Conservatives Hated MLK Back Then -- And Would Hate Him Today

[Biff_Poindexter]

I often hear so-called conservatives go on and on about how much they admire and respect MLK and how much they agree with his message -- but they only seem to talk about his "I Have A Dream Speech"-- and moreover they only really talk about the "content of his character, not the color of his skin" part -- basically trying to reduce King's whole purpose down to one excerpt from one speech. This tells me that these folks have no idea what King stood for, they have no idea why King was so hated, and they have no idea that if King was alive today, they would hate him too.

While so-called conservatives opine about how corrupt the FBI and DOJ is because of how they are being mean to Trump -- I remember how King had to deal with an ACTUALLY racist and corrupt FBI -- there is no COINTELPRO program against Trump, but there was definitely one against King -- the FBI never sent this letter to Trump, but they sent it to King -- in hopes that he would kill himself:

But you conservatives knew what King stood for? If you do, this should be an interesting exercise. I will post two excerpts from the King speeches that they don't tell you about -- you tell me if you agree with his assessment or disagree

“Whites, it must frankly be said, are not putting in a similar mass effort to reeducate themselves out of their racial ignorance. It is an aspect of their sense of superiority that the white people of America believe they have so little to learn. The reality of substantial investment to assist Negroes into the twentieth century, adjusting to Negro neighbors and genuine school integration, is still a nightmare for all too many white Americans…These are the deepest causes for contemporary abrasions between the races. Loose and easy language about equality, resonant resolutions about brotherhood fall pleasantly on the ear, but for the Negro there is a credibility gap he cannot overlook. He remembers that with each modest advance (the Negro makes) -- the white population promptly raises the argument that the Negro has come far enough. Each step forward accents an ever-present tendency to backlash.”

Was King being racist or overly radical in his assessment? Because I know if Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas had said this today, he would definitely be denounced as being a racist and a traitor to the conservative cause for saying it.

"The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power-- First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Do you agree with King's assessment of the white liberal or moderate? Do you feel radical redistribution of political and economic power is radical socialist talk or an inevitable solution? Can you imagine if Senator Tim Scott or Candace Owens have said this today, they would be ran out of the conservative movement for speaking off-code.

 

[MarcATL]

He was a socialist afterall.

 

[ptbw forever]

I often hear so-called conservatives go on and on about how much they admire and respect MLK and how much they agree with his message -- but they only seem to talk about his "I Have A Dream Speech"-- and moreover they only really talk about the "content of his character, not the color of his skin" part -- basically trying to reduce King's whole purpose down to one excerpt from one speech. This tells me that these folks have no idea what King stood for, they have no idea why King was so hated, and they have no idea that if King was alive today, they would hate him too.

While so-called conservatives opine about how corrupt the FBI and DOJ is because of how they are being mean to Trump -- I remember how King had to deal with an ACTUALLY racist and corrupt FBI -- there is no COINTELPRO program against Trump, but there was definitely one against King -- the FBI never sent this letter to Trump, but they sent it to King -- in hopes that he would kill himself:

But you conservatives knew what King stood for? If you do, this should be an interesting exercise. I will post two excerpts from the King speeches that they don't tell you about -- you tell me if you agree with his assessment or disagree

“Whites, it must frankly be said, are not putting in a similar mass effort to reeducate themselves out of their racial ignorance. It is an aspect of their sense of superiority that the white people of America believe they have so little to learn. The reality of substantial investment to assist Negroes into the twentieth century, adjusting to Negro neighbors and genuine school integration, is still a nightmare for all too many white Americans…These are the deepest causes for contemporary abrasions between the races. Loose and easy language about equality, resonant resolutions about brotherhood fall pleasantly on the ear, but for the Negro there is a credibility gap he cannot overlook. He remembers that with each modest advance (the Negro makes) -- the white population promptly raises the argument that the Negro has come far enough. Each step forward accents an ever-present tendency to backlash.”

Was King being racist or overly radical in his assessment? Because I know if Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas had said this today, he would definitely be denounced as being a racist and a traitor to the conservative cause for saying it.

"The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power-- First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Do you agree with King's assessment of the white liberal or moderate? Do you feel radical redistribution of political and economic power is radical socialist talk or an inevitable solution? Can you imagine if Senator Tim Scott or Candace Owens have said this today, they would be ran out of the conservative movement for speaking off-code.

