When it comes to civil rights, what kind of an activist are you?
Today we celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's birthday. As I have already said elsewhere, the man and his speech, "Let Freedom Ring" have a very special place in my heart.
But there is another reason why I have been thinking about this speech : I have been pondering a lot about these things called the "liberal", the "progressive", the "feminist" netroots. I am starting to see the dichotomies and the reasons why it may or may not work within the current political infrastructure people in the so-called Left have at their disposal. Notice I am putting these words in quotations because, I think we need explain what we mean by liberal or progressive or feminist. I will come back to these definitions later.
For the moment, I ask you : When it comes to civil rights, what kind of an activist are you?
When you read this :
[via c u l t u r e k i t c h e n: forty years later : martin luther king's "let freedom ring" speech]:
It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of colour are concerned. Instead of honouring this sacred obligation, America has given the negro people a bad cheque which has come back marked "insufficient funds". But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we have come to cash this cheque - a cheque that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquillising drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all God's children.
Do you read it as a call to social equality and freedom for social mobility?
Or
Do you read it as a call to social justice, reparations and a redistribution of capital and wealth?
I believe that by the way we interpret this snippet we can define what kind of a progressive, liberal or feminist we are.
So y'all have some lot of 'splainin' to do.
Civil Rights | Economics | Ideology | Justice | Language | Law | Poverty | Rhetoric | Martin Luther King
The whole idea of redistribution put Americans in a panic
That's why I am putting it out there. It's problematic for people who consider themselves of the Left to talk about this.
our propaganda
Or, should I say, the things we emphasize from history, is that redistribution leads to the kinds of mass exterminations that were seen in the Soviet Union and China. But, in fact, didn't Christ call for redistribution? That's at least how some of the various radicals within Christianity chose to interpret it. Funny how many of those people were assassinated or imprisoned for such beliefs.
If you're asking me whether I'm willing to redistribute what I have, then the answer is yes.
Re: our propaganda
[quote=Lorraine]But, in fact, didn't Christ call for redistribution? [/quote]
EXACTLY!
I came of age politically in Puerto Rico during the 80's when the Sandinistas were all the rage and when Theology of Liberation was one of the engines that fired the social and political movements across Latinoamerica during that period.
This is the direction I am taking with this conversation. I'd really like to look at this idea of being on the Left, being revolutionary and really, looking at what practices make you so. Because that is what's the fundamental tenet of Liberation Theology : To be a Christian, you have to do as a Christian. Your actions should speak the word of God not your mouth.
So if a village is being abandoned by the government and has no schools or hospitals or paved roads or running water, then as a Christian --and not just a Christian but a Catholic-- you have to take it upon yourself to make that happen. So you get the people to help pave the roads, teach the children, tend to the sick AND THEN follow through with political action. It never should be politics first, action second. Action is always king because action is the fire, the fuel for charity and compassion.
The US left would do well with some serious reading of Leonardo Boff and Gustavo Gutierrez.
Competition?
It is clear that some of us are crippled and expected to compete . . .
Here's what I'm starting to see and feel passionate about, that we needn't just assume winners and losers, competition rather than collaboration, living under the lowest common denominator of conventional wisdom rather than thriving and progressing through the natural, uncoerced individual diversity of collective wisdom -- especially before we even start talking!
What if some of us could work through that first, rather than assuming we'll always have to keep playing the same violent zero-sum games but just periodically re-rig the rules toward some different set of winners . . . JJ































Redistribution
It is clear that some of us are crippled and expected to compete against those who were, as one wry wit put it, "born on third base and thinks he hit a triple." History has shown us that redistribution rarely occurs except under the most violent of circumstances, and yet, the violence of the circumstances we live in right now (and do not think for one moment that poverty is not a form of violence) are untenable.
So, the answer to your question, Liza, is an "I don't know" from me. I know what I want the ends to be, but the question is, how shall we get there?