Congress, Constitutional Law, Courts, Free Speech, Justice, Politics, Religion, Society

Did Martin Luther King’s ‘Dream’ Come True?

Respectfully Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger

On Monday we celebrate the life of the Reverend Martin Luther King and honor him for his work with the Civil Rights movement.  One of his most famous speeches was the 1963 “I Have A Dream” speech that he gave in Washington, D.C. to a crowd of thousands.  In that speech he laid out his vision and hopes for the Civil Rights movement.  I would like to review some of his words and discuss if his dream came true for African-Americans and minorities throughout our country. “I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.” ‘ Huffington Post

Those words seem clear enough, but at the time Rev. King gave this speech, it had been 100 years since Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and the African-American was not free and equal to the white man in this country.  Jim Crow laws throughout the South kept African-Americans isolated and humiliated.  Lynchings and beatings were still far too common.  So how has the South progressed since Dr. King expressed his dream?

It seems clear that life in the South has improved for African-Americans.  African-Americans have become professionals and teachers and even Mayors of cities and towns throughout the South.  Black Congressmen and women have been elected from the South and Jim Crow is but a remnant of the history books.  In the North, Blacks have also progressed in all walks of life.  One African-American of mixed heritage grew up to be elected to the Illinois State House and the United States Senate and made it all the way to the White House.  The ability of Barack Obama to become President was made possible by Dr. King and his comrades who brought the Civil Rights movement to all of our doorsteps.

Do these successes mean that Dr. King’s ‘Dream” did come true?  I submit that at least one aspect of his dream is partly unfulfilled.  While African-Americans have made significant progress, they still lag financially behind their white counterparts.  “The gap between Black and white household [accumulated] wealth quadrupled from 1984 to 2007, totally discrediting the conventional wisdom that the U.S. is slowly and fitfully moving towards racial equality, or some rough economic parity between the races. Like most American myths, it’s the direct opposite of the truth. When measured over decades, Blacks are being propelled economically downward relative to whites at quickening speed, according to a new study by Brandeis University.”  Alternet   Without equal opportunity in the financial arena, can it truly be said that Dr. King’s dream has come true?

“A huge wealth gap has opened up between black and white people in the US over the past quarter of a century – a difference sufficient to put two children through university – because of racial discrimination and economic policies that favour the affluent.  A typical white family is now five times richer than its African-American counterpart of the same class, according to a report released today by Brandeis University in Massachusetts.  White families typically have assets worth $100,000 (£69,000), up from $22,000 in the mid-1980s. African-American families’ assets stand at just $5,000, up from around $2,000. A quarter of black families have no assets at all. The study monitored more than 2,000 families since 1984.  “We walk that through essentially a generation and what we see is that the racial wealth gap has galloped, it’s escalated to $95,000,” said Tom Shapiro, one of the authors of the report by the university’s Institute on Assets and Social Policy.”  Guardian

While significant progress has been made in many areas, the African-American is still trailing far behind his white brothers and sisters financially.  If that huge disparity in income and assets can’t be shrunk, will the Black man ever be truly free?  Dr. King initiated a huge improvement in the freedom for many, but his work is not completely done.  When we celebrate the day set aside to honor his legacy, maybe we should think of ways that the financial gap between blacks and whites can be narrowed.  Without all people being equal in all areas, how can any of us really be free?  What ideas do you have?

Additional reference:  US Constitution.net

 

75 thoughts on “Did Martin Luther King’s ‘Dream’ Come True?”

  1. Blouise, that ‘lone gunman’ was one busy sob.

    ———-
    Swarthmoree Mom, the first 30 seconds of that vid you posted, which has been edited out in favor of the Juan Williams story, shows some in the audience booing when the fact is revealed that Mitt Romney’s father was born in Mexico. The 26% just hates everybody.

  2. The battle continues and

    yes, yes, yes to lotta’s “ ‘they’ killed them and that I’m sure gave all that would come after pause. Killed ‘em all. The 60′s were a bitch.” … that “lone gunman” ploy worked time after time after time.

