Purple and Black
Taking Independent and Unofficial Back

Martin Luther King Jr.

See the source image


See the source image

Whatta man, whatta man, whatta man, What a mighty good man

See the source image
 
Here is a post in observation of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday from Steve Schmidt, former Republican political strategist, former Lincoln Project guy, etc.

"All men are created equal" [The Warning; 1.15.24]

He includes the text of a number of inspiring speeches from Frederick Douglass, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Abraham Lincoln. Also, video of Schmidt speaking about King juxtaposes King's message with d t----, the expected victor of this evening's Republican Iowa caucus. Although the video is pretty good, with good photos of King, I'm sorry to bring t---- into this thread at all.
 
A great podcast about the TRUE Dr. King, not the sanitized version the media pushes.

What do you think of the trilogy/biography of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, America in the King Years by Taylor Branch? Or, do you have other recommendations?
 
Last edited:
What do you think of the trilogy/biography of Dr. Martin Luther King, America in the King Years by Taylor Branch? Or, do you have other recommendations?
I'm not familiar with that, I'll have to check it out. A book that's highly recommended by friends of mine is "The Radical King" by Dr. King (and edited by Cornell West). I've been so busy lately I haven't had time to sit and read it, but I will.
 
I'm not familiar with that, I'll have to check it out. A book that's highly recommended by friends of mine is "The Radical King" by Dr. King (and edited by Cornell West). I've been so busy lately I haven't had time to sit and read it, but I will.
Oh. Re-reading and seeing what I didn’t see the first time, which is that “The Radical King” is by King himself. Yes?
 
'Genius: MLK/X' Offers Portraits of the Icons as Vital Young Men [NYTimes;2.16.24]

Inspired by Peniel E. Joseph’s nonfiction book “The Sword and the Shield” and the play “The Meeting” by Jeff Stetson (who also served as an executive producer and screenwriter), “MLK/X” is the fourth season in National Geographic’s “Genius” series, following previous installments on Albert Einstein, Pablo Picasso and Aretha Franklin. Sprinting through its subjects’ lives from cradle to grave in eight episodes, it dramatizes how the men came to be the most significant and recognizable figures of the civil rights movement — King through his embrace of Gandhian nonviolence and sweeping protests, Malcolm X through a more aggressive insistence on Black pride and dignity.
 
@uPtoWnNY
Thought you, and others, might be interested to see this article.

Martin Luther King Jr. Biographer Wins American History Prize [NYTimes;3.19.24]
"The New-York Historical Society honor goes to Jonathan Eig, whose "King: A Life" presents the civil rights leader as a brilliant, flawed 20th-century "founding father.""

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ a few minutes later ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Eig is jewish. Does it matter? Is there inherent bias? Can the definitive biography of someone be written by someone who doesn't fully understand that culture? I'm not saying one way or another. What's your opinion?
At the bottom of Eig's wikipedia page:
In 2023, Eig published a biography of Martin Luther King Jr., King: A Life. Reviewing the book for The New York Times, Dwight Garner stated that it "supplants David J. Garrow's 1986 biography Bearing the Cross as the definitive life of King".[1]
So, I went to check who David J. Garrow is. He's caucasian, apparently.
I'm not saying anything against these biographies, just posing the question because maybe it's worth asking.

And, the other biography I mentioned above? Also, written by a caucasian, Taylor Branch.

Hmm. . .

Maybe, for contrast, here's a link to The King Center:

The King Center
 
Last edited:
I finally have a book by King, in hand: Stride Toward Freedom, The Montgomery Story. Written in 1958. I got it from the library. I have made a minuscule goal to read 10 pages per day because I don’t sit long w a book these days.
 
Last edited:
I finally have a book by King, in hand: Stride Toward Freedom, The Montgomery Story. Written in 1958. I got it from the library. I have made a minuscule goal to read 10 pages per day because I don’t sit long w a book these days.
Good book 📖 Has anyone else read it or want to? It’s a good read, meaning, accessible, a mix of the story of the Montgomery bus boycott and interesting musing on philosophical topics: Ghandi’s concepts of non-violent resistance, non-cooperation, passive resistance; and combining that with Christian love as the guides for conduct in the boycott; discussion about Marx and communism and MLK’s interpretation of the flaws in that philosophy. That’s where I am now.

