Honoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
By Grace Lee Boggs, WORT commentary, January 17, 2000
During the 1960s, like most activists in the Black Power movement, I
identified more with Malcolm than with King. I was inspired by the civil
rights movement in the South, but I had no real understanding of how deeply
rooted it was in the people and the community or how it challenged not only
the racism of American society but the concepts of revolution held by most
radicals, including myself. It was only as I studied the speeches and
writings of Dr. King in the last two years of his life that I have learned to
appreciate how profoundly visionary he was and especially how he exemplified
what I believe to be one of the most important qualities of revolutionary
leadership, the ability to evolve and change your ideas as reality changes
and as you learn from your own experiences and those of others.
The turning point for King was the eruption of the youth rebellions in
northern cities, beginning with Watts in 1965. These rebellions made King
painfully aware that the vision of Black and white children marching hand in
hand, which had inspired the civil rights struggle in the South, did not meet
the more complex needs of new generations of Black street youth whom Hi-Tech
had made expendable and who were being sent to die in the rice paddies of
Vietnam.
Recognizing that we had entered into an era of rebellion but also
recognizing that unceasing rebellion would only mean unceasing chaos, King
was exploring a new kind of revolution, a non-violent revolution that would
challenge all the values and institutions of our society and combine the
struggle against Racism with a struggle against Poverty, Militarism and
Materialism.
Recognizing that these four evils were deeply rooted in capitalism, King
was trying to conceptualize a new system that would go beyond Capitalism
which he said was too "I-centered, too individualistic" and Communism which
he saw as "too collective, too statist." Warning that material growth had
been made an end in itself and that our scientific power had outrun our
spiritual power, he refused to accept the dictatorship of Hi-Tech which he
said diminishes people because it eliminates the sense of participation. "We
have guided missiles and misguided men," he said. He deplored the way that
educators were trying to instill middle class values in black youth, noting
that "it was precisely when young Negroes threw off their middle class values
and put careers and wealth in a secondary role" that they made an historic
social contribution. And he called for programs that would involve young
people in direct actions "in our dying cities" which would be both
self-transforming and structure-transforming.
I don't know - no one does - what King would have been thinking and doing
had he not been killed. But today, thirty-two years later, I am convinced
that in order to build a new movement for revolutionary social change for our
period we have to begin where he left off, i.e., with the need to go beyond
rebellion to revolution.
That means taking seriously King's conviction that the struggle against
Racism should not be separated out from the struggle against Poverty,
Materialism and Militarism. It also means that we should be involving our
young people in self-transforming and structure-transforming
community-building programs, especially in our schools from K-12.
King was able to respond so creatively to the black rebellions because he
had learned to think dialectically from Hegel, his "favorite philosopher."
Recognizing that new contradictions are bound to emerge in the course of
struggle, Hegel warned against getting stuck in the ideals of the pasts.
For King, as for Hegel, the essence of humanity was the struggle for
Freedom. But Freedom is not a thing. It is a concept that is constantly
evolving as we struggle to evolve more human. Thus we have to go beyond the
concept of Freedom as freedom of the will or to do your own thing and begin
conceiving of Freedom in terms of citizenship or our right and responsibility
to govern our communities, our city and our country.
Like Hegel, King had a long-range approach to struggle. As a result, he
saw revolution not as an outburst of anger or resentment but as disciplined
activity that is transformative and healing not only of society but of
ourselves.
These are some of the ways of thinking that contributed to the very
special quality of King's leadership. The best way for us to honor Dr. King
is to think dialectically ourselves.
See www.boggscenter.org for more on thinking dialectically.
Honoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
By Grace Lee Boggs, WORT commentary, January 17, 2000
During the 1960s, like most activists in the Black Power movement, I
identified more with Malcolm than with King. I was inspired by the civil
rights movement in the South, but I had no real understanding of how deeply
rooted it was in the people and the community or how it challenged not only
the racism of American society but the concepts of revolution held by most
radicals, including myself. It was only as I studied the speeches and
writings of Dr. King in the last two years of his life that I have learned to
appreciate how profoundly visionary he was and especially how he exemplified
what I believe to be one of the most important qualities of revolutionary
leadership, the ability to evolve and change your ideas as reality changes
and as you learn from your own experiences and those of others.
The turning point for King was the eruption of the youth rebellions in
northern cities, beginning with Watts in 1965. These rebellions made King
painfully aware that the vision of Black and white children marching hand in
hand, which had inspired the civil rights struggle in the South, did not meet
the more complex needs of new generations of Black street youth whom Hi-Tech
had made expendable and who were being sent to die in the rice paddies of
Vietnam.
Recognizing that we had entered into an era of rebellion but also
recognizing that unceasing rebellion would only mean unceasing chaos, King
was exploring a new kind of revolution, a non-violent revolution that would
challenge all the values and institutions of our society and combine the
struggle against Racism with a struggle against Poverty, Militarism and
Materialism.
Recognizing that these four evils were deeply rooted in capitalism, King
was trying to conceptualize a new system that would go beyond Capitalism
which he said was too "I-centered, too individualistic" and Communism which
he saw as "too collective, too statist." Warning that material growth had
been made an end in itself and that our scientific power had outrun our
spiritual power, he refused to accept the dictatorship of Hi-Tech which he
said diminishes people because it eliminates the sense of participation. "We
have guided missiles and misguided men," he said. He deplored the way that
educators were trying to instill middle class values in black youth, noting
that "it was precisely when young Negroes threw off their middle class values
and put careers and wealth in a secondary role" that they made an historic
social contribution. And he called for programs that would involve young
people in direct actions "in our dying cities" which would be both
self-transforming and structure-transforming.
I don't know - no one does - what King would have been thinking and doing
had he not been killed. But today, thirty-two years later, I am convinced
that in order to build a new movement for revolutionary social change for our
period we have to begin where he left off, i.e., with the need to go beyond
rebellion to revolution.
That means taking seriously King's conviction that the struggle against
Racism should not be separated out from the struggle against Poverty,
Materialism and Militarism. It also means that we should be involving our
young people in self-transforming and structure-transforming
community-building programs, especially in our schools from K-12.
King was able to respond so creatively to the black rebellions because he
had learned to think dialectically from Hegel, his "favorite philosopher."
Recognizing that new contradictions are bound to emerge in the course of
struggle, Hegel warned against getting stuck in the ideals of the past.
For King, as for Hegel, the essence of humanity was the struggle for
Freedom. But Freedom is not a thing. It is a concept that is constantly
evolving as we struggle to evolve into more human, human beings. Thus
we have to go beyond the concept of Freedom as freedom of the will or to
do your own thing and begin conceiving of Freedom in terms of citizenship
or our right and responsibility to govern our communities, our city
and our country.
Like Hegel, King had a long-range approach to struggle. As a result, he
saw revolution not as an outburst of anger or resentment but as disciplined
activity that is transformative and healing not only of society but of
ourselves.
These are some of the ways of thinking that contributed to the very
special quality of King's leadership. The best way for us to honor Dr. King
is to think dialectically ourselves.
See www.boggscenter.org for more on thinking dialectically.