On Demand
40 Years Later
Friday, April 04, 2008
Michael Eric Dyson, University Professor of Sociology at Georgetown University and the author of, most recently, April 4, 1968: Martin Luther King Jr.'s Death and How It Changed America (Basic Civitas Books, 2008), looks at the long-term repercussions of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., which happened forty years ago today.
- About the Brian Lehrer Show »
- Staff Bios »
- Contact Us »
- Tapes and Transcripts »
- Latest Episode »
- Show Archive »
Features & Series
Podcast
Stay up to date.
Subscribe to the Podcast
YOU PRODUCE The Brian Lehrer Show
Be a listener-producer with facts, questions and people you'd like to hear on the air.
More
The Brian Lehrer Show Scrapbook
Visit the scrapbook for daily photos and miscellany from The Brian Lehrer Show.
More
Shop at Amazon!
The Brian Lehrer Show picks
Start your Amazon shopping on WNYC.org and a portion of your total purchase goes to WNYC.
More
Comments
Refresh
thank you Michael Eric Dyson for speaking the truth! America has many sins for which it has not repented. when will people realize it? America's killing machine is the greatest the world has ever known. King's concerns about militarism and poverty just aren't very trendy today.
too bad.
Thank you, Mr. Dyson. This is what I have maintained about Dr. King and the Reverend Wright (sp?) all along. Progress has been made--not enough. Mr. Obama wants us to think that his minister is reacting to a way things were in the past and that racism is somehow over, but I still see a great deal of ugliness all too often and I understand his anger. And it's not generational--I'm younger than Obama (he was a senior at Columbia when I was a freshman at Barnard).
40 years later, things haven't changed?
You can't say the current generation doesn't have more freedom and opportunity than previous to King's assassination. I thing King would be appalled at the "Gangsta" culture that has grown up in this new opportunity. The opportunities offered by this new America are being squandered by the black youth and the white youth who like to emulate the gangsta culture.
You can’t be apart of the new knowledge economy when you are being taught hate for people and our free society. Bill Cosby says just this and is criticized to no end. –A MLK admirer.
So true, Rick, and being the cynic that I am I doubt America will ever repent for our sins nor find the just way. It is truly a sad state.
...And Jesse Jackson proudly stood up for genuine black issues (I'm not condoning his anti-semitic comments here). He didn't paint a rosier picture than what really was to placate or mollify white voters. The white voters who supported him did so because there eyes were open and were also not afraid to call things as they really were.
But Obama has distanced himself from Jackson, Sharpton and traditional black leaders and is feeding the American public a lot of lies about how much or little progress has been made regarding genuine black issues. He is making his success on a platform of lies and betrayal.
There's a difference between "*America may* go to hell" & "*May America* go to hell," which is what "God damn America" means.
And I wonder if Dr. Dyson could clear something up. I've heard defenders of Rev. Wright say that such language comes from what they call the "old testament" (Jews differ w/this!) in the books of the Prophets--that it's straight from the Hebrew. I'm fairly familiar w/the Hebrew of the Torah & much of the Prophets, & I can't think of anywhere that it says "God damn" anyone. Is there a translation where this is used? Thanks.
We are so trapped in the rhetoric of race, gender and color we miss the truth. The truth is not about white and black, latino, per se, its about economics. As money consolidates in the hands of a few, including black, latino, and, admittedly, an overwhelming majority of whites, we focus on the wrong things. It is only economic justice, a leveling of the income/resource distribution will free us all.
Race games hurt us all.
Actually I heard extended clips on Youtube of reverand wright. Actually he doesn't sound radical at all. Especially the 5 minutes before "chickens come home to roost" and the 4 minutes after.
It seems that we are cherry picking small snippets of what he had to say.
I like when u wanna make a political statement you play James Brown...
I'm ashamed to say I had no memory of the more "radical' opinions of MLK until I saw The Conscientious Objector at the Clurman Theater last week. I don't think he was murdered for his civil rights successes, but for his outspoken criticism of our government policies and practices.
@ Amy if you are familiar with the Old testament God Damned a whole host of people.
Thank you for having Dr. Dyson on your program. I am barely old enough to remember that Martin Luther King Jr., was really marginalized by 1968. His stand on the Vietnam War actually made him even more of a hero in our house, but that was not reflected across the country. It pleases me none to say it but I think that King and both Kennedys have far more influence on our culture because they were assassinated.
