January 15th marks the 81st birthday of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Junior. In the 41 years since Dr. King's assassin, many of us -- some who were around for the civil rights marches and anti-war demonstrations, others who study history -- often wonder, what would King be doing if he were alive today? What issues would he be championing? What campaigns would he be leading? To put it in 21st century lingo, WWMD -- What Would Martin Do?
It is an issue I ponder as we celebrate this year's holiday. Dr. King had a singular genius for targeting egregious examples of injustice, and using the tools of his time -- nonviolent protest, civil disobedience, broadcast television, legislative and political action and many others--to press for social and economic change. 2010 is vastly different. It is the Internet age of Facebook and Twitter; it is a diverse and multifaceted media world of cable, broadcast, and satellite television. The U.S. has its first African-American President and is in the midst of a Great Recession and the War on Terror. How would Dr. King respond?
My answer may not be the only one, but being a student of history, I do believe my answer is right.
Dr. King would do it all.
The quotes, the campaigns, the overarching quest to bring social and economic justice to ordinary people are the evidence of the ambition that he had for all of us. The Poor People's Campaign wasn't about the unemployment rate, but Dr. King knew that unemployment -- however temporary -- should be used as a tool to address the underlying causes of poverty.
His oft-quoted phrase from The Letter from A Birmingham Jail, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere", would have caused him to look directly at the face of discrimination that Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) people face and compelled him to speak up in support of their equality.
Of the contentious health care debate that the country is going through, Dr. King's view that "Of all of the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and the most inhumane," would surely have led him to fight for a broader, bolder, more progressive health care plan than what is before Congress now.
Dr. King's final speech, to the striking sanitation workers of Memphis, Tennessee demonstrated his strong backing for America's workers. His support for workers' rights to organize was as clear as was his enmity for the forces of greed that opposed them. "That is why the labor-hater and labor-baiter is virtually always a twin-headed creature spewing anti-Negro epithets from one mouth and anti-labor propaganda from the other mouth," he told the 1961 AFL-CIO Convention.
And there is no doubt about Dr. King's opposition to war -- and not just the Vietnam War which brought him criticism from the Democratic President, the mainstream media, and even some allies in the civil rights movement. That didn't matter to Dr. King, whose opposition was grounded both in his faith and in his economics, as the War in Vietnam began to take dollars from the War on Poverty.
What challenges would Dr. King face in advocating for justice? I think of those who would oppose the policies that he would espouse, from the Teabaggers to the Chamber of Commerce to the religious right. I know that they would have called Dr. King a socialist, a communist and other un-Christian like names. I think of the challenges that they pose to even incremental reforms on health care, pay discrimination, and marriage equality and know that we still have a long way to go.
I also think of 21st century politicians who opine that Dr. King's true legacy was "service". There is no doubt that Dr. King believed in service to the community, to the nation, and to those in need. But the strength of his legacy is clear. Dr. King was about justice. He addressed the toughest issues of his time, and did so publicly, without apology and in spite of threats to his life.
In 2010, we should do no less. WWMD? Dr. King would take on the hardest issues facing the people of this nation because of the love in his heart. Looking each issue straight in the eye and without blinking, Dr. King would engage in the struggle for change. Because as he said, "Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle."
Follow Michael J. Wilson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ADAction
"Many gay activists want to believe that there aren’t issues of racism within the gay community. As members of an oppressed group, they like to think that they are above oppressing others. Yet, looking around any gayborhood, something becomes blatantly clear to those of us on the outside looking in. Within the queer spaces that have sprung up in once neglected and forgotten neighborhoods, inside the slick new storefronts and trendy restaurants, and on magazine covers, gay America has given a whole new meaning to the term “whitewash.”
Here again is the link:
http://bad.eserver.org/issues/2006/76/gaysofcolor.html
"In the 1980s, the Association of Lesbian and Gay Asians found that multiple carding was widespread throughout the city of San Francisco and the “Boston Bar Study” conducted by Men of All Colors Together Boston (MACTB) cited numerous examples of discrimination at gay bars against black men."
"More importantly, gay men and women of color are routinely denied leadership roles in “gay” organizations that purport to speak for “all of us.”
Here is the link to the entire article:
http://bad.eserver.org/issues/2006/76/gaysofcolor.html
He looked Baynard Rustin directly in the face of being blackmailed and didn't speak up; and that was his friend.
Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Baptist preacher. According to him, he was a preacher first.
I'm not sure you aren't adding to the mythology.
I don't think you have the story right though, Rustin's homosexuality was going to be used to smear King.
