Progressive Boink

[Magnus J. Perriculum]

Wow, just...wow.

I think the point is that even though FDR did a bad thing he had more at stake whereas if MLK failed it wasn't like the civil rights movement would be set back any, though it'd certainly be less forward.

This is, in fact, exactly the point I'm trying to make. Though I shouldn't have said "justifies", In hindsight.

Whats all this about MLK plagiarizing?

[Duzzy Funlop]

what is your source on the adultery, I was told he never stepped out, just looked. I mean you might convict him on 'with lust in your heart.'

ps final round start whenever I get a spare minute in this damn world (tomorrow, hopefully)

from what i can gather, it's fuzzy, but there are two big "sources" that pin him as cheating quite often:

1. when the FBI had him under surveillance, they bugged his hotel rooms with cameras and and they tapped his phones. this much we know for sure. both of these methods reportedly incriminated him. this is fuzzy because the FBI obviously had it in for king, and would certainly jump at any chance to smear his name.

2. the autobiography of rev. abernathy, a good friend of his, says this:

Much has been written in recent years about my friend's weakness for women. Had others not dealt with the matter in such detail, I might have avoided any commentary. Unfortunately, some of these commentators have told only the bare facts without suggesting the reasons why Martin might have indulged in such behavior. They have also left a false impression about the range of his activities.

Martin and I were away more often than we were at home; and while this was no excuse for extramarital relations, it was a reason. Some men are better able to bear such deprivations than others, though all of us in SCLC headquarters had our weak moments. We all understood and believed in the biblical prohibition against sex outside of marriage. It was just that he had a particularly difficult time with that temptation.

In addition to his personal vulnerability, he was also a man who attracted women, even when he didn't intend to, and attracted them in droves. Part of his appeal was his predominant role in the black community and part of it was personal. During the last ten years of his life, Martin Luther King was the most important black man in America. That fact alone endowed him with an aura of power and greatness that women found very appealing. He was a hero — the greatest hero of his age — and women are always attracted to a hero.

But he also had a personal charm that ingratiated him with members of the opposite sex. He was always gracious and courteous to women, whether they were attractive to him or not. He had perfect manners. He was well educated. He was warm and friendly. He could make them laugh. He was good company, something that cannot always be said of heroes. These qualities made him even more attractive in close proximity than he was at a distance.

Then, too, Martin's own love of women was apparent in ways that could not be easily pinpointed — but which women clearly sensed, even from afar. I remember on more than one occasion sitting on a stage and having Martin turn to me to say, "Do you see that woman giving me the eye, the one in the red dress?" I wouldn't be able to pick her out at such a distance, but already she had somehow conveyed to him her attraction and he in turn had responded to it. Later I would see them talking together, as if they had known one another forever. I was always a little bewildered at how strongly and unerringly this mutual attraction operated.

A recent biography has suggested without quite saying so that Martin had affairs with white women as well as black. Such a suggestion is without foundation. I can say with the greatest confidence that he was never attracted to white women and had nothing to do with them, despite the opportunities that may have presented themselves.

Of course, J. Edgar Hoover became preoccupied with Martin's private life early in the civil rights movement, and this preoccupation was a significant factor in Hoover's pathological hatred of him and the movement he headed. Early in the game the FBI began to bug our various hotel rooms, hoping to discover our strategy but also to gather evidence that could be used against Martin personally.

I remember in particular a stay at the Willard Hotel in Washington, where they not only put in audio receivers, but video equipment as well. Then, after collecting enough of this "evidence" to be useful, they began to distribute it to reporters, law officers, and other people in a position to hurt us. Finally, when no one would do Hoover's dirty work for him, someone in the FBI put together a tape of highly intimate moments and sent them to Martin. Unfortunately — and perhaps this was deliberate — [his wife] Coretta received the tape and played it first. But such accusations never seemed to touch her. She rose above all the petty attempts to damage their marriage by refusing to even entertain such thoughts.

this is from snopes.

[webber]

uh if he was doing it for the sake of being a jerk it would but since he actually intended to accomplish something by it

that's like saying killing someone in self-defense isn't justifiable because YOU KILLED SOMEONE OH NO in which case world war 2 was corrupt anyhow right

this depends who you believe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deontological_ethics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism

as an aside i would have taken you for a deontologist

[AudeSapere]

uh if he was doing it for the sake of being a jerk it would but since he actually intended to accomplish something by it

that's like saying killing someone in self-defense isn't justifiable because YOU KILLED SOMEONE OH NO in which case world war 2 was corrupt anyhow right

this depends who you believe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deontological_ethics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism

as an aside i would have taken you for a deontologist

This is really interesting.

