-
Website
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/ -
Original page
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/07/about-mlk-being-a-black-republican/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
But his is only if you view 'freedom and liberty' in a very selfish, anit-human, and unecological fashion--and if you agree with historical US imperialism.
Opposing labor unions and allowing corporations to super-exploit do not increase your liberty--unless you value the liberty to exploit your fellow human being, your liberty to wage illegal agression against others, and the liberty to despoil the economical systems upon which future generations depend to merely survive.
The independence from 'group-think' is to a degree a pathological delusion. Without common goals and patterns of though--group-think--humans would have already have become extinct as a species.
The civil rights movement was a type of 'group-think'---labor solidarity in the face of wage slavery is a type of 'group-think'.
Philosophy--it's all about asking questions.
You might fancy that you could use a tax break, and you don't own the family of a thug in the hood a dime--but that would merely point up your own ignorance.
Don't fall for the divide and rule patterns of thinking that are pimped by the ruling class, the moder day slavers and colonialists.
Just the fact that the Republcians were cheerleaders for the illegal attack on Iraq (that has killed hundreds of thousands) should tell any thinking, ethical person something.
The rightwing line of thinking cannot survive engaged debate or scupulous scrutiny--and this is why Dr. King could only be taken out by a bullet. The ideas King embraces transcended the petty politicing of the two-headed DEM/REP hydra that is bringing the world to the brink of disaster.
Who's your master?
I am big on personal responsibility, and not waiting on the government to come in and clean up a mess of one's own creation. That's why I lean conservative, because liberal solutions always seems-to me-to involve a handout of some sort.
So looking forward!
===
The King Center in Atlanta says there is no proof that King was ever a Republican. Rice stands by her claim.
===
Lowery, who knew King well, said there is no reason why anyone would think King was a Republican. He said King most certainly voted for President Kennedy, and the only time he openly talked about politics was when he criticized Republican Barry Goldwater during the 1964 presidential campaign.
"That was not the Martin I know and I don't think they can substantiate that by any shape, form or fashion. It's purely propaganda and poppycock," Lowery said. "Even if he was, he would have nothing to do with what the Republican Party stands for today. Do they think Martin would support George W. Bush and the war in Iraq?"
In "The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr.," which was published after his death from his written material and records, King called the Republican national convention that nominated Goldwater a "frenzied wedding ... of the KKK and the radical right."
"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism," King said in the book.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Billboards_Claim_...
Being a republican then is much different than it is now. You could have argued that Nixon was more liberal than Kennedy and Johnson in 1960. This is before Goldwater in 1964 and Nixon's Southern Strategy in 1968.
This campaign is going to go nowhere.
Should Iowans give up their farm subsidies?
How about the subsidies Indians, Arabs and Koreans get for opening up small business?
Should white women give up their "minority" status when they want to open up businesses, claim minority contracts and have sports teams in schools?
No, because only BLACKS have their hands out for "handouts." Only BLACKS are needy and unwilling to work. Uh-huh. Right.
Take that bull to somebody who believes it. Fox News, ABC, CNN etc. Don't even try it over here.
What is it about socialism that just drives people here mad? Democratic socialism has served Europe very well. The most progressive countries in the world are social democracies.
This country under FDR developed socialist programs that provided a basic safety net for everyone and that, along with strong unions, launched this country into the greatest period of prosperity its ever known.
Reagan and his ridiculous crackpot theory of trickle down economics, coupled with insane tax cuts for the richest among us, launched the disastrous economic train that has taken us to where we are today. He decimated the unions, he borrowed from the social security trust fund to cover the tax cuts for his cronies. He deregulated industries that never should have been deregulated and he turned a blind eye to monopolies and trusts. So here we are, with an economic disaster of epic proportions, all thanks to unbridled capitalism and the alleged "free market" and a corporate-owned government that answers only to the top 1-2% in this nation.
