No, he was a man of his times and had the mentality of hope and healing.
This was of course in spite of the fact that he was born and raised during the Great Depression, Jim Crow WWII, Korea, and the beginning of the Vietnam era and the most vicious and insidious forms of institutional racism of the post civil war era.
You on the other hand weren’t even born yet when institutional racism was outlawed and benefited from all of the programs intended to remedy the wrongs of the past.
I am just as hopeful as MLK was, I wouldn’t even be on this forum if I wasn’t. I am hopeful that I can change some people’s minds about the black experience in this country. Not to make them feel bad about their whiteness, after all no one in this forum owned slaves, but to help them understand my experience and respect that it is different.
If I am a victim because I wasn’t born in an era of more prevalent institutional racism, then by your definition so was MLK vs Nat Turner, so was Nat Turner compare to Slaves who had to endure slave ships.
For years now, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and his associates have been deliberately undermining the foundations of internal order in this country. With their rabble-rousing demagoguery, they have been cracking the ‘cake of custom’ that holds us together. With their doctrine of ‘civil disobedience’ they have been teaching hundreds of thousands of Negroes . . . that it is perfectly all right to break the law and defy constituted authority if you are a Negro-with-a-grievance . . . And they have done more than talk. They have on occasion after occasion, in almost every part of the country, called out their mobs on the streets, promoted ‘school strikes’ sit-ins, lie-ins, in explicit violation of the law and in explicit violation of the public authority . . .
“You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations.”
You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation.
Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action.
Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue.
It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.
My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking.
But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.”
I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth.
Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.
The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation.
I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.
_
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers.
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.
Considering he dedicated his life to civil, non violent protest for social change I’d say Aces is absolutely right on.
His major protest weapon was simple civil disobedience with sit ins arm/hand locked marches chanting and signing hymns etc and he vehemently opposed the methods being employed today.
That was the stark difference between he, MalcomX, the BP’s etc.
His was a loving message and protest and was led by his faith in God, not one of incivility, vulgarity, threats, intimidation, rioting etc.