It sure does
ID: 3 panel comic:
You're viewing a single thread.
First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
Martin Luther King Jr, Letter from the Birmingham Jail
One of my most used quotes, in fact I used it earlier today, it's just so fucking accurate.
I consider it to be the defining quote on how I choose to act as a person. If my words or actions aren't aligned with the goal of total liberation, then I immediately reassess my position.
Definitely words to live by.
Context for readers: The direct action MLK Jr spoke of was political action and progressive legislative reform. The reason I bring this up is sometimes Tankies and Anarchists use his words to incite violence, which MLK Jr would strictly oppose.
Non-violent protest is an opening offer, not the endgame. It's a promise not to be violent so long as there's an honest dialoge.
Without the threat of eventual violence, they have no reason to listen at all.
You're not arguing against me, you are arguing against civil rights legend Martin Luther King Jr. and he can't hear you.
Says the white moderate who was taught so by the establishment that doesn't want you to consider violent opposition to their violent oppression a viable option, which he absolutely did, as, without even the slightest sense of irony because the reality is going over their head in its entirety, they tell you they "agree with you in the goal you seek, but cannot agree with your methods of direct action”.
Perhaps educate yourself on MLK and what he actually stood for, rather than what those who murdered him for opposing them want you to know, before you so confidently spread misinformation and continue in the task of whitewashing his legacy.
"Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. I am not unmindful of the fact that violence often brings about momentary results. Nations have frequently won their independence in battle. But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself.”
1964, I guess white oppressors forced him to write this.