I'll take a system of democratic socialism ANY day, with its emphasis on justice for all, on equality and fairness and a level playing field for every one of us, not just a select few who are no better than you or me, but by chance or thievery or family connections, good fortune and luck and yes, hard work, have risen to the very top of our economic ladder.
But it is not simply hard work that takes one there, not in this country. My grandparents came here in 1893 and they worked their asses off farming in western Kansas. They were successful, hanging on to their land even through the depression. And that family wealth has been passed down, added to, has expanded the prospects of every one of us who came after them.
Should I add that they were white? Yes, I should, because though they faced rampant discrimination as German immigrants, that ultimately vanished and they were, by second generation, "as good as" the rest of (white) America.
What about the black families who were working every bit as hard as my grandparents? Far, far more of them lost their land in the depression, lost their farms due to government misdeeds. They worked JUST as hard and they still lost out. So what to hand down to their next generations? Nothing. And then that generation, facing racism and discrimination, trying to build something on top of nothing, continues to struggle, continues to deal with economic injustice, economic inequality, and so it goes.
"Handouts make you needy and unwilling to work on your own." I agree with that. But "handouts" also help people through periods of crisis, through disastrous times that we may all face at some point, but which should not ruin a person. Those "handouts" are why I pay taxes and as someone who recognizes her own very blessed, very fortunate existence, I don't mind paying for those who were not so blessed, who have faced different and more devastating obstacles in life.
I faced such a disaster in 2001 when my husband became ill and could not work. Thank God we had insurance, but how many people in this country don't have it? Our out-of-pocket medical costs WITH insurance ran over $30K a year for the next four years, and we lost half our income when he could no longer work. Handout? I'd have taken one instantly, had one been available. As it was, I had to refinance my house, draw out the equity I'd worked so hard to create, and muddle through.
Wouldn't it be more humane ~ more European ~ for me to simply have been able to take care of him, knowing I'd not lose the roof over our heads or go bankrupt trying to pay medical bills? Of course it would, but in this country, in this fucking selfish, condemning country, we don't give a shit about one another, it's every man for himself.
Because I care about people, all people, and because I recognize the vast injustice present in this society and the persistent, systemic discrimination inherent in this country, I am a socialist and I am proud of it.
But He is endorsing and donating to Obama....
I am so confused.
Republicans need to offer solutions, not fake links to the past.
By the time he died, I am sure he thought we were all walking across the Niagara on a tightrope, and trying to get to the other side rather than falling into the deep maelstrom. I think that he had gotten to the point that when it came to the two parties, none of them could be trusted, but he would use either one if it meant rights for blacks.
These turncoats are despicable; they'll try anything. First, they say that the GOP is the party of Lincoln, when it was, for a short time, it was actually the party of Thaddeus Stevens and his Radical Republicans. These guys were, for their time, activists. They moved faster than what Lincoln might have done, and Stevens himself was dead in three years. They laid the ground under which blacks legally got the vote and all, but after the death of Radical Republicanism, they refused to do anything for their constituents, other than allow them to get burned and hung for the next hundred years.
This kind of activism is something the present GOP would rather lie about. They talk Lincoln, but Lincoln himself was more conflicted about blacks than they'd like to admit. He even thought about deporting all of us back to Africa, but it would have broken the national treasury. I just wonder, though, whether they would have chucked the bi- and triracial people along with us on that journey.
King was no Tom, not by a long-shot. King was the 'un-Tom'--and he was critical of capitalist immiseration and imperialist agression. He recognized the limitations of only organizing on a racial justice agenda and set about organizing a poor-folks march on Washington.
Yeah, the fact that Toms in the Republican Party try to claim King's legacy says it all, and on so many levels.
It does matter on a symbolic level in the current political fray whether King was down with the Republican Party back in the day. But, as has been pointed out by other commentators, the presidental race in 1964 with Goldwater saw the rise of racial back-lash on the part of Southern whites and racist whites all over the US.
King was a Republican--yeah, and McCain and his wife Cindy have some Carribean beach-front property they want to sell you in Arizona.
(McCain is the political grandson of Barry Goldwater and the white back-lash--he opposed designating a MLK,Jr. national holiday on several occassions.)
