(He's in bed, the article says, because he was having a "checkup" and getting "some rest" in a 2-day hospital stay.)
The prize was $54,000 back then, and King said he'd devote "every penny" to the civil rights movement. He said what he had done was not political: "I am a minister of the gospel, not a political leader." And: "I do not consider this merely as an honor to me personally, but a tribute to the disciplined, wise restraint and majestic courage of gallant Negro and white persons of goodwill who have followed a nonviolent course in seeking to establish a reign of justice and a rule of love across this nation of ours."
At page 14, there's a second article "Cheers and Scorn for Nobel Award/Rights Leaders Delighted — Perez Blames 'Reds.'" Eugene T. Connor ("Bull" Connor) the former police commissioner of Birmingham, Alabama said the Nobel Committee was "scraping the bottom of the barrel," and "He has caused more strife and trouble in this country than anyone I can think of." Virgil Stuart, St. Augustine, Florida police chief, went with the same strife-is-not-peace observation and called the prize "one of the biggest jokes of the year. How can you win the peace prize when you stir up all the trouble he did down here?" The "Perez" in the headline was a "prominent segregationist" named Leander H. Perez Sr., who said that the prize "only shows the Communist influence nationally and internationally. Shame on somebody."
Shame on somebody, indeed.
Posts
119 comments:
Now I'm curious about the two day hospital stay for a checkup and rest.
Where's the standard reminder that Bull Connor was a (Southern) Democrat?
I really miss gallant Negroes. It was a better country back then.
Where's rhe notice Bull Conner was a Dem?
Right next to the one saying he was conservative,...
Crack
MisterBuddwing:
I'd wager the quoted individual was a Democrat too. Microaggressions against history. Let's drop all the labels. Except the labels that assure Liberals their world view is correct. Because history written by Zinn. And also, shut up.
... disciplined, wise restraint and majestic courage...
wow, I had no idea he was so young.
Bull Connor - Democrat
Leander Perez Sr.- Democrat
Virgil Stuart - Democrat appointed
Over to you Crack,
I'm sure this was a staged photo op. It's unfortunate that he allowed a photo in bed.
Everyone quoted except MLK was probably a Democrat. They supported separate but equal schools, Jim crow, and eugenics then. They had to change the names to mandatory public education, affirmative action, and planned parenthood but they are still the racists now.
And they have uncle tom's like sharpton, Jackson, and our own local here trying to keep black people on the Democrats plantation. Under Obama black people have lost significant net worth while white people have gained slightly. Reparations are a cynical ploy to keep black people angry and ignorant of what progressive policies are doing to them.
As a second generation preacher of the Good News, King grew up with hope and with a fixed courage that good does defeat evil. His education in Atlanta was first rate.
So he fearlessly tried out using his education and the Gospel as tools, and it worked. He was a Christian man who suffered an African American man's status but he refused to let that stop his message.
To this day his opponents complain that since he was a Black Man, it was unfair for MLK to use those tools.
But hys courage won over the lazy minded whites that had accepted black men being terrorized by the evil cadres who enforced segregation laws. He turned the tide using the same Gospel inspired courage that once conquered Rome.
The evil cadres had to turn their hate talents towards Jews and Hispanic immigrants.
Of course MLK's award would be controversial, at that time he was a very controversial figure--I think less than half of Americans had a positive view of him at the time of his murder. Much of that was a lot of people vehemently supported segregation, and others simply didn't like rocking the boat. And still others may have simply disliked his anti-war stance (later on) or didn't care for his tactics. It took time for most Americans to view him favorably as a significant force for ending racial segregation in a peaceful, lawful manner.
Compare that award to some of the recent joke Nobels handed out--namely Gore and Obama, neither of who did anything to advance peace or harmony, and the latter blatantly violating international (as well as American) law in order to bomb and intervene in other countries with no serious plan to accomplish anything except maybe make things worse.
Gore's prize for "raising awareness" of global warming may earn him some environmentalist prize, but world peace? Hell, if one individual could be blamed for the most recent economic collapse, that would have done more to reduce carbon emissions (as recessions and depressions tend to do). Gore's award was for one thing--insulting George Bush, who notoriously beat Gore in 2000.
Obama's was even more a joke than Gore's--giving a man an award for what you hope he'll do is the sort of thing I'd expect to see in the Onion. Considering he got the award at a time when he had several years ahead of controlling the world's most powerful military this seems like the Nobel Committee was just asking to prove itself embarrassed.
A humble, self-aware man would have graciously declined the award, of course.
The Crack Emcee:
As a classical liberal with the view that government should be less involved in individual lives I agree that Democrats such as Bull Connor were wrong to want to conserve the intrusiveness of the governments those Democrats had created. I look forward to you embracing a more libertarian and/or classical liberal view of government's preferred size.
Now, would you like to talk about the drastic increase in government intrusiveness that your preferred political party continues to perpetrate under President Obama?
The biggest reason MLK deserved the award I think is because of his mainstreaming the use of nonviolence to achieve his ends. This may have been a tardy acknowledgment that Gandhi was unjustly denied the award himself, as it was his tactics that MLK used, and in both cases their movements became more successful as a result.
Brave dude. He looks about 20 years old there.
Who goes to the hospital to "rest?"
Ah well, another mystery.
Probably another thing to go on the negative side of his personal ledger, but doesn't change the positive side or his personal courage.
The Crack Emcee said...
"Where's rhe notice Bull Conner was a Dem?
Right next to the one saying he was conservative,..."
I am going to treat this as if you actually believe the crap you are pedaling and not a cynical moby, which is at the border of belief.
The logical outcome of your actions is racial strife and resentment. Even if you managed to get reparations from me even though I did absolutely nothing to repress anyone or ever owned slaves to people who have never been slaves and lived in a country I protected what would be accomplished? It would be impossible to make it a lifetime benefit so you would be talking about a lump sum check. Best case you get enough to live in off of for a year or two then you are right back where you were. Even if you created a social security style system trust fund the Democrats would just steal it like the ss trust fund.
