I have no problem with any “ism” taking some of my hard earned funds to help the less fortunate. I have a big problem with any “ism” that takes my hard earned money to fund the slugs from both the underclass and overclass who feel entitled simply b/c they’re here. There is nothing egalitarian in such a method of “redistribution” which “progressives” seem to incessantly harp on.

It’s easy to claim there will be “social justice” – have heard that for years, but I never hear the steps that will be taken to accomplish this goal.

Meanwhile, are you for or against the revolution? It isn’t clear.

Here in small town Redneckville opportunity is still somewhat limited so we encourage folks to be self-employed if at all possible. There are now more black owned daycare centers, barber shops, auto detailing, landscape/maintenance, moving and hauling, a menswear shop, and a caterer that makes the best ribs so he’s booked into next year.

But let me know when the revolution starts.

After the Watts riots, MLK concluded that the USA needed a “social revolution” to create “basic structural changes in the architecture of American society.” Imagine would could have happened if X hadn’t been killed just before that…

You say – “White people didn’t get their (very unequally held) advantages through dignity, self-sufficiency, or good culture.” – And you claim I’m spouting NOI views? Lol.

So we should emulate the culturally poor but privileged and lucky white folk and get massive government programs and special advantages?

P.S. White people didn’t get their (very unequally held) advantages through dignity, self-sufficiency, or good culture. Quite the contrary. They got them through a combination of sheer luck, timing (being first), and the most massive government programs in human history. Check out Jared Diamond (Guns, Germs & Steel) and Ha-Joon Chang (Bad Samaritans) on that topic…

And I was saying you yourself are NOI, Evie. I’m just saying that’s one of the main sources of the views you hold — that King was a white-pleaser who dwelled on victimhood.

Meanwhile, your own formulation bites you harder than it does we King followers: “Sit back on on your big butt and proselytize about dignity, self-respect, and self-sufficiency — see how far that gets us.”

As MLK, our problems are collective and political, and interconnected/social. Proper personal behavior is less than half the battle.

I am not into NOI Mike. Do I detect a bit of bigotry toward Islam?

Black men have lost their power in their own families and communities – why is that?

Sit back on your big butt and proselytize about victimhood – see how far that gets us.

“MLK preached integration, political lucre for pols and preachers, “social programs.” The ghost of King, is kept alive by white liberals and self-proclaimed black leaders and black “scholars” groomed by the same white imperialists they rail against. Hand in hand they’re responsible for the continued support of oppressive social problems which have made eunuchs of black men.”

There is no evidence of this in King’s life or anywhere else. It’s 100 percent Nation of Islam propaganda, based on the idea that wearing a suit, constantly congratulating yourself for your “self-respect,” or throwing a garbage can through a window are somehow radical acts, instead of farcical inversions of mainstream victim-blame.

And the bit about black men being “eunuchs” is pretty interesting in its own right. 1950s super-sexist “breadwinner” ideology is alive and well in the Nation.

Spike Lee, right?

And, yes, MLK “sells,” once people see him in full view, and despite the efforts of both the establishment (Obama included) and addled, solipsistic folks like you to trash him. That fact gives me some hope.

You are right, though, that this thread is pretty long by now.

I’ll be back, I just think this particular topic has reached a stalemate.

I really haven’t laid out what I see, but was just telling you that MLK indicated already what he would have said and it’s way different than what you said he would have (I like MX better too and remember what he said about the capitulation King made to squash the revolution in DC). It shouldn’t have taken this long to get to where we are now, but I’m not focused on making you “”wrong”" for the fuck of it.

And please don’t go home…I like your stuff

I suppose everyone but me knows “what King would say.” I’ll just take my opinions and go home.

He was immature for saying that then but would make a Bill Cosby stand now?

Again I agree with some of what you say, but so much of it isn’t the point and begs a defense before clearing up your past mistakes…stay focused

Lol. After the Kool-aid you watched Oliver Stone’s X depicting MX as becoming more King-ish.

Truth is King was becoming more militant like MX – which is one reason he was murdered. King was veering off the agenda the ruling class had agreed on.