▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ⟶
America’s celebrations of Martin Luther King Jr. typically focus on his civil rights activism: the nonviolent actions that led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
The last few years of King’s life, by contrast, are generally overlooked. When he was assassinated in 1968, King was in the midst of waging a radical campaign against economic inequality and poverty, while protesting vigorously against the Vietnam War.
This was a campaign whose intellectual roots were found in a younger King, who grew uneasy with the excesses of capitalism around him even as he focused on civil rights issues. In the summer of 1952, he wrote a letter detailing these concerns to Coretta Scott, whom he began dating earlier in the spring. In that letter, he concluded that “capitalism has outlived its usefulness”:
I imagine you already know that I am much more socialistic in my economic theory than capitalistic. And yet I am not so opposed to capitalism that I have failed to see its relative merits. It started out with a noble and high motive, viz, to block the trade monopolies of nobles, but like most human systems, it falls victim to the very thing it was revolting against. So today capitalism has outlived its usefulness. It has brought about a system that takes necessities from the masses to give luxuries to the classes.
Government officials tracked his growing radicalism, and feared it. “King is so hot these days that it looks like Marx coming to the White House,” complained President John F. Kennedy in 1963, as King was ramping up his nonviolence campaign in the South. He authorized his brother, Attorney General Bobby Kennedy, to wiretap King and his associates.
In 1966, King told staff at the Southern Christian Leadership Conference that “there must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism. Call it what you may, call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism, but there must be a better distribution of wealth within this country for all of God’s children.”
King was also increasingly disturbed by the war in Vietnam, and he would raise the issue privately with President Lyndon Johnson in their White House calls and meetings.
In April 1967, King gave a speech at Riverside Church in New York City where he called the U.S. government the “greatest purveyor violence in the world” and denounced napalm bombings and the propping up of a puppet government in South Vietnam.
The establishment responded bitterly to King’s speech. The New York Times editorial board blasted King for linking the war in Vietnam to the struggles of civil rights and poverty alleviation in the United States, saying it was “too facile a connection” and that he was doing a “disservice” to both causes. It concluded that there “are no simple answers to the war in Vietnam or to racial injustice in this country.” The Washington Post editorial board said King had “diminished his usefulness to his cause, his country and his people.” In all, 168 newspapers denounced him the next day.
President Johnson immediately terminated his relationship with King. “What is that goddamned nigger preacher doing to me?” Johnson reportedly remarked after the speech. “We gave him the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we gave him the Voting Rights Act of 1965, we gave him the War on Poverty. What more does he want?”
“Henceforth, King would be on the outside, in a picket line, shouting peace chants through the wrought-iron gates,” noted historian Harvard Sitkoff.
A Harris poll conducted after King’s Vietnam speech found that only 25 percent of even African Americans supported him in his antiwar turn — “only 9 percent of the public at large agreed with his objections to the war.”
Despite the intense backlash from elites and the public, King continued to soldier on. In 1967, he gave a Christmas Eve sermon to his congregation at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta in which he assailed not just American capitalism but the system of global markets that was failing to provide for the world’s poor.
“I started thinking about the fact that right here in our country we spend millions of dollars every day to store surplus food,” he preached. “And I said to myself: ‘I know where we can store that food free of charge — in the wrinkled stomachs of the millions of God’s children in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and even in our own nation, who go to bed hungry at night.’”
During his civil rights campaign, King had also been organizing workers; for example, he campaigned against the Oklahoma right-to-work referendum and warned that increased economic competition between whites and blacks would undermine civil rights — calling instead for a “Grand Alliance” between working-class whites and blacks.
With the Poor People’s Campaign, launched in 1968, King escalated this campaign, aimed at providing good jobs, housing, and a decent standard of living to all Americans. Decades before American protesters took to the streets of New York City and other locales to “occupy” space to protest inequality, King proposed a massive tent encampment in Washington, D.C., to demand action on poverty. Here’s an Associated Press article about the campaign:
He never saw it come to fruition. He was assassinated that year while organizing striking Memphis sanitation workers.
Southern Christian Leadership Conference president, Ralph Abernathy, and Coretta Scott King followed through with the plan, setting up tents and shacks on the Mall in Washington, D.C. Deemed “Resurrection City,” this encampment lasted a month before the Department of Interior forced it to close down.