  3. AMS, Nice posting on your site. Yes, the dearth of leaders over the last four decades is amazing in retrospect but shit, “they” killed them and that I’m sure gave all that would come after pause. Killed ’em all. The 60’s were a bitch.

    Even though I have stopped by your site and Dredd’s I can’t post comments thereon. I don’t have an account on a site that will allow me to do so. You and Dredd do good work though and I do enjoy visiting. Stay angry.

  4. Mespo and OS,
    I have maintained for some time that the very reasonable, agreeable Dr. Paul; while seeming to be more moderate than his Republican opponents; is more than likely the most dangerous candidate running for the nomination (though having heard Santorum, I now believe they may be neck and neck for the title)

    Ron Paul can’t be known as the Intellecual Guru of the Tea Party for nothing. This man is a raging Fascist from the word go.

    I think of him as the Republican “Dream Candidate”. They would love it if he was Nominated but they really don’t expect it. So they have the basic Republican in Mitt who they don’t really want but they believe they can get nominated.

    I am currently writing an article that will examine the various Republican hopefuls and their purpose and place in the Republican big picture.

    Each one has served a purpose. Each has been carefully calculated to create an impression and make a point; I believe

    An easy and quick example of this is Herman Cain. Now I don’t doubt Mr Cain’s sincerity and I have no issue with a black president as i have oft stated but the republican party could not have believed that this guy was going to be nominated. his canidacy was intended to show that Republicans are accepting of black people and are even willing to run one for President.

    Of course they chose a man whose personal life was so riddled with ethical questions and questionable behavior that he was just a sitting duck for the Democrats to take pot shots at. he was used for a secondary purpose as well.

    Mr. Cain is a very confident; very vocal man with a tendancy to speak too quickly on subjects he really doesn’t understand.

    Placing him in the position of having to answer questions outside his area of expertise; namely business management; placed this guy in an untenneble position where he was gaurenteed to make a fool of himself thereby creating the second impression that the best black man they could find to run; is incapable of handling questions from the press much less the Presdency.

    All carefully crafted and deviously evil in it’s intent

    1. “All carefully crafted and deviously evil in it’s intent”

      AMS,

      Brilliant. How come two old farts like us, coming from different parts of the country and different backgrounds, see what is happening so clearly?Experience, memory and wide open eyes I think.

  5. Raff,
    Excellent post. I’m with you all the way here. I also wrote a MLK post on my site and I think they are somewhat complementary. Check it out and let me know what you think.
    http://angrymanspeaks.wordpress.com/2012/01/17/martin-luther-king-jr-who-knew-forty-three-years-later/

    Sally,
    “So none of us are really just black, white, or brown.”

    So true. Yet it is still a maneuver used by the right to set us against each other.
    remember; they don’t really believe the lie. It’s just that blacks and hispanics are; a) mostly liberals and moderates (I can supply the emperical data upon request); b) easy targets in a nation with so many bottom feeders like Rog’ above; c) a big enough demographic to make a difference in election results and public views if allowed to express themselves as people deserving of respect.
    “So we get what we have here today; failure to communicate”
    Failure to communicate racial equality to all Americans because of right-wing propaganda.

  6. Roger Gunderson,
    “There is a reason the blacks and whites don’t get along. The black people are infurior to whites otherwise they wouldn’t have been slaves. There wouldn’t have been laws barring blacks to marry whites.The black people of africa were centries behind the whites. They couldn’t build boats or invent the wheel. They want to mix with the whites to improve their IQ. Mixing with blacks or Mexicans will lower the whites IQ.”

    Pure shit. Does anybody actually believe your mouth-breathing, bottom-feeding oral diaharea? Nevermind. I just wanted to put in my opinion that you are an asshole and also the reason the 1% find it so easy to use manipulation of the most base kind.

    Lotta,
    “I think a lot of patriots are spinning in their graves these days, I hear it too Gene.”
    The sound is becoming louder. We should all be able to hear it. The rest of your comment is right on too.

  7. SM, dog-whistle politics and the crowd cheers and boos right on cue. The 26% never disappoint. Thanks for the link and vid.