I'm getting annoyed by this type of commentary. There is opportunity to be had in this country if you reach out a grab it. It doesn't get dropped in your lap. There a many extremely successful African Americans in this generation. This talk about redistribution of wealth does not promote education, productivity, entrepreneurship, etc in the black community. It simply promotes a feeling of resentment, entitlement, etc. We really need to move on from this type of discussion, because the younger generation does not have the stigma of race that plagues older ones and harping on these people who cant get over the past simply keeps propagating this garbage to the young. Enough already.
All of you have missed the point and been suckered in to this show's continued efforts to scare away 'whitey' from voting for Obama.
Listening to Michael Eric Dyson just reinforces in my mind what absolute poison Nationalism is. It completely destroys one's ability to contextualize, and one's view of one's society becomes almost superhistorical. There's the way things happened with "us" and then there's everything else. Nationalism causes us to lose sight of where we fit in the greater scheme of things and it causes us to try to section off pieces of the human experience as being exclusive to OUR people.
And whether it's American nationalism, or black nationalism, or Jewish nationalism or Arab nationalism or any other kind of nationalism, it is without a single redeemable quality. And Dr. Dyson seems to be just as vulnerable to it as anyone else. Some of his good points get lost in a sea of rhetoric that while passionate and eloquent is not grounded in reality.
Mr. Dyson's memory of Dr. King is really not correct. I am 72 years old and lived through the whole civil rights movement. First, Dr. King was riviled during his lifetime and obviously, that's why he was ultimately marginalized and assasinated. Time has put a soft focus on this. King NEVER said things such as Rev. Wright that are either lies or fantasies, such as the US Government is injecting HIV disease into African American children. He said true facts that were as hard to take by the public (and the truth is difficult enough) as this statement of Rev. Wright and he said them both to black and white audiences. The names he was called at the time and the hate directed at him because of his hard truths was intense, but he always counseled non-violence. Later, Stokely Carmicheal and others broke with King and called him an uncle Tom because of his absolute commitment to non-violence even in the face of violence. King's courage in the face of the violence directed at him was amazing. To say that he preached anything like what are ultimately racist fantasies of Rev. Wright is to diminish his accomplishments. Dr. King DID criticize the UnAmerican America as many of us who were against the Vietnam war and racism did, but never was a racist himself.
Hi Lois Baron:
Do you think that part of the problem was the same problem we have now; in that people don't listen to the substance of what someone says but instead only pick up on the sound byte, or the style? King's speeches were fiery, I think, because he was trying to empower a lot of people who felt marginalized, but he was absolutely committed to non-violence. It seems like we have the same problem now, only on steroids. Everyone talks about having a national conversation, but to do that someone has to remember to listen. Do you think a lot of people really missed his most important point?
Well, I think that Lois has made a great point. The real problem with Reverend Wright vs. Martin Luther King is that King was using strong language against things that were true or at the very least debatable. Wright, however, argues against things that are demonstrably untrue. I mean, if the US government was intentionally flooding the streets with crack or infecting children with AIDS to destroy African Americans, I'd say God damn America too. I'd say a whole lot worse and probably do a whole lot worse.
But that's not based in reality. The Reverend's problems are not his values but rather his facts. Being wrong is not the same thing as being immoral. Nevertheless, the wildest and craziest thing he believes, from what I've heard, is that there's an invisible man in the sky who sent his son down to die for our sins. Now, THAT is out there, but it's a belief that every preacher in the country holds.
Did Brian just mention Al Gore and Gandhi in the same sentence? And not as polar opposites? Is this an attempt to bring down Gandhi's reputation or bring up Gore's or more likely, imply an equivalence? "An Inconvenient Truth" was a shameless bit of PR for Gore himself; why else include all that background about his childhood? "This is where I cracked up the family car.. yuk, yuk." And why does Gore trot out that story about his son almost dying at every opportunity? Not to mention that Gore cooked the data to make global warming look worse than it really is. Gee, it sure is tough to be the son of a rich tobacco farmer.
