I attended a symposium November 5, 2006 at the JFK
Library in Boston, focused on the Civil Rights Movement in Boston
from 1960 to 1968. Good event. Well organized, bringing together
many of the key participants of that era with an audience filled
not only with thirty, forty, fifty, and of course sixty-somethings,
but also a lot of teens and those in their twenties. However, it
ended on what was for me a strange note. The last three persons
who asked questions of the last panel each raised essentially the
same question--What meaning should we draw from that era for today's
struggle in Boston and the nation? What was strange was that none
of the panelists responded to the questions.
I could imagine a lot of reasons why the panelists
did not want to venture into that area at the end of a symposium
on the sixties. However, since I think its an important question
that does not get enough discussion, I thought it appropriate to
share my thoughts with the BlackCommentator audience with the hope
of stimulating a dialogue. My perspective is that the purpose of
life on this planet for each of us is to advance our human consciousness
of the imperative need for us to develop right relations not only
with each other but also with the environment. Therefore, the civil
rights movement of the fifties and sixties was a critical step forward
in that evolutionary process.
One hundred years after the end of the civil war,
the passage in Congress of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights
Act affirmed the commitment of the country to eradicate the virulent
cancer within the American body politic--the apartheid treatment
of Blacks in the South as well as other discriminations making a
mockery of American democratic ideals. The civil rights movement
also stimulated other groups to stand up and assert their grievances--women,
students, other racial and ethnic groups, workers, etc. However,
while the struggle to make that civil rights affirmation of the
sixties real continues into this century, in 1967 Rev. Dr. Martin
Luther King, seeing the limitations of the civil rights gains, framed
the foundation for the struggle for human rights.
On April 4th, 1967 Dr. King, much to the consternation
of many supporters, stepped out of the box of being a world renounced
leader in the struggle for civil rights for Blacks in this country
and took his place as a leader for human rights throughout the world
with his denunciation of the Vietnam War and American support for
it. While his decision to speak out must be viewed as an issue of
personal conscience, it also should be viewed, I believe, as a recognition
that civil rights for Blacks would be continually undercut if the
leaders of the country, government and business were allowed to
trample the human rights of people not only in this country, but
around the world.
Being a man of action, Dr. King could not rest on
his laurels as a champion of civil rights and as a courageous voice
on the Vietnam issue. Consequently, shortly after his historic speech,
he began to work with the leadership of SCLC on developing the first
major battle in the struggle for human rights, the Poor People's
Campaign. A key indicator that this campaign was to focus on human
rights for all was the fact that his call was to all people of this
nation who recognized that governmental policies were perverting
the body politic. His enunciation of the three evils--militarism,
materialism (and its twin brother economic exploitation), and racism
spoke to the needs not only of Blacks but also of all who were being
deprived of the opportunity to participate in the American dream.
It is also important to note that even the tactics of the movement
changed with the call being not just for a one day demonstration
but for a siege "until the promissory note is paid".
Given the fact that Dr. King's call was pointing an
arrow at the heart of the American system of oppression, it is understandable
that forces within the government and without conspired
to end his life. However, with the eradication of his courageous
energy as well as intellectual and spiritual brilliance, we no longer
had a leader able to frame the human rights issues and inspire the
people of America to challenge the empire. So for the last forty
years, we have wandered in the desert of neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism
without a shining star to guide the way. Meanwhile the civil rights
movement has created opportunities for some Blacks but not equal
opportunities for all.
In 1973, there were 500, 000 people of all races in
the jails and prisons of this country. Today, there are over 2,000,000
with 1,000,000 being African-Americans. Estimates are that 80% are
there for nonviolent drug crimes. At the same time, resources for
drug prevention and rehabilitation lag behind the resources being
put into trivialization of users. As they come out of jail, federal
law excludes them from federal subsidized housing, puts time barriers
on the ability to access higher education while businesses both
private and public find it easier and easier to discriminate against
hiring those who have been arrested, even if found not guilty. Health
disparities and infant mortality for those of African-American descent
are continuing at a high level despite the high levels of health
care available to some.
Professor Andy Sum, an economics professor at Northeastern
University in Boston, released a study in the summer of 2005 saying
that unemployment for African American and Latino young men hovered
at the 40% to 50% level in urban areas across the country. Blacks
in the unions have been the hardest hit in terms of layoffs and
terminations during the last ten years. Studies have also shown
that the major affirmative action gains have been made by white
women. Yes, while we have our Oprahs and P. Diddys, the reality
is that the civil rights movement enabled Blacks to become part
of the American system in an unprecedented way but by and large
we have found the cupboard bare.
And what has happened to the struggle for human rights?
If we use King's three evils as a measuring rod for gains in the
human rights arena, we can see that the struggle is going backwards.
That is, in terms of militarization the Defense budget is now $450
billion, not counting the supplemental appropriations for Iraq and
Afghanistan. Thus, Defense Department appropriations are at least
half of the $900 billion dollars of the discretionary allocations
of the federal government. The highest level of social spending
is education at $50 billion. In terms of economic exploitation,
workers' earning power has suffered unprecedented decline during
the last five years. Tax cuts have been given to the rich while
the federal debt (independent of the trillions borrowed from the
Social Security Accounts) is over $500 billion and rising. The issue
of racism speaks for itself. It is alive, well, and seeking to regain
lost territory.
Can we expect that the Democrats with control of the
House and/or Senate will change this situation? I would suggest
not. True, they will take actions to soften the effect of the punitive
policies, but it seems clear that the Democratic Party is also controlled
by the corporations that are focused on their profits and not the
welfare of the people of this country. While the Democrats are politically
using the Iraq issue, even if the mounting pressure forces a change
in the Bush policy toward Iraq, it does not seem that the Democrats
have the will to challenge the militarization of the country which
is the source of the future wars that will continue to deprive the
American people of the quality of life that we have a right to expect,
given the resources of this country. Kerry promised the American
people in 2004 that he would increase the military budget. And when
challenged recently on his observation on the class structure of
the country and its relation to who serves in the military, he cut
and ran.
To return to my opening question: What have we learned
from the movement for civil rights that can aid us in today's struggles?
I believe the chief lesson is that the gains in civil rights have
not changed significantly the relatively static positions of Blacks
at the bottom of the melting pot, despite the obscene displays of
wealth by some of the Blacks who have "made it". Therefore,
the last forty years remind us that Dr. King in 1968 again displayed
his brilliance by not allowing us to smugly rest on our civil rights
gains but urging us to join with all right thinking people in this
country to challenge the dysfunctionality of the American political,
social, and economic system through the Poor People's Campaign.
The above analysis is not meant to suggest that we
should abandon the struggle for civil rights, which must be an ongoing
part of our evolutionary struggle. However, we have to acknowledge
that change in the quality of life needed by most of us can only
happen by building a movement for human rights that can restructure
the relationship of government policies to the needs of all the
people of this country. Such a movement must focus both on building
human and material infrastructures at the local and regional level
that can restore our confidence in ourselves and our ability to
join together to develop successful locally based strategies. However,
such a movement has to raise the question of whether it is time
for us to complete the Poor People's Campaign that Dr. King's assassination
so tragically interrupted. Isn't it time to go back to Washington
with the commitment to stay until Congress and the President develop
the policies that will Fund the Dream that Dr. King envisioned?
BC Editorial Board member Chuck Turner
is a Boston City Council member and founder of the Fund the Dream
campaign. Turner has been an active force in progressive politics
for decades. A vocal Boston activist since graduation from Harvard,
Council Member Turner now represents Boston’s district 7, which
includes parts of Roxbury, Dorchester, the South End, Kenmore and
Fenway. He is the Chair of the Council’s Human Rights Committee,
and Vice Chair of the Hunger and Homelessness Committee. He has
most recently been involved in an effort to block the construction
of Boston University’s Biosafety Level 4 Laboratory. Click
here to contact Councilmember Turner. |