King on Where We Are Going– Part 1

King on Where We Are Going– Part 1

Thomas Allen

In “Where We Are Going,” Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (Boston: Beacon Press, 1968), pages 143–176, Martin Luther King, Jr., discusses the development of civil rights programs, power, Negro economic activity, labor unions, Negro political power and voting, Negro leaders, and poverty. The following is a critical review of King’s essay.

(First, I must remind the reader that most conservatives and nearly all conservative commentators consider King a conservative. Furthermore, many conservative commentators assert that King is an archconservative and the greatest conservative ever. Some have even deified him. Hereafter, all these conservatives are referred to as King-idolizing conservatives. Since King is an archconservative, these King-idolizing conservatives should advocate everything that King advocated.)

King blames the Vietnam War for the slow progress of the civil rights movement and the cause of the absence of program advancement. Although many programs had been proposed, most had been ignored. Moreover, the federal government failed to enforce existing laws that would have advanced the cause of the civil rights movement.

Chastising the federal government, King declares, “Underneath the invitation to prepare programs is the premise that the government is inherently benevolent.” (P. 144.) (One thing that the civil rights movement taught, or should have taught, Southerners is that the federal government is malevolent — just as it was during the First Reconstruction.)

Next, King complains about shifting the burden of producing civil rights programs from the White majority to the oppressed minority. This shifting of the burden gave Whites an excuse to do nothing and to claim that Negroes wanted nothing. (Placing the burden on Whites allowed Negroes to blame Whites for the failure of such programs although they failed because of the Negro’s innate attributes. Nevertheless, when Whites finally did push forward civil rights and related programs, they gave the country to the Negro and then enslaved themselves to the Negro. Is the country any better off because of this suicidal act of Whites?)

King declares, “When a people are mired in oppression, they realize deliverance when they have accumulated the power to enforce change.” (P. 144.) (Now the Negro has the power to enforce change. Have they changed the country for the better or the worse? If for the better, why is America destroying itself and why is America far, far more divided today than in the 1960s?)

Then, King states, “Our nettlesome task is to discover how to organize our strength into compelling power so that government cannot elude our demands.” (P. 145.) (King’s followers accomplished this goal. Not only do the federal and State governments not elude Negro demands, but they also exceed those demands while Whites attack each other for not giving the Negro more. Reparations are the only demand where Whites have not yet surrendered, but that surrender is coming.)

King wanted programs that would satisfy the Negro’s aspirations. (Within a few years after King’s death, Whites showered Negroes with rapine, benefits, and privileges that Whites never enjoyed. Yet, Negroes still demand more.)

Next, King laments that “too few Negro thinkers have exerted an influence on the main currents of American thought.” (P. 146.) (This problem has now been solved. Has the country improved because of it?)

Continuing, King complains about the lack of Negro businesses. (Negro businesses were growing under segregation during the Jim Crow Era. However, the civil rights moment diminished them — at least initially.)

Although King condemns labor unions in other essays for discriminating against Negroes, he praises them in this essay for creating racial harmony and for providing Negroes hospitality and mobility. Further, unions had brought Negroes high wages. Still, Negroes needed to increase their influence in the labor movement. He notes, “The coalition of an energized section of labor, Negroes, unemployed and welfare recipients may be the source of power that reshapes economic relationships and ushers in a breakthrough to a new level of social reform. The total elimination of poverty, now a practical possibility, the reality of equality in race relations and other profound structural changes in society may well begin here.” (P. 150.) (King-idolizing conservatives take note.)

Then King discusses Negroes using their vote as consumers to exert economic power. They needed to use the boycott to give them what they demanded. (Some Whites attempted to use the boycott to counter Negro boycotts. However, because of a lack of White unity and disorganization, White boycotts failed. Unlike White boycotts, Negroes were unified and organized in their boycotts; therefore, they succeeded. Now, after 55 years, Whites finally learned something from the Negro and are using boycotts to punish businesses that promote wokeism and queerdom, but not interracial mating. Since the country is rapidly succumbing to wokeism and queerdom, how effective these boycotts will be, remains to be seen.)