The money would be short lived in any scenario.
But that is not the goal of reparations. The goal of reparations is a lifetime of resentment amongst black people who won't get much money and white people who never had slaves. This well of resentment will last a lifetime and be sucked up by progressives to divide the people against each other. They will make sure you stay poor and angry while the sharptons and Jacksons pedal their hate and live in the nice cabin.
Did they make a cabin for you crack?
Obama's was even more a joke than Gore's--giving a man an award for what you hope he'll do is the sort of thing I'd expect to see in the Onion.
President Obama's Nobel was a confirmation of something I'd suspected for some time - that the Peace Prize is not so much a Lifetime Achievement Award as a reward for a work in progress - kind of an "attaboy" given to someone who the Nobel Committee believes is on the "right track."
"Republican" and "Democrat" and "liberal" and "conservative" aren't really appropriate labels for the likes of civil rights heroes and villains from that time. It's true that the Democratic party has changed significantly from the time that the New Dealers got in bed with populist racists, but it's also true that ideologically a "conservative" today who believes that people should be judged as individuals and by their merits rather than race have nothing to do with the "conservatives" of the Bull Connor stripe.
Yes, at the time John Stennis et al would have been called "conservative Democrats". But using them to smear "conservatives" or "Democrats" today is silly.
Bed Peace. All we are saying is give peace a chance.
Was this before or after JFK and Bobby had the FBI wiretap him. The scamps.
"wow, I had no idea he was so young."
He didn't live to see 40.
"Was this before or after JFK and Bobby had the FBI wiretap him. The scamps."
How could this be? Oliver Stone assured us the Kennedys were assassinated because they were suchc friends to civil rights!
Achilles said:
"Everyone quoted except MLK was probably a Democrat."
I don't know whether Achilles meant to imply that MKL was a Republican, or just wanted to state that MLK was not a democrat. It is true he was not a democrat, but it also true he was not a Republican.
From the linked article:
"King writes this about the 1964 Republican National Convention:
'The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism. All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right. The “best man” at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.
'Senator Goldwater had neither the concern nor the comprehension necessary to grapple with this problem of poverty in the fashion that the historical moment dictated. On the urgent issue of civil rights, Senator Goldwater represented a philosophy that was morally indefensible and socially suicidal. While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist. His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America, I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy.'"
From wikipedia:
Connor entered politics as a Democrat in 1934, winning a seat in the Alabama House of Representatives.[4] As a legislator he supported populist measures and pro-union issues. He voted for extending the poll tax and against an anti-sedition bill meant to stifle union activity.
So pro-union, in Alabama. That ain't conservative.
Also, he wasn't just southern democrat, he was a member of the DNC.
Bull Connor was also a Democratic National Committeeman. All of the Jim Crow governors were Democrats...except for George Wallace.
LEAN FORWARRRRRDDD!!!
Assuming for sake of argument reparations do come, the real entertainment will come from watching Crack and his cousins fighting over that big fat check, like some urban utes throwing down over a looted big-screen TV.
Is it churlish to mention he had many extramarital relationships?
Shame on somebody.
Shame on the Nobel Committee for degrading the currency of the Peace Prize by awarding it to carnival-barking rent-seekers like AlGore, bloody-handed murderers like Yasser Arafat and in-over-their-head null sets like President Tee Time.
It's all so easy now.
JFK wouldn't be photographed with MLK.
President Obama's Nobel was a confirmation of something I'd suspected for some time - that the Peace Prize is not so much a Lifetime Achievement Award as a reward for a work in progress.
"Paving the Road to Hell with Good Intentions" is ever a work in progress.
Leander Perez was the head democrat in Plaquemines Parish during the brief time I was in school up the road at LSU. He was brutal and his ideas on race were as backwards as the times and as Plaquemines Parish itself. I was slightly involved in civil rights in that Parish and do not remember it fondly. The food was great, however.
The bravery of the men and women actually involved in the movement at the time cannot be overstated. The mixture of virulent racism and violence prone redneckery was a dangerous one, a deadly one.
Today a visitor would be surprised to visit some of these little towns in the rural south, surprised to see the number of mixed race couples and the cooperation between the races as they struggle to survive as the populations of these hamlets slowly vanish.
The Southern Democrats were idealists. One of their ideals was the purity and supremacy of the white race. This ideal has not stood the test of time, but it that was the ideal. Southern segregationists were not especially conservative in other matters. Senator Fullbright was one of Bill Clinton's mentors. Fulbright was known for his enlightened foreign policy and opposition to integration. Sam Ervin who led the Watergate inquiry and was Hillary's boss was known for his folksy charm, liberal views, and opposition to integration.
MLK (unknowingly?) helped plant the seeds that branched into the Vagina as Fascist State, leaving blacks impotent at the feet of the Feminists: the Boot holding the black male down is now a High Heel.
Would MLK stand defiantly against The Vagina as Fascist State, or would he content himself to be a pampered chihuahua in a feminist's handbag?
Robert Cook said...
Achilles said:
"Everyone quoted except MLK was probably a Democrat."
"I don't know whether Achilles meant to imply that MKL was a Republican, or just wanted to state that MLK was not a democrat. It is true he was not a democrat, but it also true he was not a Republican. "
In this context all I am pointing out is that the progressive government had policies then that are perfectly mirrored by progressive policies now. The racists then were democrats and the racists now are democrats.
They had the same goals of statist control.
They used the same strategies to create resentment and division on racial lines.
They used the same tactics: eugenics, segregated schools, redistribution of wealth.
Make sure black people get poor public education. "Help" them with affirmative action. Make sure they lack skills to succeed and require government help to get into college or a job. Then when they fail stoke resentment. Tell them we will give them reparations. Progressives are awful people.
