What Does a Conservative Do on Martin Luther King Day?

The Claremont Institute ^ | January 17, 2005 | Ken Masugi

[Stoat]

What Does a Conservative Do on Martin Luther King Day?

 

How should conservatives celebrate Martin Luther King Day? We can honor the high-minded, patriotic side of King, who spoke of the American Dream, of a color-blind society that evaluates people on “the content of their character.” That would truly be an aristocracy of merit, a conservative idea if there ever was one. This King was the one calling us back to the ideals of the American Founding and reminding us that its legacy was not fully enjoyed by all. In this view, the Civil Rights Revolution, for which he became the principal (though by no means sole) spokesman, flowed from the American Revolution and completed the constitutionalism demanded by it. This King revived regard for the fundamental institutions of this country, cruelly and unjustly denied by a faction. Shelby Steele brings out this King most admirably.

But there is the other King conservatives loath—and with good reason. This King stressed unlawful action (civil disobedience) where bargaining with local notables might have prevailed. He lobbied for the extension of the welfare state, with all its disastrous consequences, in the claimants and in the growth of the bureaucracy. Moreover, he irresponsibly attacked his own country on the issue of Vietnam. He provided legitimate cover for a radical left that contained the worst elements of American life, posing as our true patriots. His crowning achievement, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, turned out to be a vehicle for the centralized regulation of political life. A plain reading of it sought to relieve individual injuries to one’s civil rights; the bureaucratic interpretation (the one that has prevailed) established group remedies, hiring and promotion quotas, and the emphasis on race-based solutions that bedevil our laws today. Similarly, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 has subordinated state and local governments to the whims of the Justice Department. Thus King's version of equality cut off the relationship between the civil rights cause and the ideals of the American Founding; far from protecting limited, constitutional government his vision led to unlimited government. And all this does not mention the plagiarism and infidelity that infected his character.

Despite its equality on the federal holiday calendar, we cannot honor Martin Luther King Day with the same solemnity or joy we offer any number of other federal holidays. There were surely better approaches to establishing equal civil and political rights for all than the path which led from Brown v. Board of Education to the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, as they have come to be interpreted and then modified, not to mention the detour of the Great Society welfare state. But King has become that focus, that shorthand, for the road to equal rights, from Birmingham to the Lincoln Memorial. It would be worse than pointless to abolish the holiday. The just cause transcends the man. We must focus our attention on that cause. In doing so, it would be far better to honor the better angels of King’s character in the Presidents we honor next month—Washington and Lincoln.

[Badray]

So, you are saying nothing, but are dragging a dispute from another thread over here? Is that right? Nice.

[BackInBlack]

This post gets it pretty much exactly right -- clearly, concisely, and with heart. I guess the only thing I'd disagree with is the implication that civil disobedience wasn't justified during the civil rights movement. Freedom-lovers on the right know that when the government does things that are unjust, it's our job to take back our rights. (Hence the second amendment.) But otherwise, a truly terrific post.

[BackInBlack]

Look, man -- I was willing to listen to your story until that final sentence: "maybe race does matter." Your proof? There's a civil war between Hutus and Tutsis, all black people, that has killed 800,000 people. I wonder how you explain the 24 million that Stalin killed, or the 14 million (is that the number?) that Hitler killed. To call your reasoning "selective" is far too kind. You were selective in a way clearly designed to support your pre-existing conclusion that -- though you don't mention it outright, it's clear it's what you mean -- black people are inherently more violent.

[dfwgator]

The Reverend Martin Luther King Day.

Exactly, that should be the official name for the holiday, watch the liberals go apoplectic.

[Stoat]

This post gets it pretty much exactly right -- clearly, concisely, and with heart. I guess the only thing I'd disagree with is the implication that civil disobedience wasn't justified during the civil rights movement. Freedom-lovers on the right know that when the government does things that are unjust, it's our job to take back our rights. (Hence the second amendment.) But otherwise, a truly terrific post.

Thank you very much for your kind, complimentary words, your perspectives and your insights.

I think that one thing which MAY be fuelling an unhappiness with King's civil disobedience with some is a needless tarnishing of it by others.  What I'm referring to is that in regards to the specific events that King was involved with, there may well have been a number of times when civil disobedience was his only option; I grant you that.  The plight of African-Americans during that time was a unique one that required unique measures to overcome.

Unfortunately,  the successes of King's civil disobedience protests were watched closely by people all over the world, including all manner of raggedy, hippie, scummy, commie twits here in the USA whose "issues" and "grievances" were nowhere near as valid as those of the civil rights movement..  They saw that and thought "Wow! Instead of spending the time going through legal channels to get heard, all we have to do is take over the University administration building and trash it!  We'll call it a 'sit - in' to align ourselves with legitimate civil rights grievances and we'll get our way. "

I don't know if this is what Dr. Masugi is referring to in his article; I wish that he had made that part more clear.  But I suppose that throughout history, there are all sorts of examples of illegitimate people and groups trying to piggyback their 'causes' onto more legitimate movements which have shown success.  Hopefully historians will endeavor to keep the civil rights struggles intellectually separate from others that occurred at the same time.

[rdb3]

So, you are saying nothing, but are dragging a dispute from another thread over here? Is that right?

---

No, that's wrong. But what's it to you anyway? When did I bother you to get you in such a tizzy as this? What makes you the referee? I haven't bothered you in the least.

Real men don't whine.

[rdb3]

You were selective in a way clearly designed to support your pre-existing conclusion that -- though you don't mention it outright, it's clear it's what you mean -- black people are inherently more violent.

---

You're right. That post was sick.

Real men don't whine.

[Badray]

"But what's it to you anyway?"

It's an open forum.

"When did I bother you to get you in such a tizzy as this?"

Only one in a tizzy is you.

"What makes you the referee?"

I volunteered. No appointment. No pay.

"I haven't bothered you in the least."

Yes, you did. You were rude to a lady and hinted at worse.

"Real men don't whine."

This is too ironic and too funny for words. ROFLMAO

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Bump to your righteous post.

Martin Luther King preached non-violence, individual responsibility and Christian compassion. His death opened the door for the Nation of Islam to further destroy the black family.

[WaterDragon]

non-violence, individual responsibility and Christian compassion. And he had tremendous personal courage and dignity!

[chemainus]

Cleveland? Los Angeles? Watts? look at the basketball game...are these things you are referencing?....your take...not mine...

[BackInBlack]

"Cleveland? Los Angeles? Watts? look at the basketball game...are these things you are referencing?....your take...not mine..."

Seriously, if you were standing in front of me I'd slug you in the face. Probably because I'm black and therefore violent.

[chemainus]

I can give you an address....publicly...

[Texas Songwriter]

My wife makes the best seafood gumbo in the world. When I was an undergraduate in Beaumont, I would scrounge money to have a nice meal at Don's Seafood. It was owned by the Landry Brothers out of Louisiana. Get the shrimp or seafood gumbo without the okra. The bread is great. Also take a look at Pappas or Pappados. Live a little. (We got the recipe from Don's Seafood and she has perfected it over the years)