Part of the Negro’s demands was quotas for Negroes. The workforce in each category should reflect the percentage of the Negro population. (Qualifications of the Negro for the job did not matter. What mattered was his race. Consequently, all King-idolizing conservatives need to support hiring based on race to meet the quota.)

Next, King comments on the rising political power of the Negro. The population in major cities was rising because of Negro migration and because the Negro birthrate was exceeding that of Whites in the cities. “The two trends, along with the exodus of the white population to the suburbs, are producing fast-gathering Negro majorities in the large cities.” (P. 154.) (As a result, Negroes have taken control of several major cities. In other major cities where they do not control directly, they control indirectly through their kowtowing White slaves.) By controlling governments of large cities, especially in the North, Negroes obtained enough political power substantially to “determine the political destiny of the state.” (P. 154.) 

King remarks that through a coalition of urban minorities, Negroes will control the Democratic Party. (Where Negroes are a significant part of the electorate, Democrats usually need the Negro vote to win. The question is, do Negroes use White Democrats or do White Democrats use Negroes?) Continuing, King states that even the Republican Party needs the Negro’s vote to win, especially in the presidential elections. (Even today, most Republicans believe that they need the Negro vote to win although only a small percent vote for Republicans and although Republicans have won more presidential elections than Democrats since the 1965 voting rights act. If Whites valued the interest of their race as Negroes do theirs and voted for the candidate that served their racial interest as Negroes do, no White presidential candidate would need the Negro vote.)

Then, King comments on Negroes destroying the power of the Dixiecrats and Southern reactionaries. Consequently, they eliminated the power of Dixiecrats and Southern reactionaries in Congress. Thus, Congress can impose the Negro’s agenda on the South and then the rest of the country(, which it did). 

Next, King discusses the need for Negroes in party politics. Traditionally, White political leaders have manipulated Negroes. (Some believe that White political leaders still manipulate Negroes. White oligarchs have been highly successful in manipulating Negroes to increase the power and wealth of the oligarchs.) He criticizes the typical Negro politician, most of whom were frontmen whom Whites had picked and supported. About these Negro politicians, King writes, “Tragically, he is in too many respects not a fighter for a new life but a figurehead of the old one.” (P. 156.) Then, he comments on the poor performance and distrust of Negro politicians.

About what Negroes need to do, King states that “we shall have to do more than register and more than vote; we shall have to create leaders who embody virtues we can respect, who have moral and ethical principles we can applaud with an enthusiasm that enables us to rally support for them based on confidence and trust.” (P. 158.) (This goal has only been partially achieved. Many Negro politicians have come forward whom Negroes and even many Whites enthusiastically support. However, most of these Negro politicians lack moral and ethical principles — just as many White politicians lack moral and ethical principles.) Continuing, King demands, “We will have to demand high standards and give consistent, loyal support to those who merit it.” (P. 158.) (Negroes have failed to demand high standards. But, then, since King’s moral and ethical standards were low, he may have been considering his low standards as high. Anyway, most Negroes give consistent loyal support to Negro political leaders whatever their standards. Many Whites are also guilty of supporting Negro politicians with low standards and with no moral or ethical principles.)

Next, King describes the need for Negroes to become politically independent and ways to force machine politicians to bow to the Negro’s will. Then, he states, “The future of the deep structural changes we seek will not be found in the decaying political machines. It lies in new alliances of Negroes, Puerto Ricans, labor, liberals, certain church and middle-class elements.” (Pp. 158-159.)

Copyright © 2023 by Thomas Coley Allen.

Part 2

More social issues articles.

King on Racism and the White Backlash – Part 3

King on Racism and the White Backlash – Part 3

Thomas Allen

Then, King remarks that “racism can grow and destroy nations.” (P. 99.) (True. Negro racism is destroying America, which is what the White oligarchs want Negroes to do. However, since Negro lethargy prevents Negroes from destroying America fast enough, the oligarchs are importing colossal numbers of nonwhites.)

About Negroes, King claims that “they have never been guilty of crimes against a whole people.” (P. 99.) (If this claim were true when King wrote it, it is no longer true today. Today, Negroes are willing active participants in the genocide of Whites — especially Southerners.)

About the church, King writes, “Among the forces of white liberalism the church has a special obligation. It is the voice of moral and spiritual authority on earth.” (P. 101.) (To support the Communist civil rights movement and Negrophilia-Albusphobia, many clergymen have abandoned the teachings of the Scriptures. They emphasize social justice. They teach that salvation is through social justice as the progressive Negroes define it and not through faith in Jesus.)

Then, King condemns the church for accepting slavery before Lincoln’s War and segregation afterward. For King, such acceptance was the unpardonable sin. (As stated above, the Bible does not condemn slavery. Further, God is a segregationist. Therefore, unless God is a sinner, segregation is not a sin [see “Does God Abhor or Approve Miscegenation?” by Thomas Allen].) 

Next, King condemns segregated churches and praises churches that have abandoned the Scriptures for social justice, especially integration. (In the South, most Churches were integrated although the races were usually separated. However, Negroes wanted Negro churches independent of Whites; they wanted to be free from Whites. Thus, the churches became segregated.) King demands that “the church must acknowledge its guilt, its weak and vacillating witness.” (P. 102.)

Interestingly, King states, “Today the judgment of God is upon the church for its failure to be true to its mission. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.” (P. 104.) (Most churches followed King’s urging and replaced teaching the Scriptures and salvation by faith in Jesus with social justice, integration, surrendering unconditionally to Negro demands, the genocide of the races via miscegenation, idolizing the Negro, and sanctifying King. Consequently, these churches have become irrelevant social clubs without moral or spiritual authority.)

Next, King asserts, “A religion true to its mission knows that segregation is morally wrong and sinful.” (P. 102.) (Since the God of the Bible is a segregationist and ordains segregation, this religion referred to by King is not true Christianity. At best, it is a pseudo-Christianity [see “The Bible, Segregation, and Miscegenation” by Thomas Allen].) Continuing, King claims that segregation is based “on pride, hatred and falsehood.” (P. 102.) (On the contrary, segregation is based on God’s Scriptural commands and examples.)

Then, King discusses each man universally sharing in the image of God, God stamping each human his personality, human worth lying in a relationship to God, etc. “Every man must be respected because God loves him.” (P. 102.) “An individual has value because he has value to God.” (Pp. 102-103.) (Throughout this discussion, King says nothing about preserving the races that God created. Most likely, King thought that they evolved and were not worth preserving; he advocated their genocide via miscegenation. God hates interracial mating so much that He forbids the mongrel [mulattos and mestizos] from entering His assembly [see “Commentary on Deuteronomy 23:2" by Thomas Allen].)

For King, freedom “is, first, the capacity to deliberate or to weigh alternatives. . . . Second, freedom expresses itself in decision. . . . A third expression of freedom is responsibility.” (P. 104.) From his description of freedom, he concludes that segregation “cuts off one’s capacity to deliberate, decide and respond.” (P. 104.) (Yet, the segregationist considers and weighs alternatives: segregation and integration. Then, he decides in favor of segregation and responds and accepts responsibility for his choice. If segregation denies the integrationist the capacity to deliberate, decide, and respond, then integration denies the segregationist the capacity to deliberate, decide, and respond.)

Next, King protests that if he cannot choose to do what he wants to do or live where he wants to live, he is reduced to an animal. (If true, then everyone is reduced to an animal. No one can do what he wants to do all, or even most of, the time. Many cannot live where they want to live.)

King commands, “The church must take the lead in social reform. It must move out into the arena of life and do battle for the sanctity of religious commitments. And it must lead men along the path of true integration.” (P. 105.) (Most churches obeyed King’s command and preached what he ordered them to preach. As a result, churches have become irrelevant. They have converted far more people to atheism and agnosticism and have made more people areligious, nonreligious, irreligious, and unreligious than they have converted to true Christianity. Such are the results of preaching what is contrary to the Scriptures.)

King maintains, “True integration will be achieved by men who are willingly obedient to unenforceable obligations.” (P. 107.) People must become “possessed by the invisible inner law which etches on their hearts the conviction that all men are brothers and that love is mankind’s most potent weapon for personal and social transformation.” (Pp. 106-107.) (Today, this inner law possesses far more Whites, both in percentage and absolute numbers, than it does Negroes. Is this possession causing Whites to decline in numbers and power while Negroes rise in numbers and power?)