  10. Good article Raf. I think that the wealth of Hispanic households has outpaced Black Americans in being degraded over the last 30 years, 60+ % v 50+ %. This country needs a couple of new leaders that can garner the broad popular support that MLK and Cesar Chavez had. I think a lot of people thought that a vote for President Obama was a vote for such a man.

    And a new generation of feminists to pick up the mantle from Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm, Bella Abzug, Ann Lewis, and Eleanor Holmes Norton would be a good thing also IMO. Naomi Wolffe seemed to be moving into the shoes Stinehem vacated but aside from thoughtful albeit low-key feminist lit she didn’t hit the mark. She is an excellent political writer though and has given us a short, appropriate list to measure the level of destruction of a democracy. If you want to destroy democracy, this is what you do:

    1.Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy.
    2.Create secret prisons where torture takes place.
    3.Develop a thug caste or paramilitary force not answerable to citizens.
    4.Set up an internal surveillance system.
    5.Harass citizens’ groups.
    6.Engage in arbitrary detention and release.
    7.Target key individuals.
    8.Control the press.
    9.Treat all political dissidents as traitors.
    10.Suspend the rule of law.

    I think a lot of patriots are spinning in their graves these days, I hear it too Gene.

  11. LK said, “I think the good Doctor would be spinning in his grave about now.”

    I wondered what that whirring noise was that I keep hearing.

  13. Considering the prison situation in America from a strictly racial point of view I would have to say that the dream has been in retrograde for a long time.

    Of late I’ve been reading about the expansion of the prison labor industry and the incentives (dollar and cents incentives given by government to business) to migrate their work from the free populace to the prison populous. The migration from low-wage foreign shores for call center and help-desk work is but one aspect of the problem. When a business can pick up labor for .50 cents an hour domestically you are talking about slavery. I think the good Doctor would be spinning in his grave about now.

    ———————
    “Prison Labor – How it is used to eliminate the Middle Class and provide Slave Labor for Corporations”

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/13/1024806/-Prison-Labor-How-it-is-used-to-eliminate-the-Middle-Class-and-provide-Slave-Labor-for-Corporations

    ———————-
    “New Exposé Tracks ALEC-Private Prison Industry Effort to Replace Unionized Workers with Prison Labor”

    “Many of the toughest sentencing laws responsible for the explosion of the U.S. prison population were drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council, which helps corporations write model legislation. Now a new exposé reveals ALEC has paved the way for states and corporations to replace unionized workers with prison labor. We speak with Mike Elk, contributing labor reporter at The Nation magazine. He says ALEC and private prison companies “put a mass amount of people in jail, and then they created a situation where they could exploit that.” ”

    http://www.democracynow.org/2011/8/5/new_expos_tracks_alec_private_prison

  15. OS:

    My image of him is the long-time neighbor who would pass you by while you were attempting to change your flat tire during a driving rain storm. Not my problem; gotta go.

    1. OS,

      Very good catch. I am appalled by how many people in the middle and on the left can’t see that this guy makes Santorum seem like almost a moderate in comparison and Rick is himself seriously demented.

  17. mespo, he would take us back to Jim Crow in a heartbeat on the principle that the government has no business protecting citizens from discrimination. And by extension, his professed policies could bring back lynchings if they are taken to their logical conclusion. He would deny this of course, but he is a demagogue of the most dangerous sort.

  19. Is it any wonder the knuckledraggers and Stormfront types have heartily endorsed a Ron Paul candidacy?

  20. For those who still believe Ron Paul is a viable alternative to ANYONE, here are his comments of June 4, 2004. That was the day Congress hailed the 40th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Only Ron Paul dissented. Here are his comments:

    Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.

    The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

    This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.

    The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business’s workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge’s defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.

    Of course, America has made great strides in race relations over the past forty years. However, this progress is due to changes in public attitudes and private efforts. Relations between the races have improved despite, not because of, the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

    In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I join the sponsors of H.Res. 676 in promoting racial harmony and individual liberty, the fact is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not accomplish these goals. Instead, this law unconstitutionally expanded federal power, thus reducing liberty. Furthermore, by prompting raced-based quotas, this law undermined efforts to achieve a color-blind society and increased racial strife. Therefore, I must oppose H.Res. 676.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html

Comments are closed.