Here is the famous speech by Martin Luther King, delivered on August 28, 1963. Many of us weren't even born yet. I had never read the whole speech. I wonder if people who were born and went to school in the US are more likely to have read it. Do they teach it in US high schools? Anyway, I thought today would be a good day to read it and I did. Here it is: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/treatise/king/mlk01.htm I wonder, how significant do you guys think the speech is, and what do you guys think is the most important thing he really saying in a nutshell? To me this is the key statement: 'A nation where they - (meaning his children, but obviously also all human beings) - will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character'. How far do you think America has come, since he spoke, as far as fulfulling his dream and how far do we have to go? PS: I know the Reverend King is an American icon, but the racial issue is not just an American problem. So I think his dream resonates worldwide. As many of us here grew up or live in different countries, we can also discuss how far our own countries have come, and need to come in terms of the dream.
I think that the pople who have commisioned themselves to be the guardians of Dr. King's legacy have done a poor job. They still judge by the color of skin rather than the content of character. And worse, it is done to to oppress the people they are expected to liberate. Regular Americans however have advanced by leaps and bounds and live this message better than the spinsters, reverands and politicans do. And we are better off as a society today with plenty of hope for the future on the horizon.
I know. Sorry to be a killjoy, but I think you and I both know where that thread was headed. I didn't feel like allowing it to get there today of all days. I really don't plan on being a heavy-handed mod.
No problem, I understand. But there was me all set up for a nice stoning or evisceration or at the least some good ol' fashioned blood letting and what do you do? You go and close a perfectly absurd thread by a muppet who can't argue his way out of a paper bag. The sharks were only just beginning to swarm or what ever it is sharks do. All we wanted was a good stoning - was that too much to ask?
Honestly, I don't think it would have been that ugly, as not too many would defend an opinion stated quite the way he did. Would have been just one guy getting his ass kicked by pretty much everyone else. Personally, I wish you hadn't closed it- it's a lot of fun to just bludgeon someone with opinions like those, and since it's against the law in the real world, online's as good a place as any.
What other one? PS: Never mind, I just saw it. So, really, why should America be having a day celebrating a terrorist, especially considering that the rest of the world doesn't celebrate him?
the one claiming that MLK was a terrorist, so we shouldn't have a holiday today. I saw it and thought "Man, I ain't seen a beatdown like this since Rodney King/Reginald Denny". And that was just from the conservatives. Mr Hat pulled off the one-liner of the year. By the time I nuked up some microwave popcorn, and came back to see how it ended - the thread was closed. Internet pressure got something as terrible as 'Snakes on a Plane!' out to the theaters. I wish big soccer had such clout
In retrospect, I should've let the "discussion" go on a little longer, and risked the racist comments I felt were inevitable. There is such a thing as being too proactive.
I still miss celebrating Washington and Lincoln's birthday. "President's day" is not the same. Of course, I want to keep MLK's b-day as well. Maybe we can ditch Columbus's?
Can't you reopen it have send it to world rivalries? Or maybe the international forum? Anything to lighten up the zionist/iranian banter woulda been an improvement.
Well, if the guy is really interested in defending his position (which I doubt seriously at this point), he'll post here.
If we get to vote on it, I thought you were right on the nose with it... probably better if you don't submit stuff to a vote tho'
I think in a way the fact that racist comments are not tolerated in discussions like here, the way those who make such comments are judged, is a sign of progress, in terms of MLK's dream. Have things improved? I wonder, if the internet had been around in the 60's, how many more racist ideas and comments would have been tolerated in boards like this one? Obviously there are still a lot of racist boards, and there are racists in these boards, but I think in general things are moving in the right direction, and you can see it by the way most people are responding to the racists. But I wonder, doesn't color of the skin still taint how do we judge our leaders? Do we judge government officials like Condi Rice different because of her skin color? Do we judge potential candidates for president like Obama different because of his skin color? How about athletes? Do we judge an Alan Iverson differently than we might judge Steve Nash because of the color of their skin, or is it because of the content of their character? Or maybe a bit of both? And I wonder, if we have to hire somebody, do we automatically judge people different if they are black? It seems so simple, 'Judge not by the color of their skin but by the Content of their character'. But is it really that simple? Is it even realistic? Even if we strive not to let race be a factor, how do we avoid stereotyping people by the way they look? I understand skin color may not mean anything significant in terms of genetics, but it is a big part of how people look. And we always make first impressions about people based on their looks, don't we? I think we are instinctively programed to judge people based on looks. That is why I think we have to be proactive when it comes to racism. It takes an effort not to judge people based on the color of their skin, because we are wired to judge them by how they look. So, we need to make a conscious effort to take race out of the equation. Another thing. Leaving skin color aside, are there not certain relevant characteristics that people have based on their particular culture as (for example) African-American, Mexican-American etc? Where do you draw the line? Let's say somebody's cultural background is related to their particular race. Is it racist to consider their cultural background as a factor in what we may expect from them, when we are making a first impression of somebody we don't know?
I have read it, certainly haven't memorized it... We're way ahead of 1968 for sure; we're to the point where when we ask if Obama or Condi could be elected POTUS we're asking not actually reverse coding the belief that there's no way in hell... we have a ruinously incompetent black SC justice who is not in any special danger of being assassinated AFAIK and no one is suggesting that his inadequacy is a racial attribute. I almost never hear/overhear conversations of a coarsely racist nature in mens rooms or gyms any more-- probably 5-10% of what I heard in 1968 wouldn't pass the smell test... and the few black kids in the local high school are pretty thoroughly accepted as far as I can see-- which wouldn't mean much except that in 1985 it was still easy to see that they weren't. No pro football coach on earth would choose Rex Grossman over Steve McNair if they were both reasonably priced free agents. In fact I'd go so far as to say that something like 80 % of the populace now seems to be judging individuals primarily on the content of character; what is a little scary is that the economic inequities don't die there. The inertia of old-boy networks and economic systems and such still hold back the ordinarily competent and the incompetent. There used to be a motto on feminist desks in NYC which said "Equal opportunity doesn't mean a female genius gets as far as a male genius; it means a female schnook gets as far as a male schnook." The same is true of racial equality, and we haven't got halfway on that one yet. If there aren't black and asian and native and aborigine people in your workplace or your school, you won't have much reason or way to judge their character...
I think it is pretty easy to say that things are better than they were 40 years ago. But are things better than they were five years ago, or even last year? I'm not entirely sure we're headed in the right direction.
I used to wonder what the black folks were complaining about... I grew up on various military bases and naturally hung out with many different minorities and never thought anything about it. I never heard someone use the N-word until I was 24. I honestly thought that racism was a relic of the past. Then I got out of the Navy and moved to rural east Texas. Folks, little out here has changed except the law. The most I can say is that people now tolerate talented black people as long as their talent is limited to sports.
video of the speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbUtL_0vAJk "I have a dream" starts at about 12:10. Other great moments: "100 years", "Now is the time", "We can not be satisfied ...", "With this faith", "Let freedom reign". More prophetic: his final "Mountaintop" speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_agUA-htonQ You wanna sleep with the fishes?