King’s approval ratings are much higher decades after his death than they were during his life. By 1987, 76 percent of Americans held a favorable view of the activist leader. But many are taught a simplified version of his life, focusing on only one of the three dimensions that defined him. During the Vietnam speech that turned the establishment against him, King railed against the “the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism and militarism.”
Top photo: Martin Luther King Jr. is accompanied by famed pediatrician Benjamin Spock, Father Frederick Reed, and union leader Cleveland Robinson during an anti-Vietnam War demonstration in New York on March 16, 1967.
It was work of the FBI when 168 newspapers denounced him, it was smear campaign. and FBI didn’t change methods of work, today they are the same, just they target some new people. They also tried to destroy his marriage and to sabotage his private life: https://sites.google.com/site/cointelprodocs/dr-martin-luther-king-jr-case-study
A King among men.
Brandon T.
http://www.digitaltvdish.com/
America is the land of opportunity. You can’t sit around and cry for others to take care of you, to be “fair”, meaning give you life’s essentials. You have to get off your crybaby but and work. Every see Asians cry for someone to take care of them? They are a minority and they kick ass. Blacks had an entire continent, one of the richest of earth, and they are still in the stone age.
You gotta read Paul Street, man. He’s been writing about King’s analysis of the Triple Evils (of poverty, militarism, and racism) for years. Also, bookmark the BlackAgendaReport website (and “like” it on facebook)
I’m not a prejudice person but everyone seems to forget who was here first. The Indian. They were treated very bad & still r. Yea they have their own land now but really? They should have their own day to. I’m not sry for saying this. But at these days we owe Black Americans nothen. Us or them were not here when they were treated badly but White Americans r still paying for it. We aren’t being still paid back for what was done to the Indians….let it all go & the news doesn’t help. They say black & white. We all r humans. Should not b labled. But we still r. Why? If the news can say black or white, why can’t ppl on the street say it. If we do, were being called Prejudiced. NOT FAIR TO THE WHITE PPL. WE DONT HAVE A WHITE COLLEGE. BLACKS DO! I WONDER DO THE INDIANS HAVE THEIR OWN COLLEGE? SO LET IT GO!!!!!!!
Oh my, satire or ignorance?
The Founding Father’s blueprint for the American government would also meet most criticisms of MLK. The so-called “establish” simply doesn’t believe in limited government or self-government.
In a “constitutional democratic republic” all ideas are valid within constitutional boundaries including MLK’s ideas. The Founding Fathers never designed a “nanny state” led by J.Edgar Hoover, Kennedy, Johnson or any other leader.
Capitalism Undermines Human Dignity!
I support the Government supplement the basic human needs of the citizens: food, health care, education, water, electricity, not the Privatization to the Corporate individuals, which is considered to be socialistic, and I also stated that I believe in Free Enterprise which is a form of Capitalism.
The Government should operate in the best interest of the Citizens, not the Corporations.
The assembly line, automation, computer tech and robotics have eliminated the need for human labor, so now what are citizens/people to do to sustain themselves?
Voluntary workforce would be a humane solution, much like how people serve in the arm forces.
I feel all abled body and stabled mind government assisted / welfare recipient should be obligated to provide some service back into the community.
Working hard was the Christian work ethic value, “By the sweat of your brow you shall earn your keep”; instead of adhering to this concept the Welfare System has recipients and their children expecting something for doing nothing.
One of the biggest frauds put out in centuries was referring to work as an ethic, and it was put out by the same vile control freaks who’ve ruined the world.
Well, but it is so obvious that he was neutralised for that reason, they called him a communist leader of black america. The same could happen to Bernie Sanders if elected, big corporations don’t alow such ideology in the US. MLK did a lot for black equality and civil rights and it is a great thing. Harvey Milk was very similar to MLK in his ideology and ended up the same. Movie made about him is great, loving it. Malcom X, another fighter, similar fate.
A white Republican former general said similar things about a Military Industrial Complex…but, as usual, they murdered and blacklisted…the black guy.
a man with real courage and true vision…it pains me they have diluted him and his message in schools and the media…many will never know what a true revolutionary he was
A King among men
Bingo.
Aryeh Neier, former director of the ACLU, founder of Human Rights Watch, agitated against the Universal Deceleration of Human Rights because…
“The concept of economic and social rights is profoundly undemocratic… Authoritarian power is probably a prerequisite for giving meaning to economic and social rights.”
