Growing up, I would say that my knowledge of Martin Luther King, Jr. was fairly basic. He had a cool speech, he had a dream, and now African Americans aren’t segregated throughout the South.
My history education through high school was fairly white, American, and major event related. Not criticizing it, but once I got into my major at Georgia State in social studies, I purposefully took classes I had little to no prior knowledge of. I learned more detail about other countries and cultures and saw history from their perspective. It was fun.
One of those many classes was African American History. Since the teacher was actually there during many of the major events, she concentrated more on the Civil Rights Movement from the early ’50′s to the ’70′s. This was when I first saw the series, Eyes on the Prize, which was produced by PBS but is no longer in circulation because of stupid copyright considerations. Long but incredibly informative and honest, Eyes on the Prize taught me things and ideas I never knew.
If I had heroes, depending on your definition of them, Martin Luther King, Jr. is easily one of them. And this is why I have a problem with Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.
Reading much of what he said, did, and thought, I fully believe that a holiday to the man is valid and important. But we aren’t actually honoring him. Let me explain.
First of all, he is touted as a figurehead of all black issues, but many of the things fought for and defended by most of the modern black leadership had little to do with what he stood and ultimately died for then. This division was very pronounced by the mid-60′s. Dr. King had become marginalized by many in the Civil Rights Movement. They were unwilling to love their enemies enough to be non-violent, believing instead that minds and hearts couldn’t be changed. Dr. King clearly wanted to move towards a type of American brotherhood that crossed racial and even religious lines. The Civil Rights Movement began to split because of these things, and the new, youth oriented groups were more exclusive and willing to resort to violence.
So many are still ignorant of what King actually stood for. Oh, we get the sugar coated “I Have a Dream” concept but ignore the background of his non-violent ideas, his opposition to exclusion of white liberals and Christians who wanted to support the movement, and why he was opposed to the Vietnam War.
Second, because of the ignorance of what he actually stood for, many black leaders manipulate the legend of Dr. King to give validity to their own ideas. Almost to a man, these leaders were highly critical of King during his lifetime and actively opposed him, responsible for the very division I discussed earlier. To now try to unify support throwing by his name around doesn’t seem to have too much integrity, especially on issues that he stood against in his own lifetime. It is dishonest and only shows the weakness of their argument to use MLK’s name in their propaganda.
I’m not saying that if you disagreed with King at some point you don’t get to mention him or discuss his legacy. But it is intellectually dishonest that some people get a “free pass” once they mention his name, primarily current black leaders and white Democrats, many of whom were tied to extremely racist positions in the past.
Martin Luther King, Jr. was a great man who put a mirror to the face of a nation at a time when it was desperately needed. He was strictly pacifist, deeply spiritual, and an amazing writer. He struggled for economic and political equality. He achieved much in his short life to help resolve a divided national conscience. He did not believe his work was done at the end of his life, however, and was even campaigning for worker’s rights in Memphis when he was killed.
But we have no clue what he would have stood for beyond that forty or fifty years later. It is unfair to his legacy to even try. Honor him for who he was, honestly, and the revolutionary power he exhibited. That should be enough.
Peace.