Here’s my response to the popular meme among conservatives and so-called libertarians making its rounds (MLK = Looted nothing. Burning Nothing. Attacked No one. Changed the world.”
I agree. Eye-for-an-eye violence should not be the answer. My brother in law sent me photos of his historical and internationally popular record store in Chicago boarded up and it broke my fucking heart.
I hate it.
I live within ear shot of the violence every night and it makes me shake from fear.
But how about a devil’s advocate stance? The story of redemption in the church cannot be told without the story of Mr. Christ’s ineffable torture and agonizingly violent death. First came violence, then came “peace”, for anyone who believes. Biblical history is chockfull, packed, filled to the hilt with violence before peace (e.g. Cain & Abel, the Flood Killing Umpteen number of population, Sodom & Gomorrah, Samson, Joshua & Jericho, Moses and the Plagues, David & Goliath, are just a slice of popular stories). Hell itself is a violent end to the thought crime of rejecting Jesus as Savior, but it is “necessary” for salvation for believers to choose peace over violence.
Contemporary Americans are lucky Sons of Bitches. Our collective memories does not remember the riots, the revolution, the civil war, etc. World Wars I & II were fought overseas. We nuked Japan not once, but twice, for what?
For violence? No, for “peace”.
We can make our strongest arguments about non-violent protests. It’s a tough counter when violence is what ended Mr. King’s plight yet continued his message. They don’t say “fighting for peace” for nothing, perhaps. I don’t know. It’s a fucking minding numbing cyclical argument. Difficult. Nuanced and a damn travesty of challenge. Cheers, mate. I hope to see you on NC time soon.
The last line should read: “Murdered for his passive actions.”