MLK DAY JUST NOT RIGHT
It is time to spell out what is fundamentally wrong with Martin Luther King, Jr, Day. It is not the day it is supposed to be, or at least the day it was sold as. Before accusations of racism fly consider this: MLK is the only person, not counting Jesus Christ, who has his own birthday commemorated on the calendar. The only one. George Washington’s birthday, which used to be holiday, is now the bloodless and cardboard “Presidents Day”—as if it is wrong to recognize Washington alone and elevate him above Franklin Pierce, Benjamin Harrison, or Jimmy Carter. Lincoln’s day is gone. So too there are no holidays at all nodding to Jefferson, Madison, either Roosevelt or even Kennedy (who always seems to get included on lists of great presidents, for reasons that are never explained.) So what is the implication? that MLK is the most important person in US history? That following Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Years, another holiday is desperately needed after two weeks? No. It is clearly and solely a bone thrown to blacks so they feel that something is theirs. And they should be insulted by this. It is, after all the mock-shock that follows whenever one points out that it is a “black” holiday, just that. It is National Patronize Black People Day with a wink and a nod to “civil rights” for all people, whatever that is supposed to mean.
Anyone who is white— because only white people get scolded for their use of language—knows that if they refer to MLK day as a black holiday, they will be subjected to public stocks, and probably an EEOC complaint, for doing so. “Dr” King, the Inquisitors will explain pedantically, fought for civil rights for all people. He was for truth, justice, open seating on public transport, and the Christian way. Well, OK. Maybe his movement was intended for other non-whites, as well. Although Hispanics don’t seem to see it that way. They want Cesar Chavez avenues and drives and days to institutionalize their awakening (not their liberation—that hasn’t happened yet. Non-whites must remain oppressed because the anti-oppression industry cannot hit the unemployment rates of the private, productive sector). And none of this has anything to do with white people’s civil rights. White people—specifically those who wrote the Constitution— didn’t even recognize the concept of civil rights in the way that “Dr” King and his associates were defining them. A “right” to vote? Not for my pale and freckled forefathers. And, as a slight digression, looking at the outcomes of universal suffrage it is very hard to sing its praises. Would a voter pool limited to responsible, serious-minded, and patriotic adults choose a Clinton or an Obama over either of their competitors? But anyway, the bottom line is that if the goal fo this day were really to commemorate civil rights, we would do so with a Civil Rights Day, not with any individual’s birthday. We don’t memmorialize Labor Day on the nativity of Eugene Debs, or Memorial Day as date when some particular Billy Yank who fell at Gettysburg entered the world. So why would September 9, or July 2 (the dates of the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964 respectively) not be chosen as the Big Days for the civil rights revolution? The Declaration of Independence was executed (kind of) on July 4. That’s the day we mark— not April 13th which happens to be Thomas Jefferson’s birthday. And Independence Day is what we call it. Not TJ Day.
The obvious conclusion is that the parades, speeches, and enormous bill to American taxpayers of all stripes and convictions are for the glorification of a certain man, not a bigger ideal, and that man simply does not deserves such elevation. He was flawed— and he flawed in ways quite relevant to his legacy. All humans are, of course, imperfect, but his imperfections rise a bit above the average— plagiarist, academic imposter, and serial adulterer pop right to mind. If you are thinking of the content of Martin's character, that is. If the good “doctor” were measured as he said he hoped others would be, he comes up rather short. Most other hero’s CV's do not include faked degrees, and most moral leaders who are exposed as King has been lose their moral authority. Swaggert and Bakker didn’t get passes on this stuff. Neither did Clinton, for that matter, and he was never addressed as “reverend”. The more you find out about Martin, the more it is like finding out Jesus had a group of rebellious rabbis and scribes behind him fudging his credentials, writing his sermons, and securing for him illicit creature comforts— like bacon and mayo sandwiches-- when he was off stage. And Jesus is, after all, one of the figures his devotees like to liken him to. And that does matter.
