by Dan Perkins

Remarkably, next year, we will observe the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

For those of us who lived through that nightmare, it hardly seems possible that so much time has passed. 

The world and our nation have changed in some dramatic ways over the past four decades.  At the time of Dr. King’s death, Dianne Carroll, who starred in the groundbreaking series, Julia, was the only black woman on primetime television.  Today, a black woman named Oprah Winfrey is the most commanding media presence in the world.

Forty years ago, we were embroiled in Vietnam, and our nation was fiercely divided between those who thought it was an unjust war and wanted an immediate end to it, and those who were willing to fight the good fight – as defined by our political and military leaders.

Today, war is again weighing heavily on the minds of many Americans.  Our focus now is on the Middle East - Iraq and Afghanistan to be more specific.  Our fight today is against global terrorism, which began in earnest following the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Although initial responses to war were divided, the nation was much more unanimous in its support of military action than it is today.  Back then, Americans were eager to see the Taliban removed from power in Afghanistan, and there was hope that Osama Bin Laden would be found and brought to justice for his role in masterminding the September 11^th attacks. 

Just as the American people were beginning to understand the fight against the Taliban, Al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists, our government declared war on Saddam Hussein and his Baath Party in Iraq.

Many Americans wrongly believed that Saddam Hussein was allied with Osama Bin Laden and that our war against terror was rightfully extended to his regime.  Four years later, with growing concern over our aims in Iraq, a growing number of Americans have begun to demand that our troops return home as quickly as possible.

Seeing the growing divisions over war is difficult for those of us who love our troops and our country; but it is perhaps especially painful for those who experienced the divisiveness brought on by Vietnam.

Such divisions might be inherent to war, which stands in direct opposition to the nonviolent teachings of Dr. King, who borrowed them from Mahatma Gandhi of India.

Yes, Dr. King was a man of peace; and we celebrate his birthday, not just because of the power and righteousness of the dream, which he so eloquently articulated on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in August of 1963; but because he spoke to the higher angels of our nature. 

Perhaps more than any other leader in the modern era, Martin Luther King, Jr. was able to make people think about significant issues - even when they didn’t want to.  In this respect, he stands with Abraham Lincoln, who helped save our national unity.

As part of my own commemoration of Dr. King’s birthday, I read his acceptance speech, which he gave after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize.

Dr. King accepted the Prize in 1964, the year in which young people were brutalized and murdered in Philadelphia, Mississippi for seeking to secure the right to vote.  It was also the year that saw at least 40 houses of worship bombed or burned one weekend in Mississippi because they offered sanctuary to those who resisted segregation; and it was a time when most African Americans lived in grinding poverty.

In his speech, Dr. King openly questioned why he was the recipient of the distinguished award.  He concluded that the award was in recognition of the Civil Rights Movement’s commitment to achieving social justice through non-violent means.

King believed that civilization and violence are antithetical concepts; and that humankind must adopt love in order to overcome the native impulses to resolve conflict through aggression and violence.

While we tend to embrace Dr. King’s philosophy of nonviolence - almost reflexively – that embrace became difficult to maintain after witnessing the twin towers collapsed within minutes of being struck by two large commercial airplanes moving at near maximum speed.

Our sense of security and peace was shattered by those violent acts, and the tensions only worsened as extremists boasted of impending attacks designed to end our way of life. 

The right answer to such overt acts of aggression is not always clear.  Sometimes evil is so great that it must be cut down before it strikes again.  Certain sociopaths, such as the Nazis, have no moral compass with which to appeal.  Non-violent tactics were unable to appease Nazi aggression, as British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain discovered.

Like any successful organism, civilizations must have the capacity to eradicate destructive agents, or they eventually will be destroyed by those agents.  The problem is such eradication often involves violence.

As we sit at the outset of 2007, I find it difficult to imagine how Dr. King would have responded to the attacks on September 11^th, or to the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

As America wrestles with President Bush’s plans to increase the number of troops going into harm’s way in the Middle East, I think it is useful to give serious consideration to Dr. King’s declarations regarding civilization and violence.

