Dr. King was concerned about the MOVEMENT rather than saving his ass. And I noted in his speeches Mandela is also very cautious when discussing socialism and communism (with which he was charged). In America, the real hero was KING, not Nkrumah--though Nkrumah was admirable and King admired him and the Ghana Revolution. King not only SUFFERED but lost his life in the struggle. Nkrumah mainly lost his power after the 1966 coup. Nkrumah was a Marxist, as any philosophically and politically literate person who has read him can tell. Dr. King was a non-Marxist socialist as any literate person willing to do a bit of research can discern (and which COINTELPRO apparently did discover, even if they stupidly equated Kingian socialism with Marxism). Like King, I honor Nkrumah for his leadership of Ghana's fight for freedom, and his often insightful analyses of the situation of Africa and her struggles. Like Nkrumah,Ben Bella, Mandela and others I honor King for his courageous commitment to the liberation of Black people, and his commitment to justice and liberation for every man, woman and child on earth.
-Savant
___________________
It is good that the people of Ghana voted for Nkrumah at that time--that they were ABLE to vote for Nkrumah. But at that time at least 60% of African Americans lived in the South, and COULD NOT vote. Most of my kindred lived in the South, and could not vote. We must honor the struggles of King and others for winning the right to vote--a right possibly eviscerated by the Supine Court's gutting of the Voting Rights Act last summer. And I don't think that King and others were facing guns, dogs, clubs, whips,tear gas, kkk bombs and prisons just to save their a____. Nor do I think that any Black person seriously committed to Black liberation could conceive it in that way.
-Savant
_____________
Read up on Gramsci and Lukacs to find out about their organizational affiliations. It's common knowledge. But as this thread is not about them, or even about Marxism where it doesn't relevantly intersect with a discussion of King's legacy, I will not pursue any lengthy discussion of them....or others.
-Savant
_______________________
YOU posed the question about their organizational affiliation, and I instruct you to find out. I don't intend to spend too much time talking about them either in a thread about King's legacy. Also, I do not intend to spend too much time discussing NKRUMAH in a King thread unless it's closely related to an serious assessment of the legacy of King. You are free to start an Nkrumah thread if you wish to discuss Nkrumahism
-Savant
_________________
Dr. King had the mixed blessings of living in a bourgeois democracy, a racist republic with fascist tendencies rather than full blown fascism (which could still happen in the USA). Mandela lived in a FASCIST POLICE STATE. In South Africa, nonviolent protestors were not simply tear gassed and whipped, but gunned down. Nonetheless, King's activity cost him his life--possibly at the hands of COINTELPRO---at age 39. Brothers Mandela and Nkrumah were at least able to die in old age. Under both Fascism and bourgeois democracy there is a cost may have to pay for commitment to struggle Fred Hampton didn't even live past 21. And he didn't get a trial as even Mandela did. And Marshall Eddy Conway has lived to relative old age, but has spent more time in prison than did Nelson Mandela.. You pay for your commitment to struggle, though the price varies. We can debate forever who suffered the most, or most severely. Either way, they paid dearly.
-Savant
_________________
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment