I cannot help but think that King would be displeased with two rallies purportedly in his honor being held in the same city, one nearly all white and the other nearly all black.
As I watched parts of both rallies today, it became clear to me that what separates Beck and Sharpton on this day was more about politics than race.
Political posturing is the reason that Beck and Sharpton lacked the foresight or wisdom to consider leading a rally of both of their followers to Washington. Imagine, if you will, a rally where not only Beck and Sharpton address the faithful, but Sarah Palin is either followed or preceded by NAACP President Benjamin Jealous. Imagine workshops and breakout sessions where conservatives and liberals could sit down and engage in honest discussions about their fears as well as their dreams. A rally of this ilk would have been easy to organize and groundbreaking in scope, but it will never occur, not until Americans peer deeper into the motivations of celebrities who claim to be movement leaders.
While a Republican, I long have been skeptical about Beck and his motivations. I really was offended last year when he suggested that President Obama was a racist who hated white people. I thought that such comments epitomized the height of racial hysteria.
Yet, I appreciate Beck for at least raising awareness about Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement in an era in which many of his followers know little about either or except for the fact that there is a Federal holiday in King’s name each January.
I understand the reticence that many blacks have in believing that Beck has had a “Damascus Road” experience regarding race baiting hyperbole; I, for one, am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt—while keeping a keen eye open for the old Beck.
I also keep a suspicious eye fixed upon Sharpton, too, a man who symbolizes what I believe has become the hyper-liberalization of the major modern civil rights groups, many of whom now openly align with ultra liberal policies like same-sex marriage and abortion while ignoring that vast numbers of blacks that remain opposed to both of these caustic issues.
Sharpton was right, however, when recounting that notable conservatives, like Barry Goldwater and William F. Buckley, Jr., were opposed to the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Acts that King worked and died to see passed and fulfilled. While history has proved neo-conservatives wrong on this issue, that does not render current conservatives inherently evil for questioning the efficacy of the ensuing Great Society programs, some of which have had a deleterious effect on black families by making it financially palatable for young black mothers to remain separate and apart from their children’s fathers.
Scholars have and will continue to debate where King would have stood on such issues, whether he would have been pro-choice or pro-life, or whether he would have addressed the lack of responsibility exhibited by young black males who willingly allow themselves to be placed into the criminal justice system because they cannot comport their behavior to common standards of decency. I believe that had he lived, he would have sounded much more like Bill Cosby on these issues than Al Sharpton.
And yet, when one realizes that Cosby has been castigated by many so-called black mainstream leaders for preaching personal responsibility, again, it becomes clear why there are some, on the left, who would hesitate to have a multiracial, multi- political march on Washington.
Why? Because to do so would break down barriers that ostensibly allow some to remain in power. On the right, there are some leaders who need to make “all” blacks shiftless, lazy and criminally pre-disposed to satisfy base fears within some of their followers. On the left, there are some who need their followers to believe that conservatives—be they black or white–are evil doers hoping to turn back the clocks on civil rights—if not re-institute Jim Crow all together.
Caught in the crossfire are the rest of us rational beings that believe that our fears and preconceived notions can be worked out at the “table of brotherhood.” We live in an era in which angry suspicion trumps reasonable doubts about opposing viewpoints. The former eliminates progress, while the latter provides the possibility of compromise and reconciliation. Maybe it’s quixotic, but I do believe that simple conversations allow folks of varying viewpoints to further hasten the actualization of King’s dream.
