On April 3rd 1968, Dr. Martin Luther King gave a speech in support of a strike by sanitation workers in Memphis Tennessee. He gave the speech because – during the course of his life as an activist – he had come across a number of reasons to conclude that the struggle for the recognition of his rights was intertwined with a number of other causes related to basic human dignities. One day before his assassination, King declared "We've got to give ourselves to this struggle until the end. Nothing would be more tragic than to stop at this point in Memphis. We've got to see it through."
In the years since his death, many involved with the Civil Rights movement have conveniently ignored that statement; just as many others have conveniently ignored that Dr. King lived for nearly five years following his famous "I have a dream" speech. Rather than looking at King the activist as he was, he has been transformed into a simplistic idea which reaffirms our own prejudices. "I have a dream, that my four little children will be judged not by the color of there skin but by the content of their character" is perhaps the most misconstrued line ever delivered in American oratory. It is perhaps the most famous as well. These days, the people who most frequently quote that line are white Anglo-Saxon protestant males who are either against affirmative action or against some other program which they believe will help minorities. King, however, was not a color-blind cosmopolitan: he was a visionary leader who understood that in order to reach the goal of equal rights, he would have to use “the power of economic withdrawal.”
In short, it is a line which dreams of a day beyond institutionalized bigotry which has now been co-opted by those who benefit most from that same bigotry. King the Activist knew all about institutionalized bigotry. He spelled it out in that speech in Memphis. He knew that the only way for his movement to be successful was for it to harness the collective economic power of all those who were denied their rights. In short, King knew that not only that "the issue is injustice" , but that in order to combat that injustice against African Americans the African American community needed to "strengthen black institutions." The Civil Rights movement has conveniently forgotten that in order to be effective it needs institutional strength and organizational power. Otherwise, its message will be – and in some cases already has been – used to strengthen the position of its adversaries regardless of the truth value of the mischaracterization.
The Civil Rights movement has not seen its promise through. For those who think it has, I must ask a question about the institutional homophobia of the African American community? Interestingly enough, the same Southern African American preachers who fought so hard for their rights are now actively working against granting equal rights to their Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered ‘brothers and sisters.’ Ironically enough, they use the same justification which Senator Eastland and his ilk used to deprive them of their rights for so long “'they already have all the rights they need.”
Years ago, when the struggle for Civil Rights was born, each of the parties involved signed their own metaphorical “promissory note.” When they declared that all were created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights, they were not just quoting the Framers of the American Republic, but were affirming that they would do their best to ensure that all were included in that pledge. Dr. King understood that.
Dr. King understood that his fight was not just over his right to vote, but it was for the right of the Memphis sanitation workers to earn a living wage. Dr. King understood that his fight was not just over the right to send his children to public schools without fear of reprisal, but that it was also for the right of people in other countries to send their children to school without the fear that the school would be blown up. Dr. King understood that his fight was not just for his rights as an American, but rather that it was just one facet of the fight for the American ideal.
Yet his memory, for another year, goes forgotten. A major Presidential candidate gave a speech at Dr. King's old Church. In it, he talked about dealing with homophobia in the African American community. He gave this talk several months after asking a virulently homophobic man to campaign on his behalf. He gave this talk while refusing to condemn outright the homophobia that man spread both in his name and on his behalf. He gave this talk while maintaining the position that marriage equality something he would not support for – no matter how pretty the words you use to describe it are – the phrase "civil union" is just another way to deny members of the LGBT community their rights as citizens.
Another Presidential candidate wrote that only "welfare checks" ended the 1992 LA riots and that "gay men get AIDS because they like the attention that comes with being sick." This Presidential candidate has the audacity to claim Dr. King as his hero because the individuals who should be leading the charge for Dr. King's vision of equality are instead too busy actively attempting to stop the realization of that vision.
Dr. King did not sneeze, and the knife did not pierce his heart. He continued to lead the movement for several more years before his assassination. If he had sneezed, we wouldn't have heard him give that explicit mandate to his followers in his 1967 address 'Beyond Vietnam':
A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies.
Following his death, many of the people for whom he fought have forgotten that mandate. On this day, a few short weeks after he would have turned seventy-nine, it is time for all of us all to remember it.
