For years, the radical left has treated violence and chaos as legitimate tools of political expression. They rioted after Trump’s election in 2016. They rioted at his inauguration. They set cities ablaze over George Floyd in 2020. Now they’re taking to the streets again — this time to protest the enforcement of our immigration laws. The pattern is unmistakable: leftist outrage erupts, property burns, streets are blocked, and somehow it all gets rebranded as “free speech.” Democrats not only excuse this behavior, but they also glorify it, shamelessly invoking the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to defend lawlessness that bears no resemblance to his message or methods.
And, of course, that happens each time.
On Thursday morning, Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) reacted to the riots in Los Angeles that are spreading to other states with a post on X that “Protest is Patriotism,” which featured a clip of Dr. King saying, “But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right.”
Protest is Patriotism
— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) June 12, 2025
In peace and with strength we shall overcome. pic.twitter.com/sdFuiP8fZx
How disgusting.
When violent rioters and their defenders invoke Martin Luther King Jr.'s words about America's "right to protest for right," they reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of both the man and his message that borders on historical sacrilege. Dr. King's declaration that "the greatness of America is the right to protest for right" was not a blank check for destruction; it was a precise call for moral action rooted in nonviolence, constitutional principles, and respect for human dignity.
To twist King's words into a defense of violence is to ignore the entire foundation of his philosophy. This was a man who preached that "nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals."
He repeatedly emphasized that means and ends are inseparable — that just ends cannot be achieved through unjust means. Violence, destruction of property, and chaos were not tools in King's arsenal; they were precisely what he fought against.
Does anyone really think that King would approve of burning cars, looting businesses, and assaulting innocent people, including police officers and ICE agents enforcing the law of the land?
The civil rights movement succeeded not in spite of its commitment to nonviolence, but because of it. When protesters faced police dogs, fire hoses, and brutal beatings with dignity and restraint, they exposed the moral bankruptcy of segregation to the entire nation. Their discipline in the face of provocation created what King called "constructive, nonviolent tension" that forced society to confront its injustices.
Furthermore, King understood that violence ultimately serves the interests of oppression. "The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral," he wrote, "begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."
Those who invoke King's legacy while defending violence also ignore his consistent condemnation of riots throughout his career.
“Today, all of our cities confront huge problems,” King said during a speech a Stanford University on April 14, 1967. “All of our cities are potentially powder kegs as a result of the continued existence of these conditions. Many in moments of anger, many in moments of deep bitterness engage in riots. And let me say, as I've always said, and I will always continue to say that riots are socially destructive and self-defeating. I'm still convinced that nonviolence is the most potent weapon available to oppress people in their struggle for freedom and justice.”
If only those on the left who cite Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. actually understood him.