I just finished the Ellis book on Jefferson. Ellis claimed that Jefferson's views dovetailed with those of the tea party. WTF. It's true that Jefferson made reduction of the national debt and the cutting of the size of the federal government his priorities. However, he did this by dry docking the US Navy. I don't think the dry docking of the US Navy has ever been one of the stated goals of the tea party.........It's interesting to note that those among our founders who were considered most conservative such as Hamilton and Adams were also those who were mist vehement in their opposition to slavery.
Senator Fullbright was one of Bill Clinton's mentors. Fulbright was known for his enlightened foreign policy and opposition to integration. Sam Ervin who led the Watergate inquiry and was Hillary's boss was known for his folksy charm, liberal views, and opposition to integration.
Al Gore, Sr. was known for fathering Al Gore, Jr. and voting against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Brando, 10:03:
"It's true that the Democratic party has changed significantly from the time that the New Dealers got in bed with populist racists, but it's also true that ideologically a 'conservative' today … [has] nothing to do with the 'conservatives' of the Bull Connor stripe."
It's convenient wordplay, conflating "conservative" in the sense of wanting to preserve America's (classically liberal) ideals, with "conservative" in the sense of resisting change.
Today's "liberals" cherish and nourish that confusion, and of course some conservatives seem unclear on the distinction.
My favorite example of the contradictions that result came from (if I recall correctly) the New York Times:
""Conservatives in the Kremlin have cracked down [on the breadth of the allowed reading list in the Soviet Union], banning [among others] 'The Conscience of a Conservative,' by Barry Goldwater."
Anyway - great man, and one of the most deserving recipients I can think of. Thanks for the post, Professor.
The general consensus within the Democrat Party is that during Nixon's administration all the good people left the Republican Party and became Democrats and all the bad people left the Democrat party and became Republicans.
They believe this so strongly they extend it into the past, making Abraham Lincoln a member of the Democrat Party and George Wallace a Republican.
Cause Oceania has always been at war with East Asia.
In the spirit of others here who have posted on the "liberal/conservative" divide among the Jim Crow Southern politicians, let me throw in my 2 cents worth.
I grew up in northern Alabama in the 60 - 70s. The city park I played in was named Delano Park, after FDR. The New Deal was remembered fondly by my elders, as it created the TVA, which brought industry & jobs to a part of the country where the Depression had begun well before 1929.
The modern attempt to hang Jim Crow on the Republicans or on "Conservatives" is simply revisionist history at its worst. It was easy in those times to support the "rights of the workin' man to a fair wage & a good job, make sure the corporations pay their fair share, etc." & yet still be appalled at the notion that "your sister might marry a n****r". Matter of fact, most of the populace did agree with these sentiments, no matter where they lived.
All positions on the political spectrum had their racists, even the left
"All positions on the political spectrum had their racists, even the left"
Focusing on individual racists is a ploy to take attention off of racist policy.
Public education: racist.
Planned parenthood: eugenics.
Reparations: redistribution, divisive, racist.
Affirmative Action: the definition of racist.
Even opposing voter ID is couched in the idea black people are too stupid to get photo ID.
Jim Crow laws developed and intensified after the Suffragette Movement.
The Vagina as Fascist State has been a long train coming.
If MLK ever spoke out in favor of gay marriage, I am unaware of it. When one takes cognizance of his achievements and contributions, it is important to take note of that. MLK's record on gay rights is not all it should be. Accordingly, his reputation should be revised downward and sharply so.
Hubs and I lived one county north of St. Augustine in the early 90s. Went into a little antique shop once and found a shrine to KKK memorabilia. We were completely aghast, having not known specifically the detailed history of the area during that era. So it's without surprise now that I read of that reaction by then St. Augustine police chief.
Ah, the poor notion there was ever a time or place that was good for blacks in America- based on your own descriptions of it - is a lie. Rep or Dm, liberal or con, North or South, his has always been a white-made Hell. And one whites insist we should be grateful for.
That really puts salt in the wound.
Not that they've ever cared about that,...
William,
Whites don't know MLK or the Civil Rights Movement. Notice how many times reparations are posited as a shakedown when that started in 1871 - just a massive display of ignorance.
MLK insisted Bayard Rustin, a black gay man who'd been arrested for being so, organize the March on Washington.
Whites not knowing things dosn't mean those things aren't true.
Crack
William
Thanks for trying to smear a black icon.
Whites always look less racist when they do that,...
JPS--exactly why I try to avoid using "liberal" and "conservative" in describing the modern movements--the terms are more confusing than helpful.
In any event, the segregationists of the Civil Rights Era and pre CRE were almost all Democrats, as the South was basically a single party state at the time, but their politics on issues besides race ranged from pro-New Deal support for activist government programs to anti-FDR opposition to unions and federal programs. FDR had a number of allies and opponents among the Southern politicians, but they were almost all Democrats.
As for the southerners who today vote mostly Republican and tend to oppose federal power and government activism--and call themselves "conservatives"--they are no more the political descendants of George Wallace than today's Democrats are. Unless they are actually calling for segregating public schools and water fountains.
Am I the only one who thinks MLK looks like Eddie Murphy?
Oso Negro,
"I really miss gallant Negroes. It was a better country back then."
Jon Stewart recently said we still show amazing grace under pressure from clueless whites. How a country mired in open discrimination and segregation was "better" will have to be explained.
Birkel,
"I'd wager the quoted individual was a Democrat too."
In the white worldview, everyone in the South was evil while everyone in the North was sweet as pie - damn the facts - just like with their current Democrat/Republican configuration. The truth is neither is true, but they can't handle the truth - because their identities are wrapped up in it - so they repeat the lie to make themselves feel better. Damn everyone else.
Saint Croix,
"wow, I had no idea he was so young."
Too young to be shot in the face but WHITES. He also wasn't well-loved by whites when alive, no matter what they lie and say, which also contributes to the more-accurate picture of the nation as a racist Hell hole.
