Skip to comments.Was Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King jr. a communist?
Posted on 01/18/2013 9:53:01 AM PST by Chuckmorse
This writer does not question that the late, great Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was deservedly one of the most monumental and pivotal figures of the 20th century. King's inspirational leadership, oratory, and profession of non-violence may have very well saved this nation from a race war. I am grateful that the Rev. Dr. King emerged as the most visible and influential leader of the civil rights movement as opposed to an advocate of violence such as Malcolm X or a radical communist.
No, the Rev. Dr. King was not a communist, however, he did business with communists and was influenced by them. While this is a delicate subject to broach, especially given the martyrdom and lionization of Dr. King to virtual sainthood status, the subject must nevertheless be broached for a better understanding of some of the darker forces that infiltrated and sabotaged an organically pro American, conservative, and Christian civil rights movement.
Martin Luther King surrounded himself with communists from the beginning of his career. The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, formed in 1957 and led by Dr. King, also had as its vice president Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth who was at the same time president of the Southern Conference Education Fund, an identified communist front according to the Legislative Committee on un-American Activities, Louisiana (Report April 13, 1964 pp. 31-38). The field director of SCEF was Carl Braden, a known communist agitator who also sponsored the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which counted as a member Lee Harvey Oswald, the communist assassin of President Kennedy. Dr. King maintained correspondence with Carl Braden. Also on the board of SCLC was Bayard Rustin, a known communist. In 1957, Dr. King addressed the Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tenn. which was originally called Commonwealth College until it was sited by the House Committee on un-American Activities as being a communist front (April 27, 1949). The committee found that Commonwealth, later the Highlander Folk School, was using religion as a way to infiltrate the African-American community by, among other techniques, comparing the texts of the New Testament to those of Karl Marx. Dr. King knew many of the known communists associated with the Highlander school.
In 1960, Dr. King hired Hunter Pitts O'Dell, a communist official to work at SCLC. According to the St. Louis Globe Democrat (Oct. 26, 1962) "A Communist has infiltrated the top administrative post in the Rev. Martin Luther King's SCLC. He is Jack H. O'Dell, acting executive director of conference activities in the southeastern states including Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana." Dr. King fired O'Dell when this information emerged but rehired him as head of the SCLC New York office.
Dr. King was praised by communists and promoted by fellow travelers. Communist official Benjamin J. Davis, in the Worker (Nov. 10, 1963) describes Dr. King as "a brilliant and practical leader who articulates the philosophy of the Negro people, for direct non-violent mass action." The Worker article goes on to describe Dr. King as "The foremost advocate of the solution of social problems through nonviolent methods of mass action."
In his own words, Martin Luther King expresses a communist outlook in his book "Stride Toward Freedom" He states that "in spite of the shortcomings of his analysis, Marx had raised some basic questions. I was deeply concerned from my early teen days about the gulf between superfluous wealth and abject poverty, and my reading of Marx made me even more conscious of this gulf. Although modern American capitalism has greatly reduced the gap through social reforms, there was still need for a better distribution of wealth. Moreover, Marx had revealed the danger of the profit motive as the sole basis of an economic system "
It's strikes me as sad that Dr. King, the most influential leader of the civil rights movement wasn't an advocate of the capitalism that was already leading to such great economic strides amongst African-Americans in his day. By advocating a "better distribution of wealth" he meant state control over the economy. He sneered at "the profit motive" without explaining why African-Americans shouldn't seek to profit to the best of their ability. These ideas would later on open the floodgates to radical African-American leaders such as Stokley Carmichael, H. Rap Brown, the Black Panthers, and the burning and looting of African-American neighborhoods, the institutionalizing of welfare programs, the perpetuation of poverty, the destruction of the African-American family, drugs, violence, racism, and crime. In "Stride Toward Freedom" Dr. King states that "In short, I read Marx as I read all of the influential historical thinkers from a dialectical point of view, combining a partial yea and a partial no My readings of Marx convinced me that truth is found neither in Marxism nor in traditional capitalism.
Each represents a partial truth. Historically capitalism failed to see truth in collective enterprise and Marxism failed to see the truth in individual enterprise The Kingdom of G-d is neither the thesis of individual enterprise nor the antithesis of collective enterprise, but a synthesis which reconciles the truths of both."
By stating that he views things "from a dialectical point of view" Dr. King is thinking like communists such as Marx, Lenin, or Stalin. The dialectic always and can only lead to authoritarianism. Man cannot, for example, be half free and half slave, either he is free or he is a slave. Dr. King's imperious stand toward his own people would stand in contrast to an advocacy of genuine freedom, the development of self-rule, self-sufficiency, private ownership, and the accumulation of capital resulting from achievement. Dr. King was not advocating the American system of free market capitalism. Instead, he stood for a system that has stunted the growth of African-Americans as well as the rest of us.
Much remains to be said regarding the communist infiltration of the civil rights movement as a whole. The communists sought to use African-Americans as cannon fodder in their revolution by stoking hatred and racial division. Much blood and suffering is on the hands of these communist agitators. The story of how the left-wing predominantly white establishment promoted communists in the African-American community as a means of continuing an informal system of oppression also cries out to be told
I am sure that if Dr. King could come back and see all of the Streets named after him he would be proud that his name serves as a warning to all that the neighborhood those streets are in are the most dangerous places in any city.
