The Unknown Martin Luther King, Jr.

Benjamin J. Ryan, American Renaissance, January 2011

Martin Luther King Jr.

Forty years after his death, the popularity of Martin Luther King remains extraordinary. He is perhaps the single most praised person in American history, and millions adore him as a hero and almost a saint. The federal government has made space available on the Mall in Washington for a national monument for King, not far from Lincoln’s. Only four men in American history have national monuments: Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt; and now King will make five.

King is the only American who enjoys the nation’s highest honor of having a national holiday on his birthday. There are other days of remembrance such as Presidents’ Day, but no one else but Jesus Christ is recognized with a similar holiday. Does King deserve such honors? Much that has been known to scholars for years–but largely unknown to most Americans–suggests otherwise.

Plagiarism

As a young man, King started plagiarizing the work of others and he continued this practice throughout his career.

At Crozer Theological Seminary in Chester, Pennsylvania, where he received a bachelor of divinity degree in 1951, many of his papers contained material lifted verbatim and without acknowledgement from published sources. An extensive project started at Stanford University in 1984 to publish all of King’s papers tracked down the original sources for these early papers and concluded that his academic writings are “tragically flawed by numerous instances of plagiarism.” Journalist Theodore Pappas, who has also reviewed the collection, found one paper showing “verbatim theft” in 20 of a total of 24 paragraphs. He writes:

King’s plagiarisms are easy to detect because their style rises above the level of his pedestrian student prose. In general, if the sentences are eloquent, witty, insightful, or pithy, or contain allusions, analogies, metaphors, or similes, it is safe to assume that the section has been purloined.

King also plagiarized himself, recycling old term papers as new ones. Some of his professors complained about sloppy references, but they seem to have had no idea how extensively he was stealing material, and his habits were well established by the time he entered the PhD program at Boston University. King plagiarized one-third of his 343-page dissertation, the book-length project required to earn a PhD, leading some to say he should be stripped of his doctoral degree. Mr. Pappas explains that King’s plagiarism was a lifelong habit:

King’s Nobel Prize Lecture was plagiarized extensively from works by Florida minister J. Wallace Hamilton; the sections on Gandhi and nonviolence in his ‘Pilgrimage’ speech were taken virtually verbatim from Harris Wofford’s speech on the same topic; the frequently replayed climax to the ‘I Have a Dream’ speech–the ‘from every mountainside, let freedom ring’ portion–came from a 1952 address to the Republican National Convention by a black preacher named Archibald Carey; and the 1968 sermon in which King prophesied his martyrdom was based on works by J. Wallace Hamilton and Methodist minister Harold Bosley.

Perhaps King had no choice but to use the words of others. Mr. Pappas has found that on the Graduate Record Exam, King “scored in the second-lowest quartile in English and vocabulary, in the lowest ten percent in quantitative analysis, and in the lowest third on his advanced test in philosophy.”

Adultery

King lived a double life. During the day, he would speak to large crowds, quoting Scripture and invoking God’s will, and at night he frequently had sex with women from the audience. “King’s habits of sexual adventure had been well established by the time he was married,” says Michael Eric Dyson of Georgetown University, a King admirer. He notes that King often “told lewd jokes,” “shared women with friends,” and was “sexually reckless.” According to King biographer Taylor Branch, during a long party on the night of January 6 and 7, 1964, an FBI bugging device recorded King’s “distinctive voice ring out above others with pulsating abandon, saying, “˜I’m f***ing for God!'”

Sex with single and married women continued after King married, and on the night before his death, King had two adulterous trysts. His first rendezvous was at a woman’s house, the second in a hotel room. The source for this was his best friend and second-in-command, Ralph Abernathy, who noted that the second woman was “a member of the Kentucky legislature,” now known to be Georgia Davis Powers.

Abernathy went on to say that a third woman was also looking for King that same night, but found his bed empty. She knew his habits and was angry when they met later that morning. In response, writes Abernathy, King “lost his temper” and “knocked her across the bed. . . . She leapt up to fight back, and for a moment they were engaged in a full-blown fight, with [King] clearly winning.” A few hours later, King ate lunch with Abernathy and discussed the importance of nonviolence for their movement.

To other colleagues, King justified his adultery this way: “I’m away from home twenty-five to twenty-seven days a month. F***ing’s a form of anxiety reduction.” King had many one-night stands but also grew close to one of his girlfriends in a relationship that became, according to Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer David Garrow, “the emotional centerpiece of King’s life.” Still, sex with other women remained “a commonplace of King’s travels.”

In private, King could be extremely crude. On one FBI recording, King said to Abernathy in what was no doubt a teasing remark, “Come on over here, you big black motherf***er, and let me suck your d**k.” FBI sources told Taylor Branch about a surveillance tape of King watching a televised rerun of the Kennedy funeral. When he saw the famous moment when Jacqueline Kennedy knelt with her children before her dead husband’s coffin, King reportedly sneered, “Look at her. Sucking him off one last time.”

Despite his obsession with sex and his betrayal of his own wife and children, and despite Christianity’s call for fidelity, King continued to claim the moral authority of a Baptist minister.

Whites

King stated that the “vast majority of white Americans are racist” and that they refused to share power. His solution was to redistribute wealth and power through reparations for slavery and racial quotas:

“No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries. Not all the wealth of this affluent society could meet the bill. Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. . . . The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement.” Continued King, “Moral justification for such measures for Negroes is rooted in the robberies inherent in the institution of slavery.” He named his plan the Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged. Some poor whites would also receive compensation because they were “derivative victims of slavery,” but the welfare of blacks was his central focus.

King has been praised, even by conservatives, as the great advocate of color-blindness. They focus too narrowly on one sentence in his “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he said he wanted to live in a nation “where [my children] will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” The truth is that King wanted quotas for blacks. “[I]f a city has a 30 percent Negro population,” King reasoned, “then it is logical to assume that Negroes should have at least 30 percent of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas.”

