Alex Blaze

Dream big

Filed By Alex Blaze | January 21, 2008 9:01 AM | comments

Filed in: Media
Tags: civil rights movement, LGBT history, Martin Luther King Jr., Neshoba County, revisionism

It's interesting that Obama's praise of Ronald Reagan came several days drking.jpgbefore a holiday honoring a man whose vision for America truly transcended politics, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Reagan didn't support such a holiday - his famous "states' rights" proclamation in Neshoba County and his dismal record on civil rights issues showed that the Gipper wasn't a friend to the idea of racial equality. But back in 1983, when Congress knew that it had power over the executive and that an overwhelming majority in favor of a law meant that it would be passed anyway, the president capitulated to the Congress.

How quaint.

This is probably around when opponents to equality, both racial and economic, realized that making people hate King or his message would a Sisyphean task. So instead they set about to rewrite history and re-create Dr. King in their image, and thus tried to get the rest of us to scale back our dreams of what this country could be.

Several weeks after Ron Paul pleading on CNN that he was not racist (as if any of us can make that claim), his words about Dr. King still shock me, "Rosa Parks is one of my heroes. Martin Luther King is a hero, because they practiced the civil libertarian principle of civil disobedience and nonviolence." How did they suddenly become libertarians? How did King's radical vision get turned into a call to ignore the realities of race in America?

It didn't start with Ron Paul and he's definitely not going to be the last person to make such a claim. LiP magazine provides a sampling of some of this revisionist history, perpetuated by writers like Shelby Steele, Dinesh D'Souza, and John David Skrentny. And this revisionism was thrust back into the mainstream when an ad ran in 2006 claiming, despite his lack of party affiliation, the King was a Republican.

King's dream was reduced and sold to get votes. Sign of the times, I suppose.

But the holiday's history shows us that King's vision was not to fight ignorance with further ignorance, rather is sought to destabilize the very power structures that are now trying to reclaim it.

MLK Day itself was originally a union holiday - it was demanded first by the Transport Workers' Union in New York City to honor the man who fought on behalf of laborers. Over the next decade and a half, several other unions, from dressmakers to hospital workers, won the right to "honor a man they viewed as a working-class hero."

King's vision required that we not only to begin to see each other for who we are despite various axes of identity, but also to recognize that those axes exist, that they have power, and that getting rid of them requires more work than simply willing them away. From Why We Can't Wait:

Whenever this issue of compensatory or preferential treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree, but he should ask for nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic. For it is obvious that if a man enters the starting line of a race three hundred years after another man, the first would have to perform some incredible feat in order to catch up.

Dr. King was shot in 1968 while supporting a sanitary public worker's union strike.

This may seem like small policy matters and details in his life, but they add up to help us see King's vision for America - not just one in which people are judged by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin, but one also where every person has an equal opportunity to achieve, one where the past must be acknowledged to create the future we want to see, one where hierarchy is criticized for maintaining privilege and restricting the potential of those who are at the bottom of it, one where we meet the needs of our brothers and sisters before we attend to our own because we know that working together for a common dream will make victory all that much better, and one where power doesn't perpetuate power because we've decided that it should be distributed among all people.

His vision wasn't practical, it wasn't a compromise, it didn't just demand political or legislative changes, it wasn't accomplished in his lifetime, and it still hasn't been accomplished in ours.

I've been amazed by both the American people's and the LGBT communities' inability to want, to want deeply and to want expansively, to have a vision of their own for the world they want to see that's more than what we've got now plus a few new laws. We are sitting at the precipice of great change, and yet we don't seem to have any leaders around who comprehend the magnitude of the time we're living in.

And maybe that's the way it's supposed to be for those who benefit from the way power currently acts. But let's follow Dr. King's example this Martin Luther King Jr. Day and dream big.


Recent Entries Filed under Media:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


What a powerful essay, Alex!

You said it. I remember when we didn't even have MLK Day in Arizona. That's how fucking racist this red state is.

I wonder how many of the candidtates are going to try to claim they were marching with King in Selma? We already know Romney's dad did. Oh wait, that was a lie . . .

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | January 21, 2008 10:18 AM

Alex,

What exactly was your point with that first sentence where you leave the impression that Obama is a fan of Ronald Reagan? It seems nothing more than an attempt at a provocative opening that had little to do with the body of the post.

Obama's comments where not in "praise" of Reagan's idea or his presidency, but an acknowledgment of the impact that Reagan had in changing the course of America and by extension the world.

We are at another time in our history where there is a great hunger for a change in the direction of our country. Obama is calling on us to meet the challenges that stand before us, not looking back towards some supposedly golden time.

I think Alex's opening is very accurate actually.

While you may disagree about how much Obama "praised" Reagan, he point is that he did position himself with Reagan by speaking about changing the country the same as Reagan did (although in a different direction, granted.)

That's no different than Republicans painting King as a member of their party. While it's true that Republicans were more in favor with blacks at the time (the Dems were the racists at that time) and that King more than likely would have favored them, that doesn't mean that it's not a huge example of a politician positioning themselves to be next to a bigger name and a bigger idea.

I'd rather they talk about themselves and what they'll bring without having to claim their superiority in relation to someone else.

Seriously, I thought that the Obama people and the not-Obama people were all agreeing that he was praising Reagan. About different things and to different degrees, but he did say something nice about Reagan.

I think people are familiar enough with his comments (if they read this site) to come to their own conclusion on them.

But, what's it's doing there, I was interested in Ezra Klein's idea that Obama was doing to Reagan's legacy what conservatives have done to the legacies of King, the Founding Fathers, Jesus, etc. by rewriting them in their own image. It's some symmetry and was pretty much the point of the post.

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | January 21, 2008 12:26 PM

Alex,

If people read the site, they may be familiar with the comments. If they aren't regular readers, or don't read every post, then they may not be familiar with the comments or the context in which they were said.

If you had made the points that you made in your comment, then I would have less of an issue with the post.