Skip to main content

quote:
A detailed exploration of the early King is important for showing the weaknesses in the radicalization thesis, which posits that King's politics and economics became much more radical during the last three years of his life (1966-1968). Carson rightly suggests that the pre-1955 writings reveal that the young King was far more radical than scholars have tended to depict him. For example, as a graduate student at Boston University, he was already calling for the demise of U.S. capitalism.


http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_26_119/ai_96195204

quote:
After supporting desegregation efforts in Saint Augustine, Fla., in 1964, King concentrated his efforts on the voter-registration drive in Selma, Ala., leading a harrowing march from Selma to Montgomery in March 1965. Soon after, a tour of the northern cities led him to assail the conditions of economic as well as social discrimination. This marked a shift in SCLC strategy, one intended to "bring the Negro into the mainstream of American life as quickly as possible." Having begun to recognize the deeper relationships of economics and poverty to racism, King now called for a "reconstruction of the entire society, a revolution of values." Along with demands for stronger civil and voting rights legislation and for a meaningful poverty budget, he spoke out against the Vietnam War, which took funds from antipoverty programs.

Early in 1968, King began to plan a multiracial poor people's march on Washington to demand an end to all forms of discrimination and the funding of a $12-billion "Economic Bill of Rights." In the midst of organizing this campaign, he flew to Memphis, Tenn., to assist striking sanitation workers. There, on Apr. 4, 1968, King was felled by an assassin's bullet.


http://content.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=4999

quote:
"It means that questions must be raised. You see my friends, when you deal with this, you begin to ask the question, ˜Who owns the oil?' You begin to ask the question, ˜Who owns the iron ore?' You begin to ask the question, ˜Why is it that people have to pay water bills in a world that is two-thirds water?'"


http://www.socialistworker.org/2003-1/441/441_08_MLK.shtml

I was 16 when MLK was assissinated. I wasn't paying anymore attention to economics than it took do my part time job after school. I am sure I had no idea what GNP was. I do not recall any comments by MLK about economics besides general things about poverty and jobs. That last statement was made at a SCLC meeting a few months before his death. The trouble with people making speeches is sometimes things are said for effect. That business about water bill and the world being two-thirds water sounds nice but as soon as you contemplate the fact that most of that is ocean water which is undrinkable it sounds stupid.

So I am hoping to open a discussion about did MLK have any specific economic intentions and if he was really knowledgable about economics. I did searches and looked at a lot of pages but most don't have enough detail. So has anyone read any books by or about MLK to help clarify this? And how much would his ideas matter now? He was killed before the moon landing and we could not even have discussions like this.

umbrarchist
Last edited {1}
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I trust more of Garvey's perspective on economics and action than I do King's if indeed the quotes you gave are representative samples of his thoughts on economics.---Dell Gines

And Garvey was about leaving the country.

His 'economics' were proposed for unteste, unproven, soil.

MLK's leverage in economics was sufficient to 'excite' the 'powers' of America's economy.

His 'leverage' was be able to sway the minds of African Americans, and others of African descent.

And now, in 1968, he was impacting European Americans.



PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:
And Garvey was about leaving the country.

His 'economics' were proposed for unteste, unproven, soil.

MLK's leverage in economics was sufficient to 'excite' the 'powers' of America's economy.

His 'leverage' was be able to sway the minds of African Americans, and others of African descent.

And now, in 1968, he was impacting European Americans.



PEACE

Jim Chester


Garvey was not solely about repatriation, that is a false analysis of what he proposed economically. He promoted Pan African economic ties, in particular a shipping line between the Americas and Africa. To chalk Garveyism up to repartriation alone is a grose distortion and over simplification.

In my opinion MLK never got the chance to fully develop his economic philosophy. He was leaning strongly towards socialism and some form of wealth redistribution. He got killed(precicely because he started to deal with the economic issues) before anything outside of his "Poor People's Campaign' could come to fruition.
A very short synopsis of Garvey is here:

http://www.crf-usa.org/brown50th/three_visions.htm

quote:
In 1920, over 20,000 people attended Garvey's first UNIA convention in New York. The convention produced a "Declaration of Negro Rights," which denounced lynchings, segregated public transportation, job discrimination, and inferior black public schools. The document also demanded "Africa for the Africans." Without actually consulting any African people, the convention proclaimed Garvey the "Provisional President of Africa."


Garvey always seemed like ancient history to me but I always got the impression he was more directly economically oriented than King. I think I was always turned off by him from seeing the films of him in that military uniform and the hat with the big feather.



umbra
I think I was always turned off by him from seeing the films of him in that military uniform and the hat with the big feather.---umbra

My early reaction is somewhere in that description.

But, with education comes awareness.

Beyond the pomposity and costuming was vision and self-determination.

Those are excellent attributes in any setting.

And...yes, claiming dominion over all of Africa is at least pretentious.

You must admit the man did have a plan.


PEACE

Jim Chester
Umbra, it is not the concept of organization that is usually flawed, but the purpose of organization that is flawed.

I am going to write an article when I get some time called - The Thomas Jefferson Approach to Fixing the Hood...

And talk about the concept of community & legislative control through local neighborhood and grassroots activism.

I would argue that indeed the vehicles you mentioned are tools (the internet etc) but the bottom line is still people to people and face to face.
quote:
His 'economics' were proposed for unteste, unproven, soil.

MLK's leverage in economics was sufficient to 'excite' the 'powers' of America's economy.

His 'leverage' was be able to sway the minds of African Americans, and others of African descent.

And now, in 1968, he was impacting European Americans.



This is an inaccurate statement

Please do some RESEARCH on Marcus Garvey's Universal Negro Improvement Association movement. He had several hundred thousand Blacks around the world within his organization - directly or losely. HE CREATED JOBS ORGANICALLY in many large cities in America. The Nation of Islam is the only movement to even approach the success of creating "FUBU" jobs within the Black community that stemmed from a consciousness movement. It is INACCURATE to say that Garvey's economics were "untested and unproven". He had flaws like any man did but in a hostile environment - he did much.

I can just imaging if some of you who are WAITING FOR OBAMA TO LEAD YOU ON YOUR WAY were to apply the principles of Garvey but not let ONE MAN be your king where he is taken out and the movement collapses. In America 2006 - you have the FREEDOM to do this rather than worrying about the corporate entity that you have always hated shipping your job overseas and you being surprised and suicidal .

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×