Renee,
You, like a lot of Americans miss the point. You're right, that there's a lot more opportunities today. But, there were opportunities for Blacks during the Civil Rights Movement. The point is the equivalence of opportunity. I don't know a lot of Blacks sitting around waiting for something to drop on there lap. The people I know have multiple degrees and are paid less than their white counterparts, get promoted less than their white counterparts, and are allowed less room for error than their white counterparts. It i when America realizes that non-equivalence based solely on race is pervasive and often covert will we be able to have a real conversation. The myth that Blacks sit around waiting for hand outs continues to be perpetuated and whites wonder why some Blacks seem so angry (i.e., Jeremiah Wright).
No, no MCH, they were assasinated because they were influential, those men spoke and people were moved. Listen to RFK's talk to the people of Indianapolis (?) the night of Martin's murder. He had an effect, for good, and the vested interests recognized that he could move people to action for a righteous cause. Obama comes closer, by far, to those men and their message of change than anyone else on the current political scene. I hope he doesn't get trapped by "issues" because it's really about beliefs and organization.
Hi george:
I don't disagree at all that they were assasinated because they were influential, I'm just making the point that because they were martyred they have more influence now than they would have had they not been. I don't need to listen to the RFK speech because I remember it. As to the (?) I believe he was in Indiana because he was campaigning for the Democratic nomination. Here is an interesting comparison: Eugene McCarthy who was also campaigning for the same thing was the one who was against the war "from the beginning" that year, or at least against it for far longer than RFK. But of course McCarthy was not assasinated, just lost his bid to Hubert Humphrey at a very divisive and violent Democratic convention in Chicago.
MC Hammer? jus kiddin
I'm from Mpls., familiar with HHH, no charisma. Mc Carthy, the same. Why bother killing them? They didn't have the power to lead people into the streets. Who, today, can draw a crowd like MLK did? JFK, RFK, MLK had the power to threaten the crew that Ike warned us about. In 68 the people were taking it to the streets. True leadership was just too powerful to be left intact. This is more than the Presidency at stake, we're talking GLOBAL DOMINATION. Military-industry-$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!
Amy (#6) - If you're interested in seeing where Wright's "Damn America" rhetoric comes from, the Old Testament prophets are certainly a good place to start. Look at Amos, for example. What most (if not all) of these prophets were doing was to condemn their own nation (not someone else's, mind you) for having strayed from God's principles. Amos might not use the exact words "God damn Israel," but the sentiment is the same.
The United States is the only country in the world that, on multible occassions since WWII, has sent its military forces half way around the world to engage in extrordinarily violent military action to "protect our intrests". More bombs were dropped over North Vietnam in that war than in the entire WWII. Isn't it ironic that we have a Federal holiday (MLK Day) to honor a pacifist? Two holidays if you count Christmas.
I've sometimes wondered if (some) blacks were secretly ashamed that America's first really effective pacifist / non-violent activist was "their guy". It probably felt better to watch Joe Lewis kick Max Schmeling's ass than to watch King "turn the other cheek" to Bull Connor's goons. Who could blame them. MLK really had guts.
george:
You still missed it. I was not asking why not assassinate McCarthy I was saying that JFK, RFK and MLK have more influence culturally now because they were assassinated. I find it interesting that you think McCarthy's consistency is negated by not having charisma. There were musch more seriious problems with HHH, he was not for ending the war and said so. But I guess everyone is more interested in the style than the substance. So what else is new? Why isn't anyone "takin' it to the streets" now, especially if it is as heavy as you say it is?
"The myth that Blacks sit around waiting for hand outs continues to be perpetuated and whites wonder why some Blacks seem so angry (i.e., Jeremiah Wright)."
Thanks for saying this, ayo.
It's troubling when people need to perpetuate this myth and throw in a zinger like: "get over it already." Their lack of empathy and understanding just blows me away. We all belong to the human family, but it's relatives like these that I wish to disown. Such insensitivity points to a lack of humanity towards those who are less privileged.
It's as if such people want to blame the race problem, and other societal ills on its victims. Some people have a foolish NEED to believe that if blacks would only get their act together and quit griping about inequities then all of these problems would just go away, vanish--POOF! That's their quick and easy solution. That's what denial and apathy does, it makes people look for easy answers because to look at history and to find truth would be too unsettling. Blame the victim and remain free from complicity; remain complacent and blissfully ignorant. That's the American way.
Leave a Comment
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Back to EpisodeEmail addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. WNYC reserves the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the WNYC.org Comment Guidelines before posting.