Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remembering the Real Martin Luther King, Jr.
The Reality Check ^ | 20 January 2005 | Michael Bates

Posted on 01/23/2005 7:33:44 AM PST by Lando Lincoln

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-126 next last
To: TommyDale
I have always wondered why so many people held this womanizing, plagiarizing Marxist in such high esteem. No one had the guts to tell it like it really was. I think the black community has many other leaders and heroes that had a better record in the community.

I have the guts to tell it like it was. No historical figure is or was perfect, as is no human. Many had skeltons in their closets...affairs, dubious liasons, etc. However, MLK was a catalyst for equal rights in America. He did not do this alone, but he was the one pushed forward as a leader.

Many can talk, as we do here; but few have the tenacity or public charisma to actually effect change. You don't have to love him, you don't even have to like him; however, credit should be given where credit is due. Martin Luther King opened the eyes to injustice in America.

Many gave their lives so that all America's children have the freedoms and liberties that they do. When people are praying for the troops that fight this day to stamp out oppression in the world, they pray for the troops as whole. There is no selection process in that.

Just as MLK himself was assassinated, maybe his character was, as well. Even if he was not perfect, he was human. He had the courage to follow through on his convictions, to correct an injustice. While some people may find it distasteful, he was not just a black leader, he was an American leader. That, IMO, is telling it like it was.

21 posted on 01/23/2005 8:27:51 AM PST by World'sGoneInsane (LET NO ONE BE FORGOTTEN, LET NO ONE FORGET)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

I believe that King's role was to step into and solidify a simmering movement already under way. King did NOT invent this movement any more than he directed Rosa Parks. The creation of the SLC was an attempt to create a coalition and obtain a unified front for the national media. King learned, somewhere, the tactics and techniques of doing just that. Because of this, he is pointed to as the luminary of the age in just the same way as Jesse Jackson is today and, of course, this was also why it was so important for JJ to steal the mantle and annointing ASAP.


22 posted on 01/23/2005 8:28:58 AM PST by WorkingClassFilth (Let's arm all the "patriotic" Democrats and field a penal battalion...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: Spann_Tillman
Sure, that was all bad, mmkay, but the black crime rate then was approximately one tenth what it is now. The rate of murder is double today what it was back then. So pick the greater evil.

Ah, so if we could only return the the world of the 50's then all that would go away?

24 posted on 01/23/2005 8:39:17 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Like?

Coleman Young. He was the best at fostering understanding.

25 posted on 01/23/2005 8:39:27 AM PST by Mark was here (My tag line was about to be censored.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Spann_Tillman
Sure, that was all bad, mmkay, but the black crime rate then was approximately one tenth what it is now. The rate of murder is double today what it was back then. So pick the greater evil.

The choice would be to hang these criminals without a trial, or record the crimes? Oh, that was not a written law. You forgot about those hangings, when blacks only needed to be suspected of a crime. I'll take today's society any day. Let's talk about the blacks today that succeed.

26 posted on 01/23/2005 8:40:27 AM PST by World'sGoneInsane (LET NO ONE BE FORGOTTEN, LET NO ONE FORGET)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
I believe that King's role was to step into and solidify a simmering movement already under way.

In other words, provide leadership and a voice to people who had been suffering too long under an unjust situation? So what was wrong with that? Character flaws aside, he did step up and provide that leadership. And he and other leaders with him paid a price for that in beatings and jailings and more than a few assasinations. Are we not a better country overall for it? Someone mentioned Justice Thomas and Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice before. Those three could never have risen to the position that they have under the conditions prevelent in the south, and much of the North, at the time of King and the Civil Rights movement.

27 posted on 01/23/2005 8:43:55 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: postaldave

Sad that MLK, has been diluted to Jessie Jackson, and Al Sharpton.

Truly, Black Monday.


28 posted on 01/23/2005 8:46:07 AM PST by television is just wrong (Our sympathies are misguided with illegal aliens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

See post #9:

"In the final analysis...it is up to the machinery of the culture to decide what he was and what he accomplished. So far, the Left has been in firm control of that legacy and they have sainted him with honors far, far beyond his ken. In any event, he was the lightning rod for social change and a good deal of that was good and necessary. A good deal of it, however, was just plain bad and we still suffer the ill effects of the 'moral' crusade of those times...In the future, the debate may be rejoined with the restraint of political correctness gone. Then the true measure of the man will be taken - when all those that would bludgeon legitimate questions are finally seen as the true bigots of the present age."


29 posted on 01/23/2005 8:49:44 AM PST by WorkingClassFilth (Let's arm all the "patriotic" Democrats and field a penal battalion...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
A good deal of it, however, was just plain bad and we still suffer the ill effects of the 'moral' crusade of those times...

Well I'm always willing to learn. Just what of what King stood for was just plain bad?

30 posted on 01/23/2005 8:53:03 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

"In other words, provide leadership and a voice to people who had been suffering too long..."

No, those are your words. What he did, he did because he was annointed by the national media - not because of his personal moral merit. Today's annointed leadership in the persons of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are products of the same machine.

