The celebration of the federal King holiday
brings about a whole host of conflicts and convolutions. This year
was no different. The only man to have a federal holiday named in
his honor in the 20th holiday (that wasn’t a President), the Rev.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. lost his life in a perpetual struggle
to bring about freedom, justice and equality to the masses of people
in this country. The fight for social justice in America very quickly
turned to a recognition of the economic disparities that subjugated
Blacks and others in a way that compromised their freedom and quality
of life. King’s last commitment to the struggle (besides ending
the Viet Nam war) was to eradicate poverty in the most affluent
nation in the history of the world. King did not believe it was
right that one would speak out on social injustice, but remain silent
on the questions of the war and poverty. Dr. King’s sense of rightness
was based on his sense of justice. King knew that the right to stand
for right couldn’t be a relative engagement. Right had to be right
because in its rightness, justice would be evident. The fight for
economic justice today has become a relative engagement. Forty years
later, we see greater disparities in wages and wealth than when
King was living. Those who claim to support King’s legacy need to
finish King’s last fight, ending poverty. We need another Poor People’s
Campaign.
The days leading
up to the King holiday, every year, is filled with events that romanticize
the period that was the most volatile (outside of the Civil War)
in the nation’s history. It is supposed to be a period of retrospection,
a period of rededication to the life and principles of Dr. King.
But most times it is an engagement in relativism of how people and
certain groups try to fit their relative rightness into the King
paradigm. In the same day, I was on a conference call with people
trying to plan an honest dialogue between the African American and
Latinos communities without addressing the impact the immigrant
influx has on the undermining of work and wages in the black community.
That evening, I was on a panel where the topic was supposed to be,
“King: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow,” but quickly evolved into
a debate as to whether gays rights are civil rights. In both instances
relative logic was being used to advocate for human injustices that
conflict with social standards. While social and economic discriminations
are real within both populations, to frame them in the King paradigm
is a reach for both, and not prevalent to the extent of race and
gender discrimination in America for which civil rights were constructed.
The poverty question came up in both dialogues and while a sub-context
in both conversations, the realities of economic subjugation were
evidenced in both arguments as impacting both populations. The poverty
question is a justice question, not a circumstantial “rightness”
question like gay and immigration rights where folk can hide sexuality
or citizenship or disclose it selectively when they want to pursue
the rights, privileges and benefits of citizenship and marriage.
Blacks are always black, women are always women, and the poor always
poor. The difference between the fight for right and justice is
that what is right may not always be just, but what is just is always
right. The post-King society has lost sight of this, and the relativity
of rightness has taken over society, where justice is nowhere to
be found. Everybody is right and nobody is wrong anymore. That’s
why President Bush can still believe he’s right to send 21,000 additional
troops to Iraq and spend hundreds of million more dollars in the
face of overwhelming public opposition. Yet, the poverty question
can’t be raised in any realm of American society without the ideologues
twisting the issue.
King understood
this relationship between unbridled militarism and unaddressed poverty.
At the same time King was speaking out against the war, he was planning
a campaign to address poverty. In what would end up being King’s
last fight, a Poor People’s Campaign was planned to coincide with
the 1968 Presidential Election and major party conventions to highlight
the issue of economic injustice in America. The campaign was informally
launched as King went to Memphis, Tennessee to show solidarity with
striking sanitation workers whose fight was not only about livable
wages but dignity in their effort to make an honest living. The
mantra of the strike was simply, I Am A Man. While King didn’t
live to see the Poor People’s campaign, and Resurrection City went
forth in a largely symbolic measure, the question of poverty went
ignored and unaddressed for the remainder of the 20th Century. Now
the poverty question is back on the front burner of the nation’s
conscience, and like war, is being dealt with in a relative manner.
It is right to speak of eradicating poverty, but little is being
done about poverty in a way that brings the poor any real justice.
In the meantime, America is doing more to bring about democracy
in Iraq than it is doing to bring about democracy in the urban cities
of America. With the money we’ve spent in Iraq, most of the social
ills of the top 50 urban cities in America could have been addressed
in a significant way. It is not right, nor is it just to continue
to ignore poverty in the way America does.
During this last
King week, a young labor leader out of Los Angeles, Tyrone Freeman,
president of one of the largest SEIU locals, is calling another
Poor Peoples Campaign, to make poverty a campaign issue in the upcoming
2008 presidential election. In Los Angeles, forty percent of the
nation’s second largest city live at or below the poverty line,
making them eligible for pubic assistance. But there is no assistance
to be found, and nobody has the integrity to address the question.
We need another Poor People’s Campaign to refocus this nation on
decent wages and a livable quality of life for all. This generation
needs to finish King’s unfinished fight on the eradication of poverty
in America. The most fitting tribute to King and American society
would be to return justice to the question of what is right in our
society, and move away from relativism.
BC Columnist Anthony Asadullah
Samad is a national columnist, managing director of the Urban
Issues Forum and author of 50
Years After Brown: The State of Black Equality In America.
His website is AnthonySamad.com.
Click
here to contact Mr. Samad. |