Division in America

Richard Fulton

There is an ugliness in the air poisoning the atmosphere in America. Police actions in Ferguson Missouri combined with the assassination of two police in New York have seen too many people drawing lines.

Reactions to Ferguson have festered and grown. This incident and others since have awaken the national dialogue on race in America. The concentration has been on the relationship between police and people of color but the implications are broader, en-compassing the general position of people of color in America

It has become a popular sport to use the shorthand of blaming one prominent person or another for causing the incidents; a dead end for the conversation that needs to be held on the subject.

Some say that the atmosphere has spawned a resurgence of a “civil rights movement.” Others see a surge of support for police and a rejection of incitement to confrontation.

These two perspectives demonstrate the interactions between demands for equal treatment in America and support for the agents of society responsible for maintenance of a violence-free society.

Do people have a right to demonstrate their displeasure with what they perceive to be grievances against themselves, even categories of people, whether right or wrong? Of course.

Do police have the right, even responsibility, to maintain order during these pro-cesses? Indeed, do they have the responsibility to curb violence and crimes that may occur while some are demonstrating? And crime in general. Of course.

Both sides, however, perceive the other side of being disingenuous. Too many Americans distrust either perceived threatening groups or the establishment representa-tives. This is not a good place for our communities to be.

First we must realize that neither side in these confrontations is right nor neces-sarily wrong. But there are mistakes on both sides.

Because crime statistics show a disproportionate amount of crimes committed by the poor—who are disproportionately people of color—it is too easy for police to profile. This is not a good way to police, but understandably the police are fearful when ap-proaching a potential crime scene or even a traffic violation stop.

I still remember the policeman shot dead after simple stopping a car on the high-way by St. Joseph for a traffic violation. Police face this danger daily.

Being a person of color, however, too often means being suspect by wary police too often with no cause. Be honest, many of us pause on a lonely street if the person coming our way is a man of color.

The solution can come from a reminder of Martin Luther King’s strategy of peace-ful, non-violent confrontation. It worked for Gandhi in India and for the civil rights movement as demonstrated by the King movie “Selma” now showing, go see it.

King was smashed in the mouth by someone mad at his movement in a Southern town; insisted the man not be stopped. He hit him again and again King told his aides to leave him alone. The man walked away. Non-violence touches the conscience.

The movement succeeded on many fronts and America is a better place. India separated from Great Britain’s yolk. Non-violent resistance needs a democratic society with fundamentally equalitarian values to succeed, to be sure. But America is like that.

King and Ghandi were killed, one by a racist, one by a religious fanatic. But their movements succeeded. Violence seldom wins in the long run.

Non-violence as a creed can not only provide for peaceful demonstration of grievance, it can create the atmosphere that lets police assume something other than a threat from people of color.

Both things need to happen in America.