One of King’s greatest achievements is said to have been passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. At the signing ceremony on July 2, he stood directly behind President Lyndon Johnson as a key guest. The federal agency created by the act, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, now monitors hiring practices and ensures that King’s desires for racial preferences are met.

Like liberals today, King denied racial differences. In a reply to an interviewer who told him many Southern whites thought racial differences were a biological fact, he replied:

This utterly ignorant fallacy has been so thoroughly refuted by the social scientists, as well as by medical science, that any individual who goes on believing it is standing in an absolutely misguided and diminishing circle. The American Anthropological Association has unanimously adopted a resolution repudiating statements that Negroes are biologically, in innate mental ability or in any other way inferior to whites.

The conclusions to be drawn from his belief in across-the-board equality were clear: failure by blacks to achieve at the level of whites could be explained only by white oppression. As King explained in one interview, “I think we have to honestly admit that the problems in the world today, as they relate to the question of race, must be blamed on the whole doctrine of white supremacy, the whole doctrine of racism, and these doctrines came into being through the white race and the exploitation of the colored peoples of the world.” King predicted that “if the white world” does not stop this racism and oppression, “then we can end up in the world with a kind of race war.”

Communism

In his public speeches, King never called himself a communist, instead claiming to stand for a synthesis of capitalism and communism: “[C]apitalism fails to realize that life is social. Communism fails to realize that life is individual. Truth is found neither in the rugged individualism of capitalism nor in the impersonal collectivism of communism. The Kingdom of God is found in a synthesis that combines the truths of these two opposites.”

However, David Garrow found that in private King “made it clear to close friends that economically speaking he considered himself what he termed a Marxist.” Mr. Garrow passes along an account of a conversation C.L.R. James, a Marxist intellectual, had with King: “King leaned over to me saying, ‘I don’t say such things from the pulpit, James, but that is what I really believe.’. . . King wanted me to know that he understood and accepted, and in fact agreed with, the ideas that I was putting forward–ideas which were fundamentally Marxist-Leninist. . . . I saw him as a man whose ideas were as advanced as any of us on the Left, but who, as he actually said to me, could not say such things from the pulpit. . . . King was a man with clear ideas, but whose position as a churchman, etc. imposed on him the necessity of reserve.” J. Pius Barbour, a close friend of King’s at seminary, agreed that he “was economically a Marxist.”

Some of King’s most influential advisors were Communists with direct ties to the Soviet Union. One was Stanley Levison, whom Mr. Garrow called King’s “most important political counselor” and “at Martin Luther King’s elbow.” He organized fundraisers for King, counseled him on tax issues and political strategy, wrote fundraising letters and his United Packinghouse Workers Convention speech, edited parts of his books, advised him on his first major national address, and prepped King for questions from the media. Coretta Scott King said of Levison that he was “[a]lways working in the background, his contribution has been indispensable,” and Mr. Garrow says the association with Levison was “without a doubt King’s closest friendship with a white person.”

What were Levison’s political views? John Barron is the author of Operation SOLO, which is about “the most vital intelligence operation the FBI ever had sustained against the Soviet Union.” Part of its work was to track Levison who, according to Mr. Barron, “gained admission into the inner circle of the communist underground” in the US. Mr. Garrow, a strong defender of King, admits that Levison was “one of the two top financiers” of the Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA), which received about one million dollars a year from the Soviet Union. Mr. Garrow found that Levison was “directly involved in the Communist Party’s most sensitive financial dealings,” and acknowledged there was first-hand evidence of Levison’s “financial link to the Soviet Union.”

Hunter Pitts O’Dell, who was elected in 1959 to the national committee, the governing body for the CPUSA, was another party member who worked for King. According to FBI reports, Levison installed O’Dell as the head of King’s New York office, and later recommended that O’Dell be made King’s executive assistant in Atlanta.

King knew his associates were Communists. President Kennedy himself gave an “explicit personal order” to King advising against his “shocking association with Stanley Levison.” Once when he was walking privately with King in the White House Rose Garden, Kennedy also named O’Dell and said to King: “They’re Communists. You’ve got to get rid of them.”

The Communist connections help explain why Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy authorized the FBI to wiretap King’s home and office telephones in October 1963. Kennedy, like his brother John, was deeply sympathetic to King but also aware of the threat of communism.

Mr. Garrow tried to exonerate King of the charge of being a fellow traveler by arguing that Levison broke with the CPUSA while he worked for King, that is, from the time he met King in the summer of 1956 until King’s death in 1968. However, as historian Samuel Francis has pointed out, an official break with the CPUSA does not necessarily mean a break with the goals of communism or with the Soviet Union.

John Barron argues that if Levison had defected from the CPUSA and renounced communism, he would not have associated with former comrades, such as CP officials Lem Harris, Hunter Pitts O’Dell, and Roy Bennett (Levison’s twin brother who had changed his last name). He was also close to the highly placed KGB officer Victor Lessiovsky, who was an assistant to the head of the United Nations, U Thant.

Mr. Barron asks why Lessiovsky would “fritter away his time and risk his career . . . by repeatedly indulging himself in idle lunches or amusing cocktail conversation with an undistinguished lawyer [Levison] . . . who had nothing to offer the KGB, or with someone who had deserted the party and its discipline, or with someone about whom the KGB knew nothing? . . . And why would an ordinary American lawyer . . . meet, again and again, with a Soviet assistant to the boss of the United Nations?”

Other Communists who worked with King included Aubrey Williams, James Dombrowski, Carl Braden, William Melish, Ella J. Baker, Bayard Rustin, and Benjamin Smith. King also “associated and cooperated with a number of groups known to be CPUSA front organizations or to be heavily penetrated and influenced by members of the Communist Party–for example, the Southern Conference Educational Fund; Committee to Secure Justice for Morton Sobell; the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America; the National Lawyers Guild; and the Highlander Folk School.

