Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Barlow
Nov 26, 2007
Write, speak, avenge, for ancient sufferings feel

Borneo Jimmy posted:

Are there people who still think Foreign Policy is a serious magazine?
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/28/would_martin_luther_king_have_supported_a_syrian_intervention


While indeed King opposed America's war in Vietnam, but maaaaaaabyeeeeee hypothetically, you know he would totally get behind bombing Syria with drones and cruise missiles.

The bit about Reinhold Niebuhr is disingenuous, the idea that because Obama and King read Niebuhr they would agree is insane. Sure, King often cited Niebuhr, but mostly his later work on the nature of sin and on the potential to use nonviolence to further the cause of black rights. The key difference between Niebuhr and King, as Niebuhr noted, was that King was a pacifist. This also neglects the ties King had to Bayard Rustin and the Fellowship of Reconciliation, which were explicitly pacifist.

From what we know of King's personal and theological positions he wouldn't have intervened. If we are going to assume King's views might have changed if he had lived why not just admit we're going to make poo poo up. The writer is a young, white editorial assistant from Sweden who just graduated Harvard. I suspect he must be trolling for article clicks.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • Locked thread