If anything, MLK was an independent. He held views that were liberal, conservative, and socialist. More accurately, he may have transcended the label of any one party.
Black Republicans that justify exploitation and imperialism are simply Toms. They are opprotunists and parasitic sell-outs.
Word.
'Sa damn shame.
Thank you Slave Revolt, well said. Period.
Hell, I wouldn't give it a second thought if I saw it going down the road.
LOL, and most of these Toms are intellectually dishonest for going on Fox Noise and claiming blacks are only voting for Obama because he's black because if that were the case, why aren't we seeing Senator Alan Keyes (R-IL) or Gov. Lynn Swann (R-PA) or Sen. Michael Steele (R-MD)?
As I was told once, because "no self respecting black man can be a Republican!" Black Republicans/conservatives don't really believe the stuff we say; we just get paid to say it!!
(end sarcasm)
Of course the dhimmicrats are no better.
That fact, unfortunately, will get lost in this discussion. Like it always seems to.
It's certainly possible for a Black man to be a Republican. The problem is the
inherent bargain that goes along with it: you're expected to be disrespectful
of the majority of other Black people.
who are Black that have had the courage to speak well of the entire Black
community, instead of either showing gratuitous contempt or being indifferent..
I'd say Gen. Powell, S.O.S. Rice and (of late) Michael Steele. The rest seem
to be too afraid of losing their "I'm-different-than-them" standing.
When folks like Shannon Reeves are more representative of Black Repubs,
will they gain respect--not just from other Blacks, but from very Whites they
try and appeal to.
Define yourself not by political parties.
But, I'm say'n--the Republicans simply want to kick subordinated folks in the face, as well as crap all over the environment , etc., etc. These are savage mo-fos.
In the African American/black community there are more than enough sell-outs that are bought-and-paid-for the the savage corproate sector--and you will find this type cheering on Bill Cosby making fun of black folk that name their children African names. Cosby wants black folk to give their children respectable European names--like Tom, Dick, Bill, and Mary.
Yes, these issues and politics are fraught with social class, priviledge, disporortionate allocation of opprotunity, and gender.
The support for Obama has much to do with the man's background, his empathy, and his policies--that don't simply kick subordinate classes in the face in a blatant manner.
But like Reverend Wright said--Obama is a politician, and we have to be on his ass to make him do the right thing. Commonsense.
We are talk'n comparative evil here--most folks aren't total chumps. Always follow the money--to many that have 'escaped the hood' love to preach boot-strappism while the US plutocracy lowers the minimum wage, ships decent jobs overseas where they can super-exploit and pollute with impunity.
Come on! Give us a break. Most of us know what the hell time it is! It is slave revolt time for the folk that haven't been brainwashed into Booker T. boot-lick'en.
However, back in the day there were a portion of slaves that supprted slavery. Word.
These are the types we see today suck'n up to massa, the small priviledged sectors that control the wealth. Turning on people, like Dr. King, that strive for economic and social justice pays well. If you toe the rightwing Republican line you might just get a cushy think-tank position, or a radio show, or another gig where you can help brainwash the slower-thinking among us to support more tax breaks and wage slavery.
There have been Toms in North America since the first colonizing slavers arrived to plunder the place. The point is to be down with real human freedom--not contradictory ideology that is designed to take our eyes off the most important goals.
Don't you think that sounds a bit...off?
Perhaps D believes that the GOP offers the best opportunities for freedom and liberty. Perhaps he does not care. What proof do you have of him being a Tom?
I haven't always identified myself as a Republican; preferring to go by "neoconservative independent." That's changing, for my own personal reasons (which I'm not going into here).
Before you try to write me off as a "Tom," you might want to have a discussion with me first. There's a certain three letter word that you make yourself when you assume.
I respect your thoughts and that's pretty much where I'm heading in terms of politics. I consider myself now at 24 a moderate/conservative Independent. I'm starting to really understand the Democratic party and lean more right than left. But who knows I may forever stay in the middle.