I’m tempted to write out long passages . . . But time.

Anyhow. If you want to read and talk about it, that would be cool with me.
 
Embarrassing. . . I still haven't finished Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story. But I will. Tomorrow. There are so many good passages that deserve writing out, all through this book. Here I am, near the last pages. I'll write out a few that I just read:

"Every crisis has both its dangers and opportunities. It can spell either salvation or doom. In the present crisis America can achieve either racial justice or the ultimate social psychosis that can only lead to domestic suicide. The democratic ideal of freedom and equality will be fulfilled for all - or all human beings will share in the resulting social and spiritual doom. In short, this crisis has the potential for democracy's fulfillment or fasciism's triumph; for social progress or retrogression. We can choose either to walk the high road of human brotherhood or to tread the low road of man's inhumanity to man." [in Chapter XI: Where Do We Go From Here?; page 196]

A few paragraphs on:

"A solution of the present crisis will not take place unless men and women work for it. Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable. Even a superficial look at history reveals that no social advance rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals. Without persistent effort, time itself becomes an ally of the insurgent and primitive forces of irrational emotionalism and social destruction. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action.

"It is the shame of the sunshine patriots if the foregoing paragraphs have a hollow sound, like an echo of countless political speeches. These things must be repeated time and again, for men forget quickly; but once said, they must be followed with a dynamic program, or else they become a refuge for those who shy from any action. If America is to repond creatively to the present crisis, many groups and agencies must rise above the reiteration of generalities and begin to take an active part in changing the face of their nation."

There's a lot more I could write out. Some of it needs explanation and context. MLK is addressing racism and segregation, particularly in schools, in this instance.

Here's another passage from a few pages earlier, p. 192:

"The resistance to the emergence of the new order expresses itself in the resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan, Determined to preserve segregation at any cost, this organization employs methods that are crude and primitive. It draws its members from under-privileged groups who. see in the Negro's rising status a political and economic threat. Although the Klan is impotent politically and openly denounced from all sides, it remains a dangerous force which thrives on racial and religious bigotry. Because of its past history, whenever the Klan moves there is fear of violence,

"Then there are the White Citizens Councils. Since they occasionally recruit members from a higher social and economic level than the Klan, a halo of partial respectability hovers over them. But like the Klan they are determined to preserve segregation despite the law. Their weapons of threat, intimidation, and boycott are directed both against Negroes and against any whites who stand for justice. They demand absolute conformity from white and abject submission from Negroes. The Citizens Councils often argue piously that they abhor violence, but their defiance of the law, their unethical methods, and their vitriolic public pronouncements inevitably create the atmosphere in which violence thrives."

MLK embraced non-violent resistance and that accounts greatly for the success of the Montgomery Bus Boycott. He had the ability to galvanize and encourage the African Americans in Montgomery to both resist and maintain a non-violent stance despite violent attacks, bombings, and psychological warfare techniques that aimed to destroy by raising doubts from within.
 
Last edited:
Like I told you before barnswallow, I hate how the media has softened Dr. King's message. He wasn't some passive, naive, kum-ba-yah preacher. In fact, near the end of his life, he was becoming more like Malcolm.

 
And Malcolm also moved towards Martin, yes? I'm trying to remember what I read in the autobiography (written by Haley) but remember imperfectly.

What was the nature of the nightmare for MLK? The realization that, in his lifetime, the ideals he professed would not be reached? Oppression was not bo be overcome. The change he sought was not attainable, at that time. Or, was he disillusioned to the degree that he doubted equality would ever be attainable?

From March Toward Freedom: the Montgomery Story, p.212:
". . . There is such a thing as the freedom of exhaustion. Some people are so worn down by the yoke of oppression that they give up, A few years ago in the slum areas of Atlanta, a Negro guitarist used to sing almost daily: "Ben down so long that down don't bother me." This is the type of negative freedom and resignation that often engulfs the life of the oppressed.

