MLK's "Guaranteed Income": Is Now The Time?

DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
edited September 2012 in A Moving Train
MLK's Last Speech To the SCLC: "Where Do We Go From Here?" Watch from 29:50 if you wish to skip 'introductory" remarks regarding "the past" and steps already taken.
Full text of speech
speech text from 29:50 mark only

This speech really gets me.

But, specifically to the topical point, IS NOW THE TIME FOR THIS?
MLK wrote:
Now a lot of us are preachers, and all of us have our moral convictions and concerns, and so often we have problems with power. But there is nothing wrong with power if power is used correctly.

You see, what happened is that some of our philosophers got off base. And one of the great problems of history is that the concepts of love and power have usually been contrasted as opposites, polar opposites, so that love is identified with a resignation of power, and power with a denial of love. It was this misinterpretation that caused the philosopher Nietzsche, who was a philosopher of the will to power, to reject the Christian concept of love. It was this same misinterpretation which induced Christian theologians to reject Nietzsche's philosophy of the will to power in the name of the Christian idea of love.

Now, we got to get this thing right. What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive, and that love without power is sentimental and anemic. (Yes) Power at its best [applause], power at its best is love (Yes) implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is love correcting everything that stands against love. (Speak) And this is what we must see as we move on.
MLK wrote:
Now we must develop progress, or rather, a program—and I can't stay on this long—that will drive the nation to a guaranteed annual income. Now, early in the century this proposal would have been greeted with ridicule and denunciation as destructive of initiative and responsibility. At that time economic status was considered the measure of the individual's abilities and talents. And in the thinking of that day, the absence of worldly goods indicated a want of industrious habits and moral fiber. We've come a long way in our understanding of human motivation and of the blind operation of our economic system. Now we realize that dislocations in the market operation of our economy and the prevalence of discrimination thrust people into idleness and bind them in constant or frequent unemployment against their will. The poor are less often dismissed, I hope, from our conscience today by being branded as inferior and incompetent. We also know that no matter how dynamically the economy develops and expands, it does not eliminate all poverty.

AND HE CONTINUES:
MLK wrote:
The problem indicates that our emphasis must be twofold: We must create full employment, or we must create incomes. People must be made consumers by one method or the other. Once they are placed in this position, we need to be concerned that the potential of the individual is not wasted. New forms of work that enhance the social good will have to be devised for those for whom traditional jobs are not available. In 1879 Henry George anticipated this state of affairs when he wrote in Progress and Poverty:

The fact is that the work which improves the condition of mankind, the work which extends knowledge and increases power and enriches literature and elevates thought, is not done to secure a living. It is not the work of slaves driven to their tasks either by that of a taskmaster or by animal necessities. It is the work of men who somehow find a form of work that brings a security for its own sake and a state of society where want is abolished.

Work of this sort could be enormously increased, and we are likely to find that the problem of housing, education, instead of preceding the elimination of poverty, will themselves be affected if poverty is first abolished. The poor, transformed into purchasers, will do a great deal on their own to alter housing decay. Negroes, who have a double disability, will have a greater effect on discrimination when they have the additional weapon of cash to use in their struggle.

Beyond these advantages, a host of positive psychological changes inevitably will result from widespread economic security. The dignity of the individual will flourish when the decisions concerning his life are in his own hands, when he has the assurance that his income is stable and certain, and when he knows that he has the means to seek self-improvement. Personal conflicts between husband, wife, and children will diminish when the unjust measurement of human worth on a scale of dollars is eliminated.

Now, our country can do this. John Kenneth Galbraith said that a guaranteed annual income could be done for about twenty billion dollars a year. And I say to you today, that if our nation can spend thirty-five billion dollars a year to fight an unjust, evil war in Vietnam, and twenty billion dollars to put a man on the moon, it can spend billions of dollars to put God's children on their own two feet right here on earth. [applause]

Along time ago I would have laughed at this suggestion, but now I'm not so sure. Now I'm not so sure at all. IS NOW THE TIME FOR THIS?

King's ultimate point here is that in two major ways "handing out money" will solve fundamental problems of society:

1. the abolition of dire want through the guarnateed income will elevate the SPIRIT of man
2. the removed imposition of menial employment to feed himself allows man freedom in time to respond to the more pressing needs of humanity generally. To contribute REAL good, not just menial labor, to the "economy" (ultimately, to society globally).

Of course there are some problems, and questions worthy of consideration in the *implementation* of this notion, but is not the notion itself sound in some fundamental way?

