h o m e
b a c k   t o   n e w s   a n d   u p d a t e s
b a c k  t o  a r t i c l e s
w h o   i s   m u m i a
l e g a l   d o c u m e n t s

ST. MARTIN, THE MILITANT
By Mumia Abu-Jamal, M.A.
#489 Column 1/10/2001

One night toward the end of January I settled into bed late,
after a strenuous day. Coretta had already fallen asleep
and just as I was about to doze off the telephone rang.
An angry voice said, "Listen, nigger, we've taken all we
want from you; before next week you'll be sorry you ever
came to Montgomery." I hung up, but I couldn't sleep.

-- Rev. Martin L. King, Jr., Stride Toward Freedom (1958)

Three nights after this phone call, King's house was
bombed. It is possible, in this age of consumer-
driven commodification, for millions to know a name,
to recognize an image, and still to know next to
nothing about the recognized figure. It has been over
30 years since the assassination of Dr. King, and in
the 3 decades thereafter, few Americans, black or
white, have been so honored, so lionized, or so deeply
projected into public consciousness, as a figure of
peace. This would not be so objectionable were it not
for the purposes of that projection.
Much of the projection seems purely commercial, a
secular day-off for millions of workers, to allow them
to stimulate the economy by buying stuff in the King
Day Sale. Much of it also seems political, as Rev.
King is raised as a kind of talisman, a symbol of
peace meant to keep the natives calm in times of
discontent.

But symbols are funny things. They are sometimes
overrun by the rampaging complexities of reality.
Living beings change, develop and grow. And Dr. King,
in his later years (and under pressure from black
radicals and militants on his left) became
increasingly disenchanted with society, and of course,
those who ruled the social order.

Black Christian theologian, Dr. James H. Cone, in his
excellent Martin & Malcolm & America: A Dream or a
Nightmare (Orbis, 1991), draws a compelling portrait
of King's private and public selves, and his growing
openness to radical ideas. Cone writes that Martin's
wife, Coretta, who knew him best, saw him inching
closer and closer to the views of Malcolm X. Indeed,
Coretta S. King said as much, in her My Life with
Martin Luther King, where she saw "firm agreement"
between the two men on "certain aspects" of Malcolm's
program. She sensed that "at some point the two would
have come closer together and would have been a very
strong force in the total struggle for liberation and
self-determination of black people in our society."
This was not to be.

Waves of rebellions in black communities in 1967 shook
King, and opened his eyes to what he called "a system
of internal colonialism." In words that would seem to
presage the fiery words of Dr. Huey P. Newton and the
Black Panthers a season later, King observed: "The
slum is little more than a domestic colony which
leaves its inhabitants dominated politically,
exploited economically, segregated and humiliated at
every turn" (Cone, p. 223).

With these attacks on the economic injustices in
America came criticism of King by the media and their
moneyed masters. To his eternal credit, King did not
turn from his vision, and instead heightened his
economic critique, saying, at the SCLC Convention of
Aug. 1967:

We've got to begin to ask questions about the whole
society. We are called upon to help the discouraged
beggars in life's market place. But one day we must
come to see that an edifice which produces beggars
needs restructuring. It means that questions must be
raised. "Who owns this oil?"... "Who owns the iron
ore?"... "Why is it that people have to pay water
bills in a world that is two-thirds water?"
(Cone,224).

This is the voice of a man who was being radicalized.
Nor were his previous feelings of confidence and faith
in white Americans unchanged. King called America a
"confused," "sick," and "neurotic" nation, telling a
group of blacks in Louisville that "the vast majority
of white Americans are racist," whether consciously or
unconsciously (Cone, p. 233).

In months thereafter, he would severely criticize the
Vietnam War, and call the U.S. the "greatest purveyor
of violence in the world today" (Cone, p. 237) at his
"Beyond Vietnam" speech at Riverside Church in New
York City. Relatively shortly thereafter, Dr. King
was sent to his fathers and from this world.

As King Day once again passes, let us all remember
that a man is more than a symbol. Let us remember his
growing radicalization, for if we have an idea where
he was going, we begin to see why the powers that be,
(the rulers, the FBI, the police, etc.) didn't want
him to arrive.

©MAJ 2001


h o m e
b a c k   t o   n e w s   a n d   u p d a t e s
b a c k  t o  a r t i c l e s
w h o   i s   m u m i a
l e g a l   d o c u m e n t s