I want to be free of him at last. |
Today began just like any other day for me. Then at 9:30, I checked the stock market and saw there was no trading. I was perplexed for a while, and then it hit me. Yes, it’s the ugliest day of the year, the day on which Americans celebrate the loss of their civil rights.
Let’s leave aside Martin Luther King’s communist connections and his record of adultery, sexual perversion, and plagiarism—we should all re-read Sam Francis’s “The King Holiday and Its Meaning” every year on this day. What stinks worst about the King myth is that history knows him as the man who led the “civil rights movement.”
Consider the legislation that resulted from King’s activism: the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which banned racial discrimination in hiring, and the 1968 Fair Housing Act, which outlawed racially segregated neighborhoods. Did this legislation make us more or less free? Did it broaden our civil rights or narrow them?
Well, let’s see. It is legal for me to racially discriminate in my choice of friends. If I decide that I want all my friends to be white and even announce to the world that I racially discriminate in favor of whites when I choose my friends, that’s perfectly legal. If the government tried to restrict my right to racially discriminate in this matter and demanded that I make some black friends, I think not even the American people would be befuddled and cowardly enough to accept such tyranny. We would recognize this intrusion as an intolerable restriction of our rights.
And yet if I run a business and I decide I want all my employees to be white, that is illegal.
The inconsistency of the laws is manifest. How do the two cases differ in essence? Why should one be legal and the other illegal? If limiting my choice of friends is tyranny, why isn’t limiting a business owner’s choice of employees the same? The same goes for racially segregated neighborhoods. If people can choose the race of their friends, why shouldn’t a coalition of homeowners be able to choose that theirs be a white neighborhood?
It is a grotesque distortion to say that King worked to broaden our rights. Rather, the result of his activism was to narrow our rights by denying us the right to racially discriminate in some circumstances. It is not merely the rights of whites that have been restricted either: blacks, and all other Americans, also cannot racially discriminate in hiring and housing.
And besides, what was the real moral of the “civil rights movement”? In the end it was this: blacks are so unattractive that whites have to be forced to associate with them. If blacks had any self-respect, they would revile King, rather than adulating him. Black author Zora Neale Hurston recognized that the “civil rights movement” was an insult to her race. She wrote after the Brown v. Board Supreme Court decision, which desegregated the schools:
The whole matter revolves around the self-respect of my people. How much satisfaction can I get from a court order for somebody to associate with me who does not wish me near them?
The inverted nature of the world is more palpable on this day than on any other. Once again we see the reality is the inversion of the appearance. Not only is the race of compassion and accomplishment the source of all the world’s misery, but tyranny is freedom.
Like King, I look forward to the day when:
We all will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!”
But for me, that will be the day when we free ourselves of King’s legacy forever.
If you want this article to be exposed to a wide audience, take the time to recommend it at digg. Millions of readers traffic the site, and the more recommendations an article gets, the better its chance of being read. If you don't have digg account yet, registration is easy. Just click submit to get started. |
Click here to join the White America mailing list. You'll get an e-mail notice whenever White America publishes new entries.
To Ian Jobling, regarding:
“Let’s leave aside Martin Luther King’s communist connections and his record of adultery, sexual perversion, and plagiarism…”
Interestingly, I was extremely angry at you when I read that sentence; however, having finished your article, I am quite becalmed. In fact, I would like to extend a hearty congratulations to you!
You didn’t just hit the nail on the head, you drove it straight through the board and left it bent on the floor.
All day long, I have been wishing people a Happy Saint Martin the Red Day; to no avail, it is lost or worse, the cause of a dirty look. Mind you, it was whites who got that salutation; who in their right mind, would greet a black with the same?
In the end, it is both his cause and canonization that needs to be addressed. The great revolution and the social “engineering” that these events have bestowed upon us as “our” legacy, in this country. Is the death of, or the imprisonment of freedom, to be “celebrated?” Is ignorance of the facts, a strength? Is that strength found in enforced “diversity,” based not in the content of character or good citizenship, but skin color?
Indeed, even jovially mocking the “best” of the diabolical “martyred” Red’s words, holds a chilling irony.
They chanted peace and equality; they conjured an abyss!
What more to say?
Of course, as always, God help us all!
The good news this MLK day was the great collapse on foreign stock exchanges. The international financial system has been shaken to the core. I was excited by the possibility of the whole system collapsing - the big banks and insurers imploding - followed by the corporations.
Why? Because such an event is the only real chance we have of turning our racial situation around. Let these repossessed white homeowners in the dying suburbs live amongst real diversity for a change (w/ $6.00 per gallon gas). The economy is what allows the average white to insulate his/her family from the ongoing destruction of our nation. It is the fuel that perpetuates fantasy land.
It’s coming sooner or later: the rising price of oil, the pathetic savings rate, the offshoring of jobs through free trade agreements, the going nowhere service jobs replacing them, the mountains of mortgage and credit card debt, the trade deficit, declining dollar, inflation of the money supply, the boomers retiring, insolvency of Social Security and Medicare, the “I have a dream” generation of blacks and Hispanics failing in education, etc. How long will Wall Street and the Fed’s financial smoke and mirrors keep the rotten, faith based foundation afloat?
The dullest MLK day spectacle, though the competition is fierce, is for me the white chyron jockeys who spend the day reminding us that King’s “movement” was a victory for “all” Americans. In fact it dismantled the traditional, common-law rights of whites. And yes, there is in principle no difference between the Feds telling you whom you can hire and their telling you whom you can marry. Perhaps B. Hussein Obama has something in the works, the “Right To White Women Act of 2008.”
Of course in reality the “movement” was not King’s, as he was merely its figurehead or totem; King himself was incapable of running anything more complex than a xerox machine, a device over which his mastery cannot be disputed.
The decision to integrate the public schools was made by the Supreme Court in the Brown decision. This was in 1954. Both major political parties were committed to civil rights reform by 1948. President Truman desegregated the military in 1948. The white primary was struck down in 1944. The Supreme Court had already ordered integration of public accommodations in several rulings before Brown.
MLK was a nobody until the Montgomery Bus Boycott of 1955. In that case, the federal district court struck down the local law mandating segregation on buses. Saint Martin accomplished nothing on his own. The changes in American race relations were forced on the public from the top down - through the federal judiciary - during the Truman presidency. The “civil rights movement” only materialized after the fact - when the Southern states refused to comply with federal court orders.
The MLK holiday is the height of absurdity. As you clearly show in the above article the so-called Civil Rights movement achieved all it’s main objectives before his holiness MLK came on the scene. Every subsequent “achievement” associated with the Civil Rights movement has eventually caused a loss of Civil Rights for whites. Equal treatment under the law, has been replaced by quotas to “undo” the damage done to people of color. When that rationale could no longer be used, white Americans were introduced to the concept of “diversity”. This concept has been used further do away with meritocracy and replace it with a racial spoils system. I believe Abraham Lincoln did much more for American blacks. Lincoln after his first election could have moved in the direction of the democrat party and become similar to James Buchanan the president who immediately preceded Lincoln and although a Northerner, was considered a friend of the south. Lincoln, however, became the great emancipator which eventually cost him his life. It’s ironic Lincoln’s holiday was done away with to make room for the day which honors St Martin. Even John Brown sacrificed more (his life as well as several of his sons’) for the black man than Saint Martin.
This holiday has always seemed to me to be incontrovertible proof that we no longer have government of the people, for the people, by the people. This was imposed on us by our “betters.” In no way is it popular, in the root sense of that word. One thing I will say, the sullenness that fills me on this day makes me an honorary negro.