Social Justice, Equality and Ferguson
Social justice is a form of correction for the daily injustices so many minorities and underprivileged people deal with in their daily lives. It recognizes the need for a system which ensures each individual is allowed the right to live a life free of discrimination; be it sexual, religious or racial.
Oftentimes social justice finds itself brought to the forefront due to a particular incident which epitomizes many of the issues central to this definition. Incidents which demonstrate exactly how inequity and prejudice are perpetuated in our societies.
The shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri has been one such hot button issue. Along with the focus it has brought to the increasingly obstructive role law enforcement plays in our lives. Alongside the ever growing license allowed to police officials, to act with what they deem to be “judicious” force in the face of a refusal to comply. It has also brought to the forefront a long simmering feeling of racial victimization felt by the African American community at the hands of these officials. Much like the infamous Rodney King incident, this has been the catalyst to not only a huge outpouring of grief and anger in these communities, but also a nationwide self-assessment as to how specific minorities are being targeted and dealt with.
Ferguson is in many ways a microcosm of many of the larger issues faced by the African American community, especially in regards to their attitude towards the police and vice versa. Even prior to the incident there had been long-simmering tensions between the police and these communities, with the department seen as a “for-profit” organization, with the municipal court making up one of the largest proportions of its revenue. The municipal court annually averaged three warrants per household. This is a city already faced with one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, people who can ill-afford these kind of strict sanctions on their behavior. Ferguson is city with a black majority, sixty-seven percent of its residents are black – the police force on the other hand is overwhelmingly white with a ninety-four percent representation. Already these dynamics belie a very strict, institutionalized power structure where one group is responsible for deciding and enforcing laws, and another group is almost helplessly subject to them. To this we add a history of disproportionate, some might say aggressive behavior towards civilians – the Michael Brown incident being the result of a culmination of events such as the beating of Henry Davis, rather than an outlier. Structural oppression can be seen here, whilst some may claim racism by individuals, it is not the particular circumstances of Michael Brown’s, shooting or the subsequent acquittal of Darren Wilson the police officer responsible that created social injustice. It is the hiring policies, the laws enforced and the lack of accountability asked of Ferguson’s police force.
The aftermath of the incident has seen an outpouring of rioting and violence from the community, looting, ransacking and arson have all been witnessed. The police have responded in many cases, severely which has added to the general atmosphere of this being a war played across racial lines. In terms of what this incident and the subsequent discussion has achieved in terms of social justice, one thing is certain the amount of scrutiny now being given to the role of law enforcement in America in the media is now unmatched. This is especially true in regards to how police officers are seen to deal with young black males, the death of Eric Garner in New York City is perhaps an incident which would have received nowhere near the same media attention prior to Ferguson. The conversation is vital, but its efficacy can only be determined by how police departments and those in charge of their regulation respond to this increased scrutiny. Darren Wilson has been acquitted despite the intense furore. It remains to be seen what the results of the investigation into Daniel Pantaleo’s actions will be. Structural injustices towards the black community have been an issue since the civil rights marches of the 1960’s, and each progressive generation seems to have dealt with similar flashpoints. In order for true change to come of this, for progress to be made the awareness raised as a result of this incident has to be put into action. The rioting and violence that has been seen has also placed an ugly face on these outbursts of disaffection, allowing those in favor of current policing laws to justify their actions. For progress to be made, cooler heads must prevail.
The Ethics of Violating Existing laws
The extent to which an individual can pursue social justice, at the expense of legality depends largely upon how much faith one puts in laws and subsequent enforcement of those laws by the legal system. It can be argued that any framework which either intentionally or by omission works to restrict the rights and equal opportunities of a group cannot be said to fairly enforce the ideals of justice.
The question of how to deal with structural opposition to a community or individual’s pursuit of equality and freedom can be dealt with broadly in three different fashions. You can work within the confines of the law, pursuing justice through the courts, or by lobbying representatives in the government to create better legislation for your causes. The alternatives are, to break the laws set in place by this basically unfair system to seek justice through resistance. Historically this resistance has taken two forms violent or active resistance, challenging the authority of those in positions of power. Or passive, non-violent forms of resistance such as the civil disobedience movements practice by Martin Luther King or Mahatma Gandhi, protest is such a form of disobedience. Of the two the latter has been a much championed method of challenging the rule of law without transgressing its moral boundaries.
Individually, ethics often play a large part in the decisions people make to break laws for what they deem to be the greater good. Whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden violated several laws concerning confidentiality and the exchange of sensitive state information, however in doing so he revealed a comprehensive organization of surveillance constituting the violation of civil liberties on a scale previous unimagined. How much we can condone these actions depends largely on what we value more, the sanctity of the state and its institutions or the rights of the civilians which those institutions were founded to protect. By making the decision to violate laws in the pursuit of the greater social good, Snowden found himself the victim of threats of treason, and was forced to retreat into exile.
Snowden acted as an individual his actions were ostensibly for the benefit of the public targeted by these surveillance programs. For individuals who make a stand against these laws as part of a community, or to better the lot of their families the consequences become far greater. An individual may risk imprisonment, but resistance by a group of people threatens the lives and well-being of many people, including those who take no active part, but are simply caught in the crossfire. When Lincoln violated the constitution in repealing slavery laws he essentially set in motion the events which would lead to the Civil War, in effect being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. Lincoln is seen by many to be the epitome of a moral leader, and although his sacrifices could be seen as in pursuit of social justice the repercussions may be felt to by many in the South to have outweighed his actions.
In terms of morality, slavery is an issue with little room for grey areas, therefore violating existing laws when they uphold such a patently social unjust practice is not too controversial a decision. However, at some point the essential authority of these structures must be respected, otherwise the very basis for social justice, society, crumbles into anarchy. A healthy society must allow for its rules and traditions to be questioned, sometimes these questions may take the form of acts which violate laws. The people who do so, must face the consequences of these actions, checks and balances need to be in place to ensure that these punitive measures take into account the nature and context of the disobedience and are not simply tools the state uses to crack down on any dissenting views.
In summation it can be seen that throughout history infringing upon laws in pursuit of greater equality has been a successful tactic for communities and individuals. It cannot be denied that these tactics have often come at a great cost to those people involved. The unfortunate reality is that sometimes it is necessary to sustain these injuries in order to ensure that clear limits are placed on the extent to which individuals and communities will allow the law to infringe upon their rights and freedoms.
References
Lowery, W., Leonnig, C., & Berman, M. (2014). Even before Michael Brown’s slaying in Ferguson, racial questions hung over police. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/even-before-teen-michael-browns-slaying-in-mo-racial-questions-have-hung-over-police/2014/08/13/78b3c5c6-2307-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html