Next, King declares, “The Negro’s agony diminishes the white man, and the Negro’s salvation enlarges the white man.” (P. 107.) (Contrariwise, the White man’s agony empowers the Negro, and the White man’s salvation decreases the White man while increasing the Negro.)

King concludes, “What is needed today on the part of white America is a committed altruism which recognizes this truth.” (P. 107.) (White America gave King and the Negro everything that they demanded and more — although White America has not yet agreed to reparations, but that is coming. Is America, which is on the verge of collapse and possibly civil war, any better for surrendering unconditionally to the Negro and making him the White man’s superior?)

Frequently, King insists that the Negro wanted equality. Then, hypocritically, he demands that the Negro be given special benefits and privileges that Whites never enjoyed. If Negroes wanted equality, they would denounce all these special benefits and privileges — and a few have. Since they do not, they reveal that they want supremacy.

According to King’s description of a superior and an inferior race, today, the Negro is the superior race, and the White race is the inferior race. Negroes are now the racial supremacists as Whites kowtow and grovel before them. 

America has become a fully integrated society where only nonwhites are allowed to segregate. While integration has elevated the Negro to supremacy, it has almost destroyed the White race. If he were alive today, King would be overjoyed about the Negro’s progress under integration and the demise of the White race. Further, he would approve of the genocide of the American Negro via interracial mating.

Additionally, King emphatically declared that the Negro seeks power and justice. They want power so that they can have justice. Now, the Negro has power, but they do not use it to obtain justice. They use it for vengeance and for “get out of jail free cards.” If a White kills a Negro in self-defense, Negroes demand that he be tried for murder or at least manslaughter. Often, the innocent White is tried and found guilty. Thus, vengeance is more important than justice. Also, their power has brought them freedom from being arrested and tried for many of their crimes. Seldom is any Negro rioter convicted for the destruction of property or for injuring and even killing an innocent person. Thus, the freedom to commit large-scale crimes without penalty is more important than justice. Did King know that Negroes would use their power for these miscreant purposes instead of for justice? Most certainly, he did.

A Negro whom I knew told me that light-skinned Negroes felt superior to dark-skinned Negro and so acted. (She and I could frankly discuss racial issues, which is unusual in this country.) Consequently, despite all his prattle and demands, the problems that King sought to solve did not go away; they just reappeared in a different form.

While oligarchs started the civil rights moment and the Negro revolution and have used them to destroy White America, they do not care an iota about the Negro. Once he has served his purpose, they will discard him.

Copyright © 2023 by Thomas Allen.

Part 2

More social issues articles. 

King on Black Power – Part 2

King on Black Power – Part 2

Thomas Allen

According to King, Black Power has many positive aspects compatible with the civil rights movement. However, he believes that its negative value prevents “it from having the substance and program to become the basic strategy for the civil rights movement in the days ahead.” (P. 45.) Further, “Black Power is a nihilistic philosophy born out of the conviction that the Negro can’t win. It is, at bottom, the view that American society is so hopelessly corrupt and enmeshed in evil that there is no possibility of salvation from within.” (P. 45.) (Regardless of Black Power, the Negro did win. Yet, now, many Negroes still believe, and many Whites agree, that American society is hopelessly corrupt and enmeshed in the evil of racism, whatever that means, and White supremacy, even though that died decades ago.)

After commenting on the hostile reaction that he received from the Black Power folks in Chicago, King concluded that they had lost patience because all the benefits that the civil rights movement promised had not come to fruition. (Within a decade, they not only received the benefits that King promised and advocated, but they also received much more. Now, they can even become doctors, engineers, executives of major corporations, high-ranking government bureaucrats, etc. with their race being their primary qualification and often their only qualification. One of the few high-paying occupations that they have earned by merits instead of race is athletics.)