Consider that what is wrong with the economy right now is not a lack of ability, of man power, or of materials, but a lack of FREEDOM for most of those in the economy to DO what otherwise might be of benefit. Currently our resources (all of them, especially HUMAN) are MISAPPROPRIATED, bound up in debts unpayable, and otherwise confined by systemic ailments which in all likelihood can not be addressed in any way other than to RADICALLY alter the system itself.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Follow up speech portions:
    MLK wrote:
    I want to say to you as I move to my conclusion, as we talk about "Where do we go from here?" that we must honestly face the fact that the movement must address itself to the question of restructuring the whole of American society. (Yes) There are forty million poor people here, and one day we must ask the question, "Why are there forty million poor people in America?" And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising a question about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth. When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. (Yes) And I'm simply saying that more and more, we've got to begin to ask questions about the whole society. We are called upon to help the discouraged beggars in life's marketplace. (Yes) But one day we must come to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. (All right) It means that questions must be raised. And you see, my friends, when you deal with this you begin to ask the question, "Who owns the oil?" (Yes) You begin to ask the question, "Who owns the iron ore?" (Yes) You begin to ask the question, "Why is it that people have to pay water bills in a world that's two-thirds water?" (All right) These are words that must be said. (All right)

    THIS IS MY FAVORITE PART:
    MLK wrote:
    Now, don't think you have me in a bind today. I'm not talking about communism. What I'm talking about is far beyond communism. (Yeah) My inspiration didn't come from Karl Marx (Speak); my inspiration didn't come from Engels; my inspiration didn't come from Trotsky; my inspiration didn't come from Lenin. Yes, I read Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital a long time ago (Well), and I saw that maybe Marx didn't follow Hegel enough. (All right) He took his dialectics, but he left out his idealism and his spiritualism. And he went over to a German philosopher by the name of Feuerbach, and took his materialism and made it into a system that he called "dialectical materialism." (Speak) I have to reject that.

    What I'm saying to you this morning is communism forgets that life is individual. (Yes) Capitalism forgets that life is social. (Yes, Go ahead) And the kingdom of brotherhood is found neither in the thesis of communism nor the antithesis of capitalism, but in a higher synthesis. (Speak) [applause] It is found in a higher synthesis (Come on) that combines the truths of both. (Yes) Now, when I say questioning the whole society, it means ultimately coming to see that the problem of racism, the problem of economic exploitation, and the problem of war are all tied together. (All right) These are the triple evils that are interrelated.
    MLK wrote:
    And if you will let me be a preacher just a little bit. (Speak) One day [applause], one night, a juror came to Jesus (Yes sir) and he wanted to know what he could do to be saved. (Yeah) Jesus didn't get bogged down on the kind of isolated approach of what you shouldn't do. Jesus didn't say, "Now Nicodemus, you must stop lying." (Oh yeah) He didn't say, "Nicodemus, now you must not commit adultery." He didn't say, "Now Nicodemus, you must stop cheating if you are doing that." He didn't say, "Nicodemus, you must stop drinking liquor if you are doing that excessively." He said something altogether different, because Jesus realized something basic (Yes): that if a man will lie, he will steal. (Yes) And if a man will steal, he will kill. (Yes) So instead of just getting bogged down on one thing, Jesus looked at him and said, "Nicodemus, you must be born again." [applause]

    In other words, "Your whole structure (Yes) must be changed." [applause] A nation that will keep people in slavery for 244 years will "thingify" them and make them things. (Speak) And therefore, they will exploit them and poor people generally economically. (Yes) And a nation that will exploit economically will have to have foreign investments and everything else, and it will have to use its military might to protect them. All of these problems are tied together. (Yes) [applause]

    What I'm saying today is that we must go from this convention and say, "America, you must be born again!" [applause] (Oh yes)
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • whygohomewhygohome Posts: 2,305
    A lot to digest. MLK mentioning Hegel!! Yes!! :clap:

    Many would simply label this a "redistribution of wealth," and, therefore, would reject it.

    This is interesting: "And the kingdom of brotherhood is found neither in the thesis of communism nor the antithesis of capitalism, but in a higher synthesis."

    Programs were proposed (moreso in the UK) to make welfare and unemployment recipients work while receiving benefits. For example, an individual on welfare can clean a city park, the city streets, or help a church with a food drive. This is performing a social good. The problem today is that these programs seem to have gotten away from us; i.e., it seems that it is very difficult to enforce a program like this. Unfortunately, in order to reform programs like welfare, medicaid, unemployment, we need to pump some money into them. An analogy would be remodeling an old home.

    This is quite heavy:
    "In other words, "Your whole structure (Yes) must be changed." [applause] A nation that will keep people in slavery for 244 years will "thingify" them and make them things. (Speak) And therefore, they will exploit them and poor people generally economically. (Yes) And a nation that will exploit economically will have to have foreign investments and everything else, and it will have to use its military might to protect them. All of these problems are tied together. (Yes) [applause]"
  • I don't think its a lack of other peoples money that is the problem...

    and if you go down to southside Chicago and start handing out free money to "remove the imposition of menial labor to feed himself", that is, to remove the imposition of working for what one desires, I do not think it would have the stated effect of allowing the man more free time "to respond to the more pressing needs of humanity generally. To contribute REAL good".

    Sorry.... but I don't see it.

    That being said, RIP MLK. Your unwavering dedication to non-violent ways are an example for us all. And the African-American community, indeed all communities, need you now more than ever.
Sign In or Register to comment.