Thank you.

But we both know where he was at and who he was there for when he died.

The I Am A Man Campaign.

Where black garbage men (city/state employees) in a Union were consistently thrown under the bus by white male union members.

I know people desperately want to rewrite history but these things happened in the age of mass media.

I'm as irritated by folks saying Sanders never marched (he fucking did and people need to knock it off!) as folks pretending white racist blue collar workers being okay with teir black male co-workers getting the shaft.

Don't sugarcoat your opinion. Say it LOUD!

This is fairly hilarious...

First you won't say your opinion "LOUD!" even though you demand that I do.

Second, are you trying to say that MLK Jr is racist???? Because that's pretty shocking, even for a Hillary supporter.

Is that wholehearted support for the post or criticism?

that's what he said about Sanders... and it illustrates what SOME - not all - activists are demanding Sanders say... that he integrate the word black into his speeches about income inequality; as one angry activist said at the racial forum yesterday to sanders, "I know you're scared of the word black".

The point is that Dr King thought that that was the wrong approach... and frankly I trust his opinion more than some random activists.

Put another way:

What will help the black community more? Universal healthcare and free college tuition, or saying the word Black a lot more while perpetuating a system which leaves millions of POC without access to healthcare and college education?

He did say those things, which directly disagree with Dr King.

And Dr King did say that framing poverty around race was the wrong approach.

So no.

Not fantasy.

Good try though.

you think?

My eyes are big

To make everyone you disagree with into a racist is just pathetic.

I won't hold it against you.

You obviously can't refute the actual post so you've had to return to previous form and just make race based attacks.

It's OK.. It's hard to be a Clinton supporter right now. I get it.

That both quotes are false?

Are you saying that they don't contradict each other? Because they obviously do.

The fact that you have to completely dismiss it instead of engaging in a real conversation - which might challenge your POLITICAL beliefs - is telling.

Only people that want to protect their fragile beliefs have to call this a fantasy.

And btw imagining a conversation to make a rhetorical point is something even Obama has done... Another deluded fantasist I'm sure you'd agree.

Lol.

The heart total speaks volumes to me about who has a handle on the reality of racism and poverty in this culture. Second, Dr. King never had a "black problem" such as the legions here and elsewhere in America seems to have in trying to dismiss the root causes of white racism/black genocide in this society.

Has been consistent in fighting the obfuscation and outright lies as to the root causes of black poverty/genocide by a white racist culture in America. Hearts show, to me, respect for that person and their consistency of statement and purpose. I know who has a "black problem" in America and they are on prominent display here and elsewhere in this political season. Have a real good day.

...to prop up a politician.

Smh. People keep going at this line of reasoning using Dr. King, as if I, as a black man, am going to be schooled and alter my own belief system to accommodate Bernie Sanders.

The dismaying thing these offensive uses of Dr. King are coming from people who Bernie presumably expects to carry out his political 'revolution'.

I've researched a lot of what Bernie has said over the years regarding this.

He has an ideology, a very strong one, that he still cannot let go of. Even in the face of criticisms he is facing from black persons now. People he needs to win the election.

He truly believes that race issues (and other social issues) are a subset of economic issues. He believes that those subset of issues are what is preventing us from resolving the foremost issue in his mind.... economic issues (which he believes in turn would solve racism). And that those who are victim to that subset of issues are also being played by powerful groups who seek to divide us on social issues and prevent the resolution of economic inequality.

Now, I think that is not the case.

But as you can see the message does resonate with white persons, in a not good way. His positions on this make minorities out to be the bad guy, even if inadvertently (I am trying to be kind). Also, his position when you actually parse it out, means people who belong to oppressed groups are not smart enough to know they are being played.

So, it is not just his supporters. It is him, for 40 years spreading this message.

You might have missed the point.

He more likely thinks thst he - a white male - can't fix racism. He also correctly thinks that if there's any hope for fixing institutional and societal bias and hatred it can't just come from one race or the other, but instead must be part of a unified movement.

He also believes that while he can't fix or speak for POC he CAN try and change things which would greatly help the poor, which includes many millions of POC.

And like Dr King he believed that making poverty into an issue of race is counterproductive to eliminating it.

And all of this makes a LOT more sense that simply saying the word "black" a lot and then helping the 1% subjugate the poor, and preventing the poor from accessing Healthcare and education. Which is the position of your candidate of choice.

No one is trying to "school' you.

The point of my post though, since you didn't understand it, is this:

People can discuss solutions, in good faith, and disagree.

Dr King OBVIOUSLY saw poverty as something that transcended race. And he's right.

By refusing to acknowledge that problems that face POC can be addressed in a variety of ways, and that solutions that greatly impact POC, even if they aren't framed around race, are better that solutions that don't work, that ARE framed around race, by refusing to acknowledge that success is better than a race framed failure, you doom yourself to only partial success. At best.

And by refusing to acknowledge ways to bring people together to solve universal problems, because you're can't see past the differences, well.. To again quote Dr King:

"This proposal is not a "civil rights" program, in the sense that that term is currently used. The program would benefit all the poor, including the two-thirds of them who are white. I hope that both Negro and white will act in coalition to effect this change, because their combined strength will be necessary to overcome the fierce opposition we must realistically anticipate."

And that's Bernie in a nutshell. If we work together we can defeat the fierce opposition to change which would help everyone, especially POC who face a greater challenge due to institutional and societal racism.

That's the point of my OP. We can't be so sure of our own solutions as to discount other solutions without even as much as listening to them with an open heart.

who keep up the meme that Bernie has a POC "problem" and whenever you attempt to refute that meme, the same obfuscations are employed. You're either accused of Berniesplainin or worse. Let them rant, I say. Wherever I go IRL, I have yet to encounter even one person who believes, or has even heard of, this "problem."

...for what black activists and advocates are relating to them.

Most folks I know wouldn't look to Dr. King to validate a politician's positions in an election campaign.

I've written on this here before and have little desire to go through it all again just to try and enlighten someone here, but there are myriad issues involving race which have zero to do with economics or a person's economic status.

to ACTUALLY hear anyone relating a view of their situation or aspirations that contradicts what Sanders says... on the OTHER hand I have had MULTIPLE people say that Sanders positions are untenable for semantics or optics reasons...

And btw: My OP was - again - NOT about a single opinion, but about people being open to MULTIPLE positions, when held in good faith, and when the people involved have largely the same goals.

In other words, when I have people tell me that they're voting for Hillary because she has more black staffers - and that's the only reason - and that that reason ALONE is enough to dismiss completely Sanders and anything he may have to say about race, then I think - my opinion - is that that position is naive at best... and when people try to silence me, by demanding that there's only ONE way to talk about race and poverty, well.. I feel it NECESSARY to say that that's frankly NOT true.

I think, as well, that if people want to advocate, based purely on race, for a politician, that they should have something more than optics to back up their position... if they don't then I am frankly not going to take their opinion seriously.

Pretty pithy response.

I mean I don't expect a lot from people... But not engaging past the username of someone who wrote a post you don't like is pretty shallow... Even for DU.

And I have zero use for the likes of the proud self-described propagandist who is your hero.

Bottom line, you are hurting Bernie with this nonsense.

And you wonder why Sanders does indeed have a "black problem" ...

Operation Footbullet will a fucking stellar success.