[A-List] Re: History and Sacrificial Death/MLK and sex as history
Waistline2 at aol.com
Waistline2 at aol.com
Sat Apr 28 23:36:36 MDT 2007
<<I'll debate it any time anywhere. I consider MLK just another demagogue
clearly in love with the tone and "eloquence" of his own voice.>>
The vision of ones own revolution becomes the cause of the next revolution
and herein lies the dance of the dialectic. Without this understanding the real
Dr. King as individual cannot be understood and the historical Dr. King
vanishes into sexual gossip. Until one has dreamt the dream and embraced the
vision, American history remains an inescapable maze without a guide that can
measure the impact of 1, such as Martin Luther King Jr.
Martin Luther King Jr. as historical figure and historical marker
means there was a Martin Luther king Jr. wing of the Civil Rights Movement that
was constructed as the canals to channel African American Liberation.
King of course hated J. Edgar Hoover’s wing of the state as much as Hoover
hated every wing of all political blocs, with the only exceptions being those
individuals he hated less. Hoover had to die to dismantle his bureaucratic
power because it embodied the ugliness that was Hoover body. Hoover was hard to
look at - ugly, and his body reeked with the evolved evil that is developed
evil - devil. One bowed to Hoover, not out of respect or fear, but from the
common sense knowing that to behold such evil is to know it and this knowing
requires assimilation. It is the logic and knowing of the slave, not the
masses, that carries and gives voice to real American history. It is the knowing of
the slave that carries American history and Hoover was master of freemen and
slave alike. To stare at him is to slay him, because evil demands the deed.
Hoover’s death was a happy time in America, filled with enormous drum rolls
and bombastic orchestration: "Freedom Of Information Act."
Happy is the smile that feels the moment is at hand when the dance between
dream and vision crosses the threshold and becomes force.
Many happy things happen in history.
One of these was that the mechanization of Southern agriculture, which
liquidated the economic base for segregation, coincided with the move of industry
from the North to the South. Remember how President Eisenhower set aside
fifteen billion dollars to assist industry's move from the union towns in the
northeast into the non-union south? This move was not only to break the unions,
but also to industrialize the South. Thus, as the blacks and whites were
driven off the plantations and shoved out of the sharecropping class, they had a
place to go, in order to be able to shop at the malls that were only a decade
away from leaving the world where dream and vision dance. They went first
into small scale Southern industry and into the larger industry of the North.
We saw the temporary unity of interest between the Northern oligarchy and
the political and social strivings of the blacks in the South. And the temporary
unity made the Martin Luther King wing of the freedom movement possible. It
was the missing ingredient in the struggle prior to WWII. At that time, there
was no section of the economy whose interest lay in doing away with
segregation, so the Second Constitution laid dormant as doormat. Therefore, we could
not win, the promise of the vision. The sad truth is that until a section of
the white ruling class interest lay in doing away with segregation, it could
not be done away with no matter how hard we fought or how much blood
alkalinized the earth.
A Dr. King had to happen and everything about him as an individual was
historically perfect because he was the measure of the moment that had to
happen. He wore the perfectly right hat, the right suit of clothes and his
chocolate shade of black was perfect. The sound of his voice, the sound of the slave
who would dare was perfect and defined his wing of the movement. Men admired
him, women loved him, with both, the real masses from which his oneness
could not be separated, wanting to touch his skin. King allowed himself to be
Did Martin Luther King Jr. understand moments of actuality; the movement
of the impossible as it crosses the threshold of the possible and morph into
the practical? Was he a dreamer or “The Dreamer?” Dr. King - Martin, was
born into the social movement and willed into existence by masses, whose
passion - impulse, for expanded political liberties is boundless. From the many
came the one. King was prepared, living the endless moments of the history he
already was. Given the historically important role of the Church as the only
social organization allowed under slavery and during the long night of
segregation, a King would step out of the column of the church.
Just as the church in America split over the question of slavery, the
church split over the question of engagement with the living forces of evil and
Dr. King was nothing if not engagement.
This period of his story - the King period, during the late 1950's to
early '60's is often referred to as the Second Reconstruction. There are
important parallels. Northern financial and industrial interests had to move into
the South. To do so they had to exploit African American labor. To do that, de
jure segregation had to be repealed. The bloc of Southern reactionaries and
Northern conservatives, constituting the historic Slave Power of the pre-Civil
War era had been stood on their head by history’s dance and became Northern
reactionaries and Southern conservatives, blocking every move by this new
international financial group. The only way to out was the freedom train, and
this meant “enfranchise the blacks“ and vote out the Southern Conservatives
and the hoards of local reactionaries. Unlike the pre-Civil War era, the
social process could not express itself as a secessionists movement of states. The
struggle for the ballot, however, could not be won without some assistance
from the legal arm of the state. Jeff Davis had to be buried again and the
monuments to slavery toppled.
King was charged with the same accusing finger pointed at Malcolm X. “
The leader” (take your pick) “would come to town, stirrup the natives and then
leave, leaving all the hard work for the local folk.” “All Malcolm does is
give good speeches.” “Outside agitator” and the rest of the stock in trade
of reaction since the Paris Commune. That King presided over important
meetings of organizations, civil and church groups and did real work to actually
organize and register people to vote and fight very real fascist reaction is
often discounted or omitted. The fight for the vote is being fought out even
today, in states like Florida, but this real fight and work is easy to discount
if one does not consider how constitutional crisis unfolds in America.
Just as the bakery is more important to the bread than the slaughter house
worker, King was important as an individual, in life and death. The slaughter
house worker has a story. His story is not as large as the story that is Dr.
Martin Luther King Jr.
Kings destiny with the bullet was not preordained but the consequence of his
political shift to maintain relevance in the next phase of the African
American Liberation Movement. King made political decisions and choices. It was
not his anti-war stance but his anti war stance in concert with the African
American peoples rebellion within the armed forces itself - rather than a
mythical “unity” with the anti-war movement of that period, that put that “date
with the bullet” on the agenda. It was the demands of black workers and the
cries of the most poverty stricken sector of the proletariat, that shifted the
King. And he responded as a responsible leader. King betrayed no one because he
was who he became and it was written before he was born.
As the post WW II bloc of Northern Republicans and Southern Democrats was
broken, the government set about mending the political fabric of the country and
it turned out that King was not the man Hoover thought. Dr. Martin Luther
King Jr. was not Sambo, the slave in the novel “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” that beat
Uncle Tom to death for his refusal to beat a female slave. King was murdered
by Sambo’s betrayal and the question is “who did King refuse to beat to death.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. personifies, better than any individual or event
between the period of 1952 and 1968, that which is critical to that moment of
history completion. Malcolm X does not express this continuity that is the
American South. Malcolm X in all his phases of life, from drug user to number
runner, to lady’s man, to jailbird, to religious leader, manifested a side of
Dr. King that he could not manifest and their connection is in that
King was Southern and his noted love for Belle, black and white, is admired
by many. Uncle Tom is a historical figure who was murdered because he could
not and would not beat the already downtrodden and oppressed women - female
slave, Belle in the black.
Martin Luther King Jr. was America’s greatest and last Uncle Tom and to hate
him, by speaking ill of his individuality, rather than politics is to cross
the line of decency and a failure to understand that King was on time.
King personally closed the door on the Second American Revolution,
almost exactly one hundred years after the battlefield engagement between North
and South. Only Tom could do this. The dance unfolds on a new basis.
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
More information about the A-List