RecChief,
"Bull Connor - Democrat
Leander Perez Sr.- Democrat
Virgil Stuart - Democrat appointed
Over to you Crack,"
If the Republicans were such good stewards, Reconstruction wouldn't have lasted for only 12 years after the Civil War. Those Democrats could only cause us trouble if the Republicans didn't care, so enjoy deluding yourself the Right is so much better. It never was and never is - blacks are our own best friends.
Achilles,
"Everyone quoted except MLK was probably a Democrat. They supported separate but equal schools, Jim crow, and eugenics then."
This was true of whites generally - that you attribute it to one group is dishonest - why do whites continue to lie to themselves?
traditionalguy,
"He fearlessly tried out using his education and the Gospel as tools, and it worked."
He got shot in the face - which proved whites couldn't be trusted and launched the Black Power Movement - and, if "it worked," you've got a LOT of explaining to do regarding the state of black America today and all these lies y'all telling to support it.
Brando,
"Of course MLK's award would be controversial, at that time he was a very controversial figure--I think less than half of Americans had a positive view of him at the time of his murder."
See? Out of all these white folks, there's only one - 1 - who references real history. Unfortunately, it's history that says this is and was a racist country. They shot The Man of Peace in the face.
Birkel,
"I look forward to you embracing a more libertarian and/or classical liberal view of government's preferred size."
You look forward to me betraying blacks - not going to happen. Nice try, though. I think white's thinking should be reframed as cultural "scheming" because it's never honest and straight-forward, like the effort to cut government by taking services from blacks - or fighting voter fraud using tools that hurt blacks, or - you get the idea.
It's just more racism, just like the old days.
"Leander H. Perez Sr., ... said that the prize 'only shows the Communist influence nationally and internationally. Shame on somebody.'"
King's judgment has often been questioned for associating with New York lawyer and Communist apparatchik Stanley D. Levison, who was one of King's most trusted advisers. Shame on somebody indeed! Why else would the FBI be so interested in MLK?
Brando,
"The biggest reason MLK deserved the award I think is because of his mainstreaming the use of nonviolence to achieve his ends."
Yep. As Malcolm X said - be non-violent and docile while whites abuse you in any way they want and they'll salute you. Stand up for yourself and you're an extremist.
I'm an extremist.
Tank,
"Who goes to the hospital to "rest?""
People with white Americans trying to kill him.
Achilles said...
The Crack Emcee said...
"Where's rhe notice Bull Conner was a Dem?
Right next to the one saying he was conservative,..."
Achilles,
"The logical outcome of your actions is racial strife and resentment."
They said the same thing about MLK before they shot him in the face - BTW, I'm for reparations just as MLK was - so if anyone's on the wrong side (while claiming to love his message) it's you.
"Even if you managed to get reparations from me even though I did absolutely nothing to repress anyone or ever owned slaves to people who have never been slaves and lived in a country I protected what would be accomplished?"
So much ignorance. So many straw men:
Reparations is a claim against the government - not you - so that's your first bozo statement.
Second, governments outlast people, and you support the government that committed these crimes - you even support them today and insist justice will never come to the wronged - so you're as guilty as the slaveholders you protect.
What would be accomplished - this is going to startle whites - is justice being brought to this nation.
I know - you'll never let that happen - which makes you totally different from Southern whites because you like to scream "Democrat" whenever they're mentioned. Blacks everywhere applaud.
"The money would be short lived in any scenario."
But you're not a racist - these are the words of an American Patriot, with faith in his fellow Americans, and a willingness to help those abused by the government and it's people, right?
That government abuse really riles y'all up - for everyone but blacks, for some reason.
"The goal of reparations is a lifetime of resentment amongst black people who won't get much money and white people who never had slaves."
The first application was made in 1871 - wrong again - and another amazing display of ignorance of our country's history.
But you 'splain me, OK?
"This well of resentment will last a lifetime and be sucked up by progressives to divide the people against each other. They will make sure you stay poor and angry while the sharptons and Jacksons pedal their hate and live in the nice cabin."
Again, what patriotic American speaks of his other Americans - the black ones - as though they don't possess brains? "Progressives" tell us what to do, right? We have no agency what-so-ever. No ideas of our own, no interests we follow - nothing - it's all those evil white progressives leading us astray.
And then - after telegraphing how little you think of us - you wonder why we won't vote with you.
Because you're not a progressive is probably the only reason you can understand but I'll go a little further:
You're an ignorant, patronizing, condescending, racist jerk,...
Crack deliberately reinvents history to conform to his racist agenda.
"Unfortunately, it's history that says this is and was a racist country. They shot The Man of Peace in the face."
Last time I checked, MLK's convicted assassin was James Earl Ray. Beyond that, we have only conspiracy theories. Watch out for white helicopters, Crack.
gadfly ,
"King's judgment has often been questioned for associating with New York lawyer and Communist apparatchik Stanley D. Levison, who was one of King's most trusted advisers. Shame on somebody indeed! Why else would the FBI be so interested in MLK?"
A better question is why whites let the FBI abuse MLK as they did?
Newt Gingrich chastised the Right for your type of thinking when Mandela died:
Whenever blacks are abandoned and abused by our governments, whites think further FBI abuse is warranted when we find friends who will help us against white's wrong actions.
It's circular thinking of the worst kind - and a fine example of the murderous lunacy whites consider the lives blacks should live,...
James Earle Ray escaped from Brushy Mountain state prison in Tennessee. He was gone for a couple of days and despite the fact that they searched high and low he was gone.
A dog handler was called in and he asked for them to wait a day for a rainstorm to pass through before he set off on the trail, the better to give his hounds a better scent. They reluctantly let the day pass before he let his bloodhounds loose. I think it was within twelve hours that the dogs had found Ray hiding under a log only a couple of miles from the prison.
So Crack once again assumes all other commenters are white. I wonder if Crack himself is white and doing a racially insensitive sendup of a black man? After all, on the Internet, no one knows you're not a Viking warrior.
