Re: [A-List] Re: History and Sacrificial Death/MLK and sex as history

[Omahkohkiaayo_ipoyi <omahkohkiaayo@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Waistline2@xxxxxxx wrote:

  To state that Dr. King was a great historical figure and genuine "man of 
the people" is so obvious that it is never debated amongst the American
peoples and not just blacks. Dr. King Jr. is recorded in world history as a
man of peace  in a most violent country with a history written in blood ink
on a parchment of  genocide. History is in fact measured by blood and/or
its lack of it. 


Response Jim C:

I'll debate it any time anywhere. I consider MLK just another demagogue
clearly in love with the tone and "eloquence" of his own voice. The issue
of his sexual activities is about betrayal of those "People" who trusted
him and put their lives on the line for the Cause and not narrow or
"bourgeois" morality. If one is in a leadership position, trusted by many
who are also putting their own lives on the line but have no celebrity to
protect them, and one knows that one is a target of surveillance and
searches for "black"mail material, then there are two choices: do not
engage in behaviour that can be used to compromise you and the Movement or
get the fuck out of the leadership of the Movement and make room for
someone who will not betray the Trust and not compromise the Movement.
Anyone who does not understand that is a dilettante playing at revolution
and social change like some kind of hobby and not serious in any serious
way.

MLK never did a real day's work in his life. The son of a preacher, set out
to become a preacher which is to say a parasite that lives off the fear of
death, misery and need for an opiate like religion of others, wearing
flowing robes and consciously title-mongering "Reverend" or even Dr (with a
plagiarized PhD Dissertation) presuming to be a special pipleline or
intermediator with God and/or special and "trained" interpreter of God's
word. His callouses were on his ass and his tongue while those who yes
supported him had the callouses on their hands and feet.

He was a hypocrite in more ways than using women as penis recepticles and 
then summarily dropping them without further inquiry as to how they are
even doing. When in Washington, D.C. kissing the asses of the Kennedys or
J. Edgar, he often stayed at plush hotels like the Willard that his
supporters would never be let into let alone afford to stay even one night
and this was with money donated by the many who had little to live on let
alone donate to the Cause. A real leader makes an example by never allowing
the precious donations of funds by poor masses to be wasted in any way or
living in a lifestyle that is contemptuous of the trusts and living
conditions of those masses supporting him or her. Ho Chi Minh lived in
former servant's quarters and when he died, he had few possessions of his
own.  

Giving a bunch of speeches, working a lucrative lecture circuit staying in
5-Star hotels and getting the spotlight, exposure and name recognition is
not hard work. Hard work is setting up the venues; hard work is daily mass
work and working one-on-one to recruit; hard work is laborious scholarship
to find and expose key contradictions that will be used to weaken the enemy
and gain new cadres; hard work is not marching and theatrics in a bunch of
demonstrations, hard work is working alone in isolated and depressed areas
to recruit or investigate in hostile territory and always under the threat
of death and with no celebrity to cause those who seek your death to take a
second look because of what your death may trigger.

Yes MLK was "revered" by many; but it was more a personna being revered
than on the basis of any substantive knowledge of what he was about. But on
what real basis? We see even used car dealers who finance their own
advertisements on TV become "celebrities" on TV and people come to see them
just because they recognize them on TV and they can say they met a
"celebrity". I too respected King up to a point until I did more
examination of what the real MLK, beyond the excessive use of the pronoun
"I" and his obvious savoring of his own words and voice, was about.

I go back to those FBI files. Thirty four days before MLK, personally, with
no mention of the broad Movement without which he was nothing, was supposed
to get the Nobel Prize, he and his wife get a package that included tapes
of his "Overcoming" in not one, but several different motel rooms, with
different women, with a note telling him "You know the right thing to do,
do it". Many have interpreted this "do the right thing" to mean commit
suicide. Perhaps. But a "Man of the People", who really cared for all 
those people who trusted him and whose Movement could be compromised with
the exposure of King's hypocrisy and betrayal, would have said I got to
step down because the Movement is too important, too much is on the line,
too many people have died and sacrified so much, too much is left to do,
for me, who fucked up, and who now is compromised, to remain in the
leadership. Or, MLK could have made the package public, copped to his
transgressions, did his own mea culpa with the movement and all those in it
who were not "OK" with adultery, hypocrisy and using women as penis
recpticles, and that also would have removed some of the potential for
being "black"mailed by J. Edgar in the future as well as helping to expose
the blackbag jobs and treachery of the FBI which would have helped the
whole movement and others under surveillance; but that wojuld have involved
putting the Movement and others before his own crafted personna, image,
reputation and narcisism.