They might as well rename the day "St. Marty's Day"
"When a Hollywood performer, lacking distinction even as an actor, can become a leading war hawk candidate for the presidency, only the irrationalities induced by war psychosis can explain such a turn of events."
That tells me all I need to know about this manufactured fraud. But...but...but...MLK was a Republican. So what? Socialists such as George Norris, Bob La Follette and more recently, Olympia Snowe also had the meaningless "R" next to their names.
Moreover, the last public act by King was in support of a government labor union. He certainly wasn't leading a campaign for civil rights in Memphis back in April 1968. Instead, he was defending the tyranny of unionism and Big Labor bosses.
Republican? Maybe. Conservative? NO!
Eventually the FBI will release his file. He was a philanderer, socialist, marxist aka communist sympathizer.
Yes, sadly true. I was a student at BUST in the early 60’s. The theology department was the same as it was under Dr. King. It was progressive by the late 40’s. There is no question but that King’s Christianity was social gospel, not orthodox Biblical.
I was around back then and remember watching the mobs being agitated on TV. My dad was adamant that King was a Communist and predicted somebody was “going to get him”.
Would the USA name a holiday after a commie? I think not but what do I know?
I prefer to celebrate Frederick Douglass Day.
Does a bear sh** in the woods?
Probably. But that's not all he was. See this for a look at his so-called "theology."
Much has been made of King's Communism and sexual indiscretions, but his religious beliefs have for the most part escaped scrutiny. Why is this?
I recall watching a religious program on one of the very first Martin Luther King days (maybe the first one). The conservative white host had a number of Black chrstian guests, one of whom said that King could not possibly have been a Communist because he was a minister(!). It occurs to me that many Blacks simply have no idea that Communists can pose as religious people.
King has some living relatives who are conservative, but they too refuse to expose his heretical religious beliefs, preferring to pretend he was a "chrstian conservative" whose legacy is being "misused." They are doing no one any favors by acting this way. His niece Alveda King is a crusader against abortion because she is a repentant client of abortion who was later "born again." She could point out that here family had no objections to her abortions and that she had to be "saved" while being a member of a prominent Baptist family, but she refuses to do so. Does she think Blacks cannot survive without looking on King as a super-human perfect being? Shoot, I've had to reconcile myself to imperfections in George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, and I believe Blacks could do the same.
I wonder more and more if there are any Black Fundamentalists left. I begin to suspect that all their preachers are merely melanin-blessed Jim Jones's, who use a fundamentalist preaching style to push atheism and materialism.
All the same, I am glad the author points out that the original (stated) goals of the civil rights movement were noble (because there are some who do not hold this opinion and who want to re-institute jim crow). The fact is that without jim crow and the post-Reconstruction legacy of the "redeemer" Democrats there would have been no need of a civil rights movement and we might have been spared the Sixties revolution. The original goal was to simply repeal all the local jim crow laws and leave people alone. But unfortunately, people being people (and liberals being worst than most people) it wasn't enough to abolish the offending laws; now they wanted a totalitarian state to do the exact same thing in reverse!
Unfortunately, the so-called "Left" no longer champions an international, universal "proletariat." The cause of all evil is now "whiteness" (with the poorest whites often being the most hated) and the universal scientific workers republic has given way to a sort of "palaeoconservatism" for people of color that celebrates the "culture and heritage" (including the pre-scientific beliefs) of "indigenous pipples." This is still called Marxism, but Marx wouldn't recognize it. This racial mysticism can't even be called materialistic. It's almost (dare I say it?) "right wing"--"rightism for the historically oppressed."
You know, if all the evils in the world are caused by white people, then it's not hard to imagine someone getting it into his head to simply solve all the world's problems by killing all the whites. Then if the world still isn't perfect, it will be because white people existed at one time in history; even though they're gone they'll still be to blame (as in post-colonial Africa).
We live in interesting times. I hate it.
First, you inoculated yourself against any perception of being racist and made sure to shower MLK of grand complements. You stated that MLK was NOT a communist.
“This writer does not question that the late, great Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was deservedly one of the most monumental and pivotal figures of the 20th century. King’s inspirational leadership, oratory, and profession of non-violence may have very well saved this nation from a race war. I am grateful that the Rev. Dr. King emerged as the most visible and influential leader of the civil rights movement as opposed to an advocate of violence such as Malcolm X or a radical communist.
No, the Rev. Dr. King was not a communist, however,....”
Alright then, that answers your own question, however, the rest of your article, almost to the end, states and proves unambiguously that MLK was a communist of the first order!
At the end of your article you say that Whitey did it without assigning any responsibility to the people who accepted communism and believed in destroying capitalism.
If many of us believed what the communist media spewed over the last decades, this country would have replaced or even joined the defunct USSR in no time.
So, Chuckmorse, what’s your real opinion? Why don’t you ever answer a single post on your own threads? Or, are you just a hit and run thread-poster who’s pushing his blog?
The way you write, it must be terribly difficult to drive traffic to your blog. Try to have an opinion next time, you aren’t publishing news.
Would they elect one to the oval office?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.