You do realize his “content of character” line contradicts his “redistribution” line, right?

 

[depotoo]

Your assumptions, are well, ...

 

[tinydancer]

Did you know that LBJ actually cut MLK off when King campaigned against the Democrat war in Vietnam?

Did you know that in Chicago when Reverend King campaigned for open housing in 1966 that he was confronted with white mobs that he described as more hateful than in Mississippi or Alabama?

North of the Mason Dixon line he was met with a wall of hate by liberal Yankee whites who didn't want to share their neighborhoods or their jobs with blacks?

Just curious.

 

[MarcATL]

"The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power-- First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Many USMBer, I'm guessing they consider themselves to be well-meaning, ascribe to this philosophy that King was speaking AGAINST here. "Oh, you have a point, but your methods are...", "Oh, you have a point, but be patient...", "Oh, this...", "Oh, that..." I was just engaging with such a poster yesterday on here.

You know, one of the biggest historical regrets is that both Malcolm and King were cut down short. Had they been able to live even 5 years longer, they would have ended up collaborating, that's the direction they were heading in. X had already reached out to King and were in talks.

But alas, the powers that be, read the US government, didn't allow that to happen.

 

[ptbw forever]

He was a socialist afterall.

Except he really wasn’t.

His idea of “radical political redistribution” was literally just putting black people on the Supreme Court, electing them to the highest office in the land and having them confirm or reject bills and nominees in the Congress.

Because those things were considered radical departures from the norm at the time.

You guys want to completely suppress white people.

 

[Votto]

"The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power-- First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Many USMBer, I'm guessing they consider themselves to be well-meaning, ascribe to this philosophy that King was speaking AGAINST here. "Oh, you have a point, but your methods are...", "Oh, you have a point, but be patient...", "Oh, this...", "Oh, that..." I was just engaging with such a poster yesterday on here.

You know, one of the biggest historical regrets is that both Malcolm and King were cut down short. Had they been able to live even 5 years longer, they would have ended up collaborating, that's the direction they were heading in. X had already reached out to King and were in talks.

But alas, the powers that be, read the US government, didn't allow that to happen.

I walked around the MLK memorial and was delighted to read all the Biblical quotes he spake.

Then I got to thinking, what happened to separation of church and state?

Then it hit me. What made him great was his faith in God and the adoption of the teachings of Christ. Racial division is evil and no amount of politics can solve this problem. Nor can any economic system, whether it be capitalism or socialism, solve this problem.

It is a spiritual problem. As such, his memorial stands heads and shoulders over all the rest in Washington DC.

 

[tinydancer]

Do you know who these two conservative whites are that helped organize the March on Washington?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Which Progressive Hero was the bigger racist: LBJ or FDR?

 

[Votto]

Which Progressive Hero was the bigger racist: LBJ or FDR?

That is a toughie.

Without question, Wilson was far more of a racist than the two combined, and that is saying something.

 

[MarcATL]

Do you know who these two conservative whites are that helped organize the March on Washington?

I know one is this guy...

 

[MarcATL]

Except he really wasn’t.

His idea of “radical political redistribution” was literally just putting black people on the Supreme Court, electing them to the highest office in the land and having them confirm or reject bills and nominees in the Congress.

Because those things were considered radical departures from the norm at the time.

You guys want to completely suppress white people.

No, he wanted to redistribute the wealth from the rich, to the poor as well.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Except he really wasn’t.

His idea of “radical political redistribution” was literally just putting black people on the Supreme Court, electing them to the highest office in the land and having them confirm or reject bills and nominees in the Congress.

Because those things were considered radical departures from the norm at the time.

You guys want to completely suppress white people.

No, he wanted to redistribute the wealth from the rich, to the poor as well.

You guy in your avatar, Malcolm X called blacks "political chumps" for supporting the democrat Party

 

[tinydancer]

"The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power-- First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Many USMBer, I'm guessing they consider themselves to be well-meaning, ascribe to this philosophy that King was speaking AGAINST here. "Oh, you have a point, but your methods are...", "Oh, you have a point, but be patient...", "Oh, this...", "Oh, that..." I was just engaging with such a poster yesterday on here.

You know, one of the biggest historical regrets is that both Malcolm and King were cut down short. Had they been able to live even 5 years longer, they would have ended up collaborating, that's the direction they were heading in. X had already reached out to King and were in talks.

