we are stardust's picture

    God...in Pencil

    When I listen to Martin Luther King, Jr. speak, I can believe in God.  There may be other times I have, but I can’t remember them.  In discussions about belief or not, I’ve heard people say that their personal stories have been determinant.  A lot of them include hitting some emotional or spiritual bottom, and hearing a message from God, then being reborn in some state that exemplifies grace, along with which comes both a knowledge of, and a belief in, God; sort of a personal relationship.

    I don’t know this place; this state.  Throughout the many dark nights of soul I’ve experienced, I never found that comfort or profound communication they describe.  And yet I like to say prayers.  The time spent in gratitude for my life, or mindful intentionality about my place and behavior in the universe can be nourishing, and requires no belief.   It’s more an acknowledgement that it feels good to be part of something larger, to be connected, even if it’s just to all the best thought-energy sailing around in my local branch of the universe.  You know; a hippie version of spirituality.  What I mean to say is: Whether or not I believe in God isn’t a problem for me.

    Last week I watched God on my teevee.  Well, okay; it was part of a PBS series called God in America, which said America is the most religious nation on earth.  Yeah; I blinked, too.  I’d think if such a huge majority of us believe in God, and call ourselves religious, we’d be a hell of a lot kinder to one another, and hold better values.  I guess it doesn’t work that way.

    When the MLK portion of American religious history highlighted MLK, I paid closer attention.  I do love the man, and his speeches; his vision of a Better America.  I love hearing his anti-Viet Nam War rhetoric, and his concepts of love and justice and true brotherhood among all humans, and how that needs to inform our politics.  His story, of course, is not my story.  But often when I hear him speak: his story makes me believe in God while I listen.  In one speech he told about a night that one particular “Nigger, get out of town, or I will shoot you dead, and bomb your house” phone call brought his body and his soul to their respective knees.  He considered leaving town, then heard God’s voice inside him telling him to keep up his righteous fight, and claiming he would never leave him.

    This is an excerpt from his final speech to sanitation workers at Mason Temple in Memphis:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0FiCxZKuv8

    Some people say that he went off-script here, that The Voice of God came channeling right through him.  And I can believe it while I’m watching or listening.  He knew right then that he would be dead soon, and he was letting us know that it was all right.  As it turned out, the following day he would be shot and killed on the balcony of the Lorraine Hotel, exactly a year after his Why I Am Opposed to the War in Viet Nam speech.  The man’s story knocks me out.  Listen to some things he said about war:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92-r05TH9qs          


    Are we living his prophecy concerning American arrogance in his anti-Viet Nam War speech?

    "I call on the young men of America who must make a choice today to take a stand on this issue. Tomorrow may be too late. The book may close. And don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as his divine, messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment, and it seems that I can hear God saying to America, "You're too arrogant! And if you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power, and I'll place it in the hands of a nation that doesn't even know my name. Be still and know that I'm God."

     

    More from the April 4, 1967 speech:

    "I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a "thing-oriented" society to a "person-oriented" society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

    A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies.

    [break]

    A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies.

    Let us hope that this spirit will become the order of the day. We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. The oceans of history are made turbulent by the ever-rising tides of hate. History is cluttered with the wreckage of nations and individuals that pursued this self-defeating path of hate. As Arnold Toynbee says : "Love is the ultimate force that makes for the saving choice of life and good against the damning choice of death and evil. Therefore the first hope in our inventory must be the hope that love is going to have the last word.

    We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The "tide in the affairs of men" does not remain at the flood; it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is deaf to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residue of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: "Too late." There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. "The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on..." We still have a choice today; nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation.

    As that noble bard of yesterday, James Russell Lowell, eloquently stated:

    Once to every man and nation
    Comes the moment to decide,
    In the strife of truth and falsehood,
    For the good or evil side;
    Some great cause, God's new Messiah,
    Off'ring each the bloom or blight,
    And the choice goes by forever
    Twixt that darkness and that light.

    Though the cause of evil prosper,
    Yet 'tis truth alone is strong;
    Though her portion be the scaffold,
    And upon the throne be wrong:
    Yet that scaffold sways the future,
    And behind the dim unknown,
    Standeth God within the shadow
    Keeping watch above his own."

     

    As we begin to consider advocating for principles that seem lost in the Democratic Party, and America as a whole, I’d like us all to consider how the Social Gospel of the ‘50s and ‘60s was embodied by Dr. King.  And if you’re not a believer, at least try to suspend your disbelief for even short times in order to wonder if his visions and admonitions might not have been inspired by God.  We can easily pose other theories of his revelations, but in this case Occam’s Razor theory seems easiest:  believe that King knew, or believed,  from whence the voice came. 

    And at least while you listen to MLK, then consider a new political statement or manifest that encompasses better lives for all Americans, and all people of the world, pencil into your mind that God may exist, and that people like King may be evidence for it.  And since it’s only written in your mind in pencil…it can fade again, but the messages he gave us can remain.  We shouldn’t be embarrassed to espouse them.  For too long now, the Democratic Party has been trying to couch beneficial policy in economic enlightened self-interest concepts; it’s not working, and it misses the point.

