The Rise and Fall of the Second Ku Klux Klan – The Atlantic

The Klan drew historical inspiration from the Reconstruction-era Southern past and had its headquarters in the South, but white Americans flocked to the organization all across the United States. Klan chapters could be found in cities, towns, and rural areas alike, and the organization had strongholds not only in former Confederate states like Arkansas, Georgia, Alabama, and Texas, but also in Indiana, Oregon, Kansas, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Ohio. Typical members were neither wealthy and powerful nor impoverished and dispossessed. Rather, they were middle-class white American men and their families: small-business owners and salesmen, ministers and professors, clerks and farmers, doctors and lawyers.

Ideologically, the Klan blended xenophobia, religious prejudice, and white supremacy together with a broadly conservative moralism. Amidst a global recession that came in the aftermath of World War I, fear and anxiety were widespread among native-born white Protestants that the country they had known and been accustomed to dominating was coming undone. They worried about an influx of eastern European immigrants who adhered to Communism and other supposedly subversive political creeds, about the seemingly growing influence of Catholics and Jews in American life, and about the migration of African Americans out of the South. The intellectual vogue for religious modernism, the expansion of political and sexual freedoms for women, and the perception that immorality, crime, and vice were all on the rise only confirmed the sense that the world was spinning beyond their control.

The Klan advocated the restoration of true Americanism and offered members a platform that demonized blacks, Catholics, Jews, Mexicans, Asians, and any other non-white ethnic immigrants while also condemning Communism, most other forms of leftist politics, and base cultural influences such as alcohol, birth control, and the teaching of evolution in public schools. Presenting itself in part as a Christian moral reform organization and in part as a vehicle for entrenching the economic and political power of white Anglo-Saxon Protestants, the Klan flourished with the promise that energetic white nationalism and traditional morals would hold back the tides of modernity and ensure that forces scheming to undermine the authority of native-born white Americans would be kept at bay.

Unsurprisingly, such an antagonistic worldview produced and sanctioned a great deal of violence. From the late 1910s through the 1920s, Klansmen carried out hundreds of beatings and whippings, and dozens of murders. They threatened bootleggers, flogged Mexicans, tarred and feathered doctors who performed abortions, and strong-armed politicians. They lynched black people, showed up on night rides to terrify prostitutes, bullied Jews, and lashed young women found riding in cars with men.

Here is the original post:

The Rise and Fall of the Second Ku Klux Klan – The Atlantic

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Ku Klux Klan  Comments Closed

Who is Martin Luther King Jr. to us, 50 years later …

By the age of 39, King had become a primary leader of the civil rights movement and had been active since the 1950s as a minister and founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. He was an instrumental figure in protests (in Montgomery, Washington, Selma and elsewhere) and in the passage of landmark civil and voting rights legislation. He had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize at 35. In the last years of his life, King faced criticism from some African-American activists who wanted him to employ more confrontational strategies for change. At the same time, he had become more outspoken on issues of poverty and the need to end the war in Vietnam, significantly in the “Riverside Church” speech, delivered in New York a year to the day before his death.The assassination reverberated powerfully around the world, especially in American cities, where the tragedy sparked unrest in Washington, Chicago, Baltimore, Kansas City, Missouri, and elsewhere. The following week, riots broke out in dozens of cities, in multiple instances warranting the intervention of the National Guard. King’s death (like that of Malcolm X only a few years earlier) radicalized some activists who saw futility in his strategy of nonviolence. At the same time, widespread public mourning for King was key in the passage — only days after his assassination — of the Fair Housing Act, the final significant civil rights legislation of the era. President Ronald Reagan signed into law a bill creating a national holiday in King’s name in 1983, and King’s vision remains the foundational lexicon of the fight for racial equality in the United States.

On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of his assassination, CNN Opinion asked a diverse group of activists, academics, public figures and artists: What do you see as the most applicable part of King’s legacy? On this occasion, what do you most want to say about him?

The views expressed here are solely those of the authors.

King’s place in history is still unfolding

Sherrilyn Ifill: King’s work remains unfinished, but the democracy-building work continues

King wrote that the purpose of the letter and the modest contribution which he wished wasn’t so modest, perhaps because he knew the real costs of legal representation in the trenches was to express his “deep sense of gratitude” for our work “for not only the Negro in particular but American Democracy in general.”

What’s most touching to me about King’s letter to the LDF is that it came in response to legal victories that were, as he put it, victories for “American Democracy.” The rulings were a recognition, at long last, that the Fourteenth Amendment meant what it said when it was ratified in 1868. That the Constitution’s promise of equality the command that no state could “deny to any person … the equal protection of the laws” was meant for all of us, regardless of skin color. That exclusion of anyone on account of race could not be tolerated.

And yet, we’re still fighting to make our Constitution’s true meaning real. We’re still fighting to make sure no one’s vote is suppressed. We’re still suing to ensure that the Fair Housing Act, a law enacted in the very wake of King’s death, is enforced to its fullest extent. We’re still fighting school districts that believe a segregated education is in children’s best interests. We’re still fighting so that police departments that brutalize communities of color are held to basic principles of constitutional policing. We’re still fighting so that immigrants aren’t targeted for expulsion from this country.

Worse yet, when it is the president of the United States himself who is pushing an unconstitutional vision of America by casting this struggle for basic dignity and equality as a political tool to denigrate black and brown people, all the while stoking white resentment and victimizing himself it is clear that we’re far from living up to King’s ideals.

Today, 50 years since his death in Memphis, we’re in a moment. A moment when I truly believe we are being driven to confront that rot at the foundation of our democracy. A rot we have papered over for too long. It is weakening every pillar of our democracy up to and including the highest office in our land.

Just a month before King’s death in 1968, Jack Greenberg, our second director-counsel after Marshall, met with Dr. King to discuss our next partnership: our representation of participants in the Poor People’s Campaign to advocate for fair wages, better jobs, employment training and more the next logical step in King’s vision of true equality. That he was killed while leading such an effort among striking sanitation workers in Memphis is a tragic testament to what was destined to be the next phase of his legacy.

But to this day, I’m heartened as I look back on that civic-legal bond we shared, and his insight that our connection was “the most powerful and constructive avenue” to bring African Americans to their full measure as citizens. That much is still true today, or else we would’ve given up the fight a long time ago.

King’s work remains unfinished, but the democracy-building work continues with lawyers and activists working hand in hand to reach the promised land that King saw but couldn’t yet enter.

Sherrilyn Ifill is the president & director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund Inc.

Joseph J. Ellis: The dialogue among Jefferson, Lincoln and King continues

Though it is only a conceit, I like to believe there is an ongoing dialogue on the Mall and Tidal Basin among Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. Jefferson started the conversation with the magic words of American history: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” He clearly intended the words to mean that slavery was wrong but never acted on that intention as a statesman or slave owner.

Lincoln did act, in a very big way called the Civil War. But Lincoln failed to take the next step by endorsing a biracial American society.

That was King’s mission. He believed that the meaning of Jefferson’s magic words had expanded to include blacks as well as whites. Though he delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, he claimed he was collecting on a “promissory note” written by Jefferson.

Whether Lincoln would have felt upstaged by the Jefferson reference can never be known. It is possible that Lincoln heard King’s words in the “I Have a Dream” speech as an updated version of his own words in the Gettysburg Address, where Lincoln described “a new birth of freedom,” believing that his own words also had an expansive meaning.

Jefferson’s response to King’s speech is more difficult to imagine. In his own lifetime Jefferson was a truly visionary statesman who could endorse the complete separation of church and state as well as the global triumphs of democracy. But race was his blind spot.

Even though he watched four of his own biracial children by Sally Hemings grow up at Monticello, Jefferson went to his grave believing that blacks and whites could never live together in harmony in the United States. And if and when they did, the result would be the pollution of the Anglo-Saxon race, in his view.

