Philosophy Now Forum

I'm just observing the fact that he was killed, and proposing that is both the timing and manner of his death may be a factor in the MLK saint brand.

We haven't spoken of the manner of his death, but that seems a factor too. He didn't die of the flu, this historic man of peace was violently murdered, which connects the King brand to one of the central iconic stories of our culture, the Jesus story. The fact that he was murdered by a lower class white man meshes perfectly with the story line, in a way that say, the murder of Malcolm X by a black man doesn't.

A further discussion might explore the impact of the MLK saint brand. It seems quite positive now, given that the King brand serves as an ideal, a clear and inspiring example of behavior we wish to celebrate and encourage. How many of today's children will go on to do great things as result of their exposure to this brand?

It's harder to calculate the impact over time. We can see how the Jesus brand has been manipulated and mangled etc. Time will tell...



Yes, I agree with all this. Of course it's speculative.

My only point is that while anything could have indeed happened, one possibility that seems not too likely is that the King brand would have remained as pristine perfect as it currently is. This isn't a reflection on King himself, but just an observation on the reality of the human condition. As example, if King had become President he would have become mired in all the controversial complexities that afflict any President. As a result of some policy choice or another, some people who aren't currently mad at him would have become mad.



I agree the act should be condemned, and it has been condemned a billion times. I condemn it. We all condemn it.

So, does our condemnation, which we all agree on, require us to now stop thinking?



I didn't say Ray did something good in the moral sense.

Whether his action had positive implications within the larger picture is another question.

Here's another example of this kind of irony. You know who saved the Democratic Party from oblivion? Yep, that's right, George Bush.

The history of the Clinton administration was to treat terrorism as a law enforcement issue. This plays in to the stereotype that Dems are weak on national defense.

Suppose Gore had won, and then 911 happened. The entire terror issue would have been branded as a classic Dem failure, this brand would have been accepted by the public, and it would have taken them a generation to get past the political catastrophe.

Without George Bush, here's the current President of the US.

What I really don't get about the post is what philosophical point your making or wish to explore. I can see why it might be of interest politically but I'm struggling to find any hard philosophical claims to debate. Maybe it's just me but I don't see anything particularly controversial in what you're saying.

I don't either. I was simply intrigued by the ironies involved, that's all.

And I'm interested in the process by which we elevate human beings to saint status, making them the personification of our ideals. To say it philosophically, the conversion of a reality in to an abstraction.

What is the value of these icons we create? Are they useful and valuable, even if the process involves the insertion of some degree of illusion?

And what would Plato say about soul food?? That too.

I've always gone on the assumption that we only see people through a filtered lens. I don't mean that in a cynical "everyone's a bastard" way, just that everyone has weaknesses and some peoples weaknesses are constant tabloid fodder whereas other people's remain unknown to most of us.

One thing: if MLK's legacy was preserved by his untimely death what of the fact that other "icons" like JFK had many sordid aspects of their lives revealed after death when, to the best of my knowledge, that didn't happen to MLK?

Hi Typist,

T:I'm proposing that's because we've had the opportunity to get to know Jackson as a real world human being. We respect Jackson, but don't worship him, because we've had the opportunity to see that he's an imperfect human being just like us.

AS: If that were the case then Jackson would have been as iconic as MLK back in the day. But he wasn't. He wasn't because he didn't have the aesthetic appeal that MLK had in the public. By aesthetics I don't just mean how they looked...I mean how they moved...what they say and how they say it...how they string words together and how melodic those words sound when they recite them and yes...even how beautifully passionate the person voicing those word appears to another human.
Jackson may have had the exact same message on the inside that MLK...we will never know. But it didn't translate in the same way. It was just shy of OMG!


T:Here's another example of this kind of irony. You know who saved the Democratic Party from oblivion? Yep, that's right, George Bush.

AS: These are just your thoughts. They hold no truth. The statistics prove that there are way more liberal democrats in the USA than there are conservatives....however, it's hard to get a liberal to get out and vote. If our country forced people to vote...like they do in Australia, you would see a different country. However, because of ourLIBERAL constitution, we don't force that upon our people. Personally, I think it's quite embarrassing that almost every conservative makes it to the polls on election day and still can't win all of the time.

T:Suppose Gore had won, and then 911 happened. The entire terror issue would have been branded as a classic Dem failure, this brand would have been accepted by the public, and it would have taken them a generation to get past the political catastrophe.

AS: Oh boy...here we go into fantasy land again. Okay I'll play, let's suppose Gore won. In my version of Gore winning we would not have had 9/11. It might have been that the terrorists were pissed off at Bush and his family and so were waiting for the right moment to relay their message. But you are right about one thing, Gore would have kept on treating terrorism as a law enforcement issue just as Clinton did. And he would have been right to do so...as it is not rational to invade entire countries based on a few outlaws residing within the borders. Bush fucked up big time and weakened a nation. We are in more danger of terrorist attack now than when Clinton was in office. And That is reality....not a fantasy "what if" scenario.

.


John, just one thing about understanding typist.



You have to be able to understand this guy first.



........................................................

And you don't want to do that.

If it doesn't fit within the red square box pictured above, typist doesn't see it.


Don't drink the Kool-Aid John.


Don't EVER drink the Kool-Aid!



Don't try to understand typist-just accept him for what he is.



It's extremely funny to see that guy in the red box but you don't ever want to be trapped in a room with him.


Crazy as a shithouse rat comes to mind.


Complete. Fucking. Asshole. comes to mind. The only caption I can think of. Along with the shit stains that follow him.



That's the only thing behind this thread John.

Typist trying to con-volute an argument is just the drippings off the Kool-Aid spout. Nothing more.



Real men, or the actions of real men frighten that guy above in the red box.


Brave men, philosophical men scare that man pictured above. Nothing more.


.

"Only the good die young", my gran.

By Typists argument we should just shoot all the good to do good.

With respect to MLK I think Malcolm X should have a hat tipped towards him, as he abandoned his racism towards the white man. A powerful thinker and an interesting read.

I agree. Typist is a sick puppy.
I imagine she thinks that letting Mandela out of gaol was the end of his credibility too?

Where did you find a picture of Typist's Dad???

Ah, I think I understand. You want to discuss the ethics of marketing science. I'm not sure there is much ethical insight to be gained from examining the way PR people work.

It is a mistake that few philosophers will make, I think, to put people they admire up on high pedestals. MLK's ideas, his work, and his life, are related but not inseparable and, to anyone able to separate them, your OP makes little sense.