King criticizes the Black Power movement because “it rejects the one thing that keeps the fire of revolutions burning: the ever-present flame of hope.  . . . The Negro cannot entrust his destiny to a philosophy nourished solely on despair, to a slogan that they cannot implement into a program.” (P. 47.) 

Next, King comments on the Negro’s disappointments and frustrations. (The Negro may have been disappointed in King’s day. However, today, he should have none, for he has far more privileges and benefits than King ever demanded. Yet, the Negro is still not satisfied and demands more — even the genocide of the White race. His insatiable greed and the kowtowing of Whites keep him from ever being satisfied.)

Continuing, King writes, “We Negroes, who have dreamed for so long of freedom, are still confined in a prison of segregation and discrimination.” (P. 47.).  (Whatever discrimination that Negroes face today is the result of merit and not of race, which is why Negroes want advancements and rewards to be based on race. Today, the White race is the only race discriminated against. If Negroes are still not free, it is because their demands have destroyed freedom for everyone.)

Comparing Black Power to Garvey’s Back to Africa movement, King writes, “The Black Power movement of today, like the Garvey ‘Back to Africa’ movement of the 1920s, represents a dashing of hope, a conviction of the inability of the Negro to win and a belief in the infinitude of the ghetto.” (Pp. 48-49.) (Although the Negro won, his connate traits still keep many in the infinitude of the ghetto. However, refusing to accept responsibility for his failure to escape the ghetto mentality, the Negro still blames nonexistent White supremacy. Moreover, if Garvey had succeeded, most of the race problems of the United States would not exist.)

King remarks, “Black Power is an implicit and often explicit belief in black separatism.” (P. 49.) King adamantly opposed Black separation. He preferred a society where all races are amalgamated and homogenized into indistinguishable mongrels. Such amalgamation is the objective of the oligarchs. Moreover, Black separation preserves the Negro and his uniqueness, which the policies that King promoted destroy. While King expressed a desire for Negro unity and Black identity, his integrationist policies destroy instead of preserving them. Moreover,  under Black separation, Negroes would govern themselves.)

Further, King declares, “that effective political power for Negroes cannot come through separatism.” (P. 49.) (So, Negroes governing themselves do not give them effective political power. Apparently, King thought that Negroes needed to integrate with Whites to govern themselves effectively. Thus, King implies that Negroes cannot effectively govern themselves without the assistance of Whites.)

Some Black Power adherents and King thought small — gaining control of and governing counties and cities. King’s small thinking is one reason that he opposed Black Power — controlling a few counties would give the Negro little influence in State politics. Instead, he preferred focusing on getting Negroes elected to Congress (where they could push the federal government to bully the States into surrendering unconditionally to King. If King had thought big, he would have advocated Negroes having an independent country ruled by Negroes.) While many Black Power adherents wanted the Negro to be independent of Whites, King did not.

Continuing, King writes that “the Negroes’ problem cannot be solved unless the whole of American society takes a new turn toward greater economic justice.” (P. 51.) The federal government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars to create new jobs, low-cost housing, quality integrated education, etc. for the benefit of the Negro. Also, State and local governments have spent many billions of dollars more for the benefit of the Negro. (Thus, for King, the solution to the Negro’s problem is looting Whites for the benefit of Negroes.)

In condemning Black Power, King remarks that “the weakness of Black Power is its failure to see that the black man needs the white man and the white man needs the black man.” (P. 54.) (Whites are not dependent on Negroes. However, if Negroes want to live in a technologically advanced society, they are dependent on Whites.)

King declares, “Negroes should never want all power because they would deprive others of their freedom.” (P. 55.) (Negroes have not gained all power — White oligarchs prevent that — but in alliance with progressive Whites, they have deprived Whites of their freedom. For example, no White can refuse to hire or serve a Negro because of his race, which makes him a slave of the Negro.)

Continuing his attack against Black Power, King asserts, “Probably the most destructive feature of Black Power is its unconscious and often conscious call for retaliatory violence.” (P. 56.) Nevertheless, King admitted many people in the Black Power movement were not advocates of violence. Yet, others believed that only violence would bring liberation.

Another reason that King opposed the violence of Black Power was that it would not work. (However, over time, riots and the threats of riots earned more booty for Negroes that did peaceful demonstrations.)