In that sense, King’s dream was Jefferson’s nightmare. The white racist who shot King on the balcony in Memphis could claim to be acting in Jefferson’s name with as much plausibility as King himself.

On the other hand, Jefferson was a firm believer in what he called “generational sovereignty.” Though there surely were external truths, each generation needed to rediscover those truths for itself and not be held hostage to the past. History moved forward along a gradually ascending path that Jefferson described as “the progress of the human mind.”

King had his own way of describing the same idea. He borrowed the words from Theodore Parker, a 19th-century theologian and anti-slavery advocate: “The arc of the moral universe bends upward toward justice.” With these words in mind, I can easily imagine Jefferson smiling from his perch on the Tidal Basin when the Martin Luther King Memorial went up, welcoming him as the third and final member of America’s trinity.

In this uplifting version of American history, all three icons nodded their approval when the Museum of African American History and Culture was dedicated in 2016.

Anyone who toured the new museum, however, would be forced to confront the self-evident truth that Jefferson chose to omit from the Declaration of Independence, though he was candid enough to acknowledge it in his correspondence. Lincoln and King knew it too, and both of them were killed by men who felt it in their very bones.

Namely, American society rests atop a deep pool of racial prejudice that has defined the relationship between blacks and whites for most of American history. It is still there and always will be. The conviction that we can and should become a truly biracial society is a recent, mid-20th-century idea.

King was the chief apostle for that idea, which is the reason we honor him with a place on the Mall. But he knew that he would not live to see the Promised Land.

He also knew, as Jefferson and Lincoln knew, that the upward arc of the moral universe was constantly being pulled back to earth by the gravitational force of racism. Every step forward produces progress that generates a backlash.

We currently occupy one of those backlash moments. As I listen to Jefferson, Lincoln and King discussing Trumpworld, that is what I hear them talking about, in worrisome tones.

Joseph J. Ellis is an American historian who won the Pulitzer Prize for “Founding Brothers.” He is the author of the forthcoming “American Dialogue: The Founding Fathers and Us.”

Peniel Joseph: Radical citizenship is King’s lasting legacy

We too often posit Martin Luther King Jr.’s death, with its attendant outpouring of shock, grief and threats of racial war, as the beginning of the decline of the civil rights movements — as a major force for social change in American society. This is exactly wrong. More people demonstrated, organized, protested, voted and took to the streets in search of racial, political, social and economic justice in the 1970s than during King’s lifetime.

King’s greatest legacy stems from his willingness to speak courageous truths to powerful interests that made up American society. King denounced racial and economic injustice — whether they came from presidents, business leaders or clergy — as political and moral evils that disfigured American democracy and robbed the nation of its boundless potential.

King’s claim that young children risking physical assault and voluntary arrest in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1963 were carrying the nation back to “those great wells of democracy” resonated around the world as a transcendent message that made the particular struggle of black folk in America universal.

In so doing, King expansively redefined the very meaning of the term “citizen.” King’s visit to the Watts neighborhood of Los Angeles against the backdrop of the city’s urban rebellion, sparked less than a week after the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965, profoundly altered his understanding of citizenship.

After Watts, King came to realize that in addition to voting, true citizenship began with a good job, a living wage, decent housing, quality education, health care and nourishment. Full citizenship meant equitable treatment from all institutions in American society, most notably the justice system, local, state and federal governments, private businesses, churches and civic and secular organizations.

King worked toward this goal until the day he died in Memphis, a working-class, segregated city whose sanitation workers were engaged in a grueling strike for a living wage and safe working conditions. King’s time in Memphis with black garbage workers, alongside Mexican-Americans, poor whites and Native Americans, formed the core of his final crusade, a mission for economic justice that continued long past his death.

He reimagined America by placing racial justice at the core of our national values and conceptualizing a compassionate democracy capable of resisting the triple threat to humanity — militarism, racism, materialism — that he spent his final year railing against.

Remarkably, King’s dreams of a radical citizenship that allowed America to, in his inimitable words, “be true to what you said on paper,” resonates even more now than at the time of his death.

The litany of social movements for Black Lives, to end gun violence, eradicate sexism and misogyny, and protect the rights of immigrants and Muslims, all reflect King’s most revolutionary legacy: the realization that the myths of American exceptionalism needed to be replaced by what he called a “bitter and beautiful struggle” for the very soul of the nation.

That is to say citizenship meant, according to King, more than the absence of the negative structures of oppression he spent his life fighting. His greatest legacy is his demand for an active citizenship capable of guaranteeing justice for all.

Peniel Joseph is the Barbara Jordan Chair in Ethics and Political Values and the founding director of the Center for the Study of Race and Democracy at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, where he is also a professor of history. He is the author of several books, most recently “Stokely: A Life.”

Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor: Nothing in the last 50 years has changed King’s calculus

Martin Luther King Jr. was a man disliked by a variety of people along the political spectrum when he died 50 years ago. His popularity began its precipitous decline after he received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964. King’s pivot from the battle to end Jim Crow and secure the right to vote for African-Americans in the South gave way to a much harder struggle to confront the depths of racism and discrimination that left black citizens in the worst jobs, housing and schools.

King’s battles in the South brought him into conflict with an array of powerful white racists, but the struggles against housing discrimination, school segregation and police brutality produced a different set of combatants, many of whom were protected by Democratic Party machines and black political operatives who acted as gatekeepers in black communities.

In King’s final months, he made preparations to organize a massive campaign of civil disobedience in Washington to bring attention to the persistence of poverty and to demand government action as a result. As King pointed out, “Our experience is that the federal government, and most especially Congress, never moves meaningfully against social ills until the nation is confronted directly and massively.”

King’s politics had moved further and further to the left as he confronted the recalcitrance of the federal government and as he connected the oppression and exploitation of ordinary people at home to the country’s war in Vietnam. The political conclusions reached by King during the liberal administration of Lyndon Johnson meant that the “racism, militarism and materialism” that lie at the core of the crisis in the United States was not simply a partisan issue. That these issues were systemic in nature led King to the conclusion that only a “radical reconstruction” of American society could solve them.

It was a position that earned him scorn across the narrow political spectrum of mainstream politics. But nothing in the intervening 50 years since his assassination has changed King’s calculus: both in the strategies he pursued and the political conclusions he reached.

Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor is an assistant professor at the Center for African American Studies at Princeton University. She is the author of “From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation” (Haymarket Books, 2016).

Jason Sokol: King knew when to break an unjust law

Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy of nonviolence and civil disobedience lives on today in those Americans who continue to practice civil disobedience in the face of injustice: the black athletes who have knelt peacefully during the National Anthem, the hundreds of thousands of youths who took to the streets in the March for Our Lives, and those in the Black Lives Matter movement who are waging nonviolent protests after the killing of Stephon Clark. King himself was often more disruptive and confrontational than these modern-day protesters have been.

History has valorized King. In turn, those who zealously enforce the laws — without regard for whether those laws are just or humane — risk becoming known as the heirs to Bull Connor.

Steven Levingston: King was the rare man who could change a president

Decades ago, many African-Americans proudly displayed three portraits on a wall at home: Jesus, Martin Luther King Jr. and John F. Kennedy. There was little question why Jesus or King had a place of prominence. But how Kennedy joined the wall of honor is a complicated story.

Kennedy has long been regarded as a champion of civil rights. It is true that he pushed forward the movement for black equality, but it is also true that his path was slow and hesitant. When he came into office in January 1961, Kennedy was not a strong civil rights advocate; he was more concerned about his political agenda than the struggles of 20 million black Americans. It took him 2 years to come around.

So, what changed him?

You could say he had a guiding spirit, an angel on his shoulder. The deeper you look into those 2 years, the more carefully you look, everywhere you look stands King: his preaching, his reasoning, his leadership and most important, his moral authority. King was instrumental in guiding Kennedy toward his awakening on civil rights — a transformation that was crucial to desegregation and the eventual passage of landmark civil rights legislation.

King challenged Kennedy, instructed him, urged him to think about the legacy of slavery and the meaning of inequality in America. Finally, after 2 years of bus burnings, beatings, children’s protests, riots and arrests, Kennedy had an epiphany and announced plans for civil rights legislation.

King never claimed credit, but it was he who showed Kennedy the path to his own conscience. What King taught Kennedy remains relevant today. In times of crisis, we need leaders who listen and learn and evolve in office, leaders who have courage, compassion and tolerance for all Americans. But as King observed in Look magazine in 1964: “It’s a difficult thing to teach a president.”

Gilbert King: Both faith and strategy define King’s legacy

Two weeks earlier, Betty Jean Owens, a 19-year-old coed at the historically black Florida A&M University, was abducted and raped at gunpoint by four white men. When deputies arrested the men, they laughed and joked their way to the police station, seemingly confident that the rape of a black woman wouldn’t land them in much trouble.

King said he had two reasons for not calling for capital punishment. The first, he said, was because “it might be possible to reach the hearts and souls of some of the white people” who might view the executions as “payback for all of the injustices that have been heaped upon us.”

The second, he said, was less nuanced. “I sincerely believe that capital punishment is wrong.”

In June 1959, a jury of 12 white men found the defendants guilty with a recommendation of mercy, and the judge handed down life sentences. Blacks were grateful for the verdict, but many scoffed at the recommendation of mercy because the jury claimed they had found, according to a report in the Baltimore Afro-American, “no evidence of brutality” when Owens was raped seven times.

Eddie Chambers: How King’s life and death shaped the arts, then and now

The traumatic assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in April 1968 was a pivotal moment in the manifestation of racial politics but also in the development of the arts in America.

It is, arguably, the duty of arts organizations to respond to seismic moments in our nation’s history, and it was King’s untimely passing 50 years ago that gave, within the arts, a pronounced fillip to manifestations of cultural diversity and the struggle for racial equality.

Eddie Chambers is a professor of art and art history at the University of Texas at Austin.

King’s activism was built for future generations

Bree Newsome: What’s old is new again

Like many in my generation, I was raised to view myself as inheriting rights and privileges for which the previous generations had struggled and sacrificed. The expectation that we should have equality and the realization that we still didn’t have it led to black millennials rising up in mass protest during the latter half of the Obama administration.

Access to public accommodations is the only civil rights issue of the 1960s for which we aren’t still actively organizing and protesting. Voting, education, police brutality, housing and wealth inequality remain central issues of modern civil rights and black liberation. Understanding that King’s mission was violently interrupted in 1968 is key to understanding where we find the nation in 2018: deeply divided along racial lines with great unrest, multiple social justice movements occurring and a government openly hostile to black protest. What’s old is new again.

Marc Morial: We are at a crossroads, but all roads lead to justice

As a child of civil rights activists who worked closely with Martin Luther King Jr., I remember my mother’s despair over King’s fatal shooting 50 years ago this week. But what influenced me even more was my father’s stalwart response to her despair: The movement will go on, he told me. It must.

As one of the civil rights leaders who has the honor of speaking at the official Day of Remembrance in Memphis this week, I can attest both to the achievements that have been reached since King’s murder and the failures to uphold his legacy.

Now, a new generation of activists has revived King’s vision, and the Poor People’s Campaign, led by the Rev. William J. Barber, has begun a series of rallies and protests. Young people across the nation have risen up to protest gun violence — in a sense, echoing King’s condemnation of the Vietnam War.

Fifty years after King’s death, we may be at a crossroads, but to paraphrase a favorite line of his: I do believe all roads lead, eventually, to justice.

Marc Morial is the president of the National Urban League and the former mayor of New Orleans.

Carol M. Swain: Racial oppression is changing; we need new appreciation for King

Martin Luther King Jr. was the imperfect prophet who called upon our better angels. Using religion and philosophy, King appealed to American values and principles, while seeking to connect with like-minded people. He was the right man at the right time in history to change hearts and minds across America and the world.

In my conversations with black students, it sometimes seems as if King’s contributions are seen as something to be endured during Black History Month without practical relevance for today.

George Santayana famously said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” We should not allow King’s legacy and the lessons he taught us to lie buried beneath mounds of grievances.

Blacks have achieved enormous success in many areas. Some of the problems that remain are related to social class and culture. Racial oppression is changing, bringing with it new victims, new forms of victimization and a lack of unifying, prophetic voices.

At this 50th anniversary of King’s assassination, we need to reflect on what we can do to instill a fresh appreciation of his vision in those who have not grasped the significance of his life.

Tami Sawyer: King taught my generation not to ask for consensus but to make it ourselves

Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “A genuine leader is not a searcher of consensus, but a molder of consensus.”

In the beginning of 2017, Confederate statues in Memphis were not a major focus of anyone’s political agenda. By the end of that year, the statues of Nathan Bedford Forrest and Jefferson Davis were removed from their pedestals of prominence in our city’s public parks. Beginning in May, a movement, which I titled #takeemdown901 after a sister movement in New Orleans, began.

Throughout the year, #takeemdown901 received many criticisms. While the most obvious ones came from white supremacists and Confederate apologists, the more surprising one came from moderates who did not agree with our methods for change. Their advice to me and the members of #takeemdown901 was to be a bit quieter and have a lot more patience. Studying King, I knew that it was the methodology of the moderate to take more umbrage with the type of protest than the reason behind the protest. So we continued to push with fervor and urgency.

Knowing that the 50th anniversary of King’s assassination was approaching on April 4, 2018, #takeemdown901 set that day as the deadline for the removal of Memphis’ Confederate statues. King was assassinated less than five miles from both Confederate statues and their parks. It would have been extremely hypocritical for our city to launch a wide-scale commemoration for the 50th anniversary of King’s assassination and still allow the statues of slaveholders to stand in positions of honor. There were many who felt we didn’t take the right tenor with our boisterous social media outreach, protests, petitions and traditional media campaign, which called out our city and state for their complicity in the statues remaining. But when we stood outside Health Sciences Park on December 20 and watched the removal of the statue of Forrest, we knew we had made the good kind of trouble to achieve our end goal.

There are many systemic issues, such as extreme poverty and educational segregation, which are unacceptably the same in Memphis as they were in 1968. Promisingly, there is a growing movement of political and grass-roots leaders who are no longer seeking only a consensus. We are molding the consensus into the change we want to see in our city. Because we did not wait for approval of our methods, #takeemdown901 was able to ensure that the physical landscape of Memphis is different as we commemorate King’s legacy.

Policy and leadership in Memphis urgently require great change in the near future. I believe that this change will come from the consensus molders that we see stepping up in greater numbers to answer King’s call for the radical economic and political redistribution that is necessary for true equality.

Reginald Dwayne Betts: I’m not sure at all that I do King’s memory justice imagining that today’s civil rights issue is mass incarceration

My mother, barely a grade-school student in 1968, remembers Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination. But I came up in a different era. By the time I’d reached middle school, King had become only a holiday. Streets and schools commemorated his life. And each year, though at some point during the month of February, a teacher would tell us that he led the Montgomery bus boycott, he was more myth than man. But what’s worse is that for me, born 12 years after King’s assassination, by the time I’d become a man, the issue confronting my peers and me had stopped being civil rights and had become keeping black and brown people out of prison.