The CPUSA clearly tried to influence King and his movement. An FBI report of May 6, 1960 from Jack Childs, one of the FBI’s most accomplished spies and a winner of the Presidential Medal of Freedom for Intelligence, said that the CP “feels that it is definitely to the Party’s advantage to assign outstanding Party members to work with the [Martin] Luther King group. CP policy at the moment is to concentrate upon Martin Luther King.”

As Republican Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina concluded in a Senate speech written by Francis, King’s alliance with Communists was evidence of “identified Communists . . . planning the influencing and manipulation of King for their own purposes.” At the same time, King relied on them for speech writing, fundraising, and raising public awareness. They, in turn, used his stature and fame to their own benefit. Senator Helms cited Congressman John M. Ashbrook, a ranking member of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, who said: “King has consistently worked with Communists and has helped give them a respectability they do not deserve. I believe he has done more for the Communist Party than any other person of this decade.”

Christianity

King strongly doubted several core beliefs of Christianity. “I was ordained to the Christian ministry,” he claimed, but Stanford University’s online repository includes King’s seminary writings in which he disputed the full divinity of Jesus, the Virgin Birth, and the Resurrection, suggesting that we “strip them of their literal interpretation.”

Regarding the divine nature of Jesus, King wrote that Jesus was godlike, but not God. People called Jesus divine because they “found God in him” like a divinely inspired teacher, not because he literally was God, as Jesus himself claimed. On the Virgin Birth, King wrote:

“First we must admit that the evidence for the tenability of this doctrine is to [sic] shallow to convince any objective thinker. How then did this doctrine arise? A clue to this inquiry may be found in a sentence from St. Justin’s First Apology. Here Justin states that the birth of Jesus is quite similar to the birth of the sons of Zeus. It was believed in Greek thought that an extraordinary person could only be explained by saying that he had a father who was more than human. It is probable that this Greek idea influenced Christian thought.”

Concerning the Resurrection, King wrote: “In fact the external evidence for the authenticity of this doctrine is found wanting.” The early church, he says, formulated this doctrine because it “had been captivated by the magnetic power of his [Jesus’] personality. This basic experience led to the faith that he could never die. And so in the pre-scientific thought pattern of the first century, this inner faith took outward form.” Thus, in this view, Jesus’ body never rose from the dead, even though according to Scripture, “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile.”

Two other essays show how King watered down Christianity. In one, he wrote that contemporary mystery religions influenced New Testament writers: “[A]fter being in contact with these surrounding religions and hearing certain doctrines expressed, it was only natural for some of these views to become part of their subconscious minds. . . . That Christianity did copy and borrow from Mithraism cannot be denied, but it was generally a natural and unconscious process rather than a deliberate plan of action.” In another essay, King wrote that liberal theology “was an attempt to bring religion up intellectually,” and the introduction to the paper at the Stanford website says that King was “scornful of fundamentalism.” King wrote that in fundamentalism the Trinity, the Atonement, and the Second Coming are “quite prominent,” but again, these are defining beliefs of Christianity.

Known and unknown

King is both known and unknown. Millions worldwide see him as a moral messiah, and American schools teach young children to praise him. In the United States there are no fewer than 777 streets named for him. But King is also unknown because only a few people are aware of the unsavory aspects of his life. The image most people have of King is therefore cropped and incomplete.

In the minds of many, King towers above other Americans as a distinguished orator and writer, but this short, 5″6′ man often stole the words of others. People believe he was a Christian, but he doubted some of the fundamentals of the faith. Our country honors King, but he worked closely with Communists who aimed to destroy it. He denied racial differences, but fought for racial favoritism in the form of quotas. He claimed to be for freedom, but he wanted to force people to associate with each other and he promoted the redistribution of wealth in the form of reparations for slavery. He quoted the ringing words of the Bible and claimed, as a preacher, to be striving to be more like Jesus, but his colleagues knew better.

Perhaps he, too, knew better. His closest political advisor, Stanley Levison, said King was “an intensely guilt-ridden man” and his wife Coretta also called him “a guilt-ridden man.” Levison said that the praise heaped upon King was “a continual series of blows to his conscience” because he was such a humble man. If King was guilt-ridden might it have been because he knew better than anyone the wide gap between his popular image and his true character?

The FBI surveillance files could throw considerable light on his true character, but they will not be made public until 2027. On January 31, 1977, as a result of lawsuits by King’s allies against the FBI, a US district judge ordered the files sealed for 50 years. There are reportedly 56 feet of records–tapes, transcripts, and logs–in the custody of the National Archives and Record Service.

Meanwhile, for those who seek to know the real identity of this nearly untouchable icon, there is still plenty of evidence with which to answer the question: Was Martin Luther King, Jr. America’s best and greatest man?

Topics: , , , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • john

    There’s hardly anything here not already known to regular reader of AmRen, or like-minded people with a historical bent throughout the US.

    King was a black Elmer Gantry. It may be argued that he was of some benefit to race relations in this country, though I suspect the truth is lesser than the historical teachings would have us believe.

    He likely had a significant role in the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, one of the most ill-considered legislative achievements ever, bestowing as it did special rights and privileges on persons of color and avenues for litigation and criminal penalties against those suspected of violating it in some way.

    Whatever hope there might have been for universal brotherhood between blacks and whites, and there were signs of significant progress in this regard before 1964, the CRA effectively placed a barrier between whites and blacks for all time.

  • DBA

    Is there any American city over 100,000 or so that does NOT have a street named in “honor” of this traitor ? Whites have nobody to blame but themselves for allowing this huge propaganda program to spread so far so successfully.

