King’s message misunderstood

Joseph Polowski’s letter of Jan. 29 reveals the fallacy of many who try to interpret Martin Luther King Jr. They hold to the view that since “King believed in equality and freedom for all people,” he could not also “advocate special rights or special benefits for any groups.” This is a false distinction.

In his effort to claim the universal King, Mr. Polowski neglects the particular King and thus denies King’s own voice. While King spoke of freedom for all, he also recognized that not everyone had equal access to freedom. Thus the pursuit of freedom could certainly include specific benefits for certain groups in order to make freedom a reality.

This is especially true as King develops his critique of poverty. If, as King writes, “other-preservation is the first law of life” then society and government have a “moral obligation to end poverty.” To that end, King proposed a Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged, which would create specific programs including a guaranteed income targeted at the poor.

Since human need and welfare are among the foundations of King’s social vision, he could do nothing else than suggest programs and benefits that would allow this vision to be realized.

Ron Large

Spokane