Hugo Black's Ethical Choice to Join the Klan
(Ethics)

Introduction:

Hugo Black of Alabama concludes that Black's joining of the Ku Klux Klan in Birmingham in 1923, in the context of political and economic struggles between black and white workers and the city's industrialists, was a hazardous, but ethical act. By contemporary standards, however, the Klan is a premiere symbol of racism and bigotry and joining it is universally understood as an act of hatred.

Questions:

1.  What constitutes ethical conduct in a profoundly racist society where the economic, social, and governmental structures actively sustain a way of life where people of one color dominate people of another color?

2.  In such a profoundly racist society, does affiliation with one of many racist-acting groups create an unethical act even if the affiliation does not change a person's conduct or beliefs?

3.  What were Hugo Black's choices in Birmingham in 1923 in order to "fight for the things he believed in"?

4.  If Black had decided not to join the Birmingham Klan in 1923, would that decision have helped to reduce the rampant racism in Birmingham at that time or made Black a more ethical person?

5.  Assume, for a moment, that Black had left Alabama in the early 1920s as a way to keep from associating with the Klan or organizations and institutions that worked against the ideal of "equal rights for all, special privileges to none."  Would that departure have been more of an ethical act than his remaining in Birmingham and acting as he did? How so?  Where would he have moved to find a way to promote such an ideal in Alabama?