  • Anonymous

    What breaks my heart is that schools named in honor of General Robert E. Lee — one of the ablest and most honorable men this country ever produced — are being renamed whilst this communist cretin with a melliflous voice is having schools and streets and prizes named after him.

  • Anonymous

    The FBI surveillance files, if released, will show that King had numerous sexual liaisons. And the PC liberals may say so did President Kennedy. President Kennedy’s affairs were with adult women. King liked them young, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen years old. And in his marches there were always plenty of adolescent girls for him to choose from. Not a shock they sealed those files up for over half a century! The lying white enablers who sought to make him something he wasn’t saw to that. Not that most blacks would care, they keep electing the likes of Marion Berry and Alcee Hastings. Honor, morality, what’s that?

  • Rhialto

    This article gives slight mention of the most important fact:King is the only American who enjoys the nation’s highest honor of having a national holiday on his birthday.

    The bill that made King’s birthday a national holiday, also unmade the holidays for Presidents Washington and Lincoln. This fact was not publicized when the bill was being debated. Instead the congressional office occupiers discussed what a great or not so great a man King was. Great conservative Reagan signed the bill (he claimed reluctantly).

    Consider this, the King holiday could have been added to the current federal holidays. This would have pleased everybody except the hard core opponents of MLK and business interests. Or the King holiday could have replaced an existing holiday like Columbus Day. Neither of these neutral actions were followed.

    What was done was the disrespecting of the two great Americans. Washington represents the struggle to found America. Lincoln represents the struggle to preserve America. Replacing the holidays honoring them with the MLK holiday, marks the victory of the liberal coalition in America.

    Therefore the arguments about MLK are irrelevant. The important fact is that he is honored, Washington and Lincoln are no longer honored.

  • MAJ

    King was such an obvious intellectual fraud and shameless self-promoter, such a babbling two-bit entertainer and immoral, attention-seeking bonehead, that I cringe whenever I hear brainwashed or frightened whites praise the man without a second thought.

    King’s false history has been more concocted than his thesis.

    Now they put up a statue to the guy in Washington. How did this happen?

    We are in the twilight zone.

  • SS

    To Anon #3,

    I went to Robert E. Lee High School in Staunton, Virginia and if they ever dared to rename it, I will embarrass the living daylights out of them.

    I will put facts about that worthless black on placards and walk back and forth in front of my newly named school every day for the rest of my life or until they changed it back.

  • Bilbo Baggins

    As a huge fan of American country music (a truly wonderful white art form), I was disappointed to see in the words of Tim McGraw’s “Southern Voice.”

    Chuck Berry twanged it . . .

    Aretha Franklin sold it . . .

    Rosa Parks rode it . . .

    Hank Aaron smacked it . . .

    Michael Jordan dunked it . . .

    DR. KING PAVED IT . . .

    Must even country singers pay homage to blacks? Whatever for?

  • Anonymous

    Surely there are far more pressing issues for our time than a long-time dead “Preacher”. I know our Southern former CSA brethren take a particular interest in these MLK stories…..but can they explain to me why Nikki Haley is the Governor of South Carolina, and Bobby Jindal is the Governor of Louisiana?

  • Question Diversity

    3 Anonymous:

    http://goo.gl/aYZKQ

    What’s wrong with this picture?

    My theory is that the whites who walked out were really protesting, the blacks who did just wanted to get out of school.

  • Question Diversity

    8 — Bilbo Baggins:

    What “country music?” You mean that warmed over pop recorded in Nashville? My only guess as to why “country musicians” are way different now than they were even through the 1970s (when they could be counted on to support George Wallace as a group) was that country music and pop music are are all on the same record labels owned by the same media conglomerates, and their Boards of Directors finally figured out that they own Nashville as much as they own L.A., so it was time to crack ye olde whip.

  • Anonymous

    #10 Thank You for the link. Did my heart good to read that some Americans decided to stand up to the senseless renaming of their school.

    Sadly, it sounds as though they only fought a delaying action — I bet that this superintendent will prevail and that the name will be eventually changed. Not sure where this superintendent’s motivation is, though it would not surprise me that he is trying to curry favor with the ever-growing black population.

    Also, I found it instructive to read some of the comments below the article you linked to. Many of those commenters have no clue about the origins of the War Between the States or about the quality of the people who fought therein. To assume R.E. Lee is racist, for instance, is to unwittingly profess to insuperable ignorance of history.

  • anonymous

    Suggested project for those who have sons and daughters in Government Schools (and private/parochial for that matter):

    If and when your child’s school does the MLK week thing and/or the Feb. Black History Month thing with projects that involve writing papers and such about Michael King, encourage them to view this article to use as a guide to develop their own research paper for their project. Help them with editing, methodology, footnotes etc. Make sure that their writing style does not substantially exceed their current expository writing skills which are already a matter of record. If they receive a low grade for clearly PC reasons or are otherwise subjected to any adverse consequences that are not swiftly remedied by the administration, submit the case to FIRE. http://thefire.org/

  • Anonymous

    8 — Bilbo Baggins wrote at 5:38 AM on November 5:

    As a huge fan of American country music (a truly wonderful white art form), I was disappointed to see in the words of Tim McGraw’s “Southern Voice.”

    Chuck Berry twanged it …

    Aretha Franklin sold it …

    Rosa Parks rode it …

    Hank Aaron smacked it …

    Michael Jordan dunked it …

    DR. KING PAVED IT …

    Must even country singers pay homage to blacks? Whatever for?

    —————————————————-

    The same people who run the WHOLE music industry took it over. I can’t stand to look at Tim McGraw. He even played the husband on “Blind Side”. Can’t stand Reba anymore as she is on ALL those award shows but you sure won’t see any of the REAL country artists of years past on there. Another one who loves black folk is and got (black) Darius Rucker (married to a blonde) into country music was Brad Paisley.

