people who discuss martin luther king jr as a successful example of anti-violence should know they’re part of a pretty vast propaganda campaign that’s existed since the late 70s to whitewash the history of the civil rights era. as soon as king took aim at desegregating northern cities, especially chicago, hate for him exploded. according to gallup, he was actually reviled by 1966, with two thirds of the country saying they had a negative perception of him. the major responses to his assassination mostly track with governor ronald reagan’s assessment of him, that he deserved his own death. it was common to see letters in newspapers and in senators’ offices that said things like “It is my firm belief, and [that] of all my neighbors, that King should be taken into custody. … Today, the insufferable arrogance of this character places him on a pedestal as a dark-skinned Hitler…. When greedy Mr. Hitler started taking over other countries, people at first thought ‘give him a little more, then he will be satisfied.’ Give greedy Mr. King a little more freedom then he will stop. Isn’t that what we are being told today?… Is the ultimate aim the same as the Soviet Union when all property was collectivized?“ (all from nixonland, rick perlstein). white public opinion even blamed him directly for the riots going on in american cities, as in this cartoon:
this in response to his disagreement with the war in vietnam and his effort to ensure those selling their houses couldn’t refuse to sell them to black people because they were black. king preached non-violence, and white people despised him for it.
And then they killed him.
Have to always remember to add that on the end. “And then they killed him”.
antique-romantic
