Home | About | Donate

Reality Check for Democrats: Would Martin Luther King Be Supporting Bernie?


Reality Check for Democrats: Would Martin Luther King Be Supporting Bernie?

Jeff Cohen

Corporate mainstream media have sanitized and distorted the life and teachings of Martin Luther King Jr., putting him in the category of a “civil rights leader” who focused narrowly on racial discrimination; end of story.

Missing from the story is that Dr. King was also a tough-minded critic of our capitalist economic structure, much like Bernie Sanders is today.


Great article. This is why Bernie needs to denounce the MIC and call for a reduction in America's foreign footprint. If MLK was alive he would expect nothing less from Bernie.


Thank you, Mr. Cohen. The quotes make it obvious that Martin Luther King WOULD support Sanders and I think he'd urge him to be bolder about publicly connecting the dots between the MIC's vacuum-suctioning of funds out of the general economy only to dedicate them to killing other peoples' children. NOT a wise investment on any level from the economic to the moral or spiritual.

Based on the stances Mr. Sanders took (as noted in the Jon Rainwater/Kevin Martin article published today on C.D.), he appears to be moving in the direction of taming The Beast.


Great points from Jeff Cohen. I hope this list of parallels between MLK's thinking and Bernie's gets widely distributed where it will prove educational. In other words, where the mainstream media doesn't go.

Thanks, too, to Jeff Cohen for all the great work with FAIR. There's been a lot of it. (My original "Don't Trust the Corporate Media" t-shirt is in tatters now, but I still love it.)


Who is Jesse Jackson supporting?


"Many black leaders" are owned by corporations and have been drinking inside the beltway kool aid at least as long as their white brethren.


My answer to Cohen's rhetorical question: Is the Pope Catholic ?


This burns me up. I thought of Lee as a possible running mate. Not any longer.


Though people and both the politicians and the media continue to associate being African-American with automatically being poor, they rarely if ever mention that there is a growing elite class among Blacks and other minorities.

The media will jump up to tell us that there aren't that many black billionaires yet there are some. That isn't the case for upper middle class and middle class Blacks and Latinos. Sure there needs dramatic improvements and redlining and other things hold back people, nevertheless large numbers of Blacks and Latinos own their own homes and businesses, are skilled craftsmen, doctors, lawyers, teachers and union members who are not poor.

Many of the elites among the middle class African-Americans have a stake in the status quo just as do the white middle class union officials and so forth.

We see union leadership supporting Hillary while union memberships support Bernie. The same reality exists among Black communities where a certain elite are very vocal about how (according to them) Hillary is the best choice for Blacks.

Blacks have their entrenched status quo elites too.


There are a whole lot of journalists and reporters out there who should take a page from Jeff Cohen's book! His integrity is impeccable.


I'm sure MLK would have done great things to say about Bernie's domestic policy, and he might call him the best mainstream candidate but...

MLK was notoriously anti war. He would have major problems with Bernie's foreign policy.

MLK was about all man of every color. The media doesn't like to frame him that way.


For some people, the struggle for Black Lives and Rights (or those of women) trumps the policies of the individuals involved. Maybe Barbara Lee is so sensitive to racism that any threat to Obama (and his policies) comes back to that core value? It's easy for white people to dismiss how important racial solidarity may be to those who finally have some power and influence in a nation that treated them as objects for decades.

I listen to "Feminists" who back Mrs. Clinton and it's that same thing. For them, it's more important to just HAVE a woman in the White House. They don't look honestly at her policies or the degree to which Hillary has gone along with the worst of corporatism and militarism in order to get this close to the acme of power (in its apparent state... since after all it's really the Deep State that's running the agenda).

I am not apologizing for or excusing these behaviors. But I think before blame is cast (and so often it comes from Caucasians, particularly white males who have never had to wrestle with these constant insults to their person and life prospects), it's important to really take in WHY some people show the loyalties that they do.

In case it's not clear, I fully support Mr. Sanders.

But it's wise to try to understand people on their own terms. Casting blame just shuts up discussion and does nothing to educate.


You raise valid points. If Lee is behind Clinton though, she won't make an appropriate running mate for Bernie on ideological grounds.


Watch the Feb. 11 edition of Democracy Now!
Amy had Barbara Lee on and asked a few times about who she would endorse, Barbara didn't give a clear answer.


I agree. I just watched her on "Democracy Now," and I watched the program AFTER posting. She still stands by President Obama. She thinks he's achieved a lot. To me, that's race identification... since so many of us in this forum are MORTIFIED by what Obama "achieved."

It's similar to the "Feminists" who think Hillary also achieved a lot.


What are these people smoking?


Spot on article, but, given the conclusion, shouldn't the title be "Reality Check for Democrats: Would Martin Luther King Be Supporting Hillary?"


Wow. That's awful! I'm shocked, honestly.


I agree. That is the elephant in the room and it might serve Bernie well to come out early and talk about just how much US military funding he intends to trim.


Says the guy who's constantly accusing people of being paid shills. Anyway water under the bridge. I can respect your opinions.


I love the post that says a better question is would Martin support Hillary? From my close reading of Diana Johnstone's well-researched book, "Queen of Chaos: The Misadventures of Hillary Clinton," I can answer flat-out, NO! NO and NO. Martin was anti-war; OTOH, let the record show that HRC never met a weapons system or a war she didn't crave.
Remember all those hearings about Benghazi? They never asked the right questions. HRC targeted Libya for destruction and she achieved her goals bigtime. Have you seen the before/after pictures of Libya? Before reveals a modern metropolis; after depicts a pile of rubble. As I and others have written, her bloodcurdling yelp of joy, in reference to the brutal torture and murder of Libyan strongman Gaddafi, "We came, we saw, he died." ought to put under the column headed "nuff sed." Gaddafi wrestled w/the "establishment" to have Libya be the shining country on the hill of North Africa; instead the establishment fought him tooth and nail, and then Little Miss Warhawk got her claws on the State Department, and Gaddafi met a gruesome end, as has his beloved country.
She not only destroyed Libya; she ran roughshod over Haiti, Honduras, and poked the Russian Bear, not something any sane person would do, in Ukraine. My heart of hearts tells me that if she becomes our commander-in-chief, we may well be fighting Putin for our very lives.
In my view HRC is not only a hawk where BERNIE is a peacemaker; she is a liar where he is authentic.
This is the very fight of our lives folks, and I ask each of you to see how you can help the political revolution to reclaim our democracy.