    If you want to hear the real multi-cult Brad Paisley, listen to this song of his.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0Yg9wjctRw

    I listen to this one by George Strait and Alan Jackson’s song to remind me of what happened to country music. Murder On Music Row.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny3K9irFC5k

  • B J Deller

    MLK is right up there on the roll of infamy with Nelson Mandela weho openly admitted at his trial in the 1960s that he was planning violent revolution with bombs in shops and public places as well as murdering anyone who stood in his way to gain power. Now there is a statue in London of this man as well as many streets named after him. Peolpe here are amazed when I tell them why, as someone who lived in SA until 1999, why he was jailed. They honestly did not know the facts as well as the full reasoning behind Apartheid, the prevention of the eviction of white Africans form the continent as had happened in other black African countries once the “freedom fighters” took over with the left’s help. No wonder terrorism is so popular now to overthrown governments and install murderers in power. It works as has been proven so often now.

    Remember this fact when the begging-bowls are held out for aid in countries that were more than self-sufficient under white African rule.

  • Anonymous

    Poster 5 says,

    Consider this, the King holiday could have been added to the current federal holidays. This would have pleased everybody except the hard core opponents of MLK and business interests. Or the King holiday could have replaced an existing holiday like Columbus Day. Neither of these neutral actions were followed.

    —————

    Pray tell, how would any HOLIDAY given this person “pleased” everybody? It sure did not please those in the South who were vehemently against that man and his movement. They knew who was behind it and the reasons why.

    It sure did not please me, on the West coast, or millions of others who KNEW what this man and his communist movement were all about.

    He should have NO holiday or REPLACE Columbus Day or any other holiday! Why do you even begin to think we should have replaced one of our OWN holidays for this vile person?

    ————

    You go on and say,

    Therefore the arguments about MLK are irrelevant. The important fact is that he is honored, Washington and Lincoln are no longer honored.

    —————————

    Why are the arguments about MLK irrelevant? Did you not even read this article and what a disgusting shameful person he was?

  • Peter

    Anonymous wrote at 7:12:

    I agree with you. In all due respect to the author, the man has been dead for more than 40 years (four decades). He is hardly the only leader who was crafted to have one image in public, yet was quite often different in private.

    The fact is that dredging up old stories on Martin Luther King Jr, John F. Kennedy or any other dead leader of the mid 20th century is really a futile activity and a waste of time. It does nothing to address the serious issues facing Whites in the 21st century.

  • John Engelman

    More than any single human being Martin Luther King made the 1960s what they were in the United States. It would have been a different decade without him. Racially sanctioned segregation might still exist in much of the country.

    When I was a child my father liked to take our family on vacation trips where we would stop along the way at motels and restaurants. Back then a middle class black family could not have done that in much of the United States. I do not want to go back to those days.

    When I was first told about Martin Luther King’s womanizing I could not believe it. When I kept being told I could not deny it. Nevertheless, despite his shortcomings as a human being, Martin Luther King has become on of the most admired Americans, as Benjamin J. Ryan’s article explains.

    That tells me that the civil rights legislation of the 1960s is not going to be reversed. This is not because of the power of some liberal elite. It is because most whites do not want it to be reversed.

    Race realists should concentrate on what can be achieved. Since 1980 the crime rate has been declining because the prison population has been growing. Affirmative action and forced school busing programs are being phased back. As evidence for “The Bell Curve” keeps growing it will become safer to agree with it in public, and to promote political policies based on the implications of the book.

  • Urban Teacher

    “Only four men in American history have national monuments: Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt; and now King will make five.”

    Only the first two deserve national monuments, Washington because he didn’t make himself a king when he could have (George III thought that remarkable).

  • Tom Iron

    9 — Anonymous at 7:12 AM on November 5:

    There is no more “pressing issue” than this. The bum MLK is just an image used to mask the point that when they feel they can, they will massacre every last White person they can. If they can, they will absolutely wipe us out. The black flag is already raised. Don’t think in terms this only has to do with changing names of buildings, streets, towns, etc. It has only to do with our slaughter and nothing else.

  • Anonymous

    6 — MAJ at 12:42 AM on November 5:

    Remember what O’Brien told Winston Smith in the place without windows? He said something like; “I can make MLK hover off the ground this very minute if I want to.” Ok, he didn’t say MLK, but you get the idea.

    This is the Communist States of North America, and MLK is whatever they want him to be. In 50 years he will be known for dodging bullets and single handedly saving the world from Adolf Hitler. He also got the US to the moon, don’t you know?

  • Anonymous

    18 — John Engelman at 7:22 PM on November 5:

    WHY do you keep posting on this site? Everything you say is just the opposite of what most of us think. Do you live in La La land?

    You say,

    “Nevertheless, despite his shortcomings as a human being, Martin Luther King has become on of the most admired Americans, as Benjamin J. Ryan’s article explains.”

    Admired? You have to be off your rocker. Could care less what Ryan’s article “explains” or what YOU or he “perceive” to be true.

    —————–

    As for this idiocy,

    “When I was a child my father liked to take our family on vacation trips where we would stop along the way at motels and restaurants. Back then a middle class black family could not have done that in much of the United States. I do not want to go back to those days.”

    —————————

    Of course YOU do not want to go back to those days, ( I sure do!) because you are a marxist and anti-White and it is obvious you side with blacks and Asians at every turn. So John, are you a black, asian, marxist or what? Your comments are becoming monotonous. One doesn’t even have to read them to KNOW what rubbish will come forth.

  • Anonymous

    #18

    When I was a child my father liked to take our family on vacation trips where we would stop along the way at motels and restaurants. Back then a middle class black family could not have done that in much of the United States. I do not want to go back to those days.

    You know I had wondered about that. I read MLK complaining that he had to sleep in his car on his way from, was it Birmingham? (I forgot, it has been a long time, makes no difference).