But alas, the powers that be, read the US government, didn't allow that to happen.

I walked around the MLK memorial and was delighted to read all the Biblical quotes he spake.

Then I got to thinking, what happened to separation of church and state?

Then it hit me. What made him great was his faith in God and the adoption of the teachings of Christ. Racial division is evil and no amount of politics can solve this problem. Nor can any economic system, whether it be capitalism or socialism, solve this problem.

It is a spiritual problem. As such, his memorial stands heads and shoulders over all the rest in Washington DC.

Always found it interesting that liberals prefer to call him Dr. Martin Luther King instead of Reverend. Speaks volumes.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

I often hear so-called conservatives go on and on about how much they admire and respect MLK and how much they agree with his message -- but they only seem to talk about his "I Have A Dream Speech"-- and moreover they only really talk about the "content of his character, not the color of his skin" part -- basically trying to reduce King's whole purpose down to one excerpt from one speech. This tells me that these folks have no idea what King stood for, they have no idea why King was so hated, and they have no idea that if King was alive today, they would hate him too.

While so-called conservatives opine about how corrupt the FBI and DOJ is because of how they are being mean to Trump -- I remember how King had to deal with an ACTUALLY racist and corrupt FBI -- there is no COINTELPRO program against Trump, but there was definitely one against King -- the FBI never sent this letter to Trump, but they sent it to King -- in hopes that he would kill himself:

But you conservatives knew what King stood for? If you do, this should be an interesting exercise. I will post two excerpts from the King speeches that they don't tell you about -- you tell me if you agree with his assessment or disagree

“Whites, it must frankly be said, are not putting in a similar mass effort to reeducate themselves out of their racial ignorance. It is an aspect of their sense of superiority that the white people of America believe they have so little to learn. The reality of substantial investment to assist Negroes into the twentieth century, adjusting to Negro neighbors and genuine school integration, is still a nightmare for all too many white Americans…These are the deepest causes for contemporary abrasions between the races. Loose and easy language about equality, resonant resolutions about brotherhood fall pleasantly on the ear, but for the Negro there is a credibility gap he cannot overlook. He remembers that with each modest advance (the Negro makes) -- the white population promptly raises the argument that the Negro has come far enough. Each step forward accents an ever-present tendency to backlash.”

Was King being racist or overly radical in his assessment? Because I know if Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas had said this today, he would definitely be denounced as being a racist and a traitor to the conservative cause for saying it.

"The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power-- First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Do you agree with King's assessment of the white liberal or moderate? Do you feel radical redistribution of political and economic power is radical socialist talk or an inevitable solution? Can you imagine if Senator Tim Scott or Candace Owens have said this today, they would be ran out of the conservative movement for speaking off-code.

You do realize his “content of character” line contradicts his “redistribution” line, right?

No, it doesn't...the very reason there was a gross imbalance of power in favor of whites and gained off the backs of minorities is not because of benevolent character of those whites -- it was obscene and gross injustice..

What measures the content of a man's character is his willingness to correct what was wrong, even if it means him giving up some of those obscene and unjust benefits he had to privilege of benefiting from.


but I don't expect conservatives to understand this...I expect conservatives to believe they won a 100 yard dash fair and square, even tho they started at the 70 yrd line.

 

[MarcATL]

You guy in your avatar, Malcolm X called blacks "political chumps" for supporting the democrat Party

So tell me now, are you an avid Malcolm X supporter that ascribes to his every word or are you just cherry picking something out of context for political reasons?

Choose one.

 

[tinydancer]

I often hear so-called conservatives go on and on about how much they admire and respect MLK and how much they agree with his message -- but they only seem to talk about his "I Have A Dream Speech"-- and moreover they only really talk about the "content of his character, not the color of his skin" part -- basically trying to reduce King's whole purpose down to one excerpt from one speech. This tells me that these folks have no idea what King stood for, they have no idea why King was so hated, and they have no idea that if King was alive today, they would hate him too.