“Individual Rights” supervenes the commonweal. The project of Liberalism, classical or otherwise, is to invert the historical condition. The dismemberment of the social from the civil. “Progress” in liberal society, without a countervailing socialism, is a protection racket. Its vanguard, the Token.
lol, now that’s a spellcheck
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
A lot of people point to the 1950s 1960s as the era of massive CIA conspiracy, government-sanctioned assassination of foreign and domestic political leaders, and there’s good evidence supporting that claim – but don’t forget, it was mostly a game of failure.
After all, many of the proponents of secret unilateral government power independent of democratic elections traced their ideology right back to the Nazi fascist system – and consider all the Nazis given safe haven in the US under Operation Paperclip, the 1950’s-era pardons given to many Nazi industrialists who were sitting in prisons controlled by the likes of JJ McCloy, the role of the Dulles Brothers and their friends, Prescott Bush and his deals with the Nazis in Silesia, Poland, Standard Oil’s critical airplane fuel support for the German invasion of Poland, as well as fueling the U-Boat fleet, a practice Standard didn’t stop until Congress passed the Trading With The Enemy Act in 1942 – yes, there were many members of the bureaucracy who wanted to crush American democracy in and replace it with some kind of secret unilateral power system, like the ones Hitler and Stalin promoted – but they failed, by and large.
However, along the way many crimes were committed by these power-hungry government bureaucrats – assassinations of American political figures, disruption of the lives of ordinary American citizens who opposed their agenda, and many crimes committed in other countries as well. The national ‘state security organs’ were the worst culprits, just as in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany – Hitler’s Gestapo and SS, Stalin’s NKVD, are worth studying, since their tactics are quite similar to those of the FBI and CIA in the 1950s and 1960s. The result was massive public blowback in the 1970s, with the Church Committee hearings exposing much of their dirty secrets.
However, did much change after that? In the 1980s, the CIA were fingered as a major drug dealer, helping to bring crack into American black ghettos in coordination with Nicaraguan contras, the same kind of Cold War ideology that could also be used to justify the assassination of MLK and anyone else who threatened the power of the appartchiks and functionaries who make up the bulk of the American security state bureaucracy. This same outfit’s leadership played a central role in cooking up lies about WMDs that Bush used to justify the invasion of Iraq, a Hitler-like move that did much to create the current bloody situation in the Middle East. The FBI’s leadership, similarly, failed to act on many warnings about impending 9/11 terrorist attacks, and then deliberately screwed up the anthrax letter investigation (probably Cheney was behind the anthrax attacks, all things considered).
In MLK’s case, racism is now considered socially wrong, so the corporate media can discuss it – but discussing how plutocracy has displaced democracy as the dominant political system in the USA is not OK for the corporate media, nor is discussing idiotic two-faced American foreign policy (such as supporting the anti-democratic terrorism-sponsoring (but arms-buying!) regime of Saudi Arabia. So, for the corporate media, which operates much like the Brezhnev-era Soviet media system, only racism can be discussed.
LBJ had King killed. One lone gunman (JFK), maybe. Two lone gunmen (MLK), ummm. Three lone gunmen (RFK), yeah no.
And also there’s the 1999 civil trial in which a jury found that the US Gov’t conspired to assassinate King. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/01/martin-king-assassinated-us-govt-king-family-civil-trial-verdict-demands-arrests-todays-ongoing-complicit-criminal-liars.html
For those not foolish enough to follow this link, know that much will be made there of a contrast with the O. J. Simpson trial. Don’t expect me to be able to explain why that would be relevant.
Good article! I recommend everybody interested in the 60s read Perlstein’s book Nixonland….one of Perlstein’s strengths as an historian is that he follows the archive more than the revision, meaning that we see what both media and citizenry were really saying at the time, and the reader gets to see that right up to and even shortly after his assassination, MLK was treated by the American press (and much of the public) as a dubious figure, with newspapermen happy to suggest he had brought on his own death.