But no, MLK so full of himself and his personna and leadership, so sure he
was "destined" to leadership (which is what the types that go into
management and the clery typically believe), so obsessed with getting that
Nobel Prize, so full of his titles of Reverend and Dr. (which he flaunted
often) instead books a meeting with J. Edgar, a vile fascist and himself a
hypocrite Gay Homophobe, gets into Hoover's office (I guess Hoover
recognized also his celebrity as getting into Hoover's inner sanctum was o
easy feat) and with Hoover making on veiled references to MLK's hypocrisy
and compromise, MLK is literally betraying many important members of the
movement (CP members and other Communists made many contributions and
sacrifices in the movement) with his presentation of anti-Communist bona
fides, promises to root out and expose any Communists in the movement and
promises to exhort all "Negroes" to become FBI snitches while also
praising, overall. the activities of the FBI in the South. All of this so
his hypocrisy and cover would be kept by the FBI--as it was--and he could
go on to get his Nobel Prize.

Further, MLK's hypocrisy was not well known. That is the other side of MLK,
along with his relatively late and weak speeches against the Vietnam War.
And those whoa re supposedly among the led, espeically when they are
putting their lives on the line have a right to a full and informed profile
of their leadership and among the rank-and-file of the Movement were many
who would not have been "open minded" about MLKs adultery, hypocrisy and
using women as recepticles for his penis and whatever. King's secrets were
kept from the rank-and-file not just some of his other enemies and I
suspect that he was most afraid of his own supporters (the one's who
actually believed in the Bible he and those other parasite preachers like
Jesse Jackson love to thump but not live up to) finding out what a
hypocrite and liar and user of the oppressed (aqs penis recepticles and in
other ways) he was beyond his crafted pious public personna.

All I got to know is "The Man" along with a bunch of vicious corporations
pay the Black Aristocrat family of MLK, who carefully control and profit
from his copyrighted name and image substantially, equating his personna
with the whole Civil Rights Movement, had no problem with setting up a MLK
Day (you will never see a Fred Hampton Day or Malcolm X Day) and yes,
celebrating only his message of "Nonviolence" (as if thre is ever really a
choice of "nonviolence" versus violence since nonviolence by the oppressed,
 in the face of oppressive violence, gives aid and comfort, and even more
dead and violated in th erpesent and in the future, and thus facilitates
and is complicit with oppressive violence; and thus is another form of
violence--complicit violence). All I got to knnow is J. Edgar, a vile
fascist and hypocrite had no problem coming to an accomodation with MLK to
keep his secrets from the Movement and allow him to go to Stockholm and get
his Nobel Prize. All I got to know is all sorts of the most reactionary and
violent sections of U. Imperialism have no problem "honoring" and paying
well to use the words and images of MLK in their own messages and cover-ups
of their own extreme violence and hypocrisy.

Anyone who celebrates MLK as anything but what he really was behind the
veneer that enemies of the movement helped him to keep up to this day and
were able to use against the Movement--a showman- hypocrite, demagogue,
opportunist,user of oppressed women, narcissist, megalomaniac, parasite,
claimer of credit of the work/sacrifices of others etc--simply does not
understand what real leadership, substantive praxis and even real social
change is really about and what they really take. 

This is not about MLK's sex life per se. It is not about the issue of the
"morality" of adultery (King did actually preach against it while
practicing it but that is an issue for his wife and him). There is the
issue, and it is an issue for all men, especially when purporting to be
"progressive", dealing with using poor oppressed women--or anyone--as
disposable penis recepticles, objects etc--that is not about narrow or
bourgeois morality it is about oppression. There is the issue that anyone
in any kind of position that if compromised could compromise the work of
others needs to a) avoid doing any kind of compromising behavior and/or
forming any kind of compromising associations; b) if fucking up and/or
engaging in behavior one hides but about which one is "not ashamed", be
willing to either leave the position of trust and/or cop to the fuck
up/behavior of which one is "not ashamed" but has kept hidden publicly, so
as to remove any possibility of oneself and the whole Movement continuing
to be compromised and also to give information to those trusting that
person, information kept hidden up that point, to they can apply their own
codes of morality to determine if they want to continue to trust that
person and have that person in a position of leadership. 

That is what this is all about and no attempts to frame these issues in
other ways--narrow concepts of bourgeois morality and narrow bourgeois
concepts of "sexuality"--cannot change or hide it; even the FBI understood
that.

Jim C


 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com