While so-called conservatives opine about how corrupt the FBI and DOJ is because of how they are being mean to Trump -- I remember how King had to deal with an ACTUALLY racist and corrupt FBI -- there is no COINTELPRO program against Trump, but there was definitely one against King -- the FBI never sent this letter to Trump, but they sent it to King -- in hopes that he would kill himself:

But you conservatives knew what King stood for? If you do, this should be an interesting exercise. I will post two excerpts from the King speeches that they don't tell you about -- you tell me if you agree with his assessment or disagree

“Whites, it must frankly be said, are not putting in a similar mass effort to reeducate themselves out of their racial ignorance. It is an aspect of their sense of superiority that the white people of America believe they have so little to learn. The reality of substantial investment to assist Negroes into the twentieth century, adjusting to Negro neighbors and genuine school integration, is still a nightmare for all too many white Americans…These are the deepest causes for contemporary abrasions between the races. Loose and easy language about equality, resonant resolutions about brotherhood fall pleasantly on the ear, but for the Negro there is a credibility gap he cannot overlook. He remembers that with each modest advance (the Negro makes) -- the white population promptly raises the argument that the Negro has come far enough. Each step forward accents an ever-present tendency to backlash.”

Was King being racist or overly radical in his assessment? Because I know if Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas had said this today, he would definitely be denounced as being a racist and a traitor to the conservative cause for saying it.

"The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power-- First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Do you agree with King's assessment of the white liberal or moderate? Do you feel radical redistribution of political and economic power is radical socialist talk or an inevitable solution? Can you imagine if Senator Tim Scott or Candace Owens have said this today, they would be ran out of the conservative movement for speaking off-code.

So the FBI working with the members of the DOJ seeking to at first block Trump from the Presidency and then seeking to destroy his Presidency doesn't mean jack shit?



Same old playbook that they used against MLK. Communist for King. Russia for Trump. Same old same old.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Which Progressive Hero was the bigger racist: LBJ or FDR?

As James Baldwin said (another brilliant mind that conservatives don't like to talk about) --- he isn't concerned about if a politician loves him -- he is only concerned about what policies that politician puts in place..

So if LBJ did in fact hated blacks, called them N-words 12 times a day --- the Voting Rights and Civil Rights act were still hugely beneficial pieces of legislation that the "racist" guy signed into law.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

I often hear so-called conservatives go on and on about how much they admire and respect MLK and how much they agree with his message -- but they only seem to talk about his "I Have A Dream Speech"-- and moreover they only really talk about the "content of his character, not the color of his skin" part -- basically trying to reduce King's whole purpose down to one excerpt from one speech. This tells me that these folks have no idea what King stood for, they have no idea why King was so hated, and they have no idea that if King was alive today, they would hate him too.

While so-called conservatives opine about how corrupt the FBI and DOJ is because of how they are being mean to Trump -- I remember how King had to deal with an ACTUALLY racist and corrupt FBI -- there is no COINTELPRO program against Trump, but there was definitely one against King -- the FBI never sent this letter to Trump, but they sent it to King -- in hopes that he would kill himself:

But you conservatives knew what King stood for? If you do, this should be an interesting exercise. I will post two excerpts from the King speeches that they don't tell you about -- you tell me if you agree with his assessment or disagree

“Whites, it must frankly be said, are not putting in a similar mass effort to reeducate themselves out of their racial ignorance. It is an aspect of their sense of superiority that the white people of America believe they have so little to learn. The reality of substantial investment to assist Negroes into the twentieth century, adjusting to Negro neighbors and genuine school integration, is still a nightmare for all too many white Americans…These are the deepest causes for contemporary abrasions between the races. Loose and easy language about equality, resonant resolutions about brotherhood fall pleasantly on the ear, but for the Negro there is a credibility gap he cannot overlook. He remembers that with each modest advance (the Negro makes) -- the white population promptly raises the argument that the Negro has come far enough. Each step forward accents an ever-present tendency to backlash.”

Was King being racist or overly radical in his assessment? Because I know if Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas had said this today, he would definitely be denounced as being a racist and a traitor to the conservative cause for saying it.

"The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power-- First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Do you agree with King's assessment of the white liberal or moderate? Do you feel radical redistribution of political and economic power is radical socialist talk or an inevitable solution? Can you imagine if Senator Tim Scott or Candace Owens have said this today, they would be ran out of the conservative movement for speaking off-code.

So the FBI working with the members of the DOJ seeking to at first block Trump from the Presidency and then seeking to destroy his Presidency doesn't mean jack shit?



Same old playbook that they used against MLK. Communist for King. Russia for Trump. Same old same old.

If you are trying to compare Trump to King, you are far too delusional to understand the point