Posted on 01/17/2005 11:03:12 AM PST by mrustow
Indeed, the truth is tacky. Lies are so much prettier.
Indeed, the truth is tacky. Lies are so much prettier.
Civil rights meant one thing back then. Today, its become a cover for pushing socialism upon the American people. We've corrected the abuses of the past but rest assured today's civil right leaders see King's legacy as a means of promoting racial extortion, expansion of big government, and beefing up entitlement programs. If you don't believe me, all you need to do is observe the behavior of the mainstream civil rights leadership. They've tied themselves into the Democratic Party. So as much I'm proud of what happened in the country half a century ago, today civil rights is not about extending rights to Americans but stealing from them in the name of rights - like say, "equality." Please go ahead and tell me that's fair. If that's what MLK Day means in our time, you're damned right I want no part of it.
The True Poverty Pimps who hate capitalism, freedom and the American Dream. If they liked it, they wouldn't have the power they have over others. No one would need them. Which is why they're Leftist to the core.
King didn't bring equality to anyone. He helped the black middle class get easy, well-paying government jobs keeping poor blacks in their place. If you studied history, you'd know that the greatest movemtn for black equality started in 1940 and ended in 1960 -- before any of King's "works."
How tacky is it to criticize him on his birthday?
The truth is always welcome. And if it were one of the other 364 days of the year, you'd say that was tacky, too.
It's crap like this that gets Republicans branded as racists all the time.
By dishonest pc police like you!
Just give the guy his due, and get over it.
The author gave him his due. Get over it.
It's really not a big deal.
BWAHAHAHA! You can't even keep your lies straight! You're race-baiting up and down this thread. It's a gigantic deal to you. You need to take your irony supplement.
I'll be 65 to the day when my youngest of 4 children turns 20.
I will be happy and grateful.
Exactly right. Todays paper here in St. Louis (Post-Disgrace) has an editorial chiding us about how little is being done to help equalize American society. The left hasn't learned a thing from the last election.
By the same token, you could hardly find a scholar at Harvard whose works weren't plagiarized to some degree. Why is Mr. King to be singled out and pilloried?
Nonsense! First of all you and the English language apparently are not on speaking terms. I'm guessing you meant, "who didn't plagiarize other people's works to some degree." Because otherwise, your statement doesn't make any sense. And even being so liberal in trying to help you, you still don't make a lot of sense. How many Harvard scholars can you even name? And then, name me the ones that have been caught engaging in plagiarism.
Time's up! You don't know a single Harvard scholar who was caught engaging in plagiarism. Why did you single out and pillory Harvard, when you had no idea what the heck you were talking about? With King, you posted the answer to your own question at the top of your post.
There's something about a man with great physical courage and thus great integrity that inspires the enmity of lesser men: the green-eyed monster, I suppose. Mr. Stix doesn't have as much courage in his entire body as MLK had in one fingertip.
A Christian doesn't cast the first stone. Jesus said, there is no greater love than this, that a man should lay down his life for a friend. Until you have MLK's courage, you haven't the right to criticize his petty failings.
You must have graduated from the Vicious Circle School of Logic: No one lacking King's courage may criticize him, and anyone criticizing him ipso facto lacks his courage. Why, you're infallible!
BTW, Hitler hads every bit as much physical courage as King did. According to your "logic," that means Hitler "thus [had] great integrity."
Oh, I get it. You mean what your words say. You mean some other, secret language.
And why do you bring up integrity? King had none. And how does criticizing King on his holiday make someone a "coward"? 99.9% of the population is praising him, and you could get fired from your job, beaten to death, and your children persecuted for criticizing the man. That "integrity" thing must be yet another lesson you learned at Vicious Circle.
BTW, you must not be a Christian; you demand that others tolerate wickedness, and attack them when they don't. Or you're just a hypocrite.
You pathetic excuse for a human being.
You pathetic excuse for a human being.
MLK day should be called what it really is: "Pacifying the Black Lobby Day" instead of placing a race-baiting, white-hating, criminal on a pedestal
"Civil Riot leader" -- I love it! My only memory of him from my choildhood was from either the day he was murdered, or the day before. The radio news announced that he had just given a speech, was driven away in his car, and the riot started immediately.
The fact is that he WAS a socialist and that goes to the heart of what went wrong with the civil rights establishment after the legal battles against codified discrimination were won.
I am a black man who has been getting callouses on my dome from butting heads with those in my community who refuse to relinquish big government statist solutions for the problems plaquing the black community in favor of free market solutions that are far more appropriate today. These forces frequently cite Dr. King and use his exhortations to government to lead the way. They specifically cite his socialist outlook as justification for their continuance.
