Each year when the milkman rings in
the dead of January, some Americans choose to pause to consider how
the only American with a national holiday named for him earned it.
Others reach for a bowl of chips and guacamole or they may also watch
football or play video games of less value than chess for the
creative mind.
Martin Luther King, although named
importunately for a democracy that revolted against a tyrannical,
oppressive and evil British King and his minions with ancestors that
brought African slaves to America to toil in abject misery on their
vast aristocratic land grant plantations, embodied the American
tradition of individual civil and human rights-self sovereignty-with
none above him socially except for God, as a fundamental inalienable
principle. Today it is important to remember that the Dream speech
was about judging people on the basis of their content of character
rather than party affiliation, skin color, foreign immigrant
background or ignorance about macro-economics except as that
comprises an aspects of character content. Martin Luther King was not
a derm or gender, much less a perversion based leader seeking to
advance special political interests. Instead he sought general
equality for all people who are citizens of the nation equally within
the law. He might have hated those that regard themselves as above
the laws of the United States, and cross the border to import
devastating high-quality meth to which users return like bouncing
water birds a year after kicking the habit.
Martin Luther King probably would have
respected the fact that President Donald Trump did not take sides in
the Charlottesville Klan march conflict where professional agitators
clashed with KKK or neos legally staging a march regardless of his
personal opinion about the political ideas of the marchers. A
President should be the Chief executive officer of the constitution
of the United States and let Congress make the laws. What the
President should not do is to take sides and stimulate conflict
himself and subvert the legal paradigm of full constitutional rights
for all citizens. If some have extremist opinions as those of some
southern pseudo-Christians and atheists that homosexual marriage is
o.k. if advocated by a black President who also supports abortion,
the president must respect those misguided, wayward souls and their
right to be wrong. I cannot believe that Dr. King would have urged
his congregation at Ebenezer baptist to vote for a homo-marriage and
abortion advocate, each of which are in stark contrast to the
character of the Bible.
Dr. King would have respected the law
however, after it was made law, except as he saw a need to violate an
unjust law that seemed out of character with the U.S. Constitution.
He would not have supported all sorts of clandestine organized crime
designers exploiting the poor, nor organizations that victimize
individuals illegally just because they are powerful and can get away
with it. In the present tech era innumerable opportunities exist for
national and international organized crime and narcotics-even
human-trafficking that can be resisted only by those respecting rule
of all and the sovereignty of individual rights and the national
sovereignty of the U.S. border. Dr. King would have recognized easily
that the primary responsibility of President Trump is to look out for
the interests of the people of the United States rather than those of
the globe with so many evil national leaders abroad as there are.
President trump isn’t supposed to help MS 13 of El Salvador
infiltrate narcotics traffickers into the U.S. heartland, nor support
the Sinaloa Cartel’s expansion plans to bring more billions of
dollars from corrupt Americans to Mexican gangs that corrupt Mexican
civil society. MLK was a realist I his day, rather than a posturing,
pompous pretender posing for camera and making silly, divisive,
irrelevant speeches that had little effect on the socio-economic
well-being of whatever people he represented needed.
MLK saw that his people needed freedom
from vermin in local and state government that had the power to
intimidate and repress ordinary Americans going about their lives.
Today the primary problems with that are wise-guy globalists that
would create a U.S. branch of a global plutocratic society lording it
over a debased U.S. population. The United States has 330 million
souls already---it doesn’t need to double that or add chunks of a
million here and five or ten million years. Mexico doesn’t need
that and in fact no one does with the limited and rather poorly used
resources of the earth in 2018. responsible and stable national
ecological economic policy needs to develop with solutions for all
the basic problems of poverty and oppression solved right off. The
national environment need be conserved and recovered too, as if the
Earth were to be a place with a healthy wild element that can exist
for thousands of years into the future rather than disappearing
within a few decades more.
Would MLK have even been able to have
a Holiday named for him in 2018, or would a reputation as being a
little fast with women have taken him down? Could he have survived
the intense feminine scrutiny of the day or would he have been thrown
out with former Senator Al Franken into the dust bin of history as a
chauvinist pig? How the content of character issues of tomorrow play
out will be interesting to observe.
