MLK at the Highlander Folk School for Communist Cadre, school shown below
His legal name was MIKE KING.
MLK Jr.'s pastor father took a trip to Europe where he was deeply smitten by the life story of the German religious rebel/reformer Martin Luther. The man returned and legally changed his OWN name to Martin Luther King, instructing his congregation to call his son, "Martin Luther King, Jr.", which they did.
Was he charismatic, was he a powerful speaker whose caust was just...?
Was he a leftist philanderer with very shakey academic credentials..?
Raheem Kassam. Twitter and YouTube just killed his accounts.
You know why?
Because of criticism of transgenderism that he wrote:
ELEVEN YEARS AGO.
If the left un-persons our people over trivial stuff, why is it wrong to un-person theirs for major stuff..?
Let me guess:
Because LOSING confers dignity, right?
Because LOSING makes us somehow NOBLE.
DO NOT CRAWL INTO *MY* FOXHOLE.
“The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King”.
The title, usually pronounced with greedy adulatory relish, is pretty baroque. But there it is, so let’s deconstruct it:
Reverend - Yes
Doctor - No
Martin Luker King - Again, no. MIKE KING.
People have a hard time believibg that great people can also be deeply flawed and troubled at the same time. To me, that is the very definition of humanity.
A lot more worse than that.
MLK avowed in his writings, he didn’t believe Jesus Christ had been resurrected, would ever return again physically, denied the doctrines of substitutionary atonement, repentance , and a number of other fundamental Christian doctrines.
He also had been understood to say the only reason he kept the title as a Reverend, is that it gave him a springboard to advance his political beliefs.
These little tidbits aren’t popular, because if you used them, those who amicably accept MLK as a great leader, will tend to label you as a bigoted ‘white supremist’ or as a ‘racist’.
I’ve heard the claims that he’s a communist, but I really don’t buy those claims, certainly not that he remained one up to his death, for a couple of reasons:
1. His essay “Can a Christian be a Communist” makes it very clear that Christianity and Communism can never, EVER be mixed together, and in fact they are anathma to one another. That alone makes his being a Communist unlikely, even a secret one. Not even Communists who pose as Christians such as Pope Francis could do something like that, as that would betray the Communists.
2. He’s a personal friend of Richard Nixon, and bear in mind, Nixon alongside Hoover was instrumental in taking down Alger Hiss and proving his ties to the Communists (remember, this was back before Nixon, under Kissinger’s rather asinine advice, backed détente and supported Mao Zedong’s China). That makes it even LESS likely he was a Communist. Heck, in some ways, it was thanks to Nixon that MLK’s Civil Rights crusade got any traction. So unless you want to denounce Richard Nixon as a secret communist as well, I suggest you consider dropping it.
3. Even IF MLK was a Communist initially, there’s little indication he was still a Communist by the time of his death. Let’s not forget that Whittaker Chambers also was a communist, as was Ron Radosh and David Horowitz, yet they gave up on Communism and even have gone out of their way to condemn it.