On this subject, one should consider this period in the 60’s as a free for all for the CIA, with its maddening fear of communism and its MKULTRA project. At 62, I have felt for years something so wrong with the way most things have worked out in the world. There are many ways to neutralize a growing restless mood in the population. So many tools in the tool bag. As Bob Dylan sang at the Freedom March in 63’ – “Only a Pawn in Their Game”. I can’t help but feel a conspiracy here (sorry) as Sara Lowdes (his future wife) and D.A Pennebaker (both of Luce’s Life Magazine Empire with close ties to Allan Dulles) were involved in Dylan’s and JKF’s life. After 1966; no more JFK, no more Dylan. After 1968, no more MLK, no more RFK. Dylan’s words of Sara as a “mystical wife” and “I’d taken the cure” has me thinking. I guess I just had to get this off my chest.
Dylan at the Freedom March – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY2lQV3ADfc
Check out the lyrics.
Well, also overlooked and well-so as well, is his opposition to abortion, which also stemmed from the poverty and social justice aspects of his positions.
But it’s quite politically incorrect to be pointing this out since it’s a hot-button issue with the left, especially. They’d like to continue to ignore that as much as others wish to ignore the points made in this article. Sure it’s somewhat off-topic to this discussion, but I add it as an example of certain things being overlooked in favor of others.
“Sure it’s somewhat off-topic to this discussion.”
Yeah…and that’s why Planned Parenthood gave him the Margaret Sanger Award.
Your comment is typical of the filth and lies from the religious right.
Excellent point, and it does show exactly why advocacy journalism is controversial.
I’m not sure I am satisfied with the way you present the Kennedys here, they were awaken to the facts of equality; one has to remember Hoover was a maniac, deadly afraid of anything conmmunist or pinko. He was a paranoid. the kennedys were fighting him on other levels, corruption, mafia, Unions etc…
JFK ‘had’ to authorize wiretaps or risk suspicion he was sympathetic to what was being propagandized as a great threat America.
This was such an anti-communist period. Kennedy had enough enemies.
I think he would have had King be a little more conservative with his presentation of his socialist ideals. Thus the Whitehouse remark.
JFK saw the ideals of MLK as being relevant to the time, and wished for changes.
He was a politician and he understood diplomacy.
I dislike how you attach phrases together with distinction. The shallow mind can’t tell the difference, or were not alive during that period of time.
JFK and RFK were some of the good guys in this racial and rights fight.
You also have’nt mentioned that a greater of number of blacks were being called up than whites during the Vietnam war. And greater number were dying proportunally than other ethnicities.
Query no mention of Dulles at all.
“JFK ‘had’ to authorize wiretaps or risk suspicion he was sympathetic to what was being propagandized as a great threat America.”
Aw gee everybody quit picking on JFK and RFK already, by pointing out inconvenient facts that spoil their legend.
An eloquent soul, top-knot orator … and his views on economics and social justice were exquisite.
As an icon, what you symbolize is more important than what you actually believed. We ignore the views of Thomas Jefferson on government and the views of Martin Luther King on social justice because they are no longer relevant in today’s world. They have undergone successful re-branding, and are now useful ambassadors of war-for-profit.
Donald Trump dedicates ‘record’ crowd size to Martin Luther King
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-appears-dedicate-large-164613242.html;_ylt=A0LEVv6oWp1W3h8AdyEnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByMjB0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw–
White washing legacys and re-writing them to one’s advantage is as old as the hills. Obama did it with MLK many times.
Mr. Jilani
Martin Luther King was an expert on civil rights. He exposed and rejected the racist policies of America. He died for the remarkably rapid changes that have been realized in American society since the civil rights movement began in the 1950s. The peaceful civil rights movement culminated in the election of an African American President in 2008. That’s why Mr. King is great – not because he knew very little about military and economic matters.
Martin Luther King had opinions on capitalism and the military just like the rest of us, but he was no expert in either field. For example, Mr. King was assassinated before China began their march toward the second largest economy in the world. China did this by embracing capitalist policies and rejecting the socialist programs of Mao (which starved to death possibly millions of people between 1958 and 1962). Hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of poverty in China and India because of capitalism.
To what end, really? “Progress”?
Craig, I think your arguments about capitalism are a bit simplistic. Surely neither Dr. King nor Pope Francis, both critics of the US overinfatuation with capitalism would argue for its elimination, bur rather for its regulation or modification to cub its many known excesses. For instance, in the US we have seen corporate charter laws modified over the years to eliminate a requirement for service to the community. These changes, bought and paid for by the US Chamber of Commerce and implemented by greedy, shortsighted politicians at the state level, disconnect corporations from the communities that often offer great financial incentives for them to site jobs there, and from their employees from whose labor they derive their profits. In a reasonable form of capitalism, corporations would be charged with service to their communities, to their employees, and to the environment they now so regularly despoil.
