person’s life (King, 121). Martin Luther King Jr. said Americans should realize that the burden placed upon Negro citizens was the inability to vote. According to him, the right to vote was a powerful tool for change. He suggested that there should be a law allowing all people to vote and that literacy tests should be abolished especially in areas where education was inferior and in a poor state. Purpose, which was the only way to acquire change politically, socially and economically, could only be attained by understanding power properly. He suggested that the solution to fight poverty was to eliminate it directly through guaranteed earnings. This, according to him, can be done through the creation of full time employment and incomes. Additionally, people must be made consumers in one way or another. The belief here is that when poverty is eliminated, other problems like housing will also be eliminated. Friedrich August Von Hayek is also a Nobel Memorial Prize winner, and a renowned economist. He was born in Austria-Hungary and later became a British, and was a philosopher who was best known for his defense against classical liberalism. In his writing, Hayek’s core argument concerns freedom and the value of freedom to an individual, society and civilization at large. The main basis of crisis in modern civilization was the lack of faith in freedom and liberty beliefs. Peoples’ actions were ultimately governed by opinions and through a political philosophy that restated basic principles and vindicated fundamental values. Friedrich sought to reshape the opinion. Coercion by individuals to others, or the government to individuals in the society should be reduced completely in order to acquire freedom. A free society calls for general rules that predict and constrain coercive powers of individuals and the government. Individuals are also empowered to develop and follow their own life plans. Trying to manipulate them even by holding information from them is an insidious form of coercion. A free person should also be responsible for his actions. Individuals should be enmeshed in social relationships. Friedrich, being a strong critic of modern bureaucracy claims that there is a destructive quest for perfection where invaluable rules and traditional values are discarded. This later brings about ignorance which is unavoidable and inevitable. This is exhibited clearly by the existing socialism at the time, and which was in different forms (Hayek, 254). Spontaneous growth brought about by unintentional interrelationships between individuals and groups brought about social order. Friedrich insists that individuals have a dignity which must be respected. He rejects the idea of natural equality. He justifies the freedom connected to individual dignity, but leaves it unclear, though he insists that the rule of law permits social inequalities. A democratic structure of government was the best according to Friedrich, provided that there was limited government interference. Friedrich favors a government that seeks many benefits for the community, rather than a passive government (Hayek, 257). He shares the strong presumption against governments being active in economic activities, but still claims that the lack of government involvement also made the people not know what was permissible, and what was not. He did not fully support the laissez faire structure of government. He explains that it is the character of the government activity that is vital, and not its volume. For instance, in economics he follows the ideas of classical liberals like Adam Smith who believes that a government that supports spontaneous forces of the market is more preferred as compared to one that is less active. In conclusion, Friedrich examines contemporary policies such as taxation, healthcare, social security, housing, natural resources, urban planning and education in the same light of principles developed in his earlier studies. Friedrich opposes policies that aim at wealth redistribution or social justice, and is very willing for the government to provide an immense range of social services, in line with the principles articulated above. Works Cited Martin Luther King, Jr. A Testament of Hope. The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. Washington: Melvin Harper One, 1962. Print. Friedrich A. Hayek. The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1960. Print. Read More