Helman 1

The Minority versus the Majority

By Krista Helman
 Helman 2

Abstract

This paper argues that due to the disconnect and disrespect between the governing state, and the

oppressed minority being governed, there is also a disconnect between fellow citizens and social

justice.
 Helman 3

Despite pure motives and good intentions, humanity in itself is innately flawed.

Therefore, any concept or institution created by mankind will be flawed as a result. The

American government and justice system are no exception, and “is equally liable to be abused

and perverted before the people can act through it” (Thoreau). History is riddled with examples

of oppressed citizens who were taken advantage of or denied justice. Even though America’s

democratic government system takes into account the needs and desires of the majority, there is

always a minority that is left outside the benefits of the system. Martin Luther King Jr’s Letters

from Birmingham, and Henry Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience capture the tense and disconnected

relationship between the disempowered citizens and the State seen throughout Americas history.

This disconnect results in citizens disunifying from each other and the state.

Every society needs some form of order and governing system or there would be no

civilizations. History provides us with many examples of different bodies of governments, each

with positive and negative attributes. Henry Thoreau believed in a “laissez-faire” or hands-off

approach for governing, as he states, “I heartily accept the motto, "That government is best

which governs least" (Thoreau). Thoreau envisage a minimalistic and non-invasive relationship

between the citizens and the state. This would apply even more so when the government is

imposing laws on a specific group of its population, and the aforementioned group has no

influence over the laws concerning them. All citizens should have representatives that are acting

in their best interest when creating the laws for them to live under. In Thoreau and Kings time,

this was not the case, as the majority of the African American population had no representation
 Helman 4

in the justice system at all. Despite the fact that they composed a significant portion of Americas

population.

Even in a democracy, a governmental system designed to represent the people, there are

some minorities that are not included in the majority who are influencing the laws and rights of

the nation. The majority who have power do not always maintain it “because they are most

likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are

physically the strongest.” (Thoreau). The problem comes when the minorities try to gain power

they rightly deserve as citizens to represent themselves in the governing process. When this

occurs, those already holding the power resist giving it up. Martin Luther King Jr. commented on

this when he said, “we know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given

by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed”, (King). This disconnect between the

majority ruling and the dissident minority has caused an “us vs them” mentality among the

citizens of the united states that has lasted through the time of Thoreau, King, and even the

present day.

Martin Luther King Jr fought for civil rights for African Americans. In his letters from

Birmingham prison, he says “the white power structure of this city left the Negro community

with no other alternative”. He is referring to the nonviolent demonstration performed by southern

organization fighting for African American rights. However, this is not the relationship he

envisaged for citizens and the social system. He proclaimed that “anyone who lived inside the

United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere in this country”. There were those

who were a part of the majority who were willing to fight for the minority. To unify with those

not represented and challenge the masses to make a change. There were also those who disagreed

with the treatment of the fewer being oppressed, but lacked the conviction to act against it. Both
 Helman 5

men refer to this indifference or lack of action by their fellow men. It is the guilt one feels when

an injustice is witnessed, followed by the hope that someone else will do something about it.

Especially when those witnessing the injustice are not directly affected by it. Martin Luther King

Jr. wanted American citizens of all races united with each other as Americans, not minorities

united against the majority.

Both Thoreau and King preached of the right to fight against a governing system that is

unjust and morally wrong. “The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any

time what I think right”, (Thoreau). What is right or not in this instance can be rephrased as what

is just and unjust. Martin Luther King Jr. defines just law as “a man-made code that squares with

the moral law or the law of God” or “any law that uplifts human personality”, (King). In his

time segregation was an unjust law (and way of life for some). The citizens had and still have

every right to revolt against the system that was trying to oppress a significant portion of the

population. Martin Luther King Jr. did so in a nonviolent way that was protected under the

constitution as his right. Yet despite this, him and his companions who were peacefully

protesting were arrested. Imprisonment, physical assault, and even worse consequences has

fallen on those who have in the past, and who currently, try to practice their right to change what

they believe to be unjust. Even if done peacefully. When this happens the disconnect between the

disempowered and the state is deepened and fear is grown.

Both Thoreau and King refer to gospel themes when referring to justice. Martin Luther

King mentions many biblical stories and even compares his “extremist actions” to Jesus’ being

an “extremist for love” (King). Kings continual insistence for non-violent reactions to the

mistreatment of African Americans gave his thoughts and words more authority. Similar to the
 Helman 6

affect his and Thoreau’s willingness to go to prison also gave them. Thoreau also speaks of non-

violence, but it is not as central a point to his platform as it was for Martin Luther King Jr.

People like Thoreau and King, who have had conviction to speak out against oppression

and immoral actions of their time and have gone to prison as a result, have brought a sense of

sobriety to what they say. Prison was able to legitimize their commitment to their actions and

beliefs. They (along with many others) who were willing to risk physical harm and discomfort by

going to jail reinforce their commitment in the eyes of society. Prison is a serious consequence

that most people are unwilling to consider unless they feel deeply in their conscious that they

must risk it for the sake of their own conscious. “Under a government which imprisons any

unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison”, (Thoreau).

There is a disconnect and fear driven relationship between the citizens of America who

feel disempowered, and those who are governing them. Despite Americas democratic system,

that was supposed to be in place to provide freedom for all mankind living in the country,

throughout history (and even in today’s time) there are still those who do not get represented.

This causes frustration and splits within the citizens from each other, the state, and the justice

system.
 Helman 7

Work Cited

King, Martin Luther. “Letters from Birmingham Jail.” Received by Joe C. Higginbotham,

16 Apr. 1963.

Thoreau, Henry. Resistance to Civil Government; Civil Disobedience. 1849