These things might not diminish his accomplishments at all, but they certainly argue against his personage being honored in the biggest way our country offers-- with a national holiday. Something that evidently none of the Founders or even the Great Emancipator himself rate.
It remains that the day is about him, not about the ideals. And MLK is the him is the chosen him in this case because he was black. Lyndon Johson does not get any credit, as Hilary found out in her public spanking. Neither do any other white folks who actually had more to do with advancing the cause of black equality— let alone equality in general-- than King did. So MLK Day is a black holiday. That is ok, I suppose, but it is a lot less inspiring as a myth, and not something any one need take particular heed of unless they are purposely searching for a personal hero who looks like themselves. That familiar objective of self-esteem building through constructed history. All the pure ideals that King represented are better represented by others. And, for many who are not black, by others with whom they can much more readily identify personally. So don’t look for any activity by me on MLK Day. I’m busy getting ready for March 15th. That is MY group's Civil Rights Day. It’s Andrew Jackson’s birthday. He was the first Scots-Irish American president, and he really, really advanced Scots-Irish rights in a prejudiced America that made Scots-Irish people move to the back of the country and settle in places like the Appalachian Mountains. Many of them are still there, living in poverty without housing projects or good public schools. They never did march on the Mall, or burn down cities, so they don’t have that much political clout. Believe it or not, I don’t think there is even a Scots-Irish Caucus in Congress. Of course Jackson was a very flawed man. Nasty and violent, a gambler a drinker, and a killer. He smoked, too. Still, for how important he was to popular democracy I’d like to see his birthday made a national holiday. But I guess since he made it all the way to be president, he’s probably disqualified. I suggest other groups in hyphenated America push for holidays for their heroes. I especially appeal to any groups' icon whose birthdays fall in April, June, or August. Those are months with noticeble holiday shortcomgs. There have to be some Asian, East Indian, Native American, Polish, or Greek icons who meet these modest criterion.
It is time to spell out what is fundamentally wrong with Martin Luther King, Jr, Day. It is not the day it is supposed to be, or at least the day it was sold as. Before accusations of racism fly consider this: MLK is the only person, not counting Jesus Christ, who has his own birthday commemorated on the calendar. The only one. George Washington’s birthday, which used to be holiday, is now the bloodless and cardboard “Presidents Day”—as if it is wrong to recognize Washington alone and elevate him above Franklin Pierce, Benjamin Harrison, or Jimmy Carter. Lincoln’s day is gone. So too there are no holidays at all nodding to Jefferson, Madison, either Roosevelt or even Kennedy (who always seems to get included on lists of great presidents, for reasons that are never explained.) So what is the implication? that MLK is the most important person in US history? That following Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Years, another holiday is desperately needed after two weeks? No. It is clearly and solely a bone thrown to blacks so they feel that something is theirs. And they should be insulted by this. It is, after all the mock-shock that follows whenever one points out that it is a “black” holiday, just that. It is National Patronize Black People Day with a wink and a nod to “civil rights” for all people, whatever that is supposed to mean.