    Comments

    "I've been to the mountaintop", just in case.  I've had trouble loading the clips through IE; those above may or may not load.)



    "We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The "tide in the affairs of men" does not remain at the flood; it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is deaf to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residue of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: "Too late." There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. "The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on..." We still have a choice today; nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation...."

    Stunning words, Stardust. His, and yours. Thank you.

     


    Thanks, wws.  I clipped that one out of my final edition; there were so many applicable to the times, and original word doc. was getting far too long.   ;o) 

    Does your browser play the clip I embedded in the comments? 


    It does play, and I appreciated seeing MLK giving the speech, as well as listening to it again.

    I'm really struck by your presentation of the possibility of the positive. We can choose it. Today....if only we will, in enough numbers to make a difference.


    I guess after all the discussions about the failure of Dem politics, I'm left with the sense that we need to go bold, go ethical, and make the case for inclusive policies and helpful programs for all of us.  I'm sick of having to have Good Government ideas prove themselves fiscally anymore.  We really should be oour brothers' keepers, and government should reflect that.


    Thanks Stardust. Reminded me of another recent post spotlighting the need for MLK's level of leadership. Since the time this post was written it looks like DADT may be fading away, thank goodness, in spite of resistance from the Obama Administration. 

    http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/76228


    I love it, Watt!  Thanks.  It reminds me of 'The Dirty F*cking Hippies Were Right!'


    This just in. More of the same, with minor adjustments.

    http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/10/20/obama-doj-moves-the-9th-cir...


    That's a pisser, even if expected.  Obama's DOJ is a nightmare: DADT may be Constitutional, but claims the right to refuse to tell the attorneys for many Gitmo detainees whether or not their communications with their clients were monitored.

    Well, what more?  Emptywheel's reading makes sense to me in terms of Obama's real thinking on the matter.  Thanks for the alert, Watt.  What disappointiing news.


    Thank you, we are stardust (and we are!).  Since I believe in God, I can see moments when MLK surrendered his own small self to the great Self that is the voice for the oppressed, the downtrodden, those without hope, who fear there will never be any justice again in the world.

    Even if you don't believe in God, the voice of the prophets from the Hebrew Scriptures ring through all his speeches - he was fighting for what God will's - that each shall have enough, that we will care for each other in times of need, that no one shall stand alone - that the common work of our common hands will care for us all.

    We need a voice that brings us together, not sunders us apart.  I hear it in Obama sometimes.  I know he is opposed by a fiercely dedicated group.  Maybe it's up to each of us to become to the voice of our "better angels" - to speak to what we have and are in common, and what we can build together.

    Thanks for reminding us.


    Most of had hoped Obama quickened to the voice of the Great Self, as you name it; it's what I refer to as the Great Hippie Liturgy, LOL!  As far as religious doctrine goes, I think the Gnostics had it right, as far as I understand them: God, or Godhead, resides in all of us.  If we pay attention to that within us that knows right from wrong, we can't go astray...too far.  Imagine if our political doctrine could extend in these directions!

    Yep; the fear on the Left is beginning to mirror the fear on the right.  I'm an unabashed One Love loyalist.  More...

    Thanks for the comment, mpress; it's good to have you joining the discussion.  Do weight in more often.  Dag needs more active commenters.  ;o)


    You asked a very pertinent question . . .

    Are we living his prophecy concerning American arrogance in his anti-Viet Nam War speech?

    Yes!

    And here is a blog post you may find of interest from the old Cafe that I posted back in early 2009

    The comments are spot on . . .

    Even the second to last one from a person who has ears but could not hear.

    ~OGD~

    .


    Thanks, Duck, for your '09 blog link.  And for the resounding 'Yes' to the question of American arrogance and decline.  Can I ask another question?  Why is this blog relatively Untouchable?  I have some theories, but I don't like what any of them portend.  ;o)


    Perhaps we're not the most religious nation on Earth, but the most hypocritical.  King is and was very inspiring for us to transcend our baser selves.


    It was an odd claim of the Frontline programs; I looked at the website, and they say Pew Research helped.  This is one of their pages on demographics:

    http://religions.pewforum.org/comparisons#

    It does make you shake your head in wonder, doesn't it?  What messages do many people hear in church, or from reading their Bibles or other texts?  I haven't peeked yet at the tab concerning people's beliefs that their way is the True Way; I anticipate that I won't care for the numbers so much.  ;o)

    Thought: can't we be both self-identified religious nation and the most hypocritical at the same time?  (It's not hard to doubt that we even ARE the most religious, but I suppose they may know the numbers around the world...)

    The percentages of blacks who consider religion central to their lives was highest, I think.  I wish their social gospel seemed more inclusive these days; not so much for homosexuals, I think; at least in California. 

    Good to see you, Miguel. 


    King certainly continues to inspire this dagblogian.  James Washington pulled together many of King's writings into one volume, which he called A Testament of Hope. I have it next to my bed.  I am not a Bible reader.  Having King's writings close at hand is, I suppose, the closest I have come in my life to leaning on a written text for moral and emotional support.  A not very observant Jew looks to a dead evangelical Christian minister for inspiration and spiritual sustenance.