The poll results aside, I'd like to see Mr. James respond to this -- not because I intend to attack his position one way or another, but because I'm intrigued by deontology and its implications for consequentialism. Both certainly have their difficulties, but he has his position well-thought out, it seems. I'm just wondering how, say, his position on Lincoln differs with his position on Roosevelt (I have a feeling about what he's going to say, but I thought I'd raise the subject in any case).

sorry for referring to you in the third person james

[James]

Mr. James

lol

Anyways I'm neither of those stupid theories, I judge things based on individual circumstances. I don't even compare Lincoln and FDR; one broke a huge amount of rules for a selfish cause that happened to have positive side-effects, and the other pursued a protective course of action for his country and his allies that happened to have negative side-effects. I don't see the side-effects as being as important as the main one.

also webber stop trying to classify me using big or fancy words, you know how stupid i think they are

[Nicholas]

one broke a huge amount of rules for a selfish cause that happened to have positive side-effects

wait I'm confused are you talking about the third consecutive term or the court-packing plan or the warmongering in the face of 80% public opposition or the internment of Japanese Americans?

[James]

wait I'm confused are you talking about the third consecutive term or the court-packing plan or the warmongering in the face of 80% public opposition or the internment of Japanese Americans?

yeah because corruption and term limits are just as important as invading a legally seceded territory for the gain of your own country

you know, like the rhineland

[Nicholas]

a Lincoln/Hitler comparison? Well played, sir. And well reasoned!

For the record, FDR did a whole lot of the same things you shat on Lincoln for doing. Like, it's mind-boggling to me that you can hate on Lincoln and then defend FDR with a straight face.

You gave Lincoln shit because you said the Southern states seceded legally? FDR intended and was fully prepared to get into WWII against completely sovereign nations, well before Pearl Harbor. Lincoln used slavery as an excuse to go to war? Fine, then FDR used the spreading of democracy as an excuse to get the US to build ships again. Suspension of civil liberties and being a racist? FDR threw 120k Japanese Americans into prison for no reason other than their race. Selfishness? FDR broke a time-honored unwritten rule of serving only two terms so he could continue to be president and then tried to shit on the Constitution by filling the Supreme Court with justices that would do whatever he wanted. Neckbeard? Ok, we you've got a point there. I don't care who you like or hate, I just ask for consistency.

[James]

Ha ha! Nicholas doesn't get the point that if anyone deserves to have Godwin's Law work for him, it is the guy who actually defeated Hitler maybe. Yeah, I know it was mean of us to tromp into Germany just because they were bent on world domination, but I guess that's life!

FDR intended and was fully prepared to get into WWII against completely sovereign nations, well before Pearl Harbor.

I guess I can't beat you there, seeing as allowing France and Britain to be overrun was such a noble plan and all. Too bad the Japanese had to go and ruin that, we could've been titans in the future world that would be left to us by the Axis.

FDR threw 120k Japanese Americans into prison for no reason other than their race.

You do realize there were actual Japanese citizens who spied for the Japanese, right? It wasn't just some big paranoia scare, though the scale of it was of course overblown.

FDR broke a time-honored unwritten rule of serving only two terms so he could continue to be president

Yeah, who WOULDN'T want to be president at a time like that?

Closing point: FDR responded to a war that was affecting the world. Lincoln actively and illegally pursued a course of war against a nation that was, figuratively and literally, their relative.

[Z.S. Ghost]

Closing point: FDR responded to a war that was affecting the world. Lincoln actively and illegally pursued a course of war against a nation that was, figuratively and literally, their relative.

Fort Sumter was initiated by the South, you know.

[Nicholas]

Yeah, I know it was mean of us to tromp into Germany just because they were bent on world domination, but I guess that's life!

You're missing my point. I think it's hypocritical to claim that Lincoln fighting the Civil War to stop slavery was bullshit while FDR fighting WWII to stop Nazis was captial A Awesome. They're BOTH Awesome, even if they were both excuses to fight the war (Lincoln to keep the US together, FDR to get the economy back). I just don't understand hating on Lincoln and loving on FDR when they acted almost exactly the same.

Responding to a war that was affecting the world? I'm not sure what that means...but slavery affected the world, and the attack on Ft. Sumter was an attack on a sovereign nation regardless of whether or not we were relatives, whatever that means.