King notes that “power and morality must go together, implementing, fulfilling and ennobling each other.” (P. 61.) (Unfortunately, he errs. With rare exception, those who wield political power lack morality.)

About segregation, King writes, “Racial segregation is buttressed by such irrational fears as loss of preferred economic privilege, altered social status, intermarriage and adjustment to new situations.” (P. 61.) (Irrational or not, these fears have come to pass. Not only have Whites lost economic privileges, but they have also lost economic neutrality. Whites have to give Negroes preferential treatment in hiring [affirmative action and quotas]. Interracial marriages have soared since the late 1960s. No longer can Whites have any kind of public social activity without allowing Negroes to participate.) According to King, Whites should free themselves of these fears (and surrender unconditionally and genocide themselves along with genociding the Negro via integration and the resulting miscegenation. Of course, this genocide would be in the name of love.)

King states that the Negro will not “be totally liberated from the crushing weight of poor education, squalid housing and economic strangulation until he is integrated, with power, into every level of American life.” (P. 64.) (Now, Negroes are so thoroughly integrated that many of them desire segregation. Moreover, Negroes have more power, especially political power, than Whites except for the White oligarchs. Yet, integration and power have not liberated many of them from poor education, squalid housing, and economic strangulation. Although the welfare state has alleviated much of his economic strangulation, he still lags behind Whites educationally even as academic standards have been lowered to his level. His poor education is the result of his innate genetic lack of intelligence and intellectual capabilities. Again, King preaches the wrong solution to the Negro’s problems.)

Another flaw that King sees in ”the Black Power movement is that it talks unceasingly about not imitating the values of white society, but in advocating violence it is imitating the worst, the most brutal and the most uncivilized value of American life.” (P. 66.) Also, he condemned Negroes perpetrating violence against other Negroes.

King blames the Negro’s desperation for the rise of Black Power. If it were not for White supremacy and segregation, the Black Power movement would never have happened.

A major reason that King rejected the Black Power movement was that it competed with his Freedom Now movement and diverted resources and people from King’s movement. Moreover, in some respects, the Black Power movement accomplished more for Negroes than did King’s Freedom Now movement. Unlike King’s integration movement, which ultimately leads to the genocide of the American Negro, the Black Power separation movement seeks to preserve the American Negro.

Carmichael had a higher opinion of the common Negro than did King. While Carmichael believed that Negroes could advance independently of Whites, King believed that Negroes were dependent on Whites for their advancement. While history shows that the Jim Crow Era proved Carmichael right, the history of the Civil Rights Era has proven King right.

For King and most other Negroes, the Negro has no responsibility for his problems — either in causing them or in solving them. Whites, especially Southerners, are the cause of all the Negro’s problems. Therefore, Whites should solve the Negro’s problem by giving Negroes special privileges and benefits and all their wealth; in short, Whites need to enslave themselves to the Negro until their genocide is completed.

Copyright © 2023 by Thomas Allen.

Part 1.

More social issues articles.

King on Black Power – Part 1

King on Black Power – Part 1

Thomas Allen

In “Black Power,” Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (Boston: Beacon Press, 1968), pages 23–70, Martin Luther King, Jr., discusses the rise of Black Power, its flaws, and his objections to it. The following is a critical review of King’s essay.

(First, I must remind the reader that most conservatives and nearly all conservative commentators consider King a conservative. Furthermore, many conservative commentators assert that King is an archconservative and the greatest conservative ever. Some have even deified him. Hereafter, all these conservatives are referred to as King-idolizing conservatives. Since King is an archconservative, these King-idolizing conservatives should advocate everything that King advocated.)

King begins his essay by discussing the shooting of James Meredith, which occurred in June 1966 and some events that followed. Meredith’s wounds prevented him from continuing his march in Mississippi. So, King, who represented the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), Stokely Carmichael, who represented the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), and Floyd  McKissich, who represented the Congress for Racial Equality (CORE), continued Meredith’s march. (For more about, Carmichael, McKissich, SCLC, SNCC, and CORE, see “The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement” by Thomas Allen.)