Remember, he said civilization and violence are the antithesis of one another.

As we attempt to formulate an appropriate response to violence that threatens our way of life, we need to give consideration to America’s propensity to respond in a bi-polar manner to violence. 

There are three historic manifestations of bi-polar responses to violence in American history, beginning with the decision to forcibly maintain race-based slavery while men and women of both African and European descent were fighting side by side to end British tyranny.

The second manifestation of the disorder came when Americans choose to forcibly institutionalize racial segregation in the wake of Reconstruction, even when the nation went to war to make the world “safe for democracy.”

The third bout with the disorder is evident now - in America’s dual responses to terrorism itself.

While America is willing to pay billions of dollars to fight terrorists based in the Middle East, we turn a comparatively blind eye to home grown terrorism – specifically the kind that inflicts a deadly toll each and every day in America’s urban centers. 

Look at our nation’s capital, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, or New Orleans, and you see a nation awashed in urban violence.  Unlike terrorism in the Middle East, urban terrorism in America does not have a religious underpinning.  It is based on greed, ignorance, arrogance, aggression and indifference.

The footprint of America’s urban violence, which terrorizes mostly poor, black and Hispanic communities, is rooted in historic injustices.  The map of violence across the American landscape reveals a prevailing social hierarchy that allocates privilege, protection and justice to some, and responds with indifference and injustice towards others.

I think Dr. King would be profoundly saddened by the level of violence in our cities, which is increasingly extending out to our suburbs and even our rural areas.

I also think Dr. King would be dismayed by the extent to which violence is celebrated in our culture.  Today, television programs feature a broad line up of shows that focus on human misery and destruction.  Just look at how Americans celebrate “The Sopranos.”

As a nation, we seem much less interested in educating our children’s hearts and minds than we are in entertaining them and ourselves.  As a result, many of our young people routinely pass through metal detectors on their way to classes and practice drills in anticipation of possible gun threats in the schools.

While parents must contend with constant threats of violence to their children, our financial markets invest large sums of money into corporations that develop and market video games that contain gratuitous violence.

Yes, I believe Dr. King would be bewildered by the way we have mainstreamed violence and ignorance.  We glorify pimps and gang bangers because we like the way they spew obscenities to musical beats, and menace us in their music videos.  We dress up ignorance as comedy only to have it bite us when we least expect it.

Was Michael Richards trying to be insightful, innovative or funny when he screamed “the N-word” repeatedly at members of a shocked audience?  Perhaps he was trying to mimic African American comedians who somehow feel they are entitled to publicly use the N-word and falsely believe their use of it nullifies its evil and its power.

Yes, I think Dr. King would be more than a little dismayed to see so many people, both black and white, selling their souls for a little “bling.” I believe he would also be distressed to see how many American children are now raised in foster care because their biological families are fractured as a result of psychological, social and economic pressures.

Clearly we are a conflicted people when it comes to violence.  We embrace the notions of nonviolence, but tolerate staggering levels of violence as long as it is seemingly restricted to our television sets - as news or entertainment.  We are willing to spend billions to try to eradicate the causes of terrorism overseas, but we ignore terrorism that preys upon our streets  - everyday, here at home.

Perhaps now, more than ever, we Americans need a day of reflection, a day to consider our responses to violence - in all of its many forms. 

While there is much work to be done, I think Dr. King’s words and actions offer some guidance to those of us who aspire to his dream.

When Dr. King accepted the Nobel Prize in 1964, he did so with “an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in the future of mankind.”  In his closing remarks, King said he refused to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history.  Instead, Dr. King chose to focus on people’s ability to influence unfolding events.

Yes, you and I have something to say and do about our present condition.

Dr. King never gave up on the ideals of peace and brotherhood; and I, for one, am grateful to all of those who worked to make his birthday a national holiday.

Happy King Day

Click here to read Dr. King’s Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech. 

The End