CAB--sorry, but I believe that people from historically subordinated groups that take the side of the ruling elites with respect to war or policies that exploit and marginalize people are Toms. This crosses racial lines. Someone from a working class background that backs policies that disempower and cause deeper exploitation are Toms.
No, I am not calling D a Tom at all. To his credit, he sees through the 'freedom and liberty' shuck-and-jive--and, he is also very skeptical (or, equally skeptical) of the Democrat Party.
That is to his credit.
Without a full discussion of historical forms of exploitation and imperialism, one cannot discern just how Tom someone really is at any given point in time.
When Cosby attacked and made fun of black folk naming their kids African names he was Tomming, big time.
We all have the capacity to Tom from time-to-time---by dint of the fact that we don't research issues, and we have to ingratiate ourselves toward more powerful economic forces in order to merely survive.
Again, when you have human oppression and hierarchies of privilege you will have Toms.
I admit, I come from the Dr. King anti-war leftwing, populist sector of US politics, and most folks don't take the time to engage in enough philosophical and historical research to escape the US propaganda system--that encompasses 'education', the media, and even entertainment.
Modern wage-slavery is rendered invisible to millions of people by dint of the ruling class sponsored propaganda system. And, historically it takes leaders like Sojourner Truth, Emma Goldman, and Malcom, and Dr. King to help rescue the masses from culturally induced slumber and apathy.
Again, I DON"T put D into the catagory of Tom. First off, I don't know the man enough--and, secondly, I don't see in his comments in this thread that he is down with white supremacy and wage-slavery that is rife in the US A.
oh wait. you work for the government, dontcha? hmmm . . . that was one of FDR's socialist initiatives, to recognize the beneficial effect of government as an employer of many.
it's really strange that so many of the rabid right wingers i've met are either retired government employees or still thus employed. it makes no sense to suck of the teat of government while decrying that same government with a mouth full of milk.
Your analogy, however, is hilarious.
I get it now; you don't like me. That's okay. However, it must have been past your bedtime when I posted this yesterday:
"You want me to fall on the sword for the right wing and call them bad for throwing gays, blacks, and whoever they need to under the bus? Fine; bad right wing."
I've repeatedly said that the Republican Party has been suspect-hell, more than suspect-in dealing with minorities. I know that. It's not of my doing. It is what it is.
Which doesn't take away from the fact that you wrote what you quoted above in the open thread last night, or from the second part of that comment which to me was way more interesting and less rhetorical.
I just want to add a little context as one of the others involved in that discussion.
But if Democrats go too far on affirmative action or some other issue that unnerves White men, Black Republicans are barking louder than anyone.
Colin Powell called out his party for this. No other Black Republican has had the courage.
I'm black. I'm conservative. The two are not mutually exculsive. If people can't deal with that, that's on them.
Nothing about this discussion is helping to win the War on Terror, lower the price of gas, or fix the economy.
There are much more important things that we could be discussing besides the sins of conservatism and why black Republicans/conservatives don't do what other blacks think they should.
If everyone is as tired as the "politics of the past" as they claim to be, start with letting this go.
Or, hell, if you're close enough, I'm in DC Monday-Friday.
I am offended for D. C’mon all - we are better than this. What can we possibly expect to achieve by this statement? See . . . that is what I get for coming back to read when i said i would drop off for a while.
Blessings to you msmartin.
I thought you were gone, but since you're not let me help you. This conversation is a long standing conversation between me and D (and others) and it is about dishonesty.
I don't know what color you are and don't care. In fact, color means nothing me until it is used against me. I too wish for a perfect world were it doesn't matter, but such isn't the case. I have been moved to speak out for mine at times during this campaign - sorry you haven't or uncomfortable in others doing so.
Your party affiliation is also your choice and means nothing to me until you use color as the black conservative Republicans have in conjunction with promoting the Republican party platform which is not inclusive of African Americans sugar coat it is as you wish (you too D).