Then, King describes the events leading to the resumption of the Meredith Mississippi Freedom March. He discovered that many young Negroes in the troop had become more openly militant. Unfulfilled promises had caused this militant anti-White attitude. Although King wanted to continue his “nonviolent” way, members of CORE and SNCC want to be more militant.

King opposed being openly violent because they “had neither the resources nor the techniques to win.” (P. 27.) To trick and provoke Whites into attacking “peaceful,” unarmed protestors was King’s tactic. 

Carmichael of SNCC opposed Whites joining the march. King’s speculated that  Carmichael’s opposition came from his experience in 1964 in Mississippi when Northerners flooded into Mississippi to work with and instruct Negroes, and the parental attitude of these Northerners made Negroes feel even more inadequate. (Many Northerners, especially Yankees, still believe that Negroes are incapable of taking care of themselves and of advancing without the succor of Whites.) However, King wanted the march to be interracial, and he persuaded Carmichael and McKissich to agree with his (King’s) conditions for the march: nonviolent and interracial. (Unlike Carmichael and McKissich, King appeared to have no qualms about genociding the American Negro via breeding them out of existence with interracial mating, which is a natural result of racial integration.)

During that march, “the birth of the Black Power slogan [entered] in the civil rights movement” (pp. 29-30) although the phrase had been used earlier. However, King  “had the deep feeling that it was an unfortunate choice of words for a slogan.” (P. 30.)

A schism began to occur between the Black Power folks led by Carmichael and the Freedom Now faction led by King. King argued, “The words ‘black’ and ‘power’ together give the impression that we are talking about black domination rather than black equality.” (P. 32.) (Eventually, the Negro not only achieved equality, but the White oligarchs gave the Negro domination over all Whites but themselves. Now, Negroes have far more privileges than Whites ever had at the pinnacle of White supremacy or Jim Crow. Moreover, White oligarchs have enslaved common Whites to support a vast number of Negroes through the welfare state, affirmative action, quotas, etc.) In the end, the Black Power folks and the Freedom Now folks segregated and separated from each other. (So much for these hypocrites adhering to integration.)

Next, King explains that “it is necessary to understand that Black Power is a cry of disappointment. . . . It was born from the wounds of despair and disappointment.” (P. 33.) (Negroes may have been disappointed then, but now they have more than most ever dreamed of having as Whites cower before them.) 

King writes, “For centuries the Negro has been caught in the tentacles of white power. Many Negroes have given up faith in the white majority because ‘white power’ with total control has left them empty-handed. So in reality the call for Black Power is a reaction to the failure of white power.” (P. 32). (Now, Whites are caught in the tentacles of Black Power. Evidence is Whites debasing themselves before Black Lives Matter as though such debasement would ever earn them the respect or admiration of Negroes. Instead, it has earned them the Negro’s disgust and disrespect. Not only did this debasement earn the disgust and disrespect of all self-respecting Negroes, but it also earned the disgust and disrespect of all self-respecting Whites.)

Continuing, King comments on the number of Negro and White civil rights workers killed in Mississippi and the number of churches bombed or burned. He notes, “This is white power in its most brutal, cold-blooded and vicious form.” (P. 34.) (With numerous riots since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and their vast destruction of property and many resulting deaths, Black Power has far exceeded White power in its most brutal, cold-blooded, and vicious form. When the brutal viciousness that Negro criminals perpetrate against Whites is included, Black Power makes King’s description of White power look benevolent.)

Much of the blame for the rise of Black Power, King places on the federal government. The federal government failed to become despotic enough quick enough to ram all the demands of the Negroes “down the throats” of Whites — especially Southerners. (Within a decade, the federal government had become despotic enough to force Whites to surrender unconditionally to the demands of the Negro. Over the decades, this despotism has grown until now White oligarchs are giving Negroes privileges and benefits that they never dreamed possible or even thought about.)