King himself expresses a communist outlook in his book "Stride Toward Freedom" when he stated, "in spite of the shortcomings of his analysis, Marx had raised some basic questions. I was deeply concerned from my early teen days about the gulf between superfluous wealth and abject poverty, and my reading of Marx made me even more conscious of this gulf. Although modern American capitalism has greatly reduced the gap through social reforms, there was still need for a better distribution of wealth. Moreover, Marx had revealed the danger of the profit motive as the sole basis of an economic system"
King, unfortunately, didn't understand that it was Capitalism and freedom that was responsible for the successes the African-American community already had achieved in his day and the key to future success. By "better distribution of wealth" King meant state control over the economy. His contempt for "the profit motive" was unfortunate given that African-Americans should've been encouraged by their leaders to seek fair profit to the best of their ability. King's leftist ideas contributed to an opening of the floodgates to such radicals as Stokley Carmichael, H. Rap Brown, the Black Panthers, as well as the burning and looting of African-American neighborhoods, the institutionalizing of poverty perpetrating welfare, the destruction of the family, drugs, violence, racism, and crime.
In "Stride Toward Freedom" Dr. King states "In short, I read Marx as I read all of the influential historical thinkers from a dialectical point of view, combining a partial yea and a partial no. My readings of Marx convinced me that truth is found neither in Marxism nor in traditional capitalism. Each represents a partial truth. Historically capitalism failed to see truth in collective enterprise and Marxism failed to see the truth in individual enterprise. The Kingdom of G-d is neither the thesis of individual enterprise nor the antithesis of collective enterprise, but a synthesis which reconciles the truths of both."
King, like Marx, Lenin, and Stalin, had "a dialectical point of view." The goal of the dialectic is authoritarianism. A nation, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, cannot be half free and half slave. By advocating socialism, King chose an imperious stand toward his own people in contrast to a stand for genuine freedom, self-rule, self-sufficiency, private ownership, and the accumulation of capital. King did not advocate the American system of free market capitalism. Instead, he stood for a system that has stunted the growth of African-Americans as well as the rest of us.
All Marxists believe in Hegelian Dialectics. This is a belief that "progress" is achieved through conflict between opposing viewpoints. Any ideological assertion (thesis) will create its own opposite (antithesis). Progress is achieved when a conclusion (synthesis) is reached which espouses aspects of both the thesis and antithesis.
For example, Hitler had a dialectical point of view. He rejected Marxist class warfare, but embraced the basic socialist idea of the insignificance of the individual compared to the collective state.
MLK was a man of enormous charisma and courage and certainly a pivotal figure in the civil rights movement. There is much about him that I admire. An assesment of his life could creditably yield the adjective of great. Despite that, he does not deserve to be the ONLY American with his own holiday named after him. That honor should be reserved for only one person in American history, the greatest of all Americans, George Washington. More so than any other SINGLE figure in our history, he was the "indispensable man." Without his courage, acumen,honor, and integrity, the US would simply not exist, and if it did, it probably would have been as a monarchy and certainly not as a constitutional republic.
MLK's birthday was a sop to PC and a reflection of the DemocRAT Congress that voted it. The depth of MLK's association with the most anti-freedom ideaology (Communism)of our time will prove to very embarrassing when it is fully revealed. Additionally, MLK's legacy to the modern day civil rights movement is a socialist bequeathment, that of looking to big government solutions for many of the behavioral problems in today's black community. MLK continues to cast a long shadow over most of the modern day civil rights establishment and black politicians who largely reject free market, educationally based solutions to the unique problems plaguing the black community.
But not as important as Barack Obama Day is going to be 50 years from now.
LOL! The other day, Ted kennedy called him, "Osama bin Laden"! I heard it with me own two ears.
My pleasure!
The irony works on so many levels, and is so far over the head of the self-annointed thread enforcers, that I'm just sitting here, marveling.
Javelina: Maybe so. But attacking a dead man who was a leader in the fight to bring democracy and equality to a substantial portion of our population on a day dedicated to him doesn't help much, does it? Obviously it's easy for folks on the internet to lack any sense of shame, but they ought to be a little less tacky about it.
Javelina: If you're so concerned about getting a federal holiday for George Washington, then go lobby for one.
Wow, Javelina, your arrogance is matched by your ignorance. There already IS a federal holiday for George Washington. It's called Washington's Birthday. But some time after MLK Day was proclaimed, the pc powers that be quashed the observance of Washington's Birthday.
Why should I be surprised that someone who knows nothing about King would also know nothing about Washington?
I most assuredly do not.
What alternative to the civil rights movement was there?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.