It is not my desire to go in to detail to inform you about a series of conversations that you apparently haven't been privy to because by your own admission, you haven't been around because you're so tired of the race thing, but D represents as black conservative but has never ever been offended by anything that is a clear affront to African Americans and only repeats the meme of the conservative right (with hardly an intelligble position might I add).
I wish race didn't matter, but it does, America won't let you forget it.
May I suggest, in the future that you get the background before you insert yourself into an ongoing conversation.
I read this post 6 times and this is why I stopped visiting JackandJillPolitics lately. Jack - you know I love you and I especially love your posts Rikyah but I just can't agree with this nonsense. I understand history. I understand all that but where are we going as a nation of people? When can we get past the obsession of seeing color first before we identify ourselves as Americans? Or when can we get past putting party affiliation before our country? D - If you lean toward the Republican Party because they represent "most" of your ideals -- good for you.
Will stop by in a few weeks when we get back on the track we were during the primary stage when we were more focused on getting Obama elected and having conversations on moving this country forward together as a people vs. being bogged down in race. I am so ready to turn the page. I fully understand it won't be easy but holding to this type of mindset is not a part of any solution . . . I am ready to set all that aside and move to the next level. Later All
This country will never truly move forward until this county heals the old wounds, which yes are centered on race. Race, as it has historically been known in the US, is a construct of legalistic and social making. Known as the "unthinking decision" race was codified into law and order during the infancy of the colonies.
The central conversation of race is so deeply rooted in our collective historical memory that it refuses excavation, but what I've seen in the classroom recently gives me faith that the future may hold an honest dialogue about these central issues.
However, politically: as long as one of our two parties hangs onto the legacy of the southern strategy and can ignore the actual concerns of blacks there can and will not be any movement. Perhaps as conservatism goes into bankruptcy in the coming years a new ideal will form which can free the Republican party from its tarnished past. But until then Black Republicans must ask themselves if 80% of the black community is just crazy in their distrust of said party?
The problem is that rather than thinking about what the party could be for blacks, the party (and far too many black Republicans) think the problem is with blacks. No thank you.
In the end the Republicans bought their racial problems to themselves. Don't expect black folks to come half way when the offending party won't move an inch.
Then why did the Republicans not want his birthday a national holiday?
Just give it up.
If not, seriously please correct me.
I would just say that we should approach our relationships and our goals with respect to both Jesus and Dr. King---as well as Gandi, John Brown, Walter Ruther, Mother Jones and others. Don't know all these names--do a google, educate yourself, expand your horizons.
We need to question these hierarchies--and if they cannot be rationally justified, then we should work to dismantle them and erect something better in their place.
Meritocracy is fine--but we need truely equal opprotunity to compete on a just playing field from the start.
To settle for less is, well, something that a Tom would want.
("Aunt Jemimah don't like Uncle Ben" Does anyone here remember where this line comes from?)
You can't make your voice heard by been excluded in the decision making. The democratic party will not solve the problem of black( but at least it give black the power to be heard and bring their concerns on the national scene.
It's 2008 and while the democratic party is pushing its first african american to the presidency of the USA(not Dominican republic or haiti, USA), the republican candidat is going to Memphis to apologize for not voting for MLK's birth. And this why black people unapologetically vote democrat.
"The Republican Party has lost a true champion in the passing of Jesse Helms, but it could be no more fitting that we begin the celebration of his life on Independence Day. His patriotic spirit and dedication to the tenets of our great Party will be remembered and idolized long after our mourning has ended, as will his contributions to the state of North Carolina, the United States Senate, and the many charitable causes he supported. We keep his family in our prayers and keep his conservative ideals with us always."
Part of that "spirit" and "dedication" is clear in one of Helms' many racist comments:
"The Negro cannot count forever on the kind of restraint that's thus far left him free to clog the streets, disrupt traffic, and interfere with other men's rights." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Helms
Or this little gem:
"Crime rates and irresponsibility among Negroes are a fact of life which must be faced." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Helms
That last one made in 1981.
What a great party for Black people!