    One of the favorite books I identified for my old cafe profile was Michael Honey's wonderful account of the 1968 Memphis sanitation workers' strike, Going Down Jericho Road.  It captures the grit and turmoil and despair that went into that noble campaign.

    King's spirit is present around us, if we look.  Unfortunately we don't have a public figure who embodies it in anything like the compelling way that he did.  My own view is that, for many Democrats and lefties, the biggest deficit is not in a lack of passion.  I do sometimes observe a troubling, and disempowering, fatalism.  

    Many progressives who've been at this awhile, me included sometimes, feel so beaten down and discouraged that we seem afraid or embarrassed to aspire to anything really worthwhile and responsive to the problems of our day.  Instead, the response seems to be to immediately explain why something can't happen. 

    A large green infrastucture public jobs program?  Can't happen.  The Blue Dog Dems will never support it.

    Effective financial reform? Nope. Can't happen.  Wall Street owns Congress and the White House and we just have to accept that and go about forming a third party.

    And so on.

    I think there remains, however, plenty of passion on the progressive side, King's side.  Hope springs eternal in the human heart.  Some of it is dormant, waiting to be tapped.

    But passion requires organization and staying power to have a chance of yielding results.  Bill Bradley, in his NYT op-ed a few years ago, is as relevant as ever on this point.  http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/30/opinion/30bradley.html?_r=1 (free subscription may be required)

    I think many active Democrats have come to this conclusion.  There have been some significant steps taken in recent years to try to close the gap in the enormous institutional advantage the Right has built up over 3 decades.  Matt Bai wrote about some of these efforts in The Argument.  One's assessment of the effectiveness and potential of these particular initiatives to move us in the direction Dr. King wanted us to move in is an open question.  Many here would question whether the net effect of these efforts is progressive enough, or perhaps even progressive at all.  If those aren't the kinds of institutions and initiatives that are going to get it done, the question remains: what are? Or, if they are helpful to some degree but there are important gaps on which only some progress has been made, what are those key gaps that need to be addressed?

    I am like many issue-oriented progressives.  I am driven to learn about and think about and want to discuss issues and policy responses.  I haven't spent the time I need to to check around and make some more thoughtful decisions about which efforts to build progressive, forward-looking institutional strength I am going to support.  So I find myself now sending money to the DCCC, trying to salvage as many Dem House seats as possible. Even though I know some of them are Blue Dogs who almost surely will not vote for the agenda I think the country desperately needs right now.  

    I have become painfully aware, in recent days and as a result of discussions here at dagblog, of this way in which I share responsibility for the situation that we are seeing play out now.  

    Was I paying attention a year or year and a half ago when there might have been something I could have done to support some organization that was trying to recruit and support promising progressive potential primary challengers in supposedly Blue Dog-only territory?  I was not. 

    I wanted to believe that this White House and this Congress would be committed to pressing what I see as common sense policies on key issues that I had thought would have very broad public appeal in the current context.  That simply has not happened as I see it.  Nancy Pelosi's House, the federal government institution that has been, by far, the most responsive to the issues of our day, may be about to pay the price for the utter failure of the Democratic party to harness the intense popular anger to progressive purposes.  This federal government is not seen as the friend of the ordinary person.  The field has been temporarily forfeited and so, whereas FDR picked up Congressional seats two years in, our side is going to lose a lot, number to be determined.     

    So I already know one change I am going to make going forward after the election.  I am going to look into which organizations are out there in the trenches trying to recruit candidates saying sensible, electable progressive things, to run in Democratic primaries in areas lazily, I believe, assumed or concluded to be Blue Dog-only territory.  And see where that leads me. 

    Passion, not terribly effectively channeled, can only take those who remain deeply drawn to Dr. King's vision so far.  Dr. King fully understood this, and acted accordingly, in ways that were easy to observe at the time.

    Thanks for your post, we are stardust. The thread looked as though it was not getting much attention so I took the liberty of an extended, tag-end comment here. 


    I'm very grateful that you did, Dreamer.  It was a passionate and well-constructed comment, and I highly recommend it.  Part of the reason I posted it was because a number of Lefties here who are dismayed by what the Dems on the whole have come to represent said that they were working on manifests to effect change within the party.

    I know that's a tall order; but I really do believe that for right now it's more possible than starting or massively joining forces with a third party, though I could be very wrong.  I am working on a post just now, and will come back later to re-read your good remarks, possibly comment more.  I did end up posting this at FDL where it got a little more attention.   ;o)


    Your post was read and appreciated, stardust, even if it didn't provoke the volume of discussion you'd hoped. That's just the way it happens sometimes, when people don't have anything meaningful to add. Dreamer obviously did.


    Thanks, Canuck; I really did hope for conversation.  I know that that three-letter word can be daunting, but we need to do better as Progressives or Liberals or Dems promoting worthy policy, and the Social Gospel of the '60s had a lot of visionary directives for economic justice, which is, IMO, at the core of ALL justice. 


    Latest Comments