Richard John Neuhaus: Remembering, and Misremembering, Martin Luther King Jr.

As [Ralph] Abernathy tells it”“and I believe he is right”“he and King were first of all Christians, then Southerners, and then blacks living under an oppressive segregationist regime. King of course came from the black bourgeoisie of Atlanta in which his father, “Daddy King,” had succeeded in establishing himself as a king. Abernathy came from much more modest circumstances, but he was proud of his heritage and, as he writes, wanted nothing more than that whites would address his father as Mr. Abernathy. He and Martin loved the South, and envisioned its coming into its own once the sin of segregation had been expunged.

“Years later,” Abernathy writes that, “after the civil rights movement had peaked and I had taken over [after Martin’s death] as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference,” he met with Governor George Wallace. “Governor Wallace, by then restricted to a wheel chair after having been paralyzed by a would-be assassin’s bullet, shook hands with me and welcomed me to the State of Alabama. I smiled, realizing that he had forgotten all about Montgomery and Birmingham, and particularly Selma. ”˜This is not my first visit,’ I said. ”˜I was born in Alabama”“in Marengo County.’ ”˜Good,’ said Governor Wallace, ”˜then welcome back.’ I really believe he meant it. In his later years he had become one of the greatest friends the blacks had ever had in Montgomery. Where once he had stood in the doorway and barred federal marshals from entering, he now made certain that our people were first in line for jobs, new schools, and other benefits of state government.” Abernathy concludes, “It was a time for reconciliations.”

Read it all (my emphasis).

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, History, Race/Race Relations

5 comments on “Richard John Neuhaus: Remembering, and Misremembering, Martin Luther King Jr.

  1. sophy0075 says:

    Not to condone racism in any way, but I wish the media (and Hollywood) would remember there were race riots and discrimination by whites against blacks in the northern tier of the US as well as in the south.

  2. Br. Michael says:

    It’s easier to demonize the South. That way white northern liberals can feel good about themselves.

  3. Teatime2 says:

    Yes, there was discrimination in the North. Was it as bad and as systemic as it was in the South? No, so I don’t see what passing the buck does. It is rather interesting that the KKK began in Indiana, though.

  4. Kendall Harmon says:

    “In the years after the dream speech there were racially motivated murders in the South and riots in large cities in the North.”

    The Post editorial I posted has it right. The sin has to be owned, where ever it was, by whoever it was.

  5. NewTrollObserver says:

    “As [Ralph] Abernathy tells it–and I believe he is right–he and King were first of all Christians, then Southerners, and then blacks living under an oppressive segregationist regime.”

    This was undoubtedly true from Abernathy and MLK’s internal perspective, but probably the order was reversed from the perspective of wider, Jim Crow society.