Not only does King condemn the South, but he also condemns the North.  “In the Northern ghettos, unemployment, housing discrimination and slum schools mock the Negro who tries to hope. . . . The gap between the wages of the Negro worker and those of the white worker has widened. Slums are worse and Negroes attend more thoroughly segregated schools today than in 1954.” (Pp. 35-36.) (For most Northerners, civil rights and special privileges and benefits for Negroes were only supposed to apply in the South. They were not supposed to apply in the North. If Northerners had known that they were going to be suffocated and devoured in the tentacles of the civil rights movement that they wished on the South, the civil rights movement would have died before it began.)

According to King, the Vietnam War was a major cause of the rise of Black Power and Negroes becoming more violent. Also, Negroes had become disappointed “with timid white moderates who feel that they can set the timetable for the Negro’s freedom.” (P. 36.) They had become disappointed “with a federal administration that seems to be more concerned about winning an ill-considered war in Vietnam than about winning the war against poverty here at home.” (P. 36.) Thus, King wanted resources wasted on the Vietnam War to be allocated to the War on Poverty. (Consequently, King-idolizing conservatives should be ardent supporters of the welfare state and should demand that resources spent on foreign wars promoting American hegemony be spent on the War on Poverty.)

Moreover, King condemns both Whites and Negro clergymen who fail to support the civil rights movement with sufficient alacrity. Their apathy was a cause of the rise of Black Power. The Negro middle class also suffered his wrath. 

About Black Power, King writes that “in its broad and positive meaning, [Black Power] is a call to black people to amass the political and economic strength to achieve their legitimate goals.”(P. 37) (White oligarchs would give the Negro enough political and economic power to achieve their goals, legitimate or otherwise.) King laments about the Negro’s lack of power. (Now, the Negro has power that probably exceeded what King imagined possible.)

Continuing, King writes, “The problem of transforming the ghetto is, therefore, a problem of power.” (P. 37.) (Negroes have gained control of the governments of many major cities. Not only have ghettos not vanished under Black Power, but they have often grown worse — even with the influx of enormous amounts of federal money.) King expresses a great deal of lust for power and associates power with love. 

Then, King writes that “the ultimate answer to the Negroes’ economic dilemma will be found in a massive federal program for all the poor.” (P. 39) (Eventually, King’s demand for massive federal expenditures on poverty came to fruition, yet poverty remains. [Too many people are getting rich from poverty for it to be eliminated.] Moreover, since King was a fervent supporter of the welfare state and the War on Poverty, all King-idolizing conservatives should also be zealous supporters of them.)

King urged Negroes to combine their resources and to develop habits of thrift and techniques of wise investment. (Unfortunately, most Negroes ignored his advice.)

“Black Power is a psychological call to manhood. For years the Negro has been taught that he is nobody, that his color is a sign of his biological depravity, that his being has been stamped with an indelible imprint of inferiority, that his whole history has been soiled with the filth of worthlessness.” (P. 39.) (For the most part, Negroes have overcome these psychological problems. White oligarchs and Negroes teach Whites that they are worthless oppressors and are not worthy of respect and are inferior to the Negro. However, as crime statistics show, the Negro has failed to overcome his biological depravity, which is in his genes.)

Summarizing his discussion of the impact of slavery on Negroes, King writes, “Here, then, was the way to produce a perfect slave. Accustom him to rigid discipline, demand from him unconditional submission, impress upon him a sense of his innate inferiority, develop in him a paralyzing fear of white men, train him to adopt the master’s code of good behavior, and instill in him a sense of complete dependence.” (P. 40.) (In many respects, Negroes have vanquished the effects of slavery. They are not subject to discipline or submission. [Whites are expected to submit to Negroes.] They no longer fear Whites, but Whites fear them. Most Negroes have abandoned the code of good behavior. However, most Negroes still have a sense of complete dependence. They depended on the welfare state and the special privileges and benefits that the oligarchs have given them.) Then, King writes, “Black Power is a psychological reaction to the psychological indoctrination that led to the creation of the perfect slave.”

King asserts that the Negro “must no longer be ashamed of being black.” (P. 42) (Although Negroes are no longer ashamed of being black, many Whites are ashamed of being White. Further, realizing the benefits and privileges that Negroes have but are denied Whites, a growing number of Whites are claiming to be Negroes.)

Copyright © 2023 by Thomas Allen.

Part 2

More social issues articles.