"But this is not the way out. To accept passively an unjust system is to cooperate with that system; thereby the oppresesed become as evil as the oppressor. Noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. The oppressed must never allow the conscience of the oppressor to slumber. Religion reminds every man that he is his brother's keeper. To accept injustice or segregation passively is to say to the oppressor that his actions are morally right. It is a way of allowing his conscience to fall asleep. At this moment the oppressed fails to be his brother's keeper. So acquiescence - while often the easier way - is not the moral way. It is the way of the coward. The Negro cannot win the respect of his oppressor by acquiescing; he merely increases the oppressor's arrogance and contempt, Acquiescence is interpreted as proof of the Negro's inferiority. The Negro cannot win the respect of the white people of the South or the peoples of the world if he is willing to sell the future of his children for his personal and immediate comfort and safety.

"A second way that oppressed people sometimes deal with oppression is to resort to physical violence and corroding hatred. Violence often brings about momentary results. Nations have frequently won their independence battle. But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem; it merely creates new and more complicated ones.

"Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. It is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding; it seeks to annihilate rather than to convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends by defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers. A voice echoes through time saying to every potential Peter, "Put up your sword." History is cluttered with the wreckage of nations that failed to follow this command.

". . . The third way open to oppressed people in their quest for freedom is the way of nonviolent resistance. Like the synthesis in Hegelian philosophy, the principle of nonviolent resistance seeks to reconcile the truths of two opposites - acquiescence and violence - while avoiding the extremes and immoralities of both. The nonviolent resister agrees with the person who acquiesces that one should not be physically aggressive toward his"opponent, but he balances the equation by agreeing with the person of violence that evil must be resisted. He avoids the nonresistance of the former and the violent resistance of the latter. With non-violent resistance no individual or group need submit to any wrongdoing nor need anyone resort to violence in order to right a wrong."

'. . . By nonviolent resistance, the Negro can also enlist all men of good will in his struggle for equality. The problem is not a purely racial one, with Negroes set against whites. In the end, it is not a struggle between people at all, but a tension between justice and injustice. Nonviolent resistance is not aimed against oppressors but against oppression. Under its banner consciences, not racial groups, are enlisted.

"If the Negro is to achieve the goal of integration, he must organize himself into a militant and nonviolent mass movement. All three elements are indispensable. The movement for equality and justice can only be a success if it has both a mass and militant character; the barriers to be overcome require both. Nonviolence is an imperative in order to bring about ultimate community.

". . . A mass movement exercising nonviolence is an object lesson in power under discipline, a demonstration to the white community that if such a movement attained a degree of strength, it would use its power creatively and not vengefully."
 
Last edited:
When I was going to school for my Bachelor's, a gentleman came to the college to speak with his. stories of his "friend, Martin". He worked with Dr. King for a time, was the secretary for the Congress of Racial Equity. He would talk about the things he'd seen in life. He lost a wife to a drive by shooting in Tennessee. He said that because of his work with Dr. King, many of them often faced death threats. They had moved to St. Louis to get away from the threats, but after years, his wife went back to visit family, and was shot by a drive by shooting. He had no proof, but he believed it was the same people that had threatened him all those years ago. Every year, when MLK, JR day comes, I think of Otis Woodard. His life exemplified what Dr. King was teaching. Otis would go around giving talks to colleges, schools, homes, and all he ever asked for was canned goods, to feed the people in his neighborhood. When I took a job at a children's home, whenever we would have to give out demerits (sneaking out of the home during the night, skipping school) inevitably one of the girls would claim we were being racist. So I invited Otis down. I truly wanted to help these girls, I wanted them to have better lives and to succeed! I was hoping that Otis could tell them about what racism is, how indelibly it is wired into our systems. I wanted him to talk about his friend, Martin. I wanted them to have a piece of their history. A shared history for all those that believed in Dr. King's dream. This man was one of a kind. And I can't think of Dr. King without thinking of Otis Woodard. https://www.stlpr.org/economy-busin...activist-advocate-for-the-poor-peace-crusader
 

Links to Folks we Support

Back
Top