4 ms·

> We tend to only hear the 'dream' speech Cynically I think there has been a political project to expunge most of King’s ideas from the public memory, leaving

> We tend to only hear the 'dream' speech Cynically I think there has been a political project to expunge most of King’s ideas from the public memory, leaving only those that everyone is comfortable with. The public image of the man has been watered down to merely opposing segregation and legal discrimination, and all of his more radical economic proposals and opinions tend to be politely ignored. The March on Washington also included a demand for a $2 minimum wage ($17 in 2020 dollars) and self governance for Washington DC, funny how that isn’t mentioned often. Hell, he was helping support a strike when he was assassinated. How many people were taught that before?

Taywee 5y ago
> Cynically I think there has been a political project to expunge most of King’s ideas from the public memory, leaving only those that everyone is comfortable with. I don't think so. I think it's more that things get distilled and simplified in public memory naturally. How much of all of all the activities of other greatly-remembered figures are actually all fully remembered and talked about? Do you think the public has anywhere near a complete perception of all the ideals of Gandhi, Mother Theresa, George Washington, or Abraham Lincoln? Unless you are a scholar in the area, you have done specific research out of curiosity, or you have been personally affected by it, most of what you see is the stuff that echos in the public memory, which is the largest events and purest distillation of the ideals and character of the person in question. Human memory is built on patterns, symbols, and stripping of what seems to be unnecessary extraneous information, and this seems to be much more extreme in cultural memory. I don't think there has been any conscious effort to remove the other ideals that King had, it's just not what he did that people care about most right now.
- watwut 5y ago
  Imo, memory of other great figures and greatly influenced by politics. And often very intentionally, people using their names have agendas. That includes the three people you mentioned.
ralusek 5y ago
That's because ideas shouldn't be bundled together just because a person said them. The I Have A Dream speech is famous precisely because it is the most important/widely agreed upon of his ideas: evaluate individuals according to their own character independently of whatever collective you might otherwise assume characteristics of. That's a good idea. People like that idea. We don't talk about King's socialism as much, because what he said in that arena wasn't particularly revolutionary, and many people don't find socialism to be compelling (myself included). Hence, remembering ideas.
- watwut 5y ago
  That is one sentence from that speech. The speech has many more ideas in it.
  - ralusek 5y ago
    This is why I focused on ideas, not speeches.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  > That's because ideas shouldn't be bundled together just because a person said them. I think the exact opposite. I think if you’re cherry picking pieces of thought from a figure and ignoring the bits you don’t like then you’re just using them as a prop. There is of course some complexity when someone changes over the lifetime and renounces early beliefs. But that isn’t the case here, we’re talking about people ignoring a large chunk of a celebrated man’s work because it makes them uncomfortable. I don’t think you can actually do that, and I think it does him and his legacy a great disservice to even try. > We don't talk about King's socialism as much … and many people don't find socialism to be compelling (myself included). Thank you for proving my point. > Hence, remembering ideas. What, so the rest of what he said wasn’t ideas? Or that the rest of them have less value because someone said so? If so, who decides which ideas are the real ones to be remembered? You? Me? Our political chattering classes? Here’s the thing, powerful people and instituons have long had a use for editing and celebrating dead radicals as a way to reinforce their legitimacy while also signaling that Those Times are Now Gone. You see the exact same behavior out of the July Monarchy in their rewriting the history of the three glorious days (see Mike Duncan for more). For King it is extremely convenient to make his story the story of official segregation and legal discrimination and nothing more. That neat narrative of “first segregation, then MLK made it all better, end story” only works if you ignore the rest of his work on war and poverty. Because if that is brought into the light then his work looks only half done, rather than done and finished.
AvocadoPanic 5y ago
There's alot that people aren't taught. https://standpointmag.co.uk/the-troubling-legacy-of-martin-luther-king/ https://standpointmag.co.uk/the-troubling-legacy-of-martin-l...
- trs8080 5y ago
  this would be laughable if it weren't such blatant propaganda. highly recommend reading more about the FBI/Hoover's hatred for MLK and their tireless effort to destroy his reputation (and his life) through surveillance, harassment, and outright lies. here's a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
  - AvocadoPanic 5y ago
    It can be both propaganda to discredit and also be true.
runarberg 5y ago
It is kind of funny you should say this. Right after I read this post I saw a tweet by the Icelandic minister of foreign affairs—who is also the vice president of the conservative party and avid supporter of capitalism and NATO—quoting MLK presumably in a context of COVID restrictions getting in the way of our liberties[1]. I think your cynicism is justified. 1: https://twitter.com/thordiskolbrun/status/1483080575082717184 https://twitter.com/thordiskolbrun/status/148308057508271718...