    Anyway, what I was wondering, were blacks kept from starting their own businesses, starting a motel or something akin to a bed and breakfast, so traveling blacks had a place to stay? I had often wondered, and wish someone would elaborate just how Jim Crow functioned. The evil white people would not let blacks into their schools, their restaurants, their housing developments,etc. I have seen pictures of two water fountains, one black and one white. So what was so terrible about that? How come blacks were so terribly disadvantaged and hurt, because they had their own water fountain? Could whites drink from a black water fountain and did they do that, while blacks were prohibited from doing the same?

    Up the road from where I live there used to be a black school. I went to a three room country school. I learned to write on a slate, we had very little by way of study materials, but we learned a lot more than they do in todays overloaded schools. Where blacks prohibited from having their own beach, campground, playground, basketball court, etc.,etc. Why can’t they do well and be happy unless they are forcing their way into other people’s terrain. My mother would have slapped me if I had gone anywhere where I was not wanted.

  • Anonymous

    8 — Bilbo Baggins at 5:38 AM on November 5:

    Disgusting. So-called country music has gone down the tubes along with all the current artists. They are as black loving as any rapper and they promote black “country singers” to boot.

    I will watch the CMA Awards, I think it is Wednesday night, just to see the traitors, among them are Brad Paisley (“Welcome to the Future”, his multiracial song) and his ilk. Watch those White girls in the audience go mad over any black singer (Darius Rucker) that they will have on that show. Turns my stomach.

    I am sick in my heart and soul at what our race has become. A bunch of sell out wimps and who will fall for anything trendy and hip which includes miscegenation and all the other anti-White suicidal pathologies.

  • John Engleman

    22 — Anonymous wrote at 9:03 PM on November 5:

    18 — John Engelman at 7:22 PM on November 5:

    WHY do you keep posting on this site? Everything you say is just the opposite of what most of us think.

    ——

    I not only post on this site, but I have the courage to identify myself.

    In that case it is time for you to open your mind.

    You should also exercise your mind a bit. You seem to have difficulty comprehending nuances.

  • John Engelman

    22 — Anonymous wrote at 9:03 PM on November 5:

    18 — John Engelman at 7:22 PM on November 5:

    Of course YOU do not want to go back to those days, ( I sure do!) because you are a marxist and anti-White and it is obvious you side with blacks and Asians at every turn. So John, are you a black, asian, marxist or what?

    ——

    I am quite willing to discuss black crime, and “The Bell Curve,” identifying myself by name.

    What do you know about Marxism? Have you read anything buy Karl Marx at all? Like any great political thinker, he should be read for insight, rather than doctrine.

    However, when I express my admiration for Orientals I do not quote Karl Marx. I quote Jared Taylor. For example:

    “Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.”

    – Jared Taylor, from “The Color of Crime”

    http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.html

  • Michael

    Anonymous wrote at 11:10 PM

    The FBI surveillance files, if released, will show that King had numerous sexual liaisons. And the PC liberals may say so did President Kennedy. President Kennedy’s affairs were with adult women. King liked them young, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen years old. And in his marches there were always plenty of adolescent girls for him to choose from. Not a shock they sealed those files up for over half a century! The lying white enablers who sought to make him something he wasn’t saw to that. Not that most blacks would care, they keep electing the likes of Marion Berry and Alcee Hastings. Honor, morality, what’s that?

    Do you have proof that King was a pedophile? This is STRONG charge to make against a person. It is one thing to be an adulterer which we know he was, but to accuse someone of pedohphilia is extreme and you need to provide evidence to support your clam.

  • Spartan24

    As far as blacks having their own motels- the Lorraine Motel, site of the King murder and now a “civil rights museum” was black owned and catered to a black clientel. Far from being a sleazy dive it was comparable to any other motel that was available to traveling whites during the same period. Sure it’s not the Ritz but that wasn’t the idea. Bottom line- there were businesses that were black owned and catered to blacks as their customer base so the rumors of traveling blacks having to sleep in their cars is not terribly true.

  • Anonymous

    26 — John Engelman wrote at 12:45 AM on November 6:

    22 — Anonymous wrote at 9:03 PM on November 5:

    18 — John Engelman at 7:22 PM on November 5:

    Of course YOU do not want to go back to those days, ( I sure do!) because you are a marxist and anti-White and it is obvious you side with blacks and Asians at every turn. So John, are you a black, asian, marxist or what?

    ———————————

    I did not say anything about crime stats, wasn’t even the subject of my post.

    Answer the question. Reread post #22.

  • Anonymous

    From the article: “When he saw the famous moment when Jacqueline Kennedy knelt with her children before her dead husband’s coffin, King reportedly sneered, “Look at her. Sucking him off one last time.”

    —————–

    After all that JFK did for this man (to the ultimate detriment of a nation, sadly) how could King muster the vitriol and crudeness to make such a comment about Jackie Kennedy at the funeral of her husband??

    America, the legacy of MLK is that we are going to be ruled directly and indirectly by the ilk of the family in this video linked below. Indirectly by their votes and their presence on juries and such. And directly because blacks are being elected to higher office by their ever-growing electorate and are (almost as bad) becoming more prevalent on school boards and being selected (because of their race) by other officeholders for judgeships, etc.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1FdIDGmdSU&feature=related

  • Anonymous

    25 — John Engleman wrote at 12:35 AM on November 6:

    22 — Anonymous wrote at 9:03 PM on November 5:

    18 — John Engelman at 7:22 PM on November 5:

    WHY do you keep posting on this site? Everything you say is just the opposite of what most of us think.

    ———

    I not only post on this site, but I have the courage to identify myself.

    In that case it is time for you to open your mind.

    You should also exercise your mind a bit. You seem to have difficulty comprehending nuances.

