We often find ourselves looking back, into history, for tried solutions to modern problems and an experienced guide towards the future. We wrap ourselves in the words of the heroes on headstones, weaving their bold triumphs into the fabric and strength of our identities. And yet these exercises in continuity are rarely pure; quotations given new meanings by new orators, symbols of peace re-appropriated onto flags of war, and ancient history twisted to justify modern inhumanity. The leaders of our world are professionals in this dance of national identity and pride. They gather up their symbols and their heroes and say "This is what it means to be Kenyan" and "This is what it means to be American". These leaders are our leaders, and so we, the people, are just as guilty as they, our eyes and souls willing partners in this dance of manipulation.
What does it mean, then, to have a national holiday for a man who was an opponent of the national government? And what does it mean to celebrate a man whose vision, now forty years old, is barely closer to fruition than it was on the day he was assassinated? These questions, I believe, point to the great strengths and to the great weaknesses of our society. We must take pride in those strengths, but at the same time acknowledge our weaknesses -- not as unnecessary grime due to the "others" in our society, but as a real part of our identity.
Dr. King was fought and feared, not just by stereotypical racist segregationists, but by the 'liberal' establishment as well. Robert Kennedy
himself signed the order to begin FBI wiretapping of King. King's Riverside Church
speech against the war in Vietnam earned him the ire of the 'liberal media' Washington Post, Time Magazine, and New York Times. Lyndon Johnson once
referred to him as a "hypocrite preacher". Dr. King advocated for democratic socialism and serious social and economic reform. It took fifteen years to pass a bill in Congress
creating a national holiday, and it was only in 1999 that the last state (way to go, New Hampshire) joined recognition of the holiday. Senator Jesse Helms, the strongest opponent of the holiday, publicly called Dr. King a Communist and a sexual predator and still went on to win three more terms (thank you, North Carolina). And here lies one great social strength: our ability to function despite polarizing differences, allowing all sides to speak their mind and receive recognition. We did not choose to forget such a polarizing figure; we simply debated, peacefully, until one side got its way. Having a holiday for Dr. King is only one example. Here free speech is not a right begrudged by a wary elite, but instead a celebrated pillar of our national identity. We are able to subsume our hatred for the Other's opinion, religion, or values, under this blanket of freedom. Diversity does not threaten our national identity, rather it fortifies our belief that we are special for being able to accept these differences. This is no small achievement. One need not look far in the foreign headlines to find countries torn to shreds by diversity.
And yet despite the stability of our progress over the last few decades, we have done little to erase the social and economic problems that racked the days of Dr. King. Despite the efforts of thousands of well-intentioned bureaucrats and activists, we still live in a country where class mobility is shrinking, the income gap is growing, health care and higher education are inaccessible to the poor, and great gleaming walls of prejudice still stand between racial and ethnic minorities and their dreams. Poor people, seduced by the military with rarely-heard promises of a better life, are still dying in unnecessary wars -- fighting for a country in which, no matter how many 'gooks' or 'towelheads' they killed, they will still be judged based on the color of their skin and the content of their wallet.
So this is America: Freedom and Inequality for all. A land where you are free to speak your mind, just so long as you understand that your opinions are worth less than they would be if you were wearing a more expensive suit and a lighter tone of skin. A land where theft and exploitation are accepted, as long as you do it with a pen instead of with a gun. This is America. So where do Dr. King and his legacy fit in? We must struggle to not let our history define us; we must instead seek to define its place in our struggle for self- and national improvement. Dr. King fought for social equality, but he would not want to see a nation of people yoked to the beam balance. Improvement isn't about getting rid of the "bad" elements, because that divide is never clear. The "good" and the "bad" are part and parcel. It is because of our insistence on freedom that inequality persists. And it is because of how secure the elite feel that they allow such freedom among the masses. We should not rid ourselves of the racists or the corporate raiders, because all of us are prejudiced and all of us would exploit the "other" if it sufficiently benefited ourselves and our families. We, personally and nationally, are all responsible for everything "good" or "bad" that goes on in our society.
Where, then, do we go from here? Do we accept the status quo, the permanence and necessity of the Yin and the Yang, and go about our business? Or is there a path to action without anger, to change without destruction? In lieu of any futile answers, I will quote the eloquence of Dr. King:
"We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The "tide in the affairs of men" does not remain at the flood; it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is deaf to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residue of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: "Too late." There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. "The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on..." We still have a choice today; nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation. We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace in Vietnam and justice throughout the developing world -- a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act we shall surely be dragged down the long dark and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight.
Now let us begin. Now let us rededicate ourselves to the long and bitter -- but beautiful -- struggle for a new world. This is the calling of the sons of God, and our brothers wait eagerly for our response. Shall we say the odds are too great? Shall we tell them the struggle is too hard? Will our message be that the forces of American life militate against their arrival as full men, and we send our deepest regrets? Or will there be another message, of longing, of hope, of solidarity with their yearnings, of commitment to their cause, whatever the cost? The choice is ours, and though we might prefer it otherwise we must choose in this crucial moment of human history."
(Another blog's take on MLK Day here.)