A little over 10 years ago, one Sunday morning, I sat inside of a packed African Methodist Episcopal church just outside of the nation’s capital. Back then, I’d just begun dating my wife, and every moment of every day, it seemed, was about impressing this intelligent college student who had taken a chance on a guy who still carried the funk of jail cells in his pores. I’d read King’s “Letter From a Birmingham Jail” while incarcerated in a similar cell and that morning, I thought about how different it was to go to prison for robbing someone, as I had, than to go for marching.

The pastor asked for each man in the sanctuary 26 years old or better to stand up. I was a jail-weary 26 and stood with the sea of black men who rose, and if there was a sound we made it would have been thunder. You know the moment, when everyone feels like by standing they belong, that’s where we all were, feeling like we belonged. Then the pastor went on to explain that at 26, King led the bus boycott. And we all started wondering how we’d pilfered so much of the time we’d been given.

We’re 50 years after the assassination of King, and I’m not sure at all that I do his memory justice imagining that today’s civil rights issue is mass incarceration. So many of us, young and old men and women of color, have walked into jail cells and prisons with the memory of crimes we committed. I just don’t know how to juxtapose the fight to integrate the public school system with wanting parity in drug sentencing laws and police enforcement. Some days, I stare at my sons and wonder how we messed it all up, how we went from engaging in an irreproachable fight for justice to just wanting our crimes to count for less.

Reginald Dwayne Betts is a poet, memoirist and graduate of Yale Law School. He is an Emerson Fellow at New America, working on a book that examines the criminal justice system through his experience as a formerly incarcerated person working as a public defender.

N.K. Jemisin: I pray it won’t take another 50 years

In 1963, as Martin Luther King Jr. sat in solitary confinement in Birmingham, he lamented the failures of white moderates, who at the time seemed to prefer “a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.”

Read the original post:

Who is Martin Luther King Jr. to us, 50 years later …

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Martin Luther King  Comments Closed

201 Best Martin Luther King Jr. Quotes – The Ultimate List

Another way that you love your enemy is this: When the opportunity presents itself for you to defeat your enemy, that is the time which you must not do it. There will come a time, in many instances, when the person who hates you most, the person who has misused you most, the person who has gossiped about you most, the person who has spread false rumors about you most, there will come a time when you will have an opportunity to defeat that person. It might be in terms of a recommendation for a job; it might be in terms of helping that person to make some move in life. Thats the time you must do it. That is the meaning of love.

View original post here:

201 Best Martin Luther King Jr. Quotes – The Ultimate List

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Martin Luther King  Comments Closed

Abraham Foxman Warns the Ukraine Not to Compare the Holodomor to the Holocaust

I have no idea why the Ukraine allowed a bigoted, racist, Judeo-supremacist like Foxman into a meeting with the president at the time, Viktor Yushchenko. Could you imagine if they allowed a white supremacist into such a meeting?

I understand they wanted to strengthen their ties to the West, and getting the Defamation League’s “Stamp of Approval” really is needed to get U.S funding, but that said, this was a horrible decision of the Ukrainian former president.

Abe Foxman is the perfect example of a Zionist in my opinion – no action he, nor any other Jew is wrong (including George Soros), he only cares about himself and other Jews, and nothing, I repeat, nothing can ever be compared to the sacred cow of the ‘holocau$t’ (including abortion!)

In the words of Rabbi Harry Ronsenfeld, “It is offensive when someone co-opts what’s yours”.

Back in 2010, Abe Foxman (Previous head of the Anti-Defamation League), the worlds largest advocate for Israel – created by B’nai B’rith, for the defense of child killer, Leo Frank – meets with Viktor Yushchenko (Former President of Ukraine) and his advisors and warns them against talking to deeply about the Holodomor and comparing it to the (((Holocaust))).

Israel has still yet to recognize the Holodomor as genocide, possibly because it would reveal that a disproportionate amount of Jews led the Bolshevik and Soviet government during the years of the purposely imposed Holodomor and other famines of East Europe.

Read the rest here:

Abraham Foxman Warns the Ukraine Not to Compare the Holodomor to the Holocaust

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Abraham Foxman  Comments Closed

Abraham Foxman | The Jerusalem Post

Want more stuff like this?

We’re on a mission to spread meaningful content far and wide. Try our daily email, The JPOST, and see for yourself!

By submitting above you agree to the privacy policy.

See the original post here:

Abraham Foxman | The Jerusalem Post

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Abraham Foxman  Comments Closed

Shoah DVD: DVDs & Blu-ray Discs | eBay

eBayShop by category

Shop by category

{“modules”:[“unloadOptimization”,”bandwidthDetection”],”unloadOptimization”:{“browsers”:{“Firefox”:true,”Chrome”:true}},”bandwidthDetection”:{“url”:”https://ir.ebaystatic.com/cr/v/c1/thirtysevens.jpg”,”maxViews”:4,”imgSize”:37,”expiry”:300000,”timeout”:250}}

{“delay”:300}

SHOAH (1985). Condition: New Sealed DVD. Region: ALL, World Wide, it can be played at any DVD player. Subtitle: English, French, Korean, None (you can choose one or turn off subtitle). Cover has the f…

$30.00

Buy It Now

or Best Offer

All Dvds, cover and case included. Dvds look good with just a few light scratches. Dvds play like new. Dvd cover looks good but has a little sticker residue on the front as shown in the photos All ite…

Actor : William Lubtchansky. Director : Claude Lanzmann. Title : Shoah. About Oblivion Enterprises, Inc. DVDs in original pictorial plastic case. still in publisher’s shrinkwrap. never opened. Conditi…

$49.99

Buy It Now

or Best Offer

Free Shipping

Actors: None. Studio: Criterion Collection. Playing side of disc is in nice, clean, lightly used but well kept condition. Over all a nice clean viewing copy. If the photo shows the booklet included th…

Read the original:

Shoah DVD: DVDs & Blu-ray Discs | eBay

Fair Usage Law

November 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Shoah  Comments Closed

Shoah | documentary film by Lanzmann [1985] | Britannica.com

documentary film by Lanzmann [1985]

THIS IS A DIRECTORY PAGE. Britannica does not currently have an article on this topic.

film was the stepping-stone to Shoah, his most-acclaimed work. After Israel, Why was released, the Foreign Ministry in Israel asked him to create a film on the Holocaust. The film consumed the next 11 years of his life. Perhaps the most-notable aspect of Shoah is that, in nine-and-a-half hours, there

Claude Lanzmanns Shoah (1985), for example, a nine-and-a-half-hour examination of the Nazi concentration camps, received limited theatrical distribution in many areas because of its length but still managed to reach wide audiences through the distribution markets provided by the growing cable television and videocassette industries. Ken Burnss

Read more:

Shoah | documentary film by Lanzmann [1985] | Britannica.com

Fair Usage Law

November 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Shoah  Comments Closed

Trump Roils NATO Allies With Calls to Double Military …

BRUSSELSPresident Donald Trump pressed allies to double their military spending target to 4% of GDP, while questioning NATOs value and bashing Germany for supporting a gas deal with Russia.

After attacking North Atlantic Treaty Organization leaders for months for not meeting a 2% spending target, Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that amount was too low.

Following…

Read more:

Trump Roils NATO Allies With Calls to Double Military …

Fair Usage Law

November 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: NATO  Comments Closed

NATO – Sputnik International

The fact of registration and authorization of users on Sputnik websites via users account or accounts on social networks indicates acceptance of these rules.

Users are obliged abide by national and international laws. Users are obliged to speak respectfully to the other participants in the discussion, readers and individuals referenced in the posts.

The websites administration has the right to delete comments made in languages other than the language of the majority of the websites content.

In all language versions of the sputniknews.com websites any comments posted can be edited.