    ————————————

    I don’t care what name you post, that means nothing to most of us. What is so “courageous” in posting a name? People can make up any name they want to use, it doesn’t mean a thing.

    Guess you should tell everyone on here that only uses their first names or just uses anonymous that they need to identify themselves? Why are you so concerned about our names, John?

    BTW, your last sentence is typical of those who think they are insulting someone, which isn’t working John and very juvenile on your part.

    More and more you sound like a plant or a troll who goes from one site to another posting your “nuances”….

  • Bardon

    This all stuff boils down to two different contentions on race and human nature:

    a) Blacks and Whites are races that can prosper, in their various talents, best if they are kept apart- somehow. There is so much that divides them that is simply not erasable through education, and, more important- they act as though they’re different nations. No multiracial society involving Blacks is even close to being “color-indifferent”, let alone “color-blind” – unlike some societies where Whites and Asians live side by side (for instance in Siberia etc.). The logical corollary is “soft-segregation” (although a “hard one” is also understandable due to very prominent differences in body odor). Democratic rights for every person, but no affirmative action, no forced integration in schools etc.

    b) the race, if not only a “social construct”, is something that can be relegated to the history’s dustbin. People can be re-educated by brain-washing through TV, movies, social discourse etc. The desired result is some kind of mulatto societal uniformity, a “brownization”, so to speak.

    Personally- I think that second option is not only reprehensible: it’s unrealistic, as Brazil and numerous Latin American countries have shown. The dominant color is not brown, but all the variants of White, Black, Brown…name it. True, there is a miscegenation, but Brazilians, not being hysterical about it, use it to their own advantage- despite fluctuations, the number of Whites have actually risen in past 150 yrs, and the Government is indubitably more “White” than the one in the US.

    http://goo.gl/vXjFV

    http://goo.gl/29sBe

    IMO:

    1) with the end of affirmative action & aggressive visual promotion of Blacks, miscegenation will drop to acceptable levels

    2) first & foremost- end to massive self-destructive immigration, both from Asia and Mexico & Central America (won’t even mention Africa)

    3) necessary common language at all levels of education

    4) stop courting China & dissing Russia- are you nuts ?

    5) but, to achieve this, one must strongly affirm European roots & profile of American life and culture, as well as the will to keep it that way.

  • Flaxen-headed Stumpet

    RE: #13 Anaonymous

    I have a better idea. Write a humdinger research paper on King for your child to turn in as his/her own. Then let your child be hauled up on plagiarism allegations.

    The defense will be “HWHDKDTA?” (How Would Have Doctor King Done This Assignment?) Learning by example anyone??

  • Jeffrey

    Michael wrote at 4:17 AM

    Do you have proof that King was a pedophile? This is STRONG charge to make against a person. It is one thing to be an adulterer which we know he was, but to accuse someone of pedohphilia is extreme and you need to provide evidence to support your claim.

    I have to agree with you on this one. I am certainly no fan of Dr. King. We know he was crude, risque and a chronic adulterer. He was a lewd man in many respects, but a pedophile?

    There is certainly no evidence (to my knowledge) that he was a pedophile. This is a very scurrilous allegation and if true, in today’s climate, would most likely have been presented to the public.

    The sad fact is that some our our posters get a little too carried away in their emotions and they go overborad in their comments. As our fellow poster has stated, if you do have evidence that King was a pedophile please at least provide examples as opposed to making such allegations without any substance to prove your point. Such unsubstantitated charges also damage the credibility of this website.

  • sheila

    I personally do not begrudge black people in and of America their MLKing. There have been many blacks now and in the past whose picture could be on an alter instead. Blacks who promoted violence, aggression, hatred, slaughter…does one prefer a *Huey Newton Day*?

    The Communist Party used the black civil rights movement and abandoned it for Vietnam. The Marxist Movement is evolutionary. It looks different today, and will appear differently tomorrow, though there are some things that remain constant, and one is the concept of:

    “The colored peoples of the earth crawling all over the earth…”.

    If one comprehends that notion then one would realize how important it is that black people chose MLKing as their *hero*…or *did* they?

  • Anonymous

    This longtime student of Kingology (and regular daily reader of AmRen.com) hadn’t seen some of the juiciest stuff on this page. So glad the article was reposted here — fuel for the figurative flames!

  • Anonymous

    Re: #8 Bilbo Baggins

    Indeed–this is keepin’ it real C&W music:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfrHQrlR2kc

  • Jefferson

    I could care less that Martin Luther King committed adultery, I bet the majority of married men in the world are guilty of cheating on their wives at least once and that would include most politicians who run this country. Most men are not capable of only having sex with the same 1 woman for the rest of their lives.

    What made Martin Luther King dangerous was that he was pro-communism and pro-affirmative action. Those are dangerous leftist views.

  • Anonymous

    35 — Jefferson wrote at 1:40 AM on November 7:

    I could care less that Martin Luther King committed adultery, I bet the majority of married men in the world are guilty of cheating on their wives at least once and that would include most politicians who run this country. Most men are not capable of only having sex with the same 1 woman for the rest of their lives.

    What made Martin Luther King dangerous was that he was pro-communism and pro-affirmative action. Those are dangerous leftist views.

    —————————

    Don’t agree with your view. Maybe you aren’t capable of having sex with one woman (the one you are suppose to love) but to say most men cheat is a myth. There are forces out there to make people THINK cheating is normal and it is not. You have fallen into that trap.

    As for MLK, did you not read the WHOLE article? He not only cheated, he did it in a disgusting and perverted way. Anyone who thinks his brand of cheating is nothing,(as you do) then I suggest you never get married in the first place. I would pity your wife.

  • Bebe

    36 — Anonymous wrote at 9:46 PM on November 6:

    Re: #8 Bilbo Baggins

    Indeed—this is keepin’ it real C&W music:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfrHQrlR2kc

    ———————————-

    Love George Jones.

    This one with him and Tammy makes me cry every time I see it. You can see they still loved each other deeply even after they divorced. This video proves it and it is so plain to see.

    Reminds me of myself and my ex. There are those who only have one true love for the rest of their lives, even if they do divorce. I know because I am one of those who will never get over their only true love. I know he feels the same way.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9KniULwvjE

  • Question Diversity

    38 Jefferson:

    Ordinarily I would agree with you. But Martin Luther King claimed the mantle of Christian ministry, and for outward consumption peddled his personal and family morality in his civil rights cause.

  • Brent

    39 — Anonymous wrote at 10:35 AM on November 7:

    35 — Jefferson wrote at 1:40 AM on November 7:

    I could care less that Martin Luther King committed adultery, I bet the majority of married men in the world are guilty of cheating on their wives at least once and that would include most politicians who run this country. Most men are not capable of only having sex with the same 1 woman for the rest of their lives.

    What made Martin Luther King dangerous was that he was pro-communism and pro-affirmative action. Those are dangerous leftist views.

    —————————————-

    Don’t agree with your view. Maybe you aren’t capable of having sex with one woman (the one you are suppose to love) but to say most men cheat is a myth. There are forces out there to make people THINK cheating is normal and it is not. You have fallen into that trap.

    As for MLK, did you not read the WHOLE article? He not only cheated, he did it in a disgusting and perverted way. Anyone who thinks his brand of cheating is nothing,(as you do) then I suggest you never get married in the first place. I would pity your wife.

    I agree with Jefferson. The fact is that the majority of men and a growing number of women (especially those under 35)have committed adulterey. There is a stunningly impressive book wirttten by Peggy Vaughn entitled “The Monogamy Myth” that details the fact that more than 62% of men have cheated on their wives. For women the percentage was 48%. So much for fidelity.

    Anonymous:

    Your comment:

    As for MLK, did you not read the WHOLE article? He not only cheated, he did it in a disgusting and perverted way.

    Huh? Is there a good, honest and noble way to cheat on your spouse or partner? Perhaps you can enlighten us on the proper way to be a decent and respectable adulterer?

    In fact, I would argue that marriage is becoming more and more outdated anyway, but that is another story.

  • O’Malley

    It is hilarious that people are debating the decline of country music on this site. The dumbed down lyrics and 2 cord songs of country music are just as simplistic as the dumbed down lyrics and beats of rap/RB music. Children’s music by Barney the Dinosour is less repetitive and has better lyrics than country and rap. Some redneck white guy riding around with the windows down listening to country is not much different than some brother bumping his rap. Both annoying.

  • Anonymous

    An impression: King, among Blacks, was not an extraordinarily

    intelligent (no Walter Williams, Tom Sowell ) person but was

    competent and was,initially, a well mannered and sexually restrained person, uif flawed (vain, pretentious, etc.) He appears to have been elevated by circumstances (the MSM being a key element ) to perform at a level at which he was not competent to survive morally. That he as a person has been mocked by the liberal celebrity creating forces of “our” society should not be taken as evidence he was unworthy to begin with.

  • John Engelman

    22 — Anonymous wrote at 9:03 PM on November 5:

    18 — John Engelman at 7:22 PM on November 5:

    Answer the question. Reread post #22.

    ——-

    I guess you mean this question: So John, are you a black, asian, marxist or what?

    ————————————————-

    I am a white man. Although I do not consider myself to be a Marxist, I think Karl Marx had some valid insights. he also made mistakes. He did not claim infallibility. When he learned that others claimed it on his behalf, he said, “I think God that I am not a Marxist.”

  • Anonymous

    #14: Country Singer, David Allen Coe had a great song about the worth of a White woman mixing with the wrong types. You may even be familiar with that particular song.

    Let’s just say that David Allen Coe doesn’t mince words, and says it the way it used to be said, before Country Music went Ghetto.

    So, why don’t the real Country Artists break away and form their own Music lable?

  • SS

    To John and Jarrod,

    asians commit a tremendous amount of crime and way, way, way, way much more than White People.

    asains mostly commit financial crime and because they surround themselves with only their own, they rarely get caught and this explains the stats.

    If I’m wrong, prove to me, they pay taxes on ALL the cash they receive everyday from their mostly cash run businesses.

    My Definition of asians – indians, chinese, anyone from The East.

    The trash and graffiti asians dump onto small American Communities is crime too but that is always conveniently left out too. asains are much more crime oriented than people think.

  • Sureesh

    If my family could be time transported to the Jim Crow 1940s and 1950s, I’m fairly sure that we’d be forced to stay in ‘colored’ hotels putting ourselves in danger. We Indians have dark skin but are more like whites on the inside. We would be literally eaten alive by Blacks because we are docile, smart, and hard working.

  • Anonymous

    If the FBI surveillance files are released in 2027, I highly doubt that ALL that was recorded will be made public knowledge. I and many others heard about the “pedophile” rumor after it was made public knowledge that the FBI had eavesdropped on MLK. I’m sure this rumor was purposely leaked.

    Will we ever know if it’s true or not? Doubt it. The revisionist leaders who are doing their best to rewrite history will try to suppress as much of these files as they can. They have already suppressed them for fifty years. What are they afraid will be found out?

    Anywhere MLK and his “peaceful” marches went, riots broke out. There was nothing peaceful about it. I remember, as do a lot of other people, the shootings, fires and lootings. Which they are trying to write out of history, but they can’t. Files released in 2027 will have so many holes it will look like swiss cheese.

  • Fender

    26 — John Engelman wrote :

    However, when I express my admiration for Orientals I do not quote Karl Marx. I quote Jared Taylor. For example:

    “Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.”

    I agree John,Asians are a very enlightened race.

    http://goo.gl/KJTt4