If you carefully considered what is now happening in the stock markets world wide, you might also reconsider your statement about millions being lifted out of poverty in China because of capitalism. China is an example of a fake market economy, controlled by rigid central planning. It appears to have the chief drawbacks of both the capitalist and communist systems. Certainly, the jury is out on whether it is sustainable.
“……..Surely neither Dr. King nor Pope Francis, both critics of the US overinfatuation with capitalism would argue for its elimination, bur rather for its regulation or modification to cub its many known excesses……”
We have seen that in action for a long time – especially in Europe. It’s the capitalist policies that pay for the socialist ones. Capitalism provides the incentives. Regulations are obviously necessary, but there is a fine line for sustaining growth.
“……..If you carefully considered what is now happening in the stock markets world wide, you might also reconsider your statement about millions being lifted out of poverty in China because of capitalism…..”
Well, it doesn’t change that fact at all – and it is certainly far more sustainable than the “socialist” policies introduced by Mao. I see a long and prosperous rise for the Chinese economy with ups and downs. The economic rise of the third world was inevitable and welcome.
Thanks.
>”The peaceful civil rights movement culminated in the election of an African American President in 2008.”
That’s about what I thought too, Craig!
*sadly, compared to MLK, he’s just another cracker w/ blackface…whiter than joe biden (if such a thing is possible.).
Just about every person of African decent pales when compared to the accomplishments of MLK – so it is somewhat ridiculous to compare the accomplishments of Obama with MLK. Obama was a beneficiary of MLK. It’s also really ridiculous to refer to Obama as a cracker with blackface. He is the President to ALL people – white, brown, black, yellow and green (the Martian). He made some serious, but subtle changes in US foreign policy. You cannot turn a freighter on a dime.
Thanks.
Right, and Elvis Presley’s career culminated in a years long run in Las Vegas performing a parody of himself. But you must think, “That’s why ‘Mr. Presley’ was great!”
Presley was great. He was a ground breaking successful performer. His social commentary was certainly on par with MLK. After all, he sang “In the Ghetto”. How cool was that?
Love that leap between MLK and Mao in the last paragraph, as if the two figures had something in common with one another. But if you look at the creepy rightist websites CS probably trusts, you see the whole MLK Was Really A Communist thing has a tiny little life there.
Now I ask you, where were you patriots when J. Edgar Hoover needed you? He really could have done something with some solid evidence of MLK’s communism. And instead Hoover is regarded as a paranoid racist who was totally unjustified. It just isn’t fair.
“……..Love that leap between MLK and Mao in the last paragraph, as if the two figures had something in common with one another……”
They had nothing in common. MLK brought justice while Mao was a fucking murderer. Simple.
“…….Now I ask you, where were you patriots when J. Edgar Hoover needed you? He really could have done something with some solid evidence of MLK’s communism. And instead Hoover is regarded as a paranoid racist who was totally unjustified. It just isn’t fair…..”
Agreed, but Dad was just a little over the top.
‘Martin Luther King had opinions on capitalism and the military just like the rest of us, but he was no expert in either field.’
BUT, according to yourself, you are an expert in capitalism.
Uniquely so.
There’s no basis for saying MLK was a visionary about certain aspects of politics and not others. My opinion is that he was a visionary generally. Now, let’s look at your expertise. You claim China is capitalist. Would you say China is more capitalist than, say, Venezuela or Nicaragua, and on what specific basis?
It’s easy to cherry pick. China is not the only country in the world. We could look at, say, Russia, whose GDP plummeted after the 80s, and it only started to recover in 1999. We could look at Latin America, where countries had basically no growth from 1980 to around 2004, while taking orders from the IMF, but started to do well once neoliberalism was rejected. We could look at how well capitalism has worked for Haiti and so forth.
Lyndon Johnson had Martin Luther King killed, just like he murdered JFK. http://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Killed-Kennedy-Against/dp/1629144894/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=8-2&qid=1416339107
Total bullshit – Johnson is a convenient scapegoat. This is an ongoing attempt to deflect attention from the shadow government operatives whose sole purpose is to prevent any meaningful change our capitalist system and the way they earn their living – by fomenting distrust and confusion among the masses, and creating false premises for profit-making war, war, war…
Humor me. Why would LBJ have MLK killed in spring 1968, when LBJ wasn’t even going to run for president again? (well, also, how did MLK getting killed help the Democratic Party govern, or win a presidential election? Which they didn’t, of course).
I know, I’m going on about those tedious “motive” questions again.
War bucks. We got hooked on the unconscionable profitability of war in 1914, and it’s been a driving force ever since.
https://archive.org/stream/WarIsARacket/WarIsARacket_djvu.txt
King’s Vietnam opposition, and in particular the planned occupation of DC, threatened the MI-complex’s biggest honey pot in history, at least until the 15-year perpetual war that they’re enjoying today.
LBJ and Lady Bird were straight up war profiteers. http://www.counterpunch.org/2005/07/14/the-making-of-halliburton/
Oh, I can see plenty of government bureaucrats flying into Hitlerian rage after listening to MLK’s speech in Riverside, particularly this bit:
“For nine years following 1945 we denied the people of Vietnam the right of independence. For nine years we vigorously supported the French in their abortive effort to recolonize Vietnam. Before the end of the war we were meeting eighty percent of the French war costs. Even before the French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu, they began to despair of their reckless action, but we did not. We encouraged them with our huge financial and military supplies to continue the war even after they had lost the will. Soon we would be paying almost the full costs of this tragic attempt at recolonization.
After the French were defeated, it looked as if independence and land reform would come again through the Geneva Agreement. But instead there came the United States, determined that Ho should not unify the temporarily divided nation, and the peasants watched again as we supported one of the most vicious modern dictators, our chosen man, Premier Diem. The peasants watched and cringed as Diem ruthlessly rooted out all opposition, supported their extortionist landlords, and refused even to discuss reunification with the North. The peasants watched as all this was presided over by United States’ influence and then by increasing numbers of United States troops who came to help quell the insurgency that Diem’s methods had aroused. When Diem was overthrown they may have been happy, but the long line of military dictators seemed to offer no real change, especially in terms of their need for land and peace.”
That would be enough for any of Hitler’s or Stalin’s apparatchiks to sign the death warrant, wouldn’t it? They wouldn’t even bother asking the Great Leader for permission, would they?
That’s a bit away from saying LBJ himself ordered it, which makes it more plausible. There’s no upside for LBJ having MLK killed in 1968. At least if you have LBJ as JFK’s assassination mastermind, he ends up with the presidency there.
The speech at Riverside is beautiful, timeless – I wish I had thought to look it up before, and cite it in some of the stupid wars we’ve been in. But no doubt there will be more chances to refer to it…
The NYT editorial link doesn’t work
Hello,
im so happy that this day Marther luther king gave us this day because of his powerful speech
The power of his speech yet may prevail, but people of color are in white America’s gunsights. Fear the established government as we know it.
At the moment it is still fashionable in some circles in the US to decry racism, and besides, many people of color have the vote. But that too may change, just as the citizenry of our land as a whole has come to regard endless war and the increasing concentration of wealth in the hands of the few as, if not good things, then things not to be concerned about. The main question in my mind concerns how quickly the last vestiges of King’s teachings will be lost, as the USA becomes the literal reenactment of Lord of the Flies.
January 17, 2016 | By Shahid Buttar
Ike Had a Dream, and it Unfortunately Came True
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/01/ike-had-dream-and-it-unfortunately-came-true
“Today marks the 55th anniversary of a world-historical speech by the last victorious military commander to occupy the White House: President Dwight D. “Ike” Eisenhower. His last speech while in office holds crucial implications for the U.S. today, as well as the history we celebrate tomorrow, on Martin Luther King Day.
Ike served in World War II as the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe before becoming President. He helped encourage an industrial mobilization that enabled the U.S. to liberate Europe and defend democracy from the global threat of fascism, but he expressed concerns about its future consequences.
In his departing address to the American people before leaving the White House, President Eisenhower described the necessity of creating a defense industry intertwined with secret government agencies, while predicting—in no uncertain terms—that they would together come to present a threat to democracy in America. ”
…
“Historically, the most significant congressional investigation was in the 1970s, when ad hoc committees convened in the Senate under Senator Frank Church (D-ID) and the House under Rep. Otis Pike (D-NY) revealed what the U.S. Senate in 1976 described as “a sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at preventing the legitimate exercise the First Amendment rights of speech and association….”