"Yep. As Malcolm X said - be non-violent and docile while whites abuse you in any way they want and they'll salute you. Stand up for yourself and you're an extremist."
Or, maybe it's less about getting whites to accept you, and more about getting the most advancement for a power-lacking minority in the face of opposition from those in power. See, engaging in violence, even in the aim of a noble goal, tends to calcify the opposition. It turns moderates against you, because while they are appalled at seeing peaceful protesters being treated with fire hoses, they immediately turn to law and order when they see rocks thrown and storefronts burned.
Consider the tactics the Palestinians have been using for decades. Is it not conceivable that had they engaged in nonviolent resistance, the Israelis would be more likely to make concessions? Instead, even Israeli doves react with troops and tear gas and air strikes.
MLK understood this, and succeeded in turning the tide in favor of Civil Rights during the years he was active. Malcolm X's approach was never really tried by Mr. X himself--he never led any riots or campaigns of murder, despite his rhetoric--but we have seen in the past how violent movements are treated by those in power, and the population base that the powerful depend on. As civil rights marches of the early '60s were supplanted by riots by the late '60s, "law and order" became the rule of the day.
Perhaps you think the reason we celebrate MLK rather than Huey Newton is because MLK was considered a "good negro" by the whites in power, and Newton was just a little too "real" for them. But there's a more obvious reason--King achieved quite a bit, and Newton achieved nothing more than helping "tough on crime" politicians get elected.
Crack inadvertently raises the issue at the heart of the matter. There on the threshold. The Malcolm X, black power, approach and the MLK approach, the one suggesting that black culture and black lives did not need improvement especially through integration. King urged integration and assimilation into the larger culture with emphasis on the community availing itself of eduction. The former laid out an easier road to take, black power and black pride: appealing, effortless, fruitless.
The latter's path was harder: education, integration, assimilation.
We have seen the results.
Crack:
Tank,
"Who goes to the hospital to "rest?""
People with white Americans trying to kill him.
Because there were no white people in the hospital?
He was in the Hospital Protection Program (HOPP)?
I wonder why he was really in there?
I wonder what he would think of blacks like Crack spending every day blaming white people for his own self inflicted wounds? Is that the MLK approach? I'd like to believe better of him (and I do, despite his shortcomings).
Brando,
"I wonder if Crack himself is white and doing a racially insensitive sendup of a black man?"
No, I'm a black man sitting in a facility, waiting to be assigned a bed in a shelter for the night.
Just the way y'all like it.
"See, engaging in violence, even in the aim of a noble goal, tends to calcify the opposition."
They shot MLK in the face for defending peace.
Why do whites lie?
gadfly ,
"Last time I checked, MLK's convicted assassin was James Earl Ray. Beyond that, we have only conspiracy theories."
They shot Medgar Evers in the back,...
Brando,
"King achieved quite a bit, and Newton achieved nothing more than helping "tough on crime" politicians get elected."
Because blacks owning guns are wrong - the idea Huey Newton made clear - even as whites, today, insist they have a right to open carry.
The hypocrisy is stifling,...
Michael,
"King urged integration and assimilation into the larger culture with emphasis on the community availing itself of eduction."
Bullshit - King was for reparations as much as I am.
Why do whites lie?
Tank,
"I wonder what he would think of blacks like Crack spending every day blaming white people for his own self inflicted wounds?"
Because MLK was so famous for blaming blacks for our condition,....
Acceptance Speech by Martin Luther King Jr. (12 minutes)
Crack
Where do I write that MLK was against reparations?
You know only a very little bit of what you think you know.
Martin Luther King Explains 'Reparations'
Michael,
"Where do I write that MLK was against reparations?"
You didn't, but still mischaracterized his message into the white pablum we hear today.
"You know only a very little bit of what you think you know."
And whites know even less,...
Whites are against reparations:
Even though they know blacks payed taxes for over a century for facilities - like libraries, swimming pools, etc. - they weren't allowed to use.
This is the "shakedown" whites say reparations are.
Ignoring the one they've been engaged in the whole time,...
"They shot MLK in the face for defending peace."
Sort of proves my point. MLK was shot by a white bigot--Malcolm X was shot by black Muslim assassins, and of course Huey Newton was never shot. Perhaps people are shooting those they see as their greatest threats--white racists were far more threatened by MLK than they were by a marginal ex-con like X, or thugs like Newton, because of the bunch the one who would achieve the most was MLK.
But I'm sure you'll go on calling me white and assuming MLK is some "Uncle Tom" for not advocating murdering white babies or some other nonsense. Face it--MLK's tactics were effective.
"Because blacks owning guns are wrong - the idea Huey Newton made clear - even as whites, today, insist they have a right to open carry."
That doesn't disprove my point, that thuggish behavior unites the opposition and marginalizes the movement. It is correct that gun control advocates at that time feared the idea of blacks being armed (and going further back, the NRA was started by a former Union general). But I must have missed the news about current pro-gun activists adding an asterisk about how their gun rights should apply to whites-only.
In fact, the anti-gun zealotry in big cities such as Baltimore, where I live, if anything penalizes blacks who wish to protect themselves. Now, if you live in a dangerous neighborhood and want to protect yourself with a firearm, you're likely going to have to do it illegally, adding additional risk for young black men who already have enough trouble with the police.
But you won't hear that from your big city leftist governments. No, if you're poor it's up to you to hope the cops keep you safe. Self reliance and personal agency are not virtues for these civic leaders.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Brando,
"Thuggish behavior"
Translation: anything whites don't like.
But there's no white supremacy.
And Malcolm's assassins had help from the FBI, so good history you got there.
Whitewashed, but really entertaining,...
"if you're poor it's up to you to hope the slave catchers keep you safe."
Explains black's reaction to cops waaaay better than you do,...
"Translation: anything whites don't like."
Yes, if whites don't like it then it must be good. Sounds like someone's a little obsessed with what white people like.
