Malcolm X
To show how convinced Malcolm X was that he was doing the right thing, he gave an example of his own children, stating his belief even at the young age they realised the battle he was fighting was necessary, and that they would think lowly of him if he ran away from the fight because he would then expose his myopia and risked living to fight another day, while leaving his seed to fight the whole entire battle rather than part or non of it if he was brave enough to take the opportunity he had, to fight till the end keeping in mind success was assured.
Malcolm X understood he could not be held responsible for putting the lives of his own seed at risk as a result of his activities given their lives were independent of his and not directly at threat of harm from his hand. He knew they were automatically at risk because of a status given them at birth by the system they were born into. He was not, by his striving for freedom, negating his parental responsibilities but, to the contrary, taking them by the horn because he was doing something few other parents did for their seed apart from provide food and shelter for them, and he was doing this the only way that he could under the circumstances ... an activity with the potential to remove the status that was the number one threat to their well being.
He, unlike most parents, could not accept that it made sense to leave his children to take their chances in a world where they were disadvantaged enough as it was.
If there is one thing about slain activists, no matter the cause they were fighting that got them murdered or assassinated, it is the fact they were all adamant about their chosen path. They insisted on taking the course they knew led to an abrupt end, obviously convinced it was worth it. 
JFK. Malcolm X considering his assassination a case of the hen coming home to roost was a misunderstanding of sorts. JFK's motivation was the same as that of the former ...
Some may question the judgement of these individuals and conclude they were wrong in thinking giving their life was worth it in the end. They have gauged the gains against the losses and concluded the cause in question is not worth sacrificing the particular life for.
On the other side are those who think it is. They are alright ... but not yet home until they have known a truth I will divulge further down.
This truth can better be arrived at by analysing then helping those who think it is not worth it understand it is in fact their judgement that ails them in arriving at this conclusion.
This requires going back to what I will for purposes of clarity term "the beginning".
The life of the human animal is complex. Whatever state we are in at any given moment, how free we are, how secure we are from harm by other humans, is a combo of different individual choice outcomes related to what path people chose to take to reach the status of the free.
To better understand this, we need to look at life choices as myriad and the best model that represents this better than any other is a race with a finishing line where humans start off as soon as they start seeking a coping strategy, the finishing line representing the time they find one.
Because choices of the course to take to the perfect coping strategy are myriad, and the strategies differ, let's imagine that instead of one finishing line, we have a myriad and so, when the start whistle is sounded, people rush off in different directions, choosing the one they feel will lead them to the desired coping strategy.
Models play a major role in the outcome of the race with the rich being influential in this usually because most people take it for granted wealth guarantees freedom and the rest that comes with it. The means the rich person who becomes their role model used to amass wealth are sought out, researched then emulated and propagated.
The late David Rockerfeller, one of the wealthiest men on earth while it lasted, is most definitely a role model for many
It is through this process we can go further to make the realisation how free, secure, etc. people are in society depends on the aggregate of choices of coping strategies within the same society, and, because there is such a thing in reality as a semblance of freedom, meaning people can believe they are free while in reality they are not, there also comes into play a reality related to this where we can speak of the "degree" to which members of a given society are free, but only with regards activities they can undertake because a state of freedom cannot be gauged.
We can look at this as a scale the center of which has an arrow pointing to a meter with "free" and "not free" on each end of the scale. When people who are not free, regardless they have the delusion they are free, outnumber those who are free, the scale will point this out very clearly.
The degree of freedom in that society will be tipped in favour of this group with the numbers of people who are free preventing that society from the extreme where the arrow points to the very end of the scale, in which case members of that society can be considered not free in an absolute sense.
Because our activists are prone to the rules of the same "race" and they have crossed the finishing line with their coping strategy fully developed, the things they can get away with depend on the degree to which members of that society are free, determining as well how long it takes before they walk into the wall demanding conformity where they will be forced to ask questions that include why they cannot be allowed to do that which they consider appropriate under the circumstances, if not belonging to same.
Realisation after another and the reality dawns it is about personalities and propensities, and this is the reason why they cannot be allowed to do what they want under the prevailing social conditions and it is this to which they react.
They fight for their rights primarily, and the fight is inevitably extended to other members of society when the realisation dawns being to a large extent inadvertently responsible for the few available freedoms, the success of the venture for total freedom depends on their participation.
Thus start the exhortations aimed at winning hearts and minds from the larger population while engaging in direct acts of assistance to the fallen, scheming, plotting, setting in motion conspiracies that have the increase in freedom as the ultimate objective.
The conscious (activists) eventually realise while at it that they can never be allowed to be who they are and crucially that, whatever they choose to do, their fate will not be wholly their fault. Their society will be as responsible for what happens to them as those who call the shots.
Martin Luther King Jr.
The abrupt outcome of their lives can only be prevented if the arrow was tipped in favour of the free.
They know this beforehand which is why their battle, the fight of the free, becomes not so much a preoccupation, but a means of assuring their personal survival, a way of assuring the survival of those who are like them now, and in future ... who will fall into the same trap if the current generation fails to win enough/the critical number of converts, if they do not convince enough people that the battle is also for their own good.
The conviction that should do the trick of gaining converts reads: treats and trinkets can only amount to status symbols that do not equal freedom, and all the rest of the goodies that come with the package.
No comments:
Post a Comment