Taywee 5y ago

> Cynically I think there has been a political project to expunge most of King’s ideas from the public memory, leaving only those that everyone is comfortable with. I don't think so. I think it's more that things get distilled and simplified in public memory naturally. How much of all of all the activities of other greatly-remembered figures are actually all fully remembered and talked about? Do you think the public has anywhere near a complete perception of all the ideals of Gandhi, Mother Theresa, George Washington, or Abraham Lincoln? Unless you are a scholar in the area, you have done specific research out of curiosity, or you have been personally affected by it, most of what you see is the stuff that echos in the public memory, which is the largest events and purest distillation of the ideals and character of the person in question. Human memory is built on patterns, symbols, and stripping of what seems to be unnecessary extraneous information, and this seems to be much more extreme in cultural memory. I don't think there has been any conscious effort to remove the other ideals that King had, it's just not what he did that people care about most right now.

watwut 5y ago
Imo, memory of other great figures and greatly influenced by politics. And often very intentionally, people using their names have agendas. That includes the three people you mentioned.

ralusek 5y ago

That's because ideas shouldn't be bundled together just because a person said them. The I Have A Dream speech is famous precisely because it is the most important/widely agreed upon of his ideas: evaluate individuals according to their own character independently of whatever collective you might otherwise assume characteristics of. That's a good idea. People like that idea. We don't talk about King's socialism as much, because what he said in that arena wasn't particularly revolutionary, and many people don't find socialism to be compelling (myself included). Hence, remembering ideas.

watwut 5y ago
That is one sentence from that speech. The speech has many more ideas in it.
- ralusek 5y ago
  This is why I focused on ideas, not speeches.
ashtonkem 5y ago
> That's because ideas shouldn't be bundled together just because a person said them. I think the exact opposite. I think if you’re cherry picking pieces of thought from a figure and ignoring the bits you don’t like then you’re just using them as a prop. There is of course some complexity when someone changes over the lifetime and renounces early beliefs. But that isn’t the case here, we’re talking about people ignoring a large chunk of a celebrated man’s work because it makes them uncomfortable. I don’t think you can actually do that, and I think it does him and his legacy a great disservice to even try. > We don't talk about King's socialism as much … and many people don't find socialism to be compelling (myself included). Thank you for proving my point. > Hence, remembering ideas. What, so the rest of what he said wasn’t ideas? Or that the rest of them have less value because someone said so? If so, who decides which ideas are the real ones to be remembered? You? Me? Our political chattering classes? Here’s the thing, powerful people and instituons have long had a use for editing and celebrating dead radicals as a way to reinforce their legitimacy while also signaling that Those Times are Now Gone. You see the exact same behavior out of the July Monarchy in their rewriting the history of the three glorious days (see Mike Duncan for more). For King it is extremely convenient to make his story the story of official segregation and legal discrimination and nothing more. That neat narrative of “first segregation, then MLK made it all better, end story” only works if you ignore the rest of his work on war and poverty. Because if that is brought into the light then his work looks only half done, rather than done and finished.

AvocadoPanic 5y ago

There's alot that people aren't taught. https://standpointmag.co.uk/the-troubling-legacy-of-martin-luther-king/ https://standpointmag.co.uk/the-troubling-legacy-of-martin-l...

trs8080 5y ago
this would be laughable if it weren't such blatant propaganda. highly recommend reading more about the FBI/Hoover's hatred for MLK and their tireless effort to destroy his reputation (and his life) through surveillance, harassment, and outright lies. here's a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
- AvocadoPanic 5y ago
  It can be both propaganda to discredit and also be true.

runarberg 5y ago

It is kind of funny you should say this. Right after I read this post I saw a tweet by the Icelandic minister of foreign affairs—who is also the vice president of the conservative party and avid supporter of capitalism and NATO—quoting MLK presumably in a context of COVID restrictions getting in the way of our liberties[1]. I think your cynicism is justified. 1: https://twitter.com/thordiskolbrun/status/1483080575082717184 https://twitter.com/thordiskolbrun/status/148308057508271718...