I'll say something for thuggish behavior--it does provide a stark contrast for intelligent, positive behavior. Without the example of the rioters, history wouldn't have the context to appreciate MLK's more effective activities. So, thanks, I guess?
As for your FBI theory, you should take it to Oliver Stone. He's got the FBI killing Kennedy too!
Centuries of rape and lynching always put whites in a good light.
Because they leave it out for contrast,...
As Malcolm famously said, the only difference between South Africa and America is South Africa was honest,...
Crack
Look dickhead, I have been studying this topic for fifty years. You jumped on the freedom rider blog a year ago. Trust me on this, you generally make a fool of yourself and have turned more generous and open minded people against your cause than you have "educated" with your silly theatre.
And what you call "white pablum" is the essence of what he preached until he was killed.
Michael,
So now you know when I understood black history - based only on my blog What a scholar. Or are you psychic,too?
Then please explain "POW!" and "Crackhouse" and "Me and my friends" - 3 civil rights songs I made in the 90s. Or the career of my first band that was based on nothing else. Come on, you KNOW this, right?
With Maa Angelou as my babysitter and Charles Mingus as my dad, you KNOW when my cultural awareness began and have more insight than we blacks ourselves.
Just like you KNOW MLK's message - and support it while opposing eparations.
Why do whites lie?
Michael,
Your whitewashed take on MLK is so common I even made a post just so you can hear the man in his voice:
TMR's MLK Primer For Dream-Confused Conservatives
If he - or his "essence" - don't bear much resemblance to the white pablum you've been taught to believe, well:
That's probably because my folks knew him personally,...
Awww, Crack is homeless?
What about those big music deals you were telling us about?
Maybe you should spend less time posting from your Obamaphone and more on finding a jobby job.
I agree with Crack that blacks have been mistreated and discriminated against by whites. The history is what it is. However, it is grandiose on his part to claim that American blacks are the most oppressed people on earth. In the 20th century not even close......The peasants who rose up during the French Revolution considered themselves the most oppressed people on earth. They were less sympathetic to the Haitian rebellion.......Lenin considered the industrial proletariat the vanguard of the revolution. Great for those who rode the Moscow subway and bad luck for those peasants who were underfed and, in many cases, starved to provide funds for the chandeliers in the Moscow subway stations......None of the black intellectuals and revolutionaries have ever expressed any sympathy for their plight. Fuck them. Whiny peasants bitching about starvation. Segregated water fountains. Now that's real suffering.
Who said blacks are the most oppressed people on Earth?
I'm sure that Crack would never watch an evil show of the white man like "Game of Thrones", but I have some advice for ya.
Winter is coming.
How cold does it get on the streets of San Francisco? Maybe Crack will be able to give us weather reports coming up in the next few months.
And if routinely having the flesh ripped from black bodies - and chldren ripped from the mothers white men raped - can be reduced to water fountains, then what's the point of an eucation?
Didn't someone suggest, yesterday, that it was ME who wished the worst on you?
President whatever proves y'all wrong again.
Why do whites lie?
BTW - even big record deals come apart,...
"“The great bulk of the legal voters of the South were men who owned no slaves; their homes were generally in the hills and poor country; their facilities for educating their children, even up to the point of reading and writing, were very limited; their interest in the contest was very meagre--what there was, if they had been capable of seeing it, was with the North; they too needed emancipation. Under the old regime they were looked down upon by those who controlled all the affairs in the interest of slave-owners, as poor white trash who were allowed the ballot so long as they cast it according to direction.”
― Ulysses S. Grant, explaining why whites act the way they do about blacks and race - still:
Other whites are controlling your interests,...
The Crack Emcee:
Given that you cannot or did not respond to the substance of my comment I am forced once again merely to mock you. But pathos overwhelms my desire to mock.
Crack
LOL. Charlie Mingus and Maya Angelou right there in baby Crack's house teaching reparations. Knowing Angelou doesn't make you a writer and knowing Mingus clearly hasn't translated into much musical talent. And their knowing MLK doesn't change the fact that the reparations fixation you have was not shared by him.
Read more, talk less. You have a lot of catching up to do. Pleased to see you learned about Bayard Rustin Don't assume others heard about him from you.
"Why do whites lie?"
Indeed. Crack, you'll never be happy in White-run USA - land of racism and Crack-o-phobia. Its Gulag for the black man.
That's why I am willing to buy you a one-way ticket to West Africa - or Jamaica or Haiti (I assume you speak french).
Freedom, Crack, Freedom.
Other whites are controlling your interests,...
Reparations for Crack and people he deems worthy will emancipate you from other whites, white people. Crack has your best interests at heart, even though he's ok with you being killed (if you're a white police officer just doing your job) or raped (if you're a white woman). Trust him, he cares.
So, now we're reaching back 50 years to find some racist to kick around?
Crack would find that suspicious. A little mis-direction. Trying to forget that America is a gulag for men like Crack.
Sorry, Althouse your "Hey things were real bad then, and hey, lets sneer at the racist" doesn't help Crack.
The Nobel Peace Prize is supposed to be awarded to those who have "done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".
Which is to say, that the perversion of the NPP, into a mere instrument of Leftism, was already well-advanced in 1964. Another case of O'Sullivan's Law, althought he NPP never had very far to fall to begin with.
Martin Luther King won the Nobel Peace Prize? How many countries did he bomb?
The Nobel Peace Prize is supposed to be awarded to those who have "done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses"
That's actually a very old-fashioned notion of war. The idea is that "war" is something countries do to each other, and it harms the people in those countries.
But what about a civil war? That's internal violence. Surely putting an end to a civil war should qualify for the peace prize.
And sometimes the state can declare war on its own people. You can have a Holocaust or the killing fields of Cambodia or Mao's "Great Leap Forward." I think slavery would obviously qualify under this idea of war. And abortion too. If a state is killing people, and other people try to stop it non-violently, you should identify those people and give them the peace prize.
What people like MLK and Gandhi were doing were revolutions. Which is a war-like activity, yes? But they were doing these revolutions peacefully. So they obviously qualify for the award. When I think of "peace" I think of people like MLK and Gandhi. I certainly don't think of "peace negotiators" like Henry Kissenger or Le Duc Tho. That's the classic definition of what the Nobel committee is supposed to be doing. But what an ugly peace that was.
Which is to say, that the perversion of the NPP, into a mere instrument of Leftism, was already well-advanced in 1964.
What about Lech Walesa receiving the award?
And I do not believe that subverting an anti-democratic state is "leftist." Yes, MLK was a liberal, maybe even a socialist. But a right-wing conservative can object to a fascist state. I like the right to vote. It's important. Anti-democracy goes hand-in-hand with dehumanization.
I do not agree with the Marxists that everything should be reduced to money. So while I disagree with MLK in regard to his economics, on the majority of his agenda I completely agree. Racism is odious. And equally odious is not allowing people to vote.
The American South in 1964 was synonymous with a right-wing dictatorship. And it hurts me to say that. I'm a child of the South. I think of the South, I think of Washington, Jefferson, Madison. I think the South gave birth to our Constitution, and our republic.
But the South was also the home of slavery. And it's a historical fact that black people were not allowed to vote in the South in 1964. That is a fascist mentality.
I think the racism is vile. But that racism went hand-in-hand with a repugnant attempt to keep people from voting. Nothing democratic about that.
The Voting Rights Act would be passed the next year, 1965. So kudos to MLK.
And, finally, I love MLK because he was so obviously a Christian, and it's fun reminding the secular of that fact.
Crack said:
"Again, what patriotic American speaks of his other Americans - the black ones - as though they don't possess brains? "Progressives" tell us what to do, right? We have no agency what-so-ever. No ideas of our own, no interests we follow - nothing - it's all those evil white progressives leading us astray.
And then - after telegraphing how little you think of us - you wonder why we won't vote with you.
Because you're not a progressive is probably the only reason you can understand but I'll go a little further:
You're an ignorant, patronizing, condescending, racist jerk,"
I will note you didn't substantively deal with any of the examples I made. You just called me names. I will go a little further too.
I actually want black people to succeed, be wealthy, and happy. I want them to have good educations and the skills to live well. I want them to be free.
You want black people to be tools for the progressive party. To live in permanent resentment. You want them to get shit public education, need affirmative action to get jobs. And you want to keep racial resentment alive so you can live from one shakedown to the next. How is uncle tom's cabin?
Birkel,
"The Crack Emcee:
Given that you cannot or did not respond to the substance of my comment I am forced once again merely to mock you. But pathos overwhelms my desire to mock."
Considering I don't take you seriously - either as a Native or a commenter - mock away:
You can't hurt me,...
Michael,
"Their knowing MLK doesn't change the fact that the reparations fixation you have was not shared by him."
No, he had nothing to say on the subject that's anything like what I say.
Jesus, you guys are obtuse,...
rcocean,
"I am willing to buy you a one-way ticket to West Africa - or Jamaica or Haiti (I assume you speak french).
Freedom, Crack, Freedom."
Listen to you:
You don't have answers for fixing injustice in this country - you're fine with it. Just like your ancestors, all you've got is "back to Africa" bullshit.
I feel sorry for you.
I'd hate to discover I'm a racist,...
HoodlumDoodlum,
"Reparations for Crack and people he deems worthy will emancipate you from other whites, white people."
That's better than you - you think of no one but whites. I'm part of the Civil Rights Movement - what are you?
"Crack has your best interests at heart, even though he's ok with you being killed (if you're a white police officer just doing your job) or raped (if you're a white woman)."
The idea I'm going to care about racists is a stretch. Enjoy your fantasy.
"Trust him, he cares."
And y'all mock anyone who does - so what does that make you?
Sorry, but I'm not going to defend being good,....
Saint Croix ,
"I love MLK because he was so obviously a Christian, and it's fun reminding Christian whites they shot him in the face."
Achilles,
"You want to keep racial resentment alive so you can live from one shakedown to the next."
Man, you guys are so stuck in white conventional thinking, it's impossible for me to imagine blacks losing the reparations battle to you. You simply can't think for yourselves - which is what you accuse blacks of - which means you're projecting. These are white's problems and habits - the classic shakedown being whites taking centuries of our taxes for services and facilities we had no access to - a direct payment from blacks to whites with no return and (because whites are oblivious) no sense of injustice. Just a demand to smile, like blacks are pretty girls and whites are jerks.
Which IS how it is BTW,...
Crack
Again, you think you discovered this. You did not. You can link to a limited number of King speeches or writings on reparations but I can link to thousands that do not.
No one is obtuse except the one who actually thinks he instructs when he bores.
Like most not-so-swift students you cherry pick and are satisfied with your cherry picking.
Your argumentation is weak and very very boring. Asserting something over and over does not make it true.
Crack:
There is no "reparations battle". It does not exist. HR40 will not come to the floor and if it did it would not pass. You can forget it. A racist, supremacist country is not going to elect people, or re-elect people, who would argue seriously to pay reparations for slavery. It won't happen. It is a guaranteed way for a politician to lose his job.
The Crack Emcee:
Did you understand my use of the word pathos?
If so, you would not have responded as you did.
Further, The Crack Emcee, because my ancestry cannot be affected by your take on me I can safely ignore anything you say on the matter.
Natives were restricted to reservations, prevented from owning real property, subjected to the whims of their oppressors, hunted, killed and subjugated. And yet my grandparents were able to overcome all of that to become moderately successful and provide for their children's successes. I do not have a dark spot in my soul that consumes me because of the mistreatment my forebears suffered. I choose, actively, to avoid the things that make you pathetic and that you choose, actively, to pursue both in real life and in these comments sections.