What Congress had uncovered was known within U.S. intelligence agencies as the Counter-Intelligence Programs, or COINTELPRO. It was a well-kept secret until a group of antiwar activists in Philadelphia literally broke into an FBI office to take and copy files that had long remained secret.
The most prolific target of unconstitutional surveillance during this era was a figure whose memory we celebrate with a national holiday tomorrow, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. His example, involving not only surveillance, but also a character assassination campaign and a coordinated attempt to drive him to suicide, should serve as a stark reminder to anyone today who thinks that because they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to worry about.
And Dr. King is not alone: other examples abound.
The Snowden revelations should have sparked the same outrage that drove the Church and Pike committees to investigate and reveal COINTELPRO. They still could, if Congress finally does its job and investigates the issues that Snowden and other whistleblowers have raised.
In 2016, a decade and a half since the beginning of the mass surveillance regime, a robust congressional investigation still has yet to happen.
We have a great deal to learn from President Eisenhower’s prescient warning. His final speech as President appears increasingly poignant, particularly as we celebrate the memory of an international hero who was targeted by parts of the military-industrial complex that Ike helped create and grew to fear.”
COINTELPRO 2.0, also by Shahid Buttar
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shahid-buttar/cointelpro-20_b_664943.html
Like so many others on this site, you have no problem walking right up to the line, but fear crossing the line, to seriously question King’s assassination.
Government conspiracies built this nation, in more ways than good…
well, have no fear, kamper, the heavy-lifting has already been done, in case you have not heard, there was a real trial with powdered wigs and everthing:
Coretta Scott King: “We have done what we can to reveal the truth, and we now urge you as members of the media, and we call upon elected officials, and other persons of influence to do what they can to share the revelation of this case to the widest possible audience.” – King Family Press Conference, Dec. 9, 1999.
Dr. Martin Luther King’s family and personal friend/attorney, William F. Pepper, won a civil trial that found US government agencies guilty of assassination/wrongful death. The 1999 trial, King Family versus Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators, is the only trial ever conducted on the assassination of Dr. King. The King Center fully documents the case, with full trial transcript.”
*pssst* not to spoil the ending for you, but it was Colonel Military Industrial Komplex, in broad daylight, with the patsy…
as an aside to all the SJW’s in the studio audience today, how do you manage to overcome your gross hypocrisy in decrying the historical racism, robber-baronism, sexism, etc-ism, of the woodrow wilson’s, carnegie’s, etc of the world, who ‘trigger’ such, um, hatred (!) that you must scrub their names from his story, all stalin-esque ? ? ?
firstly, um, it was carnegie’s money (whatever meta-principles you apply retroactively, in absentia) so you don’t like the name of HIS school, library, museum, theater, whatever, DON’T FUCKING GO THERE…
secondly, name me ONE HUMAN BEAN on this planet who is NOT flawed… (other than pwecious SJWs, of course!) by the IDIOTIC criteria of SJW’s, NO ONE IN HIS STORY would be eligible to have a fucking bus kiosk named after them…
no, whatever great leaders we have had, have been flawed; you know why i KNOW that for an absolute certainty ?
BECAUSE they are human beans !
just because we name a school or a park or a library after someone (for whatever reasons), DOES NOT mean that person was a paragon, or an object of abject servility and admiration no matter what…
just because a literal handful of butt-hurt, holier-than-thou kreepazoids bitch about something, that is true, doesn’t make them right…
AND, for bonus points, HOW MANY SJW seminal figures/heroes do you think could be found to have feet of clay and -according to the non-reasoning-reasoning of SJW’s- should never be accorded a second of respect ? ? ?
um, how about ALL OF THEM…
for example, take MLK…
is there ONE (theoretically principled) SJW who will go on foaming-at-the-mouth rants about the horror of MLK’s name being plastered on statues, roads, schools, etc; even a fucking federal holiday honoring him ! ! !
for a known rape-culture philanderer ! ! !
how can you do anything but erase him from his story ? ? ?
yeah, another flawed human who was a sum total much greater than his worst moments…
just like you, just like me…