Ask yourself this question: Why was the party of Jim Crow, the KKK, lynchings and all of the repression you speak about so closely allied with that age and movement in spite of their historic crimes and their actual resistence (Against CRA: %D's > %R's) to change?

Somehow Democrats and black leadership were able to conceal all of that history and baggage and transform traditionally Republican voting blacks into a stable of state dependent wards. Today, after nearly $6 trillion dollars spent in erradicating poverty and the supposed ills of racial injustice, we now have a legacy of more poor, greater social disintegration and demographics amongst black America that they may never recover from. All, I might add, as direct products of the "dream" as it was actualized by King and his fellow crusaders.


31 posted on 01/23/2005 9:02:35 AM PST by WorkingClassFilth (Let's arm all the "patriotic" Democrats and field a penal battalion...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

"Just what of what King stood for was just plain bad?"

A better question would be: What was good?

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as they say. By using your yardstick of moral righteousness, any historic figure should be weighed solely by the content of their words - not by the content of their character or the consequences of their actions.

In my view, King role did that was positive little beyond reminding us of our Constitutional duty to provide equality under the law - something, I might add, Americans have ALWAYS led the world in. His abruptly terminated legacy and his followers have wrought positive mayhem in their zeal for the "dream" and its suppose utopia.


32 posted on 01/23/2005 9:12:07 AM PST by WorkingClassFilth (Let's arm all the "patriotic" Democrats and field a penal battalion...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln

ping


33 posted on 01/23/2005 9:16:06 AM PST by lunarbicep (Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice - Thomas Paine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
This is another thing about King that the public seems to have forgotten -- seems that every time he came to town, riots and looting broke out. Amazingly, he claimed to be non-violent, but violence always reared its ugly head when he was present.

Some people forget that the civil rights movement was not monolithic. There were groups like the Black Panthers who openly advocated violence. It is our good fortune as a country that Martin Luther King emerged as the most prominent leader of the movement. MLK was non-violent, and had the charisma (or whatever you want to call it) to convince others to stand up and be non-violent with him. Pretty extraordinary if you ask me.

As for his flaws - so what? As far as I know, there has only been one leader in the history of the world who was not flawed, Jesus. Reading the Bible reveals that God often chooses some mightily flawed people to do his work.

34 posted on 01/23/2005 9:25:01 AM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
>....but violence always reared its ugly head when he was present."

"For example?"

in contrast to that foolish statement, wasn't MLK booed and jeered at the watts riots because he spoke out against the riots.

35 posted on 01/23/2005 9:25:19 AM PST by postaldave (ACLU = Anti-Christian, Liberal, and Un-American.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
I am 57-years old, 58 on the next aniversary of King's assassination, and that is the Martin Luther King, Jr I recall.

The liberals have developed a cult of King, based on revised history that overlooks or hides the ugliness that was Martin Luther King, Jr. These are the same liberals who are trying to invent revised history to trash our Founding Fathers, such as Thomas Jefferson and the great Emancipator, Abraham Lincoln.

Go figure!

36 posted on 01/23/2005 9:27:45 AM PST by Redleg Duke (Pass Tort Reform Now! Make the bottom clean for the catfish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke
I am 57-years old, 58 on the next aniversary of King's assassination, and that is the Martin Luther King, Jr I recall.

It is a shame that "is the Martin Luther King, Jr" you recall. I don't respect MLK for what the revisionist liberals do for, or against him. I respect the movement that he led.

I remember being five years old, and my mother telling me that there were separate bathrooms and drinking fountains for different people. At the age of five, I found that incredible. But then, I am from the North.

Isn't it ironic that Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King were assassinated for the great things that they did?! Today, I am now much older than five, but I am just as incredulous that some people still just don't get it. More than that it makes me both sad, mad, and sick.

BTW, it is not only the liberals that revise Martin Luther King's life. There are many who gleefully use character assassination, just as they use bullets. I am thankful that these people are only few and far between.

37 posted on 01/23/2005 9:53:02 AM PST by World'sGoneInsane (LET NO ONE BE FORGOTTEN, LET NO ONE FORGET)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
In my view, King role did that was positive little beyond reminding us of our Constitutional duty to provide equality under the law - something, I might add, Americans have ALWAYS led the world in.

If America ALWAYS held up its duty to provide equality, Martin Luther King would not have had a platform. The fact that there were many who believed, and still believe, that they are "chosen" Americans, is the reason that civil rights are even being discussed here.

38 posted on 01/23/2005 9:58:27 AM PST by World'sGoneInsane (LET NO ONE BE FORGOTTEN, LET NO ONE FORGET)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
No doubt.

It is not the truth that bothers me - no man should be idolized (See Lincoln, Lee, FDR, Reagan) because it ignores the truth and also make ANY critisism impossible.

I am just wondering about his motives.

39 posted on 01/23/2005 10:10:59 AM PST by NJ Neocon (Democracy is tyranny of the masses. It is three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Spann_Tillman

I pick today, thanks.


40 posted on 01/23/2005 10:11:31 AM PST by thathamiltonwoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-126 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson