#the mlk never quoted

[qupritsuvwix]

Dr. King was murdered with a DEER RIFLE!

[palatinewolfsblog]

"Every crisis has both it's dangers and it's opportunities.

Each can spell either salvation or doom." Martin Luther King.

The Age of Incertainty (for my Dear Friend @rubenesque-dollyd-93 )

[constantvariations]

I remember someone saying "there's no such thing as a good racism allegory" and it's been bouncing around in my head for a while. I'm someone who typically thinks anything can work if given the right circumstances, but then I really started thinking about it and I believe they're right

Because if you want to talk about racism, you should just talk about racism

(This is unpolished and ramble-y, so strap yourselves in)

Racism is deeply ingrained into our society, no matter where you live. Imperialism and colonialism has ensured that no corner of Earth has been left untouched. Choices from hundreds of years ago are still being felt today. There's practically no end to the discussion of its effects on the world and its people

So, why should anyone feel the need to dress it up in cat ears?

I've consumed a lot of media where writers have consciously echoed in part some aspect of racism in their fantasy story: Bright 2017, Dragon Age, RWBY, the MCU, Harry Potter, Detroit: Become Human, etc. The biggest thing they have in common is that the narrative is told to side with the victims, but it somehow always ends up against them

It always sides with the status quo

It's confusing, maddening even, because the narrative oft goes out of its way to show how horrible the system is and how these folk don't deserve their treatment, so why are we going back to normal as if it's a good thing? Why are the people actively working to improve the system decried as annoying at best and monstrous at worst?

Then you look at the people who write these storylines. The beliefs they hold, the people they vote for, which charities and organizations they give to, and it all makes sense. Centrists (at best) trying to look progressive are the ones who need to dress racism up in cat ears and rainbow freckles. They set aside the long, brutal histories and crushing systemic realities to play pretend that racism is Not That Bad and is only done by Those Bad Individuals

That's why Velvet's ears are tugged instead of culled. That's why the Mantle drunkards say mean things to Blake instead of attempting to assault her. That's why everything surrounding the SDC's labor practices is so vague as to be useless while the biggest evidence of their malice is hand-waved away by a writer who says the victim "had it coming" as if someone can deserve being branded by being too much of a brat

These stories aren't meant to make the audience question why our society works off the bloodied backs of the exploited or demands we take good, hard looks at ourselves and how we've been duped into believing so much garbage about entire swathes of people. They're meant to satisfy the people who only feel bad that these things are happening because they (white folk) look like the bad guys. It's a self-congratulatory wank about how "I'm not like THOSE guys, therefore I'm a good person!"

And then there's the characters meant to convey this story in the first place: always inoffensive, mostly aimless, "not like the other girl" types that pander to that delicate palate. Blake - a conventionally attractive, pale skinned girl in fashionable clothes - used to be passionate about equality but only in the right way, and demonizes anyone who does not conform to this mindset despite having no reasoning to back it up while never once demanding better of the privileged people around her even when they do racially insensitive things

The biggest downfall of these racial allegories, be they about cat girls or orcs or elves or robots, is that they do something that marginalized folk have been forced to endure since the dawn of time: literal dehumanization. There are tangible differences between humans and whatever the allegory is, which undermines the very fundamental fact that black/asian/queer/neurodivergent/disabled/whatever folk are unapologetically, undeniably, exceedingly human. By dressing up their plights in cat ears or spottled blue skin, you're creating theater not for the people who actually live through these struggles as a means of connecting with them and providing them a safe outlet for their feelings, but giving the people who benefit from passively allowing the system to enforce said struggles a pat on the head for not being the grand wizard

I don't really know where I'm going or how to end this, so I'll just sign off with if you're going to talk about racism, just talk about racism

[thekimspoblog]

I keep thinking about something my Crim-Law professor told me. "That the rate of victimization for sexual assault for women is roughly 1/4-1/5", and that he "wasn't optimistic any amount of legislation could change this number. Not that there aren't ANY ways to lower the rate, but legislation is the bare minimum compared to the social change which is actually necessary to reduce these rates."

The fact that we have RAPISTS making decisions about the legality of women's healthcare isn't even confined to being a legal issue. We are sending a message about who is worthy of respect, and what kind of behavior is condoned, and those messages in themselves affect the level of violence women are subjected to. Not to mention allowing women to be killed through medical malpractice is a suffrage issue. Dead men cast no votes and the republicans like it that way. The more women die, the less our voices will be heard moving forward.

This is what I keep coming back to. Of course I want McWexler to be happy. If they got out early on good behavior, and they found a cute 1 story house in Colorado, and they found a power dynamic between them that worked for them, that would be just fuckin adorable. Of course I want them to be happy and (and this is the important part) curb the impulse to lash out at the system in petty ways that tend to backfire. But nowhere is safe. The noose is tightening around every woman's neck right now. At bare minimum, Kim needs to confront the attacks on Roe for her own self-preservation because this affects everyone's healthcare. But also... yeah I guess I am crazy; I construed that scene from 6x13 as implying Kim gives a shit about the safety of other women. Yes, the duo have every reason in the world to want to lie low right now, but lying low is no guarantee of safety. In the long term, fighting for justice is always the safest bet. Otherwise, tyranny is going to continue to grow out of control, and eventually you're going to run out of hiding places, or run out of resources, whichever happens first.

[queeranarchism]

Everyone on this website is pretending to be passionate allies against injustice until they disagree with me on one minor and highly specific sub-issue or refuse to participate in my cancellation campaign, which shows all their other work was never genuine and they were always shallow traitors so now I have no choice but to become bitter and isolated and quote MLK about white moderates.

[alwaysbewoke]

wake me up when white people starting quoting THIS FROM MLK

ain't never gonna wake up hahaha

[liquidorcard]

Okay, part two. Let's go girls, gays and theys, Papa Polarity ain't saved yet.

[Part 1] [Part3]

Lily Commits Elder Gay Mutant Abuse, feat. "Eldritch Lily" (Part 2)

Everything gets worse . . .

4:13: Lily mischaracterizes Charles Xavier, throws up a Martin Luthor King quote she either doesn't understand or didn't read carefully enough, going full whyte. (Never go full whyte.)

How much do I need to dignify this by explaining why this is fucking asinine? Charles is a pacifist for the most part. A recognized and respected form of activism and protest. Like, the least charitable interpretation of what Lily's trying to say here is that figures like Gahndi, Abbie Hoffman, and dear old MLK himself are posers complicit in the oppression two of them lost their fucking life to.

That quote is referring to white people passively complicit in racism that just want black people to shut the fuck up Lily-- not passive forms of activism.

You know, it's one thing to be profoundly fucking wrong about cartoons, it's an entirely different beast when you're profoundly wrong about shit like this. Absolutely fucking ghoulish.

It feels weird pivoting back to the costumed vigilantes with funky genes, but we gotta keep going. Ironically for how much Lily is focusing on the movies here-- one of my issues with the way Charles is portrayed is he keeps casually threatening people/doing shady shit and getting away with it. Makes you question why it's framed as okay when he does it and not when it's Erik. Charles isn't a saint, he shouldn't be portrayed as one, and there's a lot of thematic dissonance when the films feel the need to lampshade the shit he gets up to less he lose the moral high ground.

4:50: OH HERE WE GO.

5:00: Lily goes on a long rant about the "activists who GO TOO FAR" trope in media.

I technically agree with her, but I can tell by the examples she's giving that she's parroting things Hbomberguy said in his RWBY video, just in a less charitable tone. So, really I agree with Hbomberguy.

She's not wrong that the BoM and Magneto sometimes wanders into this territory (I mean, they were originally 'The Brotherhood of Evil Mutant' and all that) unfortunately, but she hasn't supported that position at all. I have to assume she's heard this brought up somewhere else, this isn't exactly a unique take by any means. I doubt she's actually familiar enough with the content to create an original cohesive argument.

Lily doesn't like moral ambiguity in her media. That would be fine if she wasn't this butthurt that other people feel very differently.

6:05: "And yes, you knew we were getting to it! [ . . .] Almost all of Legend of Korras main villians start at a good through line. But then some twist comes up that makes everything they said before completely pointless."

THESE TWO, "START AT A GOOD THROUGH LINE!?"

LILLLLLLLLYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

6:15: "Season one's Amon is a socialist activist who cares about the oppression of non-benders by benders-- until it turns out that he doesn't."

I know this is a popular interpretation of the equalitists, especially given that their name is 'the equalists,' but actually the show never gives us enough information about the sociopolitical dynamics of benders and non-benders to say for sure. I'm not going to get into it here, if you want my full breakdown and analysis on the social politics of Avatar, let me know. In summary, it's tempting to assume benders would be the dominant class as they have literal powers, but that's not really how systemic power works. There's conflicting inference on what the dynamics are, and it may be different depending on the nation. The equalists are schrodinger's activists. They could be the Black Panthers, they could be the Proud Boys. That is not me making a false equivalency between those two groups, it's just never established if their perceived systemic persecution is real or imagined.

This isn't really a criticism of Lily. That it is so ambiguous is a flaw in the show. The interpretation Amon is supposed to be a socialist is as valid as any. Well. . . It's an extremely reductive interpretation of a socialist, and I know Lily doesn't know what a socialist actually is, but I'm trying to be charitable when possible here.

I do LIKE Korra myself, to be clear. But, yeah. There's problems.

6:31: "Season four's Kuvira wants to stitch the Earth Kingdom back together but doesn't want to restore an oppressive monarchy like everyone else does. And then declares that she is the dictator of the Earth Kingdom."

Yeah, that is just a thing that has happened in history, Lily. When there's a power vacuum left by a sudden or violent upheaval of a tyrant, unfortunately often another tyrant at least attempts to take their place. This is one of the reasons why former colonies struggle to cultivate stability-- societies and communities can get fucked in the ass by this kind of shit. This isn't a pro-monarchy message Lily-- consider maybe trying to learn things now and again.

This is why people call you a fake leftist Lily. Doing (relatively) minor gestures of good will like handing out food for a short period then pulling the rug out from under the people once they're complicit is right out of the facist playbook. You are virtually doing the exact thing you accused Rebecca Sugar of, but for real.

You're being outfoxed by a kid's show again.

6:44: "Season two's Unalaq [you get the idea.]"

Lily is pro gentrification until you involve demon kites I guess. I'm confused why she thinks he ever had any good intentions, it's telegraphed immediately he's a bad dude. He's also by far the worst villain-- as in, the worst written.

7:10: "All of them go 'the status quo is bad therefore commence genocide' like they got their political theory from fucking Vaush."

By your line of thinking so did Firelord Sozin:

"I had my own vision for a brighter future . . ."

I don't like Vaush either, but-- this isn't even the pot calling the kettle black. This is the blackened grime on the pot calling the kettle black.

GOD THIS VIDEO IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT MAGNETO. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT KORRA FOR ALMOST THIS WHOLE POST.

7:19: "The entire show you're watching Korra become a stooge for the status quo every single time. 'The problem isn't that the system is bad, it's that the wrong people are in charge.' And then they inevitably change the status like bringing democracy to the Earth Kingdom and you're left wondering-- wait, why wasn't the other person doing this!?"

I did not edit those two statements together. That is, in fact, Lily pointing out why her own arguments are stupid in the very next breath. Thanks for saving me the effort, I guess.

7:45: "Why weren't the characters you set up to do these things . . . Doing the things?!"

Because they weren't set up to do these things Lily. They're the antagonists. They ideologically were designed to be foils for Korra to overcome.

Korra's political messages aren't even that deep, and yet you're this incapable from telling even obvious totalitarian right-wing ideology and mild liberalism apart.

8:10: "It's so nakedly obvious how protective of the status quo these stories are."

This is, in a very abstract way, a valid criticism of Korra. This is a common problem in a lot of media, and Korra is far from the worst offender. I think it does breach past this to some extent, just not as much as I would have personally liked with all its seasons.

But make no mistake this is Lily again, taking something Lily has seen someone else say and putting that opinion through a blender.

Let's not beat around the bush here, Lily just wanted to bitch about Korra again. It's almost like she thinks if she repeats her idiotic media analysis enough, maybe THIS time people will realize how brilliant she is.

8:27: "A victim of abuse, torture or r@pe trying to kill her [only 'her,' huh?] abuser in vengeance is right to do so."

Okay, that's enough of this for now. Part 3 coming soon.

[girlactionfigure]

“You know,” Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. intoned from a podium in Memphis April 3rd, 1968, the night before he was killed, “whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula of doing it. What was that? He kept the slaves fighting among themselves. But whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh’s court, and he cannot hold the slaves in slavery. When the slaves get together, that’s the beginning of getting out of slavery. Now let us maintain unity.”

I’ve always wondered why MLK employed a biblical oratory that fateful night, a story that is Jewish and over 3000 years old. I’m sure there are wonderful quotes of black historical figures he could have used. Why use the Jewish story?

Our slavery in Egypt 3,336 years ago was the first time in recorded history that a nation enslaved another nation. Never before were an entire people slaves. We proved to the world that a nation can be enslaved and freed in a single generation. Since then, nations who have enslaved have looked at our story for inspiration and hope. We did it and so can they.

This year, when we sit around the Seder table and recall our people’s struggle for freedom it’s just as real and apparent as it was then.

Today, the fallacies that divide us are dissipating and there are so many more reasons to be united. In the words of MLK, let us maintain unity.

Rabbi Yisroel Bernath

[invested-in-your-future]

What do you think the mistakes with White Fang story were?

The biggest mistake was not having that plotline at all beyond lipservice.

I think the "no no, any sort of actual resistance instantly makes you bad guys" is such a flawed and stupid position for a show to take.

The show's failure is highlighting WF motivations and WHY would anyone feasibly go down that route - HOW do Mistral, Atlas, etc treat Faunus or even Vale.

JFK once said - "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

If he existed in MilesWBY the quote would be "Only peaceful revolution is possible and anything else is evil"

We never see WHAT the Faunus have to deal with or how the society changed, (and if it did) since the Great War. We never see HOW Blake becomes the person she is (and if anything, have her regress by making her a runaway princess of tropic paradise)

The result is honestly quite racist - the show silently suggests (through the combined force of Blake's awful monologue and how Ilia's storyline ends) that the problem with The Faunus is their own "destructive" tendencies and their "unwillingness" to compromise or "wait for things to get better by being model minorities" - if only they waited a bit longer all the bigots would recognize how wrong they were!

With what the show presents, it's literally impossible to delve into the intricacies of the nature of extremism or why Adam's approach is flawed - because the show posits that the only right way forward is via complete no-exceptions peaceful resistance of… being nice and docile even when threatened with death?

We are straight up EXPECTED to see Ilia beating up bigots who laughed at people dying in the mines as BAD - the narrative EXPECTS the viewer to be horrified at her revelation rather than feel catharsis for her doing the right thing. The writing wants us to "feel like Blake" by being horrified at how violent and unhinged her friend is while completely ignoring the context - because any resistance beyond non-violent slogans is instantly a slippery slope into blowing up schools.

And where does that argument end up? In Twitter posts about how all those people shot by the cops "deserved" it by "doing something to aggravate them" - that's where.

Adam IS abusive, and Adam IS in the wrong and it's pretty clear that he has long since been addicted to power, BUT there's no possibility to even begin discussing what's right or wrong with the way the show handles the WF plotline as a whole.

We don't know what position Blake can take nor what position she had on the matter before because we don't get a sense of how WF could function beyond the two completely absurd strawman extremes of whatever sunken place nonsense Ghira's WF was in and whatever slippery slope cult-like strawman his successor created (nor how that progression happened).

What is his "vision"? What does he hope to achieve? How did he, according to Blake, "change"? We know nothing about White Fang beyond "Ghira's Non-Resistance White Man's Strawman of MLK" WF being good and his successor's WF being a slippery slope argument.

No wonder the show defaults to the most rudimentary aspect of Adam's flaws in the final confrontation, refusing to give both Yang and Blake a chance to refute him thematically while also refusing to give them proper character arcs that would lead to that confrontation - because the narrative never thought things through beyond that.

The show jumps around random and nonsensical gods subplots and religious imagery being all daring about what needs to change, but the moment actual themes of discrimination and human nature are at play, the narrative instantly becomes just so in love with status quo.

The WF began as "angry redshirts to be beaten up" and when the show decided to move on to all the "exciting"(it's really not) Brother Gods nonsense, the subplot got thrown away in the most racist way possible.

[moontheoretist]

It's very clear that even X-Men are tired of playing "the good guys" when the only thing mutants ever get in exchange for their hard work to make the world better place for all humans and mutants, is pain and death over and over and over again. In this scene Hank is positioned as one in the right and the reported as one in the wrong. Because what mutants need right now is not playing the game of house and trying their best to convince the world that they deserve to live too, but a revolution that will overthrow the status quo and pave a new path.

This is why Hank quoted MLK. Because they're unheard no matter how much they scream. The only thing they want is to live in peace and even asking that is too much for the world. Trying to go around humans on eggshells all the time, trying to not scare them more is what seems a sensible thing to do, but in reality it's what hurst the mutant cause the most. When the system is designed to never take you on seriously, no matter how much effort you put, then the only thing you can do is to destroy that system and build a better one.

For King had never meant nonviolent protest to mean “wait and see.” In fact, he made very clear that rebellions have their place in America. Just a few weeks before he died, in a packed high school gym just outside Detroit, constantly interrupted by a rowdy right-wing crowd picketing his appearance, King had these radical words to say: “…it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear?…It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.” (“The Other America,” 1968). ~ Source: For Martin Luther King Jr., Nonviolent Protests Never Meant 'Wait and See'

If mutants keep being scared to push harder for the change, because they are aware of the human fear, then that change will never happen. Sometimes you need to topple the tower to build something stable.

[eretzyisrael]

By: Ronn Torossian

The day after hundreds of Pro-Hamas protestors rallied outside of a Manhattan cancer hospital, we learn that the organization which hosts these heinous rallies throughout New York City calling for an elimination to the State of Israel, and mass murder of Jews is funded by Goldman Sachs. Full stop. Period.

Goldman Sachs, one of the largest banks in the world has given $18 Million Dollars to The People’s Forum which organizes these rallies. Goldman Sachs has a fund, where donors send money to send nonprofits and rather than Goldman Sachs saying no, we will not send money to an organization which supports rape and terror, they sign the checks. And Goldman Sachs funds it. Goldman Sachs can refuse to sign the checks – they choose not to.  It has been ongoing.

Manolo De Los Santos of the People’s Forum gave a speech Monday in New York City where he said “When we finally deal that final blow to destroy Israel. When the state of Israel is finally destroyed and erased from history, that will be the single most important blow we can give to destroying capitalism.”

The speech preceded a rally, “Flood Manhattan for Gaza MLK Day”, during which pro-Hamas protestors walked the streets of Manhattan blocking traffic, and eventually they protested outside Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, a hospital. As The New York Post reported protestors screamed:  “Make sure they hear you. They’re in the window,” one organizer said through a bullhorn, and another in the crowd chanted, about the cancer center, “MSK, shame on you, you support genocide, too.”

These are people who support rape and baby-killing. On October 7th, the leader of The People’s Forum tweeted about “the heroic resistance of the Palestinian people”, and “the struggle for the national liberation in Palestine.” On October 7 in Manhattan. These protests are a clear call for murder with chants of “Free Palestine from The River to the Sea”, and “Intifada Now” are calls for violence and murder of Jews.

Authorities allow these terrorist Anti-Semitic supporters to block traffic, disrupt the city and threaten Jews. The People’s Forum has hosted Anti-Semitic rallies in NYC since October 8th they are well-funded and well organized  and there are also events on Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin and “the path to revolution.” In the New York Post, a 74-year-old Jewish woman was quoted as saying, “I thought I was in Germany in 1939.” She is right, and in 2024 the free world is either with us or against us. Goldman Sachs is funding calls for the mass murder of Jews. Goldman Sachs is signing checks which pays for Anti-Semitic events in New York City. It must end now. It’s not unlike Outten Golden, a leading law firm in New York City, where their lawyer Kathleen Peratis has visited the Hamas deadly terror tunnels multiple times, praised Hamas leaders, openly opposes a Jewish state and supports BDS.

Elie Wiesel rightfully said: “I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides.” Goldman Sachs stop funding this.

[reasonandempathy]

"I find it telling that people say there should be a ceasefire, because the on going war will just make Palestinians hate Israelis more, leading to more groups like Hamas being established, but I saw no one denouncing Hamas' massacre on Oct 7, or the decades of Palestinian terrorism that preceded it, being denounced because of the hatred for Palestinians that would plant in the hearts of Israelis."

It's takes like these that only serve to help convince me that people exist on entirely different planes of existence, and that's sincerely and seriously concerning.

Different lived experiences, to be sure, but I couldn't find any mainstream conversation that didn't include condemnations of the crimes of Hamas, and didn't center the pain experienced by Israelis and Jewish people until 2024 rolled around.

Maybe on the most extremely-online circles, or tankie circles, that was more common (or maybe Twitch?), but "Palestinian terrorism [like Hamas' actions] is counter-productive" has been arguably the main leftist and anti-Zionist point against Hamas the entire time. There is some steel-manning of Hamas in the "they're resisting occupation" thought, but I haven't seen anyone seriously advocating that Hamas' actions are productive/"good". The best defense I've ever seen, even in passing, of Hamas is either vague Tankie bullshit or that one MLK quote, which itself has a condemnation of the acts built into it.

There are a long list of reasons why Hamas is abhorrent, so maybe this person only noted reasons 4-27 and missed 1-3 and 28-96, but...

Palestinian terrorism [and Hamas specifically] fostering fear and hatred in the hearts of Israelis is the central political machination of the Netanyahu Government's support for Hamas in the first place. Granted there was also the "we need to keep palestinian political life separate to make resistance weaker," but there was also very much a "Hamas is horrible, it will not be a reasonable partner for Israel, and its abhorrent beliefs will ensure Netanyahu has a stable base of hatred of Palestinians to use as political fuel."

Where do they think the "The Palestinian/Israeli Conflict is so long and so complicated and we can't expect [Israelis and Palestinians] to stop fighting, because how could Israelis not hate Palestinians/Hamas" concept come from?

It's like saying U.S. Society never really spoke about Slavery because it's only passingly referenced in the 2024 Constitution.

[constantvariations]

It kinda sucks we never see why Blake turns against the White Fang besides "but the crew members :("

Like, she feels so strongly that peaceful protest is better than violent but... why? Who introduced her to it? What happened that cemented this ideology? Did a mission go too far and get too many people killed? Is she uncomfortable with the scorched earth aftermath? It's clear that she has no problem getting her hands dirty so long as it's Faunus blood, so what finally compelled her to leave the Fang and run away to a school?

For fuck's sake, she can't even give a real reason for why violent protest is bad!

This lack of thought into her motivation and methods, as well as her constant chastisement of the Faunus while cowering before blatant racists, makes her seem like she's catering to the oppressor class. She's written to be palatable to people with privilege, to never force them to question their own in/actions, and definitely never shatter the illusion of docile catgirl spankbank by having strong, consistent morals or a personality

Fucking disappointing

[contemplatingoutlander]

Contemplations on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, January 16, 2023

The coming Republican nightmare | Cartoon by Ann Telnaes

Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream.

Sadly, what is currently happening the in U.S. isn't it.

Given the anti-CRT movement in red states, the rampant banning of books by Black and Brown authors across the U.S., the vitriol on the right regarding the BLM movement, the unrestrained right-wing zeal of the conservative justices on the Supreme Court who have been slowly dismantling the Voting Rights Act and who are now poised to ban affirmative action programs at universities, and the acceptance of blatant racist remarks by many of today's GOP politicians (most notably their leader Trump), Martin Luther King would probably think that what is currently happening in the U.S. is indeed a nightmare.

Finally, MLK would be livid if he knew that the GQP anti-CRT, covert white nationalist movement has been repeatedly misusing his "dream" quote:

“I have a dream 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.” --Martin Luther King Jr.

According to Melinda Guerra this quote has been:

Used: to defend the incredibly patronizing and trivializing thought that claiming to be colorblind is something laudable, rather than a way of discounting the fact that people of color have the privilege of being because we have to deal with the fact that our non-whiteness dictates parts of our experiences in ways those who talk about being will never understand. Also used to defend the idea of America being post-race, which would be laughable if its very falseness lead to so many awful things. Also used to suggest King would be against affirmative action, as if he hadn't been part of a group of leaders proposing an affirmative-action-like employment program (See #5 below).

Guerra goes on to suggest that we

Remind people: 1. This speech actually consists of more than the 2-3 sentences that get quoted. (Seriously, remind them of that. I'm almost convinced people don't know that.) 2. It is foolish and trivializing to claim you don't see color or suggest America is post-race, and flat-out wrong to suggest King wouldn't support affirmative action programs. 3. The march at which he delivered this speech was the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. As a result of that march, meetings with administration, and a ton of work done by other leaders in the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights act of 1965 were passed, with provisions reflecting the demands of that march. But, contrary to popular opinion, that didn't lead King to suggest we’d “arrived” and the civil rights movement should pack up and go home [...] 4. King’s speaking and activism stretched from before this speech to after it. This speech–and even the passage of important (but baby step) laws like the aforementioned Civil Rights Act and Voting Act–was not some final “end” to all he’d said. It was but one speech (and the lines people love to claim were but a few lines) in a long legacy of things he said, and his lifetime should not be reduced to a few nonthreatening lines white people like to remember. 5. King and others actually proposed something that sounds an awful lot like the affirmative action programs people use this quote to suggest he was opposed to. He supported a “massive program of economic aid, financed by the Federal Government, to improve the lot of the nation’s 20,000,000 Negroes.” Answering an interviewer’s question about whether it was fair to request a “multibillion-dollar program of preferential treatment for the Negro, or for any other minority group,” King responded as follows:

“I do indeed. Can any fair-minded citizen deny that the Negro has been deprived? Few people reflect that for two centuries the Negro was enslaved, and robbed of any wages—potential accrued wealth which would have been the legacy of his descendants. All of America’s wealth today could not adequately compensate its Negroes for his centuries of exploitation and humiliation. It is an economic fact that a program such as I propose would certainly cost far less than any computation of two centuries of unpaid wages plus accumulated interest. In any case, I do not intend that this program of economic aid should apply only to the Negro; it should benefit the disadvantaged of all races.”*

I’m sure you’ll see plenty of your own memes misquoting King this year. If you have the emotional energy (and I do understand if you don’t), consider using some of the above responses (or researching your own) and responding, instead of just scrolling past them.

Happy Martin Luther King Jr. Day!

_____________ * http://playboysfw.kinja.com/martin-luther-king-jr-part-2-of-a-candid-conversation-1502358645

[skadi-gemini]

MLK was not a Zionist

I've seen Pro-Israel accounts spreading the lie that MLK was a Zionist when this simply isn't factual at all. Zionists continue to appropriate shit that isn't theirs. Below are snippets from a study conducted by Harvard in 2016 disproving this popular theory.

"In the Words of Martin Luther King"

"As the veneration of Martin Luther King, Jr. has deepened in America, he has been recruited posthumously to more causes. This is encouraged by his memorial in Washington. Inscribed on the pedestal of King’s statue, and on the walls of the surrounding enclosure, are quotations attributed to King. Although he spoke all of these words in specific contexts, they are assembled as though they convey eternal verities, much like the biblical passages which King himself quoted." [1]

"Both Israelis and Palestinians (and their supporters) are avid recruiters of King, presuming that something he once said more than half a century ago justifies this claim or that policy today. This appropriation is done piecemeal, perhaps because there is no comprehensive study of King’s views on the Middle East. As a result, not a few errors and omissions of fact mar most efforts to press King’s ghost into service." [2]

He supported Israel's right to exist but not the ongoing war in 1967 occurring. Digging deeper into this document shows that he was mistakenly led to sign a document without fully knowing its contents. Here is the text explaining where it began. [Keep reading]

"Did King support Israel in the 1967 war? The belief that he did rests in part upon his signing a statement by prominent Christian theologians that began to circulate on May 28, 1967, and that eventually appeared as an advertisement in the New York Times on June 4, the day before Israel went to war. At the time the statement was formulated, the Johnson administration seemed to have left Israel to face its enemies alone."

"The statement went on to “call on the United States government steadfastly to honor its commitments to the freedom of international waterways. We call on our fellow Americans of all persuasions and groupings and on the administration to support the independence, integrity, and freedom of Israel. Men of conscience all over the world bear a moral responsibility to support Israel’s right of passage through the Straits of Tiran.” "

The FBI has recorded conversations of MLK and his associates, so we have proof that he was misled. These are his own words. [Read below]

"But did the “Moral Responsibility” statement accurately reflect King’s position? King claimed in private that he never saw the text as published, and would not have signed it if he had. Tis is documented by the FBI wiretaps of Stanley Levison, one of King’s advisers, whose communist past made him a target of government surveillance. The declassified transcripts contain the verbatim record of conference calls conducted among King, Levison, and two other confidants, activist Andrew Young and legal counsel Harry Wachtel. On June 6, 1967, the day after the war began, King said this to his associates:

Did you see the ad in the New York Times Sunday [June 4]? Tis was the ad they got me to sign with [John C.] Bennett, etc. I really hadn’t seen the statement. I felt after seeing it, it was a little unbalanced and it is pro-Israel. It put us in the position almost of setting the turning-hawks on the Middle East while being doves in Vietnam and I wouldn’t have given a statement like that at all.

None of King’s advisers asked him how his name wound up on a statement he “really hadn’t seen,” but they instead looked ahead."

"Two days later, on June 8, King told his advisers he had come under growing pressure to make his own statement on the Middle East.

The statement I signed in the N.Y. Times as you know was agreed with by a lot of people in the Jewish community. But there was those in the negro community [who] have been disappointed. SNCC for one has been very critical. The problem was that the N.Y. Times played it up as a total endorsement of Israel. What they printed up wasn’t the complete text, even the introduction wasn’t the text. I can’t back up on the statement now, my problem is whether I should make another statement, or maybe I could just avoid making a statement. I don’t want to make a statement that backs up on me[;] that wouldn’t be good. Well, what do you think?

King’s confidants went back and forth, suggesting that he say as little as possible, that he urge an end to the fighting and refer to the role of the United Nations. “I don’t think you have to worry too much about losing the support of the Jewish community at this time,” advised Wachtel. “They’re very happy at this point, with their apparent victory. I think you should just stride very lightly and stress the end of violence.” So over the next days, King worked to avoid the subject and keep attention focused on Vietnam."

"It was only on June 18, when King appeared on the ABC Sunday interview program “Issues and Answers,” that he finally answered direct questions on the subject. After giving boilerplate replies about the importance of Israeli security and the need for Arab economic development, one of the interviewers cut to the quick: “Should Israel in your opinion give back the land she has taken in conflict without certain guarantees, such as security?”

King gave this answer: Well, I think these guarantees should all be worked out by the United Nations. I would hope that all of the nations, and particularly the Soviet Union and the United States, and I would say France and Great Britain, these four powers can really determine how that situation is going. I think the Israelis will have to have access to the Gulf of Aqaba. I mean the very survival of Israel may well depend on access to not only the Suez Canal, but the Gulf and the Strait of Tiran. These things are very important. But I think for the ultimate peace and security of the situation it will probably be necessary for Israel to give up this conquered territory because to hold on to it will only exacerbate the tensions and deepen the bitterness of the Arabs."

He eventually goes on to doubt Israel. Ya'll can read it all here in this document I found here. >>

Click this link to read the document

Please do your own research before believing such blatant lies by people appropriating black liberation leaders. It's so gross how they keep doing this. I found this in FIVE SECONDS with a simple Google search!

[meyhew]

I was not expecting Macklemore of all celebs to put out the best statement about the genocide going on in Palestine but I am glad someone like him is using his platform for good.

first, i did not know his govt name is BEN. kinda crazy. anyway full statement for anyone wondering:

I have been in fear. I have felt a literal lump in my throat and I cannot stay silent any longer. I condemn the murder of any human. The bombings, kidnappings and murder of the Israeli people carried out by Hamas was horrific in every way imaginable. My heart deeply hurts for the Israelis that lost loved ones to such an abomination. As a father, I cannot imagine if one of my kids was at that festival, or was still missing after being kidnapped. It is absolutely unfathomable. But killing innocent humans in retaliation as collective punishment is not the answer. That is why I am supporting the people around the world who are calling for a ceasefire. We are witnessing an unfolding genocide in Palestine at this very moment. A U.S.-backed human catastrophe in front of our eyes. Gaza is being demolished. Well over 1 million people have lost their homes. Schools, hospitals, places of worship obliterated. Innocent kids are being murdered as I’m typing this. People can’t get out. They are literally fenced in. Israel isn’t allowing water, food and medicine into the open-air prison that is Gaza. And yet we remain silent. I have. There’s the fear of immediately being labeled Anti-Semitic when you say anything against the Israeli government. This is false. I  can wholeheartedly love my Jewish brothers and sisters while simultaneously condemning the Israeli government for their mass killings and Apartheid.  I have been backstage at night before the shows, tears uncontrollably streaming down my face in absolute disbelief at how we as a country are supporting these murders with our weapons and financial backing. We are collectively praying for Israel before NFL football games, projecting Israeli flags onto our buildings and watching in-depth news stories on the catastrophic bombings in Israel. All are important ways of honoring the Israeli lives lost and those that are suffering because of it. But why are we not doing the same for Palestinians? How are one group of people’s lives worth more than others? By no means am I an expert on this conflict. I am relatively new to this and learning as I go. There’s 75 years of Palestinian occupation and deeply rooted pain on both sides, stemming back far before I was born. But there is no side to take when it comes to our collective human spirit. We all have a voice and a platform to stand for what is right and just. Even if it’s a one-on-one conversation with someone. I understand my privilege in speaking out publicly because I have financial resources and am void of a boss or company to answer to. A lot of Americans are afraid that if they say something it could put their livelihood at risk. But if I’m putting my business, career, or Instagram followers above using my platform to speak out against genocide… what does that say about me?” I keep coming back to this MLK quote: ‘Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.’ I have so many close lifelong Jewish and Muslim friends and I don’t want to cause any additional harm to any of them. But I trust in our friendships that even if we disagree we can be rooted in love and acceptance in whatever dialogue transpires. I trust that these potential challenging and emotional conversations will not divide us in the end but lead to more compassion. Killing the innocent is never the answer. Revenge only breeds more hatred. Thinking of ourselves as separate from one another is a lie.