Anyone who is white— because only white people get scolded for their use of language—knows that if they refer to MLK day as a black holiday, they will be subjected to public stocks, and probably an EEOC complaint, for doing so. “Dr” King, the Inquisitors will explain pedantically, fought for civil rights for all people. He was for truth, justice, open seating on public transport, and the Christian way. Well, OK. Maybe his movement was intended for other non-whites, as well. Although Hispanics don’t seem to see it that way. They want Cesar Chavez avenues and drives and days to institutionalize their awakening (not their liberation—that hasn’t happened yet. Non-whites must remain oppressed because the anti-oppression industry cannot hit the unemployment rates of the private, productive sector). And none of this has anything to do with white people’s civil rights. White people—specifically those who wrote the Constitution— didn’t even recognize the concept of civil rights in the way that “Dr” King and his associates were defining them. A “right” to vote? Not for my pale and freckled forefathers. And, as a slight digression, looking at the outcomes of universal suffrage it is very hard to sing its praises. Would a voter pool limited to responsible, serious-minded, and patriotic adults choose a Clinton or an Obama over either of their competitors? But anyway, the bottom line is that if the goal fo this day were really to commemorate civil rights, we would do so with a Civil Rights Day, not with any individual’s birthday. We don’t memmorialize Labor Day on the nativity of Eugene Debs, or Memorial Day as date when some particular Billy Yank who fell at Gettysburg entered the world. So why would September 9, or July 2 (the dates of the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964 respectively) not be chosen as the Big Days for the civil rights revolution? The Declaration of Independence was executed (kind of) on July 4. That’s the day we mark— not April 13th which happens to be Thomas Jefferson’s birthday. And Independence Day is what we call it. Not TJ Day.
The obvious conclusion is that the parades, speeches, and enormous bill to American taxpayers of all stripes and convictions are for the glorification of a certain man, not a bigger ideal, and that man simply does not deserves such elevation. He was flawed— and he flawed in ways quite relevant to his legacy. All humans are, of course, imperfect, but his imperfections rise a bit above the average— plagiarist, academic imposter, and serial adulterer pop right to mind. If you are thinking of the content of Martin's character, that is. If the good “doctor” were measured as he said he hoped others would be, he comes up rather short. Most other hero’s CV's do not include faked degrees, and most moral leaders who are exposed as King has been lose their moral authority. Swaggert and Bakker didn’t get passes on this stuff. Neither did Clinton, for that matter, and he was never addressed as “reverend”. The more you find out about Martin, the more it is like finding out Jesus had a group of rebellious rabbis and scribes behind him fudging his credentials, writing his sermons, and securing for him illicit creature comforts— like bacon and mayo sandwiches-- when he was off stage. And Jesus is, after all, one of the figures his devotees like to liken him to. And that does matter.
These things might not diminish his accomplishments at all, but they certainly argue against his personage being honored in the biggest way our country offers-- with a national holiday. Something that evidently none of the Founders or even the Great Emancipator himself rate.
It remains that the day is about him, not about the ideals. And MLK is the him is the chosen him in this case because he was black. Lyndon Johson does not get any credit, as Hilary found out in her public spanking. Neither do any other white folks who actually had more to do with advancing the cause of black equality— let alone equality in general-- than King did. So MLK Day is a black holiday. That is ok, I suppose, but it is a lot less inspiring as a myth, and not something any one need take particular heed of unless they are purposely searching for a personal hero who looks like themselves. That familiar objective of self-esteem building through constructed history. All the pure ideals that King represented are better represented by others. And, for many who are not black, by others with whom they can much more readily identify personally. So don’t look for any activity by me on MLK Day. I’m busy getting ready for March 15th. That is MY group's Civil Rights Day. It’s Andrew Jackson’s birthday. He was the first Scots-Irish American president, and he really, really advanced Scots-Irish rights in a prejudiced America that made Scots-Irish people move to the back of the country and settle in places like the Appalachian Mountains. Many of them are still there, living in poverty without housing projects or good public schools. They never did march on the Mall, or burn down cities, so they don’t have that much political clout. Believe it or not, I don’t think there is even a Scots-Irish Caucus in Congress. Of course Jackson was a very flawed man. Nasty and violent, a gambler a drinker, and a killer. He smoked, too. Still, for how important he was to popular democracy I’d like to see his birthday made a national holiday. But I guess since he made it all the way to be president, he’s probably disqualified. I suggest other groups in hyphenated America push for holidays for their heroes. I especially appeal to any groups' icon whose birthdays fall in April, June, or August. Those are months with noticeble holiday shortcomgs. There have to be some Asian, East Indian, Native American, Polish, or Greek icons who meet these modest criterion.
posted by the wrightist at 8:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home