I do, however, observe that it was governmental power that was wielded against my ancestors. Therefore, after observing the practical results of the exercise of that power I advocate less power in the hands of people. When given excess power over others all people -- regardless of race, gender or their own perceptions of good intentions -- will exercise that power unjustly given enough time. Therefore I advocate for you and everybody else the freedom to fail or succeed without impediment.
The Democrats in the South during the Jim Crow era were wrong, self evidently. So too are the Democrats now who advocate greater governmental control of personal affairs. So too are the Republicans who advocate greater governmental control. And that is true regardless of the characteristics of the people who advocate for their own dominion over what should be free people exercising authority over their own lives.
That the lessons you learned are so diametrically opposed to the obvious lessons of history across societies and across time is what makes you so pathetic.
And I feel nothing but pity for you.
Michael,
"Again, you think you discovered this."
Look at you:
You've moved the goalposts from "the reparations fixation you have was not shared by him" to he talked about a lot of other things, too - a total admission I was right with the racist lack of dignity in doing so - and you're so oblivious, you think I'll miss that you did so.
Dude, you have no education to offer me, when you can't even willingly admit when you're wrong.
MLK warned you "we're coming to get our check," and the white pablum I-Have-A-Dream whitewash can't make those words mean anything else.
He even mentioned it - before the line about character - in the I Have A Dream speech, now that I think about it:
America has given the negro a bad check, he said.
It's terrible y'all are going to insist it's because you're bad people,...
Michael,
"Crack:
There is no "reparations battle". It does not exist. HR40 will not come to the floor and if it did it would not pass. You can forget it."
If you actually read reparations lit, you'd discover many blacks (and whites in favor) say this, too. We understand the odds. Outnumbered 6 to 1. Defeat and disappointment are part of our lives, extended over generations. But you know what?
We're also used to defeating those odds where it matters.
Go look at those photos of whites standing at the schoolhouse door, or pouring ketchup over black's heads at the store lunch counter, or kids getting hit with firehoses, or police busting our heads, or even shooting us down in the streets:
If you're sincerely such a white supremacist that you'd refuse us justice (and not truly a conservative fighting government intrusion in American lives) I wouldn't be too comfortable if I were you because there's one over-riding historical fact you still don't get:
We're playing a long-game strategy, and we're never going to stop coming,...
Birkel,
"Did you understand my use of the word pathos?
If so, you would not have responded as you did."
Don't care.
The Crack Emcee:
That you are either unable or unwilling to care is exactly why you require pathos. It is exactly your inability or unwillingness that makes you pathetic. It defines you. Every comment you post proves the point. It has become who and what you are. And you are pathetic.
Crack
It is not either/or. You display the sad logic of a poorly educated, poorly self educated, person. Your fixation is all consuming and stupid. MLK spoke about reparations a few times. It was not all consuming to him.
I was not wrong. In fact I was right.
As to reparations, the demographics are against you as you surely would find if you took the time. I would say that the Asian and Latino populations will not be sympathetic. You can believe that persistence will be rewarded but it will not.
Reparations might be well deserved but they won't be paid. The idiotically huge numbers that were spread around have backfired. They were so stupidly calculated, so ignorantly devised that people concluded it was not a serious effort. A joke.
Too good to pass up:
“They too needed emancipation. Under the old regime they were looked down upon by those who controlled all the affairs in the interest of slave-owners, as poor white trash who were allowed the ballot so long as they cast it according to direction.”
Nikki Haley: It’s OK to have the Confederate flag at the statehouse because not “a single CEO” has complained
Michael,
"The Asian and Latino populations will not be sympathetic."
It's always hilarious to hear whites explain to the oppressed who doesn't like them, as though whites have the inside track on that, or have shown anybody decent treatment.
When whites start showing some sympathy - to anyone - I'll buy their claims they can spot it in others,...
Michael,
"Reparations might be well deserved but they won't be paid."
Another movement of the goal post - from they're not deserved to they are - thanks. Makes my day. That's the key to payment - the establishment of injustice. Whites aren't going to publicly smear their name again. Not today. It's too important to them not to be racists - to not be "whites".
Your incremental movement proves it - you DO know right from wrong.
"The idiotically huge numbers that were spread around have backfired. They were so stupidly calculated, so ignorantly devised that people concluded it was not a serious effort. A joke."
Now that's just a stupid comment - whites are dismissing official figures they haven't seen since HR40 hasn't taken up studying the issue yet - so their ignorance makes the unseen results a joke.
.Whites are a joke.
Really, this kind of nonsense "thinking" is so below what blacks were led to believe whites are capable of:
You were supposed to be SMART,...
Crack:
Help me out here, dude. I am trying not to tag you as terminally stupid but I am having difficulty. I am making allowances which I should not do.
I am not making any "incremental movements" and certainly not from anything you have ever written or linked to.
I did not make up the 100 trillion dollar reparations figure and have read a guy posing as The Crack Emcee both note and support that figure. It is a stupid number, laughable. It has been in The Nation. It has been tossed around on the internet for years. It is the (all caps in your world) number that has been floated.
Sorry, it is a joke number. HR40 has been around for decades. Perhaps its sponsor or co-sponsors could have rounded up the energy to supply a realistic number instead of kicking it down the road.
There are no goal posts to move. You have trouble with high school logic.
The 100 trillion, just so you know, equals $7 dollars an hour in two to four hundred year old dollars compounded at the rate of 6% over the same period. Craftsmen during the period made maybe $7 a week. The interest rate was not 6%. The total amount of 100 trillion equates to 2.5 million dollars for every black man, woman and child in the U.S. It is preposterous. A joke.
Contact Conyers and ask him to fucking study the matter and then bring it to the floor for the house to decide. They can commission another study to refute or support. Conyers is tooling you and every other person who looks at HR40 as something real. He is playing you, dude.
Crack
Link to any writing of mine saying reparations are not deserved.
Give it a try.
Go on.
Give it a try.
Post a Comment