Posted on 01/14/2018 9:53:38 AM PST by Cubs Fan
Liberals will pay lip service to Dr. King. But the hard fact is that the American Left has long since abandoned Dr. King.
(In Kings I have a dream speech he gave) A salute to the Declaration of Independence. To the Constitution. And most critically, the demand “that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
Sadly, the American Left believes none of this today. The poison of identity politics is merely the modern version of the segregation that Dr. King would give his life fighting to end. It is, as noted here often enough, the son of segregation and the grandson of slavery.
Today, to believe as Dr. King did — that people should “not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character” — is to be seen as racist. (Or, as ex-CNNer Soledad O’Brien said of me for daring to believe as did Dr. King — “a stone cold racist.”) Up is now down, and down is now up.
Somewhere Dr. King is shaking his head in disgust. Having literally given his life to fight this kind of racist garbage, there, in 2018 America in the 21st century — a full fifty years after his death and fifty-five years after his “I Have a Dream” speech — the pitch is made in the Party of Race to ensure that America is always judging people by the color of their skin and not the content of their character in a colorblind America.
What a disgrace.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
King was for integration todays left give safe spaces to certain protected races and seperate graduation ceremonies.
King was a for a society where merit is judged, not skin color Todays left demand racial preferences and special treatement of minorities based on race
King advocated non violence while Black Lives Matter riots and kills police routinely, and antifa beats anyone who doesn't toe their line.
Todays left believe in none of these core principles.
Michael King was a plagiarist, womanizer, and any feminist who would tolerate his “ I’m F’n for Jesus tonight “ with his white hookers is a hypocrite ...
King’s own children, sadly, were more interested in how to make a buck off MLK than anything else.
King’s dream died with him and the dreams of the black nationalists ruled the field.
Also note that despite the claims of his conservative apologists (including some in his own family), King was a typical religious liberal who rejected the actual supernatural doctrines of his supposed religion and considered religion to be mere didactic mythology to be used to promote secular "ethics."
“...will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
The people we object to is not based on their color. It is because of their education level and character. Those deficiencies aren’t usually their fault but we can’t allow pity to ruin our country.
“...where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
This is literally the exact opposite of today’s Leftist SJW type.
To them, the only things that matter are the external characteristics like color of the skin, which genitalia are present, what religion they follow, or who they like to sleep with.
To them, the content of someone’s character is predetermined by the responses to those characteristics.
Then we should be promoting Booker T. Washington and not just tearing down King, because that plays right into our enemy’s hands, whether true or not.
This is literally the exact opposite of today’s Leftist SJW type.
To them, the only things that matter are the external characteristics like color of the skin, which genitalia are present, what religion they follow, or who they like to sleep with.
Good post! Exactly right
Yes. Whether rightly or wrongly king is remembered fpiorst and foremost for saying judge character not color. Don't let the left get away with claiming they are for that ideal when they are for the exact opposite.
It is the Big Agenda for the few psychopaths who control almost all our information now, the banks (world economies), all public skool textbooks, Hollywood, art, music, “culture”, google, twitter, youtube, Facebook, etc.
King was a Christian pastor so he can NOT be elevated. Only satanists and pagans like the sodomite and pederast Harvey Milk can be made into “heroes” by Hollywood, skools, etc., since the Left has been trying to flip Good and Evil for 200 years-—esp. by controlling culture (which they almost completely do).
The few gatekeepers only allow ONE way to “think” which is not thinking. They program children using the Pavlovian method (Classical Christian curricula was banned by the 50s), and they use lies and misinformation in textbooks, so children are incapable of virtue (which is necessary for Freedom). Rhetoric, the most essential skill to learn was eliminated by the evil communists like John Dewey (father of “progressive” (Marxist) “education” (conditioning). (Read Edward Bernay’s book, “Propaganda”— Freud’s nephew). Control the airwaves, skool textbooks (communist core) and destroy Classical Christian curricula and ideas (like King’s) so you can literally destroy the ideas that created the Age of Reason, Modern Science and the US Constitution. You erase traditions, history, and all philosophy and theology which was rational-—for the total removal from Realty, Truth, Justice, etc-—back to the puerile, tribal, feudalism for the psychopathic elites who worship satan (materialism/scientism).
I understand your misgivings about who king really was, but we mustn’t let the left use the moral authority of “treating people according to character over color” when they do the exact opposite.
Yes. It is true of the degeneracy of MLK jr., but our culture is all about “perceptions” of the masses. Unless you research original documents, which most people never do, and which a lot of times is impossible because it is hidden to us, like in case of death of JFK and RFK, we are just controlled by emotions—never critical thought. Truth sets us free. Only if we knew the truth, can we think critically.
MLK, jr. was being controlled by the communists, yes, and he was a sodomite and communist, and used to have “parties” who forced people to watch hired homosexuals have sex, etc., but he was killed for the traumatization of the public, as was the CIA killing of JFK and RFK and with all the Marxist brownshirts creating chaos at Berkeley, Chicago, Ohio, etc. All to get more government control, normalize socialism (slavery) with the “Great Society” to embed dependency in all children, and destroy the natural family (”marriage” “laws”) and create more government “laws” to corrupt the system and create a Leviathan—completed with the so-called “Patriot” Act, to strangle freedom and totally destroy and corrupt us and our children and create a totalitarian “smart” world where people who “think” like a Christian (free will/individualism) will be ostracized (Alinskied) and demoralized and destroyed if they have any type of power.
Without Just Law, everything will collapse eventually. They need to erase the Christian worldview of good and evil from minds of children off the face of the earth for total slavery, so the “use” of MLK is now a liability, rather than an asset as it was when “fear” was needed to take over all the institutions and destroy our legal system. With sodomy “marriage” now “normalized” in the West, the total irrationality of children is almost completed and they are almost totally corrupted to have the little puerile mindset of serfs with the inability to “think critically” like a true Christian, which is being erased and destroyed for irrational satanism, slavery (socialism) and Ba’al rites (sodomy/baby-killing).
I heard his speeches on AM radio, while in study hall in high school.
There were many Negro Vietnam servicemen, that the day could have been named for, instead of a non-veteran Negro.
Eww, I didn’t know of his alleged fondness for male genitalia.
I know about the prostitutes (White women), but the sleeping with men part I’m dubious about. That may be confused with Malcolm X, who was a male hustler when he was younger. As for being “slow on his feet”, I’d take issue with that. I saw an interview of him on Merv Griffin from the mid ‘60s and he was pretty well able to handle solid questions and a fairly intellectual discussion. My father saw him in person at Berkeley where he was able to shift topics from Civil Rights (which the crowd was bored to hear about) to Vietnam (which he wasn’t apparently prepared to address except peripherally, but did so when the crowd demanded it).
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.