Last week, I attended my first MLK Day On. As a new student to Andover, this was the first time where my day was used to actively honor the legacy of the late civil rights activist. I enjoyed this day, especially the inspirational opening ASM featuring astronaut José Hernández. MLK’s change helped many of us to be able to live and thrive in this country. On a broader vision, MLK’s activism continues to motivate millions of people through the image of unity and non-violence. Today, however, King’s lasting effects on the U.S. government and society is credited to his peaceful and wise character. However, this is a cleaned version of the reverend, one designed to promote comfort. The actual MLK, outspoken on his views against American capitalism, promotion of institutional governmental reform, and warning of moderate voices, would still be called an uncomfortable radical today. Therefore, to fully honor his legacy, especially on MLK Day On, we must criticize the sanitized narrative that excludes these radical views.
MLK, through changes like integration, wanted society to be pluralist. This society would become a “Beloved Community,” his vision for a community based on love, justice and solidarity. This view was reiterated during his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, hoping for an America where the descendents of slaves and white people could respectfully coexist and even eat at the table together. Beyond this foundational social justice, King urged for all kinds of justice, including economic justice through redistribution.
Other than his civil rights work, MLK looked towards economic reform, including distribution of wealth through services like guaranteed income and housing for the poor. King, in a 1952 letter to his then fiancee Coretta Scott, mentions, “I am much more socialistic in my economic theory than capitalistic.” With this comment, King clearly illustrates his want for something better for the community. In his 1967 speech to the SCLC in Atalanta, MLK pointed to capitalism as one reason for continuous Black bondange in a lower economic class. Fundamentally, King’s interpretation of a better society lacked the American capitalism that oppressed non-white populations during the 20th century. Even now this idea remains radical when used by activists.
Along with calling for the reform or improvement of capitalism, MLK condemned the military-industrial complex. During the peak of MLK’s activism, the Vietnam War was in full swing, where the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong allies fought South Vietnam and later, the U.S. in 1965. Two years after the invasion, MLK spoke about his many qualms about the situation. MLK despised that the U.S. wanted to disproportionately send young Black men to Vietnam for liberation while also not having similar liberties back home. Additionally, MLK linked historical reasons for war, economic and imperialistic, mainly pertaining to how “capitalists of the West [invested] huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, … with no concern for the social betterment of the countries.” MLK believed that this war symbolized America’s moral failure, especially when it spent resources and lives, while the problems of Black America persisted. And he was right about the true nature of the war, as even the U.S. itself thought it was unable to win the war, but stayed for the sake of global “superiority.” Almost as an insult to King, the modern U.S. has gotten in hundreds of military interventions since 1991, leading to destabilization for economic and political control. And not even a week to the new year, the U.S. unilaterally invaded Venezuela and captured its disputed leader, with White House officials already wanting investment in the captured Venezuelan oil industry. If MLK saw these interventions, he would reply radically, calling for military reform, or even the dissolution of it.
Finally, MLK claimed that the path for equality was not blocked by the Ku Klux Klan member, nor the Segregationist, but the white moderate. This idea of a white moderate was a white person who was not extremely racist, but did not help the cause of Black liberation and equality. This is someone who didn’t dislike justice, but preferred comfort within order, even if order promoted inequality. King asks: is it enough to support justice in theory, while not doing anything about it? Given modern widespread inequality, from constant law enforcement violence to modern forms of economic exploitation, it is impossible King would tolerate inactivity akin to the “white moderate.”
With all of these radical views, King would deeply condemn much of the post-1970s actions taken by the U.S. He would recognize the undeniable progress made through integration and expanded civil rights, but he would also be deeply frustrated by the persistence, if not acceleration, of economic inequality, endless war, and widespread political complacency. To truly honor King’s legacy, it is not enough to celebrate him once a year or quote his most comforting words. Instead, we must be willing to confront the discomfort of his full message and ask whether we are advancing justice, or merely honoring it in name. As Andover students participating in MLK Day On, this responsibility is ours: not just to reflect on King’s ideals, but to engage with the radical demands they place on our community and ourselves.
