Biden Won. But This Election Proves Just How Racist America Really Is

71 Million Americans Voted For Trump. Is White America Ready to Understand What That Really Means?

There’s a strange and difficult question that has to be asked in the wake of Biden’s victory over Trump. Do the numbers really say what they appear to? Does half of America really support hate?

It seems too ugly to be true. So the way that pundits often put it is this. “Half of Americans can’t be racists!!” The idea here is simply a kind of populist appeal to mass numbers — half of a country can’t be bad people!! Alas, quite the opposite is true. A cursory check of history tells us how much so. More than half a country can be racists, bigots, full of hate, and so forth. How much so? Think about apartheid South Africa — how much of its white population was racist? Think about those Asian societies which are still caste societies today. The examples are endless. But the best one is America itself.

Think back in history not so long ago — less than one human lifetime. America was still a segregated country. And yet it was a democracy. More than half its population believed in the idea that blacks and whites should be kept separate. Was segregation racism? Of course it was. It is more or less the canonical example of racism.

Now think about the struggle for gay rights. It was only recently in human history that things like gay marriage or even being out became socially acceptable and legally protected. Until then, much more than half a society was bigoted and prejudiced.

Think about how long it took for women to win the vote. That was an example of more than half a society — at least among men, this time — being badly misogynist and sexist.

Think about those parts of the world which are theocracies today. More than half the population supports the idea of religious law, which is usually itself made up of some combination of bigotry, stupidity, and hate.

So a glance at history tells us the way pundits frame the question — asking incredulously “But half a country can’t be…bad people!!” — is wrong. Badly wrong. Sure, half a country can be all kinds of terrible things — and throughout history, it often has been.This line of thinking is easy to demolish — just a moment’s reflection tells us how badly mistaken it is. And it sheds light on the mistake it makes, too.

So. Is half of America…racist? Let’s examine the question objectively. Not to cast aspersions — but simply to examine reality. Half of America or thereabouts — just under half — supports all the following things, which occurred during the Trump years. Kids in cages in camps — of only the “wrong” ethnicity. “Family separations,” which seem to be a crime against humanity, against of the “wrong” ethnicity. Demonization and scapegoating. Brutality and violence. Institutional dehumanization — the state working to deny the personhood of certain ethnic groups.

If I supported all those things, or at least turned a blind eye to them, would I be a racist?

Here, Ibram X Kendi’s way of thinking about racism comes in helpful. He says that not being a racist is about being anti-racist. That is, not just objecting to racism, in some abstract way, but being decisively against it. If we adopt that framework, then it should be easy to see that, for example, letting a President demonise minorities — and rationalising it away by saying, “Oh, he’s just talking crap” — badly fails the test of anti-racism.

If we look at reality, about half of America fell for the Big Lie. The one that fascism is based on — and always has been. Fascism, remember, in my telling of the story, isn’t just what the Nazis did to Weimar Germany. It is the America they studied, to model their race laws and hatred on. Fascism was born in America, in its centuries long genocide of Black people, in its annihilation of Natives, in its long, sordid history of hate.

The Big Lie that fascism — and racism is a kind of fascism — tells is this. Hated minorities are responsible for the woes of the majority. They bring impurity, corruption, filth, moral corrosion and social degeneration. The way back to “greatness” — which is what the majority, since they are pure and noble and true in blood, genetically superior — therefore is to annihilate or enslave minorities. The justification is that they are subhuman — less than persons. To cleanse them away is to purify a society in blood and virtue.

That was the story of America until 1971 — when segregation ended. White Americans don’t want to admit that — even liberal ones. But that is how illiberal white America is licensed to hate. Even the “good” white Americans don’t want to face the ugly truth of their country’s history. Until 1971 or so, it was the world’s biggest apartheid state. When I say that, they run away, trying to hide this fact under the rug. But hiding it that way only lets racism in America grow and fester. And not just racism — but all the other kinds of hate, too. Bigotry, prejudice, and so on.

Liberal white Americans need to understand a few things, therefore.

One, they are very much in the minority in their own social group, and yet they badly overestimate themselves. The majority of white Americans don’t just support hate — they support institutionalised hate, becoming the law of the land, the way society is run, its norms and values and codes and creeds. White liberals badly overestimate their numbers and cause.

That is why, two, when we minorities point out painful truths to them, they ignore it. But that too is a form of mild supremacism — the idea that the White always knows best, more, the most. White Americans need to understand that their social group is failing society, and failing it badly. How and why?

That brings me to point three. Even white liberal Americans are in denial about how bad the situation of race and colour and creed in America really is, how bad it’s history has been, and until how recently America has been a state run by and for hate. 1971 was the year America even attempted to become some kind of vaguely modern democracy.

Biden won. But America has not really had it’s reckoning with hate just yet. At least white America hasn’t. Let me try to sum up.

Can 71 million people be racists? Of course they can. That was the story of the entire Western world, more or less, until not so long ago. It’s not impossible for societies to be made of prejudice and hate and ignorance. Until very, very recently in human history, that was the norm. 20% of the world, the white Western part, went out and colonized, enslaved, and brutalised much of the rest — and much of that was driven by theories of how some races were superior to others.

It’s not nice to draw that conclusion. I understand why so many want to wriggle out of it, especially white American intellectuals. It’s a profoundly ugly and uncomfortable truth to hear, to bear, to carry.

Let’s ask the question a different way. To support the terrible things that happened during the Trump years — is that being a racist? If your kids were taken away, and put in cages, because of the colour of their skin — did you see any French people being put in the camps? Any Danish families being ripped apart? But if they were, and I said nothing, what would that make me?

If Trumpists aren’t racists, then surely the word holds no meaning whatsoever. Then a racist is only someone who actively, say, beats a person for the colour of their skin. Not someone who, say, cheers on a head of state calling for hated minorities to be beaten. And that is self-evidently ridiculous and illogical and absurd and morally repugnant.

To call the millions of Americans who support Trump racists is to understate the case. Many of them appear to also be prejudiced against any form of deviation from the mean, from being gay to women’s rights and so forth.

It’s more accurate to say that half of America is still hateful. 71 million people can be full of hate, and in this case, they are.

Again, let me stress this isn’t an insult. But rather a sad observation. Let me add some more context to it. To make the transition to being a society free of structural racism — or at least one that aspires to be — is one of the and fundamental aspects of modernization. When we say things like “America isn’t a modern society yet”, one of the things we mean is precisely that it’s not even a society whose white majority aspires to be rid of structural racism yet.

But that is not so odd. Around the world, racism is still very much a living evil, and so is bigotry. If you go to Asia, or