Well, this was the claim in a recent comment here on the blog and it was accompanied by the thought that the only place I learn anything is movies.
In fact, neither of the above is true. Martin Luther King was not affiliated with either political party and I didn't learn this from a movie but rather from Wiki: Martin Luther King, Jr
Something else I learned from the Wiki is that MLK was not born with that name but rather his father changed his name after a trip to Germany in 1934. He changed his son's name from Michael King to Martin Luther King out of respect for Martin Luther the reformer. This was interesting to me as I've been taking a great deal of inspiration from Germany in my own life so it was intriguing to learn of this.
Another thing that is probably obvious is that King formed his opinions regarding non-violent resistance from Mohandas Gandhi (i.e. Mahatma Gandhi).
In the comment mentioned above, it said LBJ sucked as a leader and would not have had anything to do with Civil Rights legislation if MLK had not forced him into it. OK, so I accept the premise and let's find out if it's true.
An additional premise was that LBJ referred to black people, when speaking privately, as 'niggers' and this is true. (History Learning Site: Lyndon Baines Johnson)
However, from that same site, we learn that LBJ commonly worked with teaching black kids and working with black adults in Texas. He was certainly aware of the political advantages later in courting the black vote but that couldn't have had anything to do with his activities as a younger man.
Johnson's political voting record prior to the Presidency is largely a Southern cliche and there's not much to be gleaned from it. He was not typically supportive of civil rights legislation but his rationale was logical if not reasonable. His positions were changing as he moved through the 50's into the 60's and it appears political expediency was a substantial part of that although he took risks he did not have to take. For example, supporting Eisenhower in the Civil Rights Act of 1960 could not have made Johnson a big hit in the South.
It's claimed after signing Civil Rights legislation in 1964 that Johnson said, “I’ll have them niggers voting Democrat for the next two hundred years.”
Whether the above is actually true is questionable. It's taken from a book by Ronald Kessler and who knows how many other witnesses there were. I'd say it's probably about 50/50 whether he said it as know LBJ was not above using the word and certainly wasn't a virgin in political opportunism.
As to whether Martin Luther King forced Johnson to do something he would not have done otherwise, this is really speculation as there's no way to know.
To summarise:
Martin Luther King was a Republican: FALSE
I learn everything from television or movies: FALSE
Lyndon Baines Johnson was a political opportunist: TRUE
Lyndon Baines Johnson used the word 'nigger' with some regularity: TRUE
Lyndon Baines Johnson was forced into signing Civil Rights legislation: QUESTIONABLE
At the same time, J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI and the closest America has ever had to a dictator, was treating MLK like a terrorist and LBJ did little or nothing to stop it. As President he almost certainly knew of it so that speaks further toward LBJ being a political opportunist.
What is definitely false is Hillary Clinton's contention that Martin Luther King could not have accomplished anything without Lyndon Baines Johnson as I submit very few political forces on this Earth could have stood up to the validity of King's words or the power of the non-violent movement that grew up around them. We saw the same phenomenon with Mohandas Gandhi as he stood up to the British Empire and it sure as hell did roll over. Note that Clement Attlee was Prime Minister at the time so, extending Clinton's thought, should anyone believe Gandhi would have accomplished nothing without him. I'll leave that to the interested student to determine.
In fact, neither of the above is true. Martin Luther King was not affiliated with either political party and I didn't learn this from a movie but rather from Wiki: Martin Luther King, Jr
Something else I learned from the Wiki is that MLK was not born with that name but rather his father changed his name after a trip to Germany in 1934. He changed his son's name from Michael King to Martin Luther King out of respect for Martin Luther the reformer. This was interesting to me as I've been taking a great deal of inspiration from Germany in my own life so it was intriguing to learn of this.
Another thing that is probably obvious is that King formed his opinions regarding non-violent resistance from Mohandas Gandhi (i.e. Mahatma Gandhi).
In the comment mentioned above, it said LBJ sucked as a leader and would not have had anything to do with Civil Rights legislation if MLK had not forced him into it. OK, so I accept the premise and let's find out if it's true.
An additional premise was that LBJ referred to black people, when speaking privately, as 'niggers' and this is true. (History Learning Site: Lyndon Baines Johnson)
However, from that same site, we learn that LBJ commonly worked with teaching black kids and working with black adults in Texas. He was certainly aware of the political advantages later in courting the black vote but that couldn't have had anything to do with his activities as a younger man.
Johnson's political voting record prior to the Presidency is largely a Southern cliche and there's not much to be gleaned from it. He was not typically supportive of civil rights legislation but his rationale was logical if not reasonable. His positions were changing as he moved through the 50's into the 60's and it appears political expediency was a substantial part of that although he took risks he did not have to take. For example, supporting Eisenhower in the Civil Rights Act of 1960 could not have made Johnson a big hit in the South.
It's claimed after signing Civil Rights legislation in 1964 that Johnson said, “I’ll have them niggers voting Democrat for the next two hundred years.”
Whether the above is actually true is questionable. It's taken from a book by Ronald Kessler and who knows how many other witnesses there were. I'd say it's probably about 50/50 whether he said it as know LBJ was not above using the word and certainly wasn't a virgin in political opportunism.
As to whether Martin Luther King forced Johnson to do something he would not have done otherwise, this is really speculation as there's no way to know.
To summarise:
Martin Luther King was a Republican: FALSE
I learn everything from television or movies: FALSE
Lyndon Baines Johnson was a political opportunist: TRUE
Lyndon Baines Johnson used the word 'nigger' with some regularity: TRUE
Lyndon Baines Johnson was forced into signing Civil Rights legislation: QUESTIONABLE
At the same time, J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI and the closest America has ever had to a dictator, was treating MLK like a terrorist and LBJ did little or nothing to stop it. As President he almost certainly knew of it so that speaks further toward LBJ being a political opportunist.
What is definitely false is Hillary Clinton's contention that Martin Luther King could not have accomplished anything without Lyndon Baines Johnson as I submit very few political forces on this Earth could have stood up to the validity of King's words or the power of the non-violent movement that grew up around them. We saw the same phenomenon with Mohandas Gandhi as he stood up to the British Empire and it sure as hell did roll over. Note that Clement Attlee was Prime Minister at the time so, extending Clinton's thought, should anyone believe Gandhi would have accomplished nothing without him. I'll leave that to the interested student to determine.
No comments:
Post a Comment