A user comment will be deleted if it:

The administration has the right to block a users access to the page or delete a users account without notice if the user is in violation of these rules or if behavior indicating said violation is detected.

Users can initiate the recovery of their account / unlock access by contacting the moderators at moderator@sputniknews.com

The letter must contain:

If the moderators deem it possible to restore the account / unlock access, it will be done.

In the case of repeated violations of the rules above resulting in a second block of a users account, access cannot be restored.

To contact the team of moderators, write to moderator@sputniknews.com

See the rest here:

NATO – Sputnik International

Fair Usage Law

November 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: NATO  Comments Closed

The Rise and Fall of the Second Ku Klux Klan – The Atlantic

The Klan drew historical inspiration from the Reconstruction-era Southern past and had its headquarters in the South, but white Americans flocked to the organization all across the United States. Klan chapters could be found in cities, towns, and rural areas alike, and the organization had strongholds not only in former Confederate states like Arkansas, Georgia, Alabama, and Texas, but also in Indiana, Oregon, Kansas, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Ohio. Typical members were neither wealthy and powerful nor impoverished and dispossessed. Rather, they were middle-class white American men and their families: small-business owners and salesmen, ministers and professors, clerks and farmers, doctors and lawyers. Ideologically, the Klan blended xenophobia, religious prejudice, and white supremacy together with a broadly conservative moralism. Amidst a global recession that came in the aftermath of World War I, fear and anxiety were widespread among native-born white Protestants that the country they had known and been accustomed to dominating was coming undone. They worried about an influx of eastern European immigrants who adhered to Communism and other supposedly subversive political creeds, about the seemingly growing influence of Catholics and Jews in American life, and about the migration of African Americans out of the South. The intellectual vogue for religious modernism, the expansion of political and sexual freedoms for women, and the perception that immorality, crime, and vice were all on the rise only confirmed the sense that the world was spinning beyond their control. The Klan advocated the restoration of true Americanism and offered members a platform that demonized blacks, Catholics, Jews, Mexicans, Asians, and any other non-white ethnic immigrants while also condemning Communism, most other forms of leftist politics, and base cultural influences such as alcohol, birth control, and the teaching of evolution in public schools. Presenting itself in part as a Christian moral reform organization and in part as a vehicle for entrenching the economic and political power of white Anglo-Saxon Protestants, the Klan flourished with the promise that energetic white nationalism and traditional morals would hold back the tides of modernity and ensure that forces scheming to undermine the authority of native-born white Americans would be kept at bay. Unsurprisingly, such an antagonistic worldview produced and sanctioned a great deal of violence. From the late 1910s through the 1920s, Klansmen carried out hundreds of beatings and whippings, and dozens of murders. They threatened bootleggers, flogged Mexicans, tarred and feathered doctors who performed abortions, and strong-armed politicians. They lynched black people, showed up on night rides to terrify prostitutes, bullied Jews, and lashed young women found riding in cars with men.

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Ku Klux Klan  Comments Closed