MLK was a preacher in the Baptist church, a theologian, you would be asking him to turn away from a core belief of the church it you asked him to deny the sanctity of marriage (between one man and one woman). He may have been supportive of some kind of civil union, but I don't see the Baptist church leading the way on that either.
What Coretta King said was "Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union," she said. "A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriages." That is not same sex marriage advocacy because she leaves open the notion of civil union and respects traditional marriage.
I don't think she or King would want to see an active civil rights struggle for any group.
The issues of civil rights and the sanctity of marriage are two very different issues. I think King would have tried to find a middle ground.
Walter Fauntroy -Former DC Delegate to Congress Founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus Coordinator for Martin Luther King, Jr.'s march on DC
We can never know, so it makes no sense to speculate.
What matters is what WE do now.
You've never read King's speeches have you or those of many preachers over time in this country. Malcolm X was also an advocate of personal responsibility.
Maybe he was just the right man at the right time for the right cause. And that was enough.
Historically, it is accurate to say that before 1964, most blacks were Republican, including MLK, Sr. However, blacks' allegiance to the Republican party OF THAT ERA was rooted in the fact that the Republican party OF THAT ERA was the party of Lincoln & Abolitionists. Most racists OF THAT ERA and thru the early 60's, were Democrats, like Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd, and David Duke. Thurmond switched to the Republican party in 1964, and Duke did the same 1988 to win an election.
MLK, were he alive today, would've never voted for this Republican party. In fact, he may not have voted for these Dems either - BUT he sure a he11 wouldnt be voting Republican.
With your one, small-minded, uninformed, misguided statement, you misrepresent and denigrate the memory of a man, of a movement, that stood for the most progressive social change in the history of this country. A movement that stood for social equality on all fronts - including the disparity that existed and persist between rich & poor ( not just black and white -but ALL rich (5%) and ALL poor (the rest of us) ) in these United States.
Completely wrong. Within twenty years after the end of the Civil War both major political parties in the U.S. turned their backs on the initial promise of the Reconstruction era and permitted a wholesale denial of civil rights to African American citizens. It is one of the great sources of shame in our nation's history.
He would blog and phone bank and yes, he'd do it all BUT . . . most of all. . . .he would tell you that once you're done writing your blog and calling your Senator, you need to get ur a$$ up out the chair, join him and thousands of others, and . . .
MARCH IN THE STREETS FOR THE CHANGE YOU WANT!!!
Transformative CHANGE in this country has only come when people have taken to the streets, e.g.: Abolition, Women’s Suffrage, Workers’ Rights, Civil Rights, Farm Workers’ Rights, etc. Such change has, more often than not, come in spite of (and with the very qualified and calculated assistance of) many of our “representatives” on Capitol Hill.
The fight for affordable, healthcare is no different; and neither is the fight for banking reform, an intelligent foreign policy in the fight on terrorism, equal protection under the law for all Americans, thoughtful and compassionate immigration reform, rebuilding the US manufacturing base, rebuilding our unions, environmental responsibility, bettering our public educational system, affordable access to higher education, . . . the list goes on. Make no mistake, this is a battle. It will be hard fought and require all of our strength commitment and resolve.
And, he'd be downright pissed that NO ONE from the left is out in the streets as a visible countermeasure, showing support for this, or any other worthy cause!!!
A ticket to DC is over a hundred dollars, and then there's the travel time and the time spent there. A hundred million dollars in well-targeted donations, plus the same number of hours volunteering locally, would do more good than a million-person rally in Washington that no one pays any attention to.
If MLK were alive today, he would be working on some strategy as up-to-date and effective as the March on Washington was then. But another March on Washington doesn't fit the bill.
From the Presidential campaign through today, it has been VERY evident that there is a not insubstantial number or people in this nation who simply cannot stand the reality that a bi-racial man could be and is in fact the POTUS!
These same people would suggest that others who are outraged by seeing bigoted and outright racist signs at rallys, hearing right wing conservative talk-show hosts constantly and openly inflame racial hatred, including calling the POTUS "a racist who has a deep hatred of the white culture", hear GOP leaders call Judge Sotomayor a racist, and in the past few days see and hear this President be criticized for "acting too quickly to help Haiti, when he took 3 days to react to the recent failed terrorist bombing.... BECAUSE he cares more for black people than the saftey of his our nation"... should just IGNORE this ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS and unacceptable behavior!
My suspicion is if Dr. King were still alive today, he would be outraged and saddened! He would have been once again leading marches in protest of ALL of the above and in particular the continuous hate mongering of Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and all THEIR despicable brethren! My belief is that each of these men would be openly trying to destroy him, just as they do our President Barack Obama!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0