Skip to main content

Reply to "Does MLK Get A Bad Rap?"

quote:
I'm not sure how this is relevant to the discussion, but since you ask, how do you differentiate and define the two?
MBM, I asked you to define those terms. You have used them and carelessly interchanged them, IMO, without defining either.

SIMILAR OBJECTIVES? TO hairsplit, can you really say similar is the same? and then judge both MLK and MX if the objectives were merely similar but perhaps not completely the same?

Please. I asked you to define those terms. I would think you could at least do that.

As far as reading what you've said, I could not have made one comment without doing so. You are quibbling because I don't agree with your characterizations and your "lukewarm" esteem of MX.

That's my point here, defending the esteem of MX and trying to provide you with the context. I have not berated MLK while doing so. If I have please point that out. And while you're at it, please point out what I "haven't read".

Own your bias and lukewarm treatment. That's all. Now, don't quibble over terms if you want to take issue with me and my "semanticals"...
quote:
Why do you deny MLK the same opportunity to be thoughtful and analytical that you give MX? (The right to adjust strategies according to the ebb and flow of the fight?)

Is that not saying that I have a bias or some type of limiting perspective concerning either a positive for MX or a negative for MLK?

Before that... did I say anything that could be (mis)construed as a negative towards MLK? Be honest and READ my post.

SHORT-TERM and LONG TERM is providing a sense of context. Short-term = MLK; Long-Term = MX (IMO) If you feel that's giving MLK less than his due then I can own that bias. However, I will not devalue the necessity of short-term solutions, nor have I suggested anything to that effect. READ MY POST (do you want me to dig out one that sounds more favorable to you... I've got one!)

I know you understand Short-Term and Long-Term and I know you understand how maybe some unanticipated and perhaps ignored known or unknown consequences.

Now, not being a business person per se, I will venture to say that companies evaluate strategies both in terms of pass performance of certain models or methods yet, in order to be on the cutting edge and stay "competitive", have to anticipate the coming trends and/or see exactly how long the "effectiveness" of a particular strategy will last and ultimately whether the initial strategy chosen got them where they want to be and if it will have optimum yields.

In that process, they cannot "lose sight" of what the ultimate goal is and may even have to re-define their goals and/or make sure nothing has been lost in the translation of the principles into practice.

That's why I've asked you to define FREEDOM and EQUALITY... and you can elaborate on their relationship and intertwine-ness.

Thank you.

Is this a team or what? If you agree with the football analogy as I expanded on it, what don't you understand about my perspective?

Own your bias, MBM. That's not a bad thing, MBM. It's honesty. You want it from me and whether you use that term or not you think I have one along with Yssys or anyone who values MX.

Frankly, I would have you refer to FAHEEM's post again and I'll answer that MLK does not get a bad rap for me and IMO hardly gets it from others. If you took a poll of ALL African-Americans who do you think would win? MLK or Malcolm X?

What relevance do you think the "popular" conceptions of them would have?

I'm sure MLK would win... but... (in MBMite fashion)
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Smile
×
×
×
×