Who is Martin Luther King Jr. to us, 50 years later …

By the age of 39, King had become a primary leader of the civil rights movement and had been active since the 1950s as a minister and founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. He was an instrumental figure in protests (in Montgomery, Washington, Selma and elsewhere) and in the passage of landmark civil and voting rights legislation. He had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize at 35. In the last years of his life, King faced criticism from some African-American activists who wanted him to employ more confrontational strategies for change. At the same time, he had become more outspoken on issues of poverty and the need to end the war in Vietnam, significantly in the “Riverside Church” speech, delivered in New York a year to the day before his death.The assassination reverberated powerfully around the world, especially in American cities, where the tragedy sparked unrest in Washington, Chicago, Baltimore, Kansas City, Missouri, and elsewhere. The following week, riots broke out in dozens of cities, in multiple instances warranting the intervention of the National Guard. King’s death (like that of Malcolm X only a few years earlier) radicalized some activists who saw futility in his strategy of nonviolence. At the same time, widespread public mourning for King was key in the passage — only days after his assassination — of the Fair Housing Act, the final significant civil rights legislation of the era. President Ronald Reagan signed into law a bill creating a national holiday in King’s name in 1983, and King’s vision remains the foundational lexicon of the fight for racial equality in the United States. On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of his assassination, CNN Opinion asked a diverse group of activists, academics, public figures and artists: What do you see as the most applicable part of King’s legacy? On this occasion, what do you most want to say about him? The views expressed here are solely those of the authors. King’s place in history is still unfolding Sherrilyn Ifill: King’s work remains unfinished, but the democracy-building work continues King wrote that the purpose of the letter and the modest contribution which he wished wasn’t so modest, perhaps because he knew the real costs of legal representation in the trenches was to express his “deep sense of gratitude” for our work “for not only the Negro in particular but American Democracy in general.” What’s most touching to me about King’s letter to the LDF is that it came in response to legal victories that were, as he put it, victories for “American Democracy.” The rulings were a recognition, at long last, that the Fourteenth Amendment meant what it said when it was ratified in 1868. That the Constitution’s promise of equality the command that no state could “deny to any person … the equal protection of the laws” was meant for all of us, regardless of skin color. That exclusion of anyone on account of race could not be tolerated. And yet, we’re still fighting to make our Constitution’s true meaning real. We’re still fighting to make sure no one’s vote is suppressed. We’re still suing to ensure that the Fair Housing Act, a law enacted in the very wake of King’s death, is enforced to its fullest extent. We’re still fighting school districts that believe a segregated education is in children’s best interests. We’re still fighting so that police departments that brutalize communities of color are held to basic principles of constitutional policing. We’re still fighting so that immigrants aren’t targeted for expulsion from this country. Worse yet, when it is the president of the United States himself who is pushing an unconstitutional vision of America by casting this struggle for basic dignity and equality as a political tool to denigrate black and brown people, all the while stoking white resentment and victimizing himself it is clear that we’re far from living up to King’s ideals. Today, 50 years since his death in Memphis, we’re in a moment. A moment when I truly believe we are being driven to confront that rot at the foundation of our democracy. A rot we have papered over for too long. It is weakening every pillar of our democracy up to and including the highest office in our land. Just a month before King’s death in 1968, Jack Greenberg, our second director-counsel after Marshall, met with Dr. King to discuss our next partnership: our representation of participants in the Poor People’s Campaign to advocate for fair wages, better jobs, employment training and more the next logical step in King’s vision of true equality. That he was killed while leading such an effort among striking sanitation workers in Memphis is a tragic testament to what was destined to be the next phase of his legacy. But to this day, I’m heartened as I look back on that civic-legal bond we shared, and his insight that our connection was “the most powerful and constructive avenue” to bring African Americans to their full measure as citizens. That much is still true today, or else we would’ve given up the fight a long time ago. King’s work remains unfinished, but the democracy-building work continues with lawyers and activists working hand in hand to reach the promised land that King saw but couldn’t yet enter. Sherrilyn Ifill is the president & director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund Inc. Joseph J. Ellis: The dialogue among Jefferson, Lincoln and King continues Though it is only a conceit, I like to believe there is an ongoing dialogue on the Mall and Tidal Basin among Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. Jefferson started the conversation with the magic words of American history: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” He clearly intended the words to mean that slavery was wrong but never acted on that intention as a statesman or slave owner. Lincoln did act, in a very big way called the Civil War. But Lincoln failed to take the next step by endorsing a biracial American society. That was King’s mission. He believed that the meaning of Jefferson’s magic words had expanded to include blacks as well as whites. Though he delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, he claimed he was collecting on a “promissory note” written by Jefferson. Whether Lincoln would have felt upstaged by the Jefferson reference can never be known. It is possible that Lincoln heard King’s words in the “I Have a Dream” speech as an updated version of his own words in the Gettysburg Address, where Lincoln described “a new birth of freedom,” believing that his own words also had an expansive meaning. Jefferson’s response to King’s speech is more difficult to imagine. In his own lifetime Jefferson was a truly visionary statesman who could endorse the complete separation of church and state as well as the global triumphs of democracy. But race was his blind spot. Even though he watched four of his own biracial children by Sally Hemings grow up at Monticello, Jefferson went to his grave believing that blacks and whites could never live together in harmony in the United States. And if and when they did, the result would be the pollution of the Anglo-Saxon race, in his view. In that sense, King’s dream was Jefferson’s nightmare. The white racist who shot King on the balcony in Memphis could claim to be acting in Jefferson’s name with as much plausibility as King himself. On the other hand, Jefferson was a firm believer in what he called “generational sovereignty.” Though there surely were external truths, each generation needed to rediscover those truths for itself and not be held hostage to the past. History moved forward along a gradually ascending path that Jefferson described as “the progress of the human mind.” King had his own way of describing the same idea. He borrowed the words from Theodore Parker, a 19th-century theologian and anti-slavery advocate: “The arc of the moral universe bends upward toward justice.” With these words in mind, I can easily imagine Jefferson smiling from his perch on the Tidal Basin when the Martin Luther King Memorial went up, welcoming him as the third and final member of America’s trinity. In this uplifting version of American history, all three icons nodded their approval when the Museum of African American History and Culture was dedicated in 2016. Anyone who toured the new museum, however, would be forced to confront the self-evident truth that Jefferson chose to omit from the Declaration of Independence, though he was candid enough to acknowledge it in his correspondence. Lincoln and King knew it too, and both of them were killed by men who felt it in their very bones. Namely, American society rests atop a deep pool of racial prejudice that has defined the relationship between blacks and whites for most of American history. It is still there and always will be. The conviction that we can and should become a truly biracial society is a recent, mid-20th-century idea. King was the chief apostle for that idea, which is the reason we honor him with a place on the Mall. But he knew that he would not live to see the Promised Land. He also knew, as Jefferson and Lincoln knew, that the upward arc of the moral universe was constantly being pulled back to earth by the gravitational force of racism. Every step forward produces progress that generates a backlash. We currently occupy one of those backlash moments. As I listen to Jefferson, Lincoln and King discussing Trumpworld, that is what I hear them talking about, in worrisome tones. Joseph J. Ellis is an American historian who won the Pulitzer Prize for “Founding Brothers.” He is the author of the forthcoming “American Dialogue: The Founding Fathers and Us.” Peniel Joseph: Radical citizenship is King’s lasting legacy We too often posit Martin Luther King Jr.’s death, with its attendant outpouring of shock, grief and threats of racial war, as the beginning of the decline of the civil rights movements — as a major force for social change in American society. This is exactly wrong. More people demonstrated, organized, protested, voted and took to the streets in search of racial, political, social and economic justice in the 1970s than during King’s lifetime. King’s greatest legacy stems from his willingness to speak courageous truths to powerful interests that made up American society. King denounced racial and economic injustice — whether they came from presidents, business leaders or clergy — as political and moral evils that disfigured American democracy and robbed the nation of its boundless potential. King’s claim that young children risking physical assault and voluntary arrest in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1963 were carrying the nation back to “those great wells of democracy” resonated around the world as a transcendent message that made the particular struggle of black folk in America universal. In so doing, King expansively redefined the very meaning of the term “citizen.” King’s visit to the Watts neighborhood of Los Angeles against the backdrop of the city’s urban rebellion, sparked less than a week after the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965, profoundly altered his understanding of citizenship. After Watts, King came to realize that in addition to voting, true citizenship began with a good job, a living wage, decent housing, quality education, health care and nourishment. Full citizenship meant equitable treatment from all institutions in American society, most notably the justice system, local, state and federal governments, private businesses, churches and civic and secular organizations. King worked toward this goal until the day he died in Memphis, a working-class, segregated city whose sanitation workers were engaged in a grueling strike for a living wage and safe working conditions. King’s time in Memphis with black garbage workers, alongside Mexican-Americans, poor whites and Native Americans, formed the core of his final crusade, a mission for economic justice that continued long past his death. He reimagined America by placing racial justice at the core of our national values and conceptualizing a compassionate democracy capable of resisting the triple threat to humanity — militarism, racism, materialism — that he spent his final year railing against. Remarkably, King’s dreams of a radical citizenship that allowed America to, in his inimitable words, “be true to what you said on paper,” resonates even more now than at the time of his death. The litany of social movements for Black Lives, to end gun violence, eradicate sexism and misogyny, and protect the rights of immigrants and Muslims, all reflect King’s most revolutionary legacy: the realization that the myths of American exceptionalism needed to be replaced by what he called a “bitter and beautiful struggle” for the very soul of the nation. That is to say citizenship meant, according to King, more than the absence of the negative structures of oppression he spent his life fighting. His greatest legacy is his demand for an active citizenship capable of guaranteeing justice for all. Peniel Joseph is the Barbara Jordan Chair in Ethics and Political Values and the founding director of the Center for the Study of Race and Democracy at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, where he is also a professor of history. He is the author of several books, most recently “Stokely: A Life.” Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor: Nothing in the last 50 years has changed King’s calculus Martin Luther King Jr. was a man disliked by a variety of people along the political spectrum when he died 50 years ago. His popularity began its precipitous decline after he received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964. King’s pivot from the battle to end Jim Crow and secure the right to vote for African-Americans in the South gave way to a much harder struggle to confront the depths of racism and discrimination that left black citizens in the worst jobs, housing and schools. King’s battles in the South brought him into conflict with an array of powerful white racists, but the struggles against housing discrimination, school segregation and police brutality produced a different set of combatants, many of whom were protected by Democratic Party machines and black political operatives who acted as gatekeepers in black communities. In King’s final months, he made preparations to organize a massive campaign of civil disobedience in Washington to bring attention to the persistence of poverty and to demand government action as a result. As King pointed out, “Our experience is that the federal government, and most especially Congress, never moves meaningfully against social ills until the nation is confronted directly and massively.” King’s politics had moved further and further to the left as he confronted the recalcitrance of the federal government and as he connected the oppression and exploitation of ordinary people at home to the country’s war in Vietnam. The political conclusions reached by King during the liberal administration of Lyndon Johnson meant that the “racism, militarism and materialism” that lie at the core of the crisis in the United States was not simply a partisan issue. That these issues were systemic in nature led King to the conclusion that only a “radical reconstruction” of American society could solve them. It was a position that earned him scorn across the narrow political spectrum of mainstream politics. But nothing in the intervening 50 years since his assassination has changed King’s calculus: both in the strategies he pursued and the political conclusions he reached. Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor is an assistant professor at the Center for African American Studies at Princeton University. She is the author of “From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation” (Haymarket Books, 2016). Jason Sokol: King knew when to break an unjust law Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy of nonviolence and civil disobedience lives on today in those Americans who continue to practice civil disobedience in the face of injustice: the black athletes who have knelt peacefully during the National Anthem, the hundreds of thousands of youths who took to the streets in the March for Our Lives, and those in the Black Lives Matter movement who are waging nonviolent protests after the killing of Stephon Clark. King himself was often more disruptive and confrontational than these modern-day protesters have been. History has valorized King. In turn, those who zealously enforce the laws — without regard for whether those laws are just or humane — risk becoming known as the heirs to Bull Connor. Steven Levingston: King was the rare man who could change a president Decades ago, many African-Americans proudly displayed three portraits on a wall at home: Jesus, Martin Luther King Jr. and John F. Kennedy. There was little question why Jesus or King had a place of prominence. But how Kennedy joined the wall of honor is a complicated story. Kennedy has long been regarded as a champion of civil rights. It is true that he pushed forward the movement for black equality, but it is also true that his path was slow and hesitant. When he came into office in January 1961, Kennedy was not a strong civil rights advocate; he was more concerned about his political agenda than the struggles of 20 million black Americans. It took him 2 years to come around. So, what changed him? You could say he had a guiding spirit, an angel on his shoulder. The deeper you look into those 2 years, the more carefully you look, everywhere you look stands King: his preaching, his reasoning, his leadership and most important, his moral authority. King was instrumental in guiding Kennedy toward his awakening on civil rights — a transformation that was crucial to desegregation and the eventual passage of landmark civil rights legislation. King challenged Kennedy, instructed him, urged him to think about the legacy of slavery and the meaning of inequality in America. Finally, after 2 years of bus burnings, beatings, children’s protests, riots and arrests, Kennedy had an epiphany and announced plans for civil rights legislation. King never claimed credit, but it was he who showed Kennedy the path to his own conscience. What King taught Kennedy remains relevant today. In times of crisis, we need leaders who listen and learn and evolve in office, leaders who have courage, compassion and tolerance for all Americans. But as King observed in Look magazine in 1964: “It’s a difficult thing to teach a president.” Gilbert King: Both faith and strategy define King’s legacy Two weeks earlier, Betty Jean Owens, a 19-year-old coed at the historically black Florida A&M University, was abducted and raped at gunpoint by four white men. When deputies arrested the men, they laughed and joked their way to the police station, seemingly confident that the rape of a black woman wouldn’t land them in much trouble. King said he had two reasons for not calling for capital punishment. The first, he said, was because “it might be possible to reach the hearts and souls of some of the white people” who might view the executions as “payback for all of the injustices that have been heaped upon us.” The second, he said, was less nuanced. “I sincerely believe that capital punishment is wrong.” In June 1959, a jury of 12 white men found the defendants guilty with a recommendation of mercy, and the judge handed down life sentences. Blacks were grateful for the verdict, but many scoffed at the recommendation of mercy because the jury claimed they had found, according to a report in the Baltimore Afro-American, “no evidence of brutality” when Owens was raped seven times. Eddie Chambers: How King’s life and death shaped the arts, then and now The traumatic assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in April 1968 was a pivotal moment in the manifestation of racial politics but also in the development of the arts in America. It is, arguably, the duty of arts organizations to respond to seismic moments in our nation’s history, and it was King’s untimely passing 50 years ago that gave, within the arts, a pronounced fillip to manifestations of cultural diversity and the struggle for racial equality. Eddie Chambers is a professor of art and art history at the University of Texas at Austin. King’s activism was built for future generations Bree Newsome: What’s old is new again Like many in my generation, I was raised to view myself as inheriting rights and privileges for which the previous generations had struggled and sacrificed. The expectation that we should have equality and the realization that we still didn’t have it led to black millennials rising up in mass protest during the latter half of the Obama administration. Access to public accommodations is the only civil rights issue of the 1960s for which we aren’t still actively organizing and protesting. Voting, education, police brutality, housing and wealth inequality remain central issues of modern civil rights and black liberation. Understanding that King’s mission was violently interrupted in 1968 is key to understanding where we find the nation in 2018: deeply divided along racial lines with great unrest, multiple social justice movements occurring and a government openly hostile to black protest. What’s old is new again. Marc Morial: We are at a crossroads, but all roads lead to justice As a child of civil rights activists who worked closely with Martin Luther King Jr., I remember my mother’s despair over King’s fatal shooting 50 years ago this week. But what influenced me even more was my father’s stalwart response to her despair: The movement will go on, he told me. It must. As one of the civil rights leaders who has the honor of speaking at the official Day of Remembrance in Memphis this week, I can attest both to the achievements that have been reached since King’s murder and the failures to uphold his legacy. Now, a new generation of activists has revived King’s vision, and the Poor People’s Campaign, led by the Rev. William J. Barber, has begun a series of rallies and protests. Young people across the nation have risen up to protest gun violence — in a sense, echoing King’s condemnation of the Vietnam War. Fifty years after King’s death, we may be at a crossroads, but to paraphrase a favorite line of his: I do believe all roads lead, eventually, to justice. Marc Morial is the president of the National Urban League and the former mayor of New Orleans. Carol M. Swain: Racial oppression is changing; we need new appreciation for King Martin Luther King Jr. was the imperfect prophet who called upon our better angels. Using religion and philosophy, King appealed to American values and principles, while seeking to connect with like-minded people. He was the right man at the right time in history to change hearts and minds across America and the world. In my conversations with black students, it sometimes seems as if King’s contributions are seen as something to be endured during Black History Month without practical relevance for today. George Santayana famously said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” We should not allow King’s legacy and the lessons he taught us to lie buried beneath mounds of grievances. Blacks have achieved enormous success in many areas. Some of the problems that remain are related to social class and culture. Racial oppression is changing, bringing with it new victims, new forms of victimization and a lack of unifying, prophetic voices. At this 50th anniversary of King’s assassination, we need to reflect on what we can do to instill a fresh appreciation of his vision in those who have not grasped the significance of his life. Tami Sawyer: King taught my generation not to ask for consensus but to make it ourselves Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “A genuine leader is not a searcher of consensus, but a molder of consensus.” In the beginning of 2017, Confederate statues in Memphis were not a major focus of anyone’s political agenda. By the end of that year, the statues of Nathan Bedford Forrest and Jefferson Davis were removed from their pedestals of prominence in our city’s public parks. Beginning in May, a movement, which I titled #takeemdown901 after a sister movement in New Orleans, began. Throughout the year, #takeemdown901 received many criticisms. While the most obvious ones came from white supremacists and Confederate apologists, the more surprising one came from moderates who did not agree with our methods for change. Their advice to me and the members of #takeemdown901 was to be a bit quieter and have a lot more patience. Studying King, I knew that it was the methodology of the moderate to take more umbrage with the type of protest than the reason behind the protest. So we continued to push with fervor and urgency. Knowing that the 50th anniversary of King’s assassination was approaching on April 4, 2018, #takeemdown901 set that day as the deadline for the removal of Memphis’ Confederate statues. King was assassinated less than five miles from both Confederate statues and their parks. It would have been extremely hypocritical for our city to launch a wide-scale commemoration for the 50th anniversary of King’s assassination and still allow the statues of slaveholders to stand in positions of honor. There were many who felt we didn’t take the right tenor with our boisterous social media outreach, protests, petitions and traditional media campaign, which called out our city and state for their complicity in the statues remaining. But when we stood outside Health Sciences Park on December 20 and watched the removal of the statue of Forrest, we knew we had made the good kind of trouble to achieve our end goal. There are many systemic issues, such as extreme poverty and educational segregation, which are unacceptably the same in Memphis as they were in 1968. Promisingly, there is a growing movement of political and grass-roots leaders who are no longer seeking only a consensus. We are molding the consensus into the change we want to see in our city. Because we did not wait for approval of our methods, #takeemdown901 was able to ensure that the physical landscape of Memphis is different as we commemorate King’s legacy. Policy and leadership in Memphis urgently require great change in the near future. I believe that this change will come from the consensus molders that we see stepping up in greater numbers to answer King’s call for the radical economic and political redistribution that is necessary for true equality. Reginald Dwayne Betts: I’m not sure at all that I do King’s memory justice imagining that today’s civil rights issue is mass incarceration My mother, barely a grade-school student in 1968, remembers Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination. But I came up in a different era. By the time I’d reached middle school, King had become only a holiday. Streets and schools commemorated his life. And each year, though at some point during the month of February, a teacher would tell us that he led the Montgomery bus boycott, he was more myth than man. But what’s worse is that for me, born 12 years after King’s assassination, by the time I’d become a man, the issue confronting my peers and me had stopped being civil rights and had become keeping black and brown people out of prison. A little over 10 years ago, one Sunday morning, I sat inside of a packed African Methodist Episcopal church just outside of the nation’s capital. Back then, I’d just begun dating my wife, and every moment of every day, it seemed, was about impressing this intelligent college student who had taken a chance on a guy who still carried the funk of jail cells in his pores. I’d read King’s “Letter From a Birmingham Jail” while incarcerated in a similar cell and that morning, I thought about how different it was to go to prison for robbing someone, as I had, than to go for marching. The pastor asked for each man in the sanctuary 26 years old or better to stand up. I was a jail-weary 26 and stood with the sea of black men who rose, and if there was a sound we made it would have been thunder. You know the moment, when everyone feels like by standing they belong, that’s where we all were, feeling like we belonged. Then the pastor went on to explain that at 26, King led the bus boycott. And we all started wondering how we’d pilfered so much of the time we’d been given. We’re 50 years after the assassination of King, and I’m not sure at all that I do his memory justice imagining that today’s civil rights issue is mass incarceration. So many of us, young and old men and women of color, have walked into jail cells and prisons with the memory of crimes we committed. I just don’t know how to juxtapose the fight to integrate the public school system with wanting parity in drug sentencing laws and police enforcement. Some days, I stare at my sons and wonder how we messed it all up, how we went from engaging in an irreproachable fight for justice to just wanting our crimes to count for less. Reginald Dwayne Betts is a poet, memoirist and graduate of Yale Law School. He is an Emerson Fellow at New America, working on a book that examines the criminal justice system through his experience as a formerly incarcerated person working as a public defender. N.K. Jemisin: I pray it won’t take another 50 years In 1963, as Martin Luther King Jr. sat in solitary confinement in Birmingham, he lamented the failures of white moderates, who at the time seemed to prefer “a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.”

