King for a Day

[wodurid]

It has been my habit for several years now to celebrate Martin Luther King Day by ….. putting on my Malcolm X … “by any means necessary.” t-shirt. I wear the t-shirt at no other time, so it is almost ceremonial. I wear it not to dis MLK per-se* but rather to state my contention that MLK would not have gotten much of anywhere ….. if it had not

Comments

[myndcryme]

You bring up some interesting points here which are valid. I won't waste time or space re-affirming what I already agree with. This, however, struck me;

"I often wonder what would have happened to MLK if he had not been murdered** Methinks we would have yet another civil rights gadfly on our hands, like Al Sharpton or Jessie Jackson."

I'll begin by saying that I believe the "Good Reverend" Al Sharpton and the "Good Reverend" Jesse Jackson are despicable opportunists who have crafted livelihoods and careers based on the assumption that Blacks are consistently and innately oppressed and beaten down. I don't like them or agree with them. They "preach" on the assumption that there is bias and an almost impossible barrier to overcome for every black american. (In the meantime, a black american is one of the viable candidates for the President of the United States). By doing so, they immediately pre-suppose the idea that there is no justice and a societally-accepted handicap to the reality of being born with a skin color that is not white. They couch the argument on a false premise from the beginning, and then make every conclusion from that point. They constantly reinforce the stereotype with their assumptions.

I believe that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are two of the greatest racists working within our society today. They are by nature divisive and inflammatory... as well as being remarkably inconsistent on whom it is they choose to defend, condemn, or champion.

Now... is there some truth to the bias? Yes, I believe there is. I also believe that the choices certain members of the African American community make contribute to and exacerbate the negativity perceived by those who are not embroiled within that culture. But the laws have been written, and in the last four decades we have made remarkable advancements toward a culture that merits people "on the content of their character, and not the color of their skin".

In contrast, Martin Luther King spoke of the potential of the human spirit. He spoke of indomitable will, the unassailable power of the free man and woman, and our ability to achieve and cooperate. Whereas Malcolm X was the quintessential "victim", Martin Luther was the visionary. He championed hope, and never asked for anything more than equality - a fair shake at the pursuit of the American Dream.

I'm not discounting your appraisal of Malcolm X - his role may indeed have propelled King into a place of greater acceptability and palatability. But when you analyze the actual philosophies of both of them, MLK's vision is consistent with the true meaning of our founding fathers, whereas Malcolm's is the philosophy of one who has been wronged and is seeking vengeance in a way that would have only swung the pendulum too far in the opposite direction.

- Vajra -

[wodurid]

I concur. In many ways, the biggest impediment to racial equality and national unity is ..... much of the black "leadership"..... not racist Whitey. Further, I have encountered many individual blacks that are so psychologically invested in their victimhood that they can't see straight.

... and as I said, Malcolm X had started to mature in his thinking ... and even his radicalism was not one of wallowing in victimhood, but of transcending it .... "by any means necessary." (much, you must allow, like our revolutionary Founding Fathers)

As to the rest of it, frankly I just have an innate mistrust of anyone with "Reverend" in front of their name .... Rev. Jessie Jackson, ... Rev. Al Sharpton ... Rev. Martin Luther King .....

[myndcryme]

Okay, the comparison between Malcolm and a bunch of riled up Virginians makes sense in my head... I probably shouldn't have intimated Malcolm X was as much of a victim as I did. At least he was pro-active in standing up for himself. He and Martin Luther King simply had very different solutions in mind for the same problem. As we've been shown throughout history, it's great if you can accomplish something through non-violent means. However, the cold reality is that sometimes - Violence IS the answer.

[wodurid]

MLK as say, diplomat Ben Franklin .... to Malcolm X as say, rabble-rouser Patrick Henry.

"by any means necessary" speech = "give me libery or give me death" speech.

[laserbitch]

Did you ever see that play where Martin Luther King Jr and Malcolm X were together and talking about their differences? I think it was at the St John's auditorium (whatever it was called), and we had to attend it for theater classes?

Holy crap was that good. And thought-provoking.

Too bad I can't remember much else about it... :(