41 years ago today, Martin Luther King, Jr., one of the greatest US citizens ever to live, was assassinated, allegedly by a white supremacist, James Earl Ray.

The only major US figure that I know of to advocate non-violence, King and his fellows in the Civil Rights Movement made great progress in achieving justice and equality for America’s African Americans. African Americans had first been subjected to slavery, and then to decades of discrimination, at least some of which still exists today. By using non-violent techniques such as boycotts, civil disobedience, and mass marches, King and his associates, as well as their supporters, demonstrated again how with persistence these techniques can lead to change. They used to their best advantage the political rights which are guaranteed in the US constitution and turned them into meaningful change to end some of the greatest injustices in US society.

Unfortunately, it seems that, unlike Gandhi in India, King’s message of non-violence has, at least to some degree, been lost in America. Violence remains pervasive in US society, especially in the form of violent crime, legal possession of weapons, and violence in movies, on TV and other forms of media. The US has failed as well, to eliminate, or even lessen violence in its foreign policy, as shown in the dual wars of the Bush administration in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I fail to understand why there is still so much violence in US society, but it seems to me that it comes primarily from three things. The first is the continued advocacy by many groups such as the National Rifle Association for the “right” to bear arms. The second is the presence of violence in so many forms of media. While this does not necessarily make people violent in a direct way, I do think that it makes them more likely to support violent actions, as for example in foreign policy. The third reason that I see is that the US correctional system/prison system fails to rehabilitate prisoners, and in fact when prisoners are released they may be more hardened than they previously had been.

It’s hard for me to say how much discrimination against African- Americans remains in US society. For one thing, I haven’t lived in the US for many years. Secondly, it is often hard to empirically confirm that discrimination exists, since people with racist attitudes often hide them. (This by itself is an improvement, since in years past people would more openly express racism.) One’s perception of the degree of racism is often influenced by a person’s political positions, as well as anecdotal experience. There has probably been a lot of research done on this subject, but I have not looked at it. On the other hand, the existence of “racial profiling”, in which police admit that they pursue and interrogate people based on their race, is a clear sign that it does still exist, at least in that manifestation. If any readers have any comments on this or have access to such information, please leave a comment.

There can be no doubt, however, that many African Americans still experience institutional racism. This means that impersonal forces of society continue to affect African Americans in negative ways that their white counterparts do not experience. For example, for those African Americans who are born into low-income communities, and attend the schools of poorer quality in their neighborhoods, they do not have the same opportunities as people of other races or of higher income levels. This still disproportionately affects African Americans because they have never been able to rise out of the poverty that discrimination put them in over those decades past.

While for most of my life I have been an advocate of non-violent philosophy, over the past few years I have come to see that it is limited in some ways. Generally it is limited by the society which it seeks to change. That is, if certain freedoms are not present in that society, or if the institutions of justice are not sound or independent, or if the ruling regime is harsh and authoritarian, there is little hope for non-violence to succeed. Non-violence relies on the conscience of the perpetrators, or of other members of society, to be affected. But, for example, in societies with strict censorship or control of information, non-violence is unlikely to work, since those people whose consciences would be stimulated cannot even get information about what has happened. In another example, in harsh regimes like Myanmar, where all resistance is ruthlessly quashed, there is little hope for non-violence to succeed.

Thus it is necessary to transform societies into ones where non-violence can be successful, by ensuring that certain rights, such as freedom of the press and the right to demonstrate, are guaranteed.

I honor Martin Luther King, Jr. for what he represented, as well as his affect on my own life. As a young high school student his ethic stirred idealism in me which still continues to this day, although in different forms as I have changed. When seeking inspiration in my life, the iconic image of King was one that I often remembered.

I hope that King will continue to be an inspiration to new generations of Americans, and that people will realize how great he was, and what a valuable legacy he left to the US. Hopefully as time goes on the message he espoused, of non-violence, will also be adopted by greater numbers of Americans.