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Martin Luther King  Comments Closed

201 Best Martin Luther King Jr. Quotes – The Ultimate List

Another way that you love your enemy is this: When the opportunity presents itself for you to defeat your enemy, that is the time which you must not do it. There will come a time, in many instances, when the person who hates you most, the person who has misused you most, the person who has gossiped about you most, the person who has spread false rumors about you most, there will come a time when you will have an opportunity to defeat that person. It might be in terms of a recommendation for a job; it might be in terms of helping that person to make some move in life. Thats the time you must do it. That is the meaning of love.

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Martin Luther King  Comments Closed

Abraham Foxman Warns the Ukraine Not to Compare the Holodomor to the Holocaust

I have no idea why the Ukraine allowed a bigoted, racist, Judeo-supremacist like Foxman into a meeting with the president at the time, Viktor Yushchenko. Could you imagine if they allowed a white supremacist into such a meeting? I understand they wanted to strengthen their ties to the West, and getting the Defamation League’s “Stamp of Approval” really is needed to get U.S funding, but that said, this was a horrible decision of the Ukrainian former president. Abe Foxman is the perfect example of a Zionist in my opinion – no action he, nor any other Jew is wrong (including George Soros), he only cares about himself and other Jews, and nothing, I repeat, nothing can ever be compared to the sacred cow of the ‘holocau$t’ (including abortion!) In the words of Rabbi Harry Ronsenfeld, “It is offensive when someone co-opts what’s yours”. Back in 2010, Abe Foxman (Previous head of the Anti-Defamation League), the worlds largest advocate for Israel – created by B’nai B’rith, for the defense of child killer, Leo Frank – meets with Viktor Yushchenko (Former President of Ukraine) and his advisors and warns them against talking to deeply about the Holodomor and comparing it to the (((Holocaust))). Israel has still yet to recognize the Holodomor as genocide, possibly because it would reveal that a disproportionate amount of Jews led the Bolshevik and Soviet government during the years of the purposely imposed Holodomor and other famines of East Europe.

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Abraham Foxman  Comments Closed

Abraham Foxman | The Jerusalem Post

Want more stuff like this? We’re on a mission to spread meaningful content far and wide. Try our daily email, The JPOST, and see for yourself! By submitting above you agree to the privacy policy.

Fair Usage Law

November 11, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Abraham Foxman  Comments Closed

Shoah DVD: DVDs & Blu-ray Discs | eBay

eBayShop by category Shop by category {“modules”:[“unloadOptimization”,”bandwidthDetection”],”unloadOptimization”:{“browsers”:{“Firefox”:true,”Chrome”:true}},”bandwidthDetection”:{“url”:”https://ir.ebaystatic.com/cr/v/c1/thirtysevens.jpg”,”maxViews”:4,”imgSize”:37,”expiry”:300000,”timeout”:250}} {“delay”:300} SHOAH (1985). Condition: New Sealed DVD. Region: ALL, World Wide, it can be played at any DVD player. Subtitle: English, French, Korean, None (you can choose one or turn off subtitle). Cover has the f… $30.00 Buy It Now or Best Offer All Dvds, cover and case included. Dvds look good with just a few light scratches. Dvds play like new. Dvd cover looks good but has a little sticker residue on the front as shown in the photos All ite… Actor : William Lubtchansky. Director : Claude Lanzmann. Title : Shoah. About Oblivion Enterprises, Inc. DVDs in original pictorial plastic case. still in publisher’s shrinkwrap. never opened. Conditi… $49.99 Buy It Now or Best Offer Free Shipping Actors: None. Studio: Criterion Collection. Playing side of disc is in nice, clean, lightly used but well kept condition. Over all a nice clean viewing copy. If the photo shows the booklet included th…

Fair Usage Law

November 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Shoah  Comments Closed

Shoah | documentary film by Lanzmann [1985] | Britannica.com

documentary film by Lanzmann [1985] THIS IS A DIRECTORY PAGE. Britannica does not currently have an article on this topic. film was the stepping-stone to Shoah, his most-acclaimed work. After Israel, Why was released, the Foreign Ministry in Israel asked him to create a film on the Holocaust. The film consumed the next 11 years of his life. Perhaps the most-notable aspect of Shoah is that, in nine-and-a-half hours, there Claude Lanzmanns Shoah (1985), for example, a nine-and-a-half-hour examination of the Nazi concentration camps, received limited theatrical distribution in many areas because of its length but still managed to reach wide audiences through the distribution markets provided by the growing cable television and videocassette industries. Ken Burnss

Fair Usage Law

November 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Shoah  Comments Closed

Trump Roils NATO Allies With Calls to Double Military …

BRUSSELSPresident Donald Trump pressed allies to double their military spending target to 4% of GDP, while questioning NATOs value and bashing Germany for supporting a gas deal with Russia. After attacking North Atlantic Treaty Organization leaders for months for not meeting a 2% spending target, Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that amount was too low. Following…

Fair Usage Law

November 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: NATO  Comments Closed

NATO – Sputnik International

The fact of registration and authorization of users on Sputnik websites via users account or accounts on social networks indicates acceptance of these rules. Users are obliged abide by national and international laws. Users are obliged to speak respectfully to the other participants in the discussion, readers and individuals referenced in the posts. The websites administration has the right to delete comments made in languages other than the language of the majority of the websites content. In all language versions of the sputniknews.com websites any comments posted can be edited. A user comment will be deleted if it: The administration has the right to block a users access to the page or delete a users account without notice if the user is in violation of these rules or if behavior indicating said violation is detected. Users can initiate the recovery of their account / unlock access by contacting the moderators at moderator@sputniknews.com The letter must contain: If the moderators deem it possible to restore the account / unlock access, it will be done. In the case of repeated violations of the rules above resulting in a second block of a users account, access cannot be restored. To contact the team of moderators, write to moderator@sputniknews.com

Fair Usage Law

November 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: NATO  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."