Martin Luther King Jr. has received credit that he does not deserve. I want to know what did MLK do for me. Thrugood Marshall said that MLK gave nice speeches while other blacks did the hard work. MLK never tried to change the law. He never fought in any legal aspects to congress nor to the Supreme Courts. He only gave public speeches. Giving a speech is great. What good is a speech without action? I do not mean violent action, I mean legal action. He did not take any legal action. Actions speak louder than words. Anyone can give a speech. However, he never took any legal actions to make change. It is impossible to change the law without taking legal action.
Did MLK help blacks get into school? Nope! Thrugood Marshall is the reason why blacks are in school. Many black lawyers of the NAACP helped blacks go to school. MLK was not involved in this process.
Is MLK the reason why blacks are in sports? NO! I will take it a step further. Jackie Robinson is not the reason why blacks are in sports. The NFL actually had black players in the 20s. However, many black players were cut because some teams were no longer active. These black players went to the AFL(today's AFC).However, a larger number blacks reappeared in NFL by 1946. Some of these blacks are in the NFL Hall of Fame.
Did MLK end bus segeration? Nope. Ed Nixon set up the boycott with Rosa Parks and many civil right leaders including King. However, this was Nixon's plan. Do you here about him in black history? MLK was not even involved in Rosa's court case.
Lyndon Johnson pushed congress to pass the civil rights act of 1964. He is not mention in black history.
You may find my opinion to be crazy. Maybe you will find my post to be self hate. Let me leave you all with this note. Thurgood Marshall also had the same opinion about Martin Lurther King as I do!
I am black by the way.
He was an inspirational leader. If you truly think he did nothing but give a speech, you should probably brush up on your research. Atop that, if we went around giving holidays to everyone, we'd have way too many holidays. MLK has come to symbolize the civil rights movement, and as a result has been given a holiday.
Without his voice, the movement would have had no voice. implying he did nothing is fucking stupid.
The Civil Rights moment had MANY voices. MLK is not the only person in this movement. MLK did give speeches. That was the only thing he did in the movement. He never went to court to fight the law. There were many black lawyers who fought the law. Many times they lost, but they stood back up. They continued to fight and eventually won their battles. They changed the law. Who got their credit? MLK did not change a single law.
OMG, you are soooooooo right!!!!
Not really.
It's like saying Obama had nothing to do with the gay rights movement. All he did was sign his name on a piece of paper. Oh, wait, that piece of paper allowed for states to chose to have gay marriage or not. It didn't exactly work out the way we might have wanted, but it was progress.
You live in a democracy; ostensibly the law gets changed when a majority of citizens think it should be changed. The role of the courts is generally limited and only rarely does it really "lead" the way in changing laws. "Giving speeches" can raise awareness and change people's minds, and hence change the law. MLK was a charismatic leader who inspired hope in a lot of people and helped change minds. I think you are underestimating his importance.
Quote from: redyugi on January 14, 2011, 11:56:54 PM
OMG, you are soooooooo right!!!!
Not really.
It's like saying Obama had nothing to do with the gay rights movement. All he did was sign his name on a piece of paper. Oh, wait, that piece of paper allowed for states to chose to have gay marriage or not. It didn't exactly work out the way we might have wanted, but it was progress.
You don't understand what my message is about.
Unlike King, Obama deserves credit. Obama was part of the legal process to help homosexuals and transsexuals. MLK was never part of any legal process. He never spoke to congress nationally. He never had any casts held at the states' and federal's Supreme Courts. He never wrote a bill.
What if MLK never existed? These legal changes in the law to stop segregation would still be in place because he was NEVER apart of the legal law changing process. He only talked and didn't walk!
You're undermining the power of speech. An idea is powerless if it isn't spread and supported by the people. King spread and fueled the message of equality.
Also, what are you talking about redyugi? When were states not permitted to decide on the legality of gay marriage? This is news to me.
Quote from: modern algebra on January 14, 2011, 11:59:43 PM
You live in a democracy; ostensibly the law gets changed when a majority of citizens think it should be changed. The role of the courts is generally limited and only rarely does it really "lead" the way in changing laws. "Giving speeches" can raise awareness and change people's minds, and hence change the law. MLK was a charismatic leader who inspired hope in a lot of people and helped change minds. I think you are underestimating his importance.
Look at the laws that were changed. He never once was involved in these cases. Actually if you look at the Civil Rights moment most of the laws were changed by the States' and Federal's Supreme Courts. The NAACP's lawyers fought many cases that most people have no knowledge of their importance.
Democrats supported blacks because they needed the black vote. Republicans no longer cared about the black vote because they could win without the black vote. Democrats ironically helped the the movement. lol That's why the Democrats pushed for civil right bills to be passed. Look at the politicians who helped the blacks in this movement. The majority of them were Democrats.
To be fair, I have heard a lot about Martin Luther King getting more praise than he deserved. Example, the march that would eventually lead to him giving the famous "I Have A Dream" speech was actually more organized by Bayard Rustin. The year he won the Nobel Peace Award for his efforts in the civil rights movement, many black people were angered with his support and advocation of the war in Vietnam. I'm going only by hearsay, but there was a lot I've heard against him.
However, without him, I doubt the civil rights movement would have come as far as it did. He was a strong presence whose voice did manage to send out their message. So, to say that he did nothing is untrue.
King did NOT support the Vietnam war. He was against it.
Look at the examples I gave. MLK is not the man who put blacks into white schools. MLK did not set up the bus boycotts. MLK did not write a single bill. MLK NEVER went to any court case to support the movement. MLK did not help blacks get into sports, that actually happen before he entered into the movement.
lol, I feel like you're lurking so hard in this thread. I say you just want to argue with somebody so bad right now haha
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 15, 2011, 12:50:14 AM
King did NOT support the Vietnam war. He was against it.
Not according to what I've heard. But then, I could be wrong; I've done no research into this, nor do I care to. Martin Luther King is gone, and I'd much rather celebrate MLK day in respect of the movement itself and all the people who fought for it rather than the man himself.
Quote from: Zylos on January 15, 2011, 12:53:39 AM
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 15, 2011, 12:50:14 AM
King did NOT support the Vietnam war. He was against it.
Not according to what I've heard. But then, I could be wrong; I've done no research into this, nor do I care to. Martin Luther King is gone, and I'd much rather celebrate MLK day in respect of the movement itself and all the people who fought for it rather than the man himself.
You're not being logical. You can't believe everything you hear. Most people would say that lower class people commit the most crimes. However, statistics prove that the upper class commits the most crime and the lower class commits the least amount of crime.
How can you say you refuse to research information and go by word of mouth? You're not even trying to debate. Instead you are saying things without researched knowledge. A debate requires reasonable people to do their research before opening their mouths.
It's ironic that I am now defending King on a different issue. lol
I think you're underemphasizing the importance of speech and overemphasizing the court system. Jesus also didn't write any laws or fight any court battles. Has He had no effect on the world? Not that I'm comparing Jesus to MLK - just an example to show that ideas and the conveyance of those ideas matters.
Quote from: modern algebra on January 15, 2011, 01:16:05 AM
I think you're underemphasizing the importance of speech and overemphasizing the court system. Jesus also didn't write any laws or fight any court battles. Has He had no effect on the world? Not that I'm comparing Jesus to MLK - just an example to show that ideas and the conveyance of those ideas matters.
Jesus actually took action. Not only did he talk, he walked! Let me explain. Jesus had a religious mission. Jesus helped the sick. Jesus saved sinners. Jesus actually did tell the Roman Government that the world should have a universal economic system, for example every nation uses the same currency. Roman government rejected such an idea, and saw Jesus as a threat.
Jesus's mission did not involve human rights. It's hard to say he needed to go to court. God gives people the choices to worship him or not to worship him.
Jesus actually started new christian laws, but did not write them. Jesus told Christians that they are now allowed to eat scaled fish. Jesus broke many Old Testament laws, and removed them.
Quote from: Irock on January 15, 2011, 12:05:33 AM
Also, what are you talking about redyugi? When were states not permitted to decide on the legality of gay marriage? This is news to me.
Quote from: redyugi on January 14, 2011, 11:56:54 PM
Oh, wait, that piece of paper allowed for states to chose to have gay marriage or not. It didn't exactly work out the way we might have wanted, but it was progress.
The power of reading
Yeah, and Rosa Parks liek, totally didn't matter cuz all she did was sit in a bus seat, amirite?
Martin Luther King inspired people and gave them hope. How do you know he could have even done any good in the legal system? Was he a politician? Correct me if I'm wrong, and I very well could be wrong, but I don't remember him being anything more than an activist and clergyman.
Quote from: redyugi on January 15, 2011, 02:28:04 AM
Quote from: Irock on January 15, 2011, 12:05:33 AM
Also, what are you talking about redyugi? When were states not permitted to decide on the legality of gay marriage? This is news to me.
Quote from: redyugi on January 14, 2011, 11:56:54 PM
Oh, wait, that piece of paper allowed for states to chose to have gay marriage or not. It didn't exactly work out the way we might have wanted, but it was progress.
The power of reading
I'm asking what disallowed states to decide whether or not gay marriage is legal within their state. It would already have to be prohibited in order for allowing it to make any sense. Unless the power is prohibited to the states, it's authorized by the 10th amendment of the US constitution. What prohibited it, and what legislation did the current president sign to allowed it?
You're forgetting that most major societal changes need either a scapegoat or a poster-child. Regardless of whether or not he was the only one who did anything, the things he did, coupled with his assassination, make him the perfect poster-child for equality. Most everything that happens in life are eventualities. If it wasn't King, it would've been someone else. That much I agree with. The thing is, it doesn't really matter. King is no longer just a person, he is a symbol.
Quote from: RATION on January 15, 2011, 09:15:02 AM
You're forgetting that most major societal changes need either a scapegoat or a poster-child. Regardless of whether or not he was the only one who did anything, the things he did, coupled with his assassination, make him the perfect poster-child for equality. Most everything that happens in life are eventualities. If it wasn't King, it would've been someone else. That much I agree with. The thing is, it doesn't really matter. King is no longer just a person, he is a symbol.
I see King as the scapegoat and poster-child.
Quote from: Irock on January 15, 2011, 03:12:01 AM
Quote from: redyugi on January 15, 2011, 02:28:04 AM
Quote from: Irock on January 15, 2011, 12:05:33 AM
Also, what are you talking about redyugi? When were states not permitted to decide on the legality of gay marriage? This is news to me.
Quote from: redyugi on January 14, 2011, 11:56:54 PM
Oh, wait, that piece of paper allowed for states to chose to have gay marriage or not. It didn't exactly work out the way we might have wanted, but it was progress.
The power of reading
I'm asking what disallowed states to decide whether or not gay marriage is legal within their state. It would already have to be prohibited in order for allowing it to make any sense. Unless the power is prohibited to the states, it's authorized by the 10th amendment of the US constitution. What prohibited it, and what legislation did the current president sign to allowed it?
Ah.. I see.. That does make sense, therefore, I am going to research after my raid today.
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 15, 2011, 01:34:28 AM
Jesus actually started new christian laws, but did not write them. Jesus told Christians that they are now allowed to eat scaled fish. Jesus broke many Old Testament laws, and removed them.
Wait, what the hell? MLK never actually wrote laws either. MLK told people to break laws, too (civil disobedience). What makes them so different in the context of this debate?
All the boycotters and all the sit-ins and stuff. They're all worthless because they made no legal changes? Like MA said, speeches raise awareness. Really, who gives a crap about what the black people were doing back then? Who really paid attention? What change is a few hundred black people going to do? Raise awareness, get more participation, make a bigger impact. Those court decisions never would have happened unless people cared enough about black rights.
It's like saying an SAT prep class is worthless. I mean, they're not actually providing answers real-time during the middle of the SATs. They just give possible things that could come up on your SAT. The preparation for something is just as important as the thing it leads up to.
Quote from: Master Moo on January 16, 2011, 04:47:16 AM
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 15, 2011, 01:34:28 AM
Jesus actually started new christian laws, but did not write them. Jesus told Christians that they are now allowed to eat scaled fish. Jesus broke many Old Testament laws, and removed them.
Wait, what the hell? MLK never actually wrote laws either. MLK told people to break laws, too (civil disobedience). What makes them so different in the context of this debate?
Uh. He said that.
Quote
It's like saying an SAT prep class is worthless. I mean, they're not actually providing answers real-time during the middle of the SATs. They just give possible things that could come up on your SAT. The preparation for something is just as important as the thing it leads up to.
SATs are actually useless. lol. The higher your score the more likely you'll be to accomplish more time in higher education. If you do really well it's like telling colleges that you're likely to accomplish all 4, or more, years of college. If you suck dick it's like telling colleges that you'll likely drop out of college after a year. It doesn't really mean much else. A way for colleges to check their possible investments. Even so, it's total here-say.
Quote from: Master Moo on January 16, 2011, 04:47:16 AM
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 15, 2011, 01:34:28 AM
Jesus actually started new christian laws, but did not write them. Jesus told Christians that they are now allowed to eat scaled fish. Jesus broke many Old Testament laws, and removed them.
All the boycotters and all the sit-ins and stuff. They're all worthless because they made no legal changes? Like MA said, speeches raise awareness. Really, who gives a crap about what the black people were doing back then? Who really paid attention? What change is a few hundred black people going to do? Raise awareness, get more participation, make a bigger impact. Those court decisions never would have happened unless people cared enough about black rights.
It's like saying an SAT prep class is worthless. I mean, they're not actually providing answers real-time during the middle of the SATs. They just give possible things that could come up on your SAT. The preparation for something is just as important as the thing it leads up to.
You suggest you reread my posts. I never said any of those things.
By the way while you're rereading I never said the boycott was unimportant. I said the wrong person got the credit. Damn
Franklin, implying King never participated in sit downs or marches is FUCKING STUPID AND IGNORANT WHEN HE WAS ARRESTED FOR DOING SUCH. He did more than just talk, your argument is therefore invalid. He organized rallies and did loads of things for the movement besides just talk. you do not have a full understanding of this topic and you should definitely go read up before you continue making an ass out of yourself.
Too harsh for elitist debate? maybe, fuck it.
black people u mad lolol
Martin Luther King was a public figure who got a lot of attention from white people during the civil rights movement (like the most attention as far as I ever remember) and therefoooooooooore is the most important black guy. I mean if you want to go into someone who really didn't do all that much for blacks, bitch about Abe Lincoln cool?
It's not what he didn't do. It's what he did do. Martin Luther king was a symbol, a leader for the civil rights movement. His words inspired a people and that's all what it takes. A man who can speak clear and show the world for what they truly are...
Take Winston Churchill during World war 2. In the UK many look to him as the man who saved the country. Despite not actually fighting himself during the conflict, it didn't matter, he was a leader and his speeches united a nation to fight in their darkest hour and we succeeded. Sometimes words is all what it takes to change the world.
Of course action also help and King did actually take part.
Quote from: Strike Reyhi on January 16, 2011, 05:16:41 PM
Franklin, implying King never participated in sit downs or marches is FUCKING STUPID AND IGNORANT WHEN HE WAS ARRESTED FOR DOING SUCH. He did more than just talk, your argument is therefore invalid. He organized rallies and did loads of things for the movement besides just talk. you do not have a full understanding of this topic and you should definitely go read up before you continue making an ass out of yourself. The NAACP did a lot of good things that King gets credit for in the movement.
Too harsh for elitist debate? maybe, fuck it.
Too harsh? Yes, you're flaming me and being rude.
I also never said any of those things. I said King was never part of the major law changing movements. He wasn't part of the boycott. He wasn't part of the desegregation of schools. When schools were desegregated that also outlawed Jim Crow and all segregation laws which later formed the Civil Rights Act. He wasn't part of the Civil Rights acts. He didn't help blacks get into sports. These are four of the major changes of the black community, and he gets the credit for these things.
King was a public speaker which includes marches and sit ins. Many blacks were also arrested, but NO one gives them any praise for their courage.
Are you implying we should give a holiday to everyone who was arrested, or make them national, known heroes? MLK was the face of the movement, which includes everything everyone else did. It's like saying we just totally forget what everyone else did and pretend they didn't do it. Everyone's well aware everyone else got arrested and hosed and abused by the police, yet you talk as if we're flat out purposefully ignoring them. Do you want everyone who ever got arrested during the civil right's movement to be given a nobel peace prize?
To make that short; what are you trying to get at here? This isn't a 'debate' it's a proclamation of your feelings on something and allowing no room for people to even voice their opinion. There's nothing to be done about the credit that MLK gets, because he was the face of the movement. Nobody said he sat down on that bus and ended transport segregation, everyone knows it was Rosa Parks.
Quote from: Anski on January 17, 2011, 12:28:57 AM
Are you implying we should give a holiday to everyone who was arrested, or make them national, known heroes? MLK was the face of the movement, which includes everything everyone else did. It's like saying we just totally forget what everyone else did and pretend they didn't do it. Everyone's well aware everyone else got arrested and hosed and abused by the police, yet you talk as if we're flat out purposefully ignoring them. Do you want everyone who ever got arrested during the civil right's movement to be given a nobel peace prize?
A lot of people do not get credit for the movement. A lot of white people helped blacks, and NONE of them got credit.
I think there should be a holiday respecting everyone including King. King gets all the glory for the hard work of many other people.
Quote from: Anski on January 17, 2011, 12:30:18 AM
To make that short; what are you trying to get at here? This isn't a 'debate' it's a proclamation of your feelings on something and allowing no room for people to even voice their opinion. There's nothing to be done about the credit that MLK gets, because he was the face of the movement. Nobody said he sat down on that bus and ended transport segregation, everyone knows it was Rosa Parks.
True Rosa Parks deserve SOME credit. However, it was Ed Nixon's plot. He deserves some credit for the idea. No one ever mentions him!
The black community gives the wrong people credit. Micheal Jackson gets credit for getting blacks into music. What happen to James Brown?
Jackie Robinson gets credit for getting blacks in sports. What happen to the blacks in 1920s who played in the NFL(NFC) and AFL(AFC)?
I had this debate with a few friends at work. Most of them said that if it wasn't for King I wouldn't be at a school. I had to correct them and inform them of Thurgood Marshall.
If you have a book that says how everyone in the world feels about the civil rights movement and all the credit that's around, i'd like to see it, because you seem pretty certain that you know exactly how everyone in the world feels and gives credit to.
I'm just going to go ahead and assume that RATED-RKOFRANKLIN is either an angry black guy or a skin head.
Quote from: Strike Reyhi on January 16, 2011, 05:16:41 PM
Franklin, implying King never participated in sit downs or marches is FUCKING STUPID AND IGNORANT WHEN HE WAS ARRESTED FOR DOING SUCH. He did more than just talk, your argument is therefore invalid. He organized rallies and did loads of things for the movement besides just talk. you do not have a full understanding of this topic and you should definitely go read up before you continue making an ass out of yourself.
This. See: Letter from Birmingham Jail. Plus, I guess the
president of the SCLC does nothing in deciding the boycotts and sit-ins they do.
angry blacks have no reason to be angry anymore really
It isn't as if he isn't raising some good points though. While I disagree that King gets too much credit, he's right: many are very ignorant of who exactly did what. It isn't taught correctly in school. I've seen a great deal of teachers completely glaze over chapters on the subject in their text books. As a result, king gets credit for his work... and everyone else's. Remember, people are ignorant. So they'll just say what they think is right. And then start believing it. Martin, by no fault of his own, is in fact getting to much credit, just because people don't know any better, and that's wrong.
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 17, 2011, 12:46:55 AM
I think there should be a holiday respecting everyone including King. King gets all the glory for the hard work of many other people.
>black history month.
Quote from: Strike Reyhi on January 17, 2011, 07:21:20 AM
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 17, 2011, 12:46:55 AM
I think there should be a holiday respecting everyone including King. King gets all the glory for the hard work of many other people.
>black history month.
Please that month is a joke. White Civil Activist have never gotten credit for their hard work. That month is screwed. Look at my Jackie Robinson example from earlier posts.
The media will focus in these stages during Black History Month.
1. King
2. King
3. King
4. Let's mention Rosa Parks
5. King
6. King
7. Time to talk about Jackie Robinson
8. King
9. King
10. King
11. Don't forget that negro in the white house!
12. King
13. King
14. Lets talk about Micheal Jackson who for some odd reason is now referred to as the black man who got blacks into music. What in the hell happen to James Brown? :mad:
so why aren't you doing anything to change it?
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 17, 2011, 08:33:22 AM
14. Lets talk about Micheal Jackson who for some odd reason is now referred to as the black man who got blacks into music. What in the hell happen to James Brown? :mad:
Now wait just a second here. Don't you think you're being a little hypocritical by glorifying James Brown? There were a lot of influential black musicians. Chuck Berry, Jimi Hendrix, Bob Marley, Tina Turner, Louis Armstrong, The Temptations? Do they not matter now? Seems like you're giving James Brown an awful lot of credit....
You could go back much, much further than James Brown, it's true. You're basically doing the very thing this thread is complaining about.
Billie Holiday
Quote from: RATION on January 17, 2011, 09:56:19 AM
Billie Holiday
[yt]h4ZyuULy9zs[/yt]
Strange Fruit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Fruit)
Glad I wasn't the only one thinking of her. This song hits me everytime. ;9
Gloomy Sunday is the most depressing song I've ever heard. It is also one of the best. I think it should be in Fallout.
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48cTUnUtzx4[/yt]
Quote from: Acolyte on January 17, 2011, 08:56:58 AM
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 17, 2011, 08:33:22 AM
14. Lets talk about Micheal Jackson who for some odd reason is now referred to as the black man who got blacks into music. What in the hell happen to James Brown? :mad:
Now wait just a second here. Don't you think you're being a little hypocritical by glorifying James Brown? There were a lot of influential black musicians. Chuck Berry, Jimi Hendrix, Bob Marley, Tina Turner, Louis Armstrong, The Temptations? Do they not matter now? Seems like you're giving James Brown an awful lot of credit....
I'm not doing the same thing at all. I never said James Brown was the only major black musician. I simply ask what happen to James Brown. He came many decades before Jackson. He is known in the black community. He is also more popular than the people you listed so it seems odd that he was forgotten. It's like people not knowing Thurgood Marshall. Although the people you listed deserve credit for their talents. I don't think he deserves all of the credit. I do think he deserves some credit.
Quote from: RATED-RKOFRANKLIN on January 17, 2011, 03:12:06 PM
He is also more popular than the people you listed so it seems odd that he was forgotten.
Contradiction.
Maybe it's because James Brown wasn't that great of a singer to begin with. Just because he came before Jackson doesn't automatically make him a hero for doing so. If anyone deserves respect, it should be the ones who actually brought jazz music from being illegal, people like Louis Armstrong, Cab Calloway or everyone in the Great Day in Harlem photo. By the time the 40's rolled around, James Brown was just another musician. Just because he was black does not make him a hero for being successful in playing music.
That and I HIGHLY doubt James Brown is more popular than the guitarist god of the 60's and 70's.
James Brown's new hit single: "Guitar Riff- Woo!"
Franklin, I see your point in that, if anything, Martin Luther King Jr. Day should be named Civil Rights Day instead, or something along those lines. But it'd still be on his birthday, so I dont know if that's too much credit for you ;p
But seriously, it's not nearly as big of an issue as you make it out to be. While he probably does get more credit than he deserves, that's the fault of society's ignorance as a whole, and not the fault of the man himself. So if anything, be angry at stupid people. Works for me at least!
man seriously who even cares about blacks. because who cares about race. it's not practical to care about race anymore because now everyone has the same rights. or maybe I'm just a terrible racist whitey because I think that angry black are annoying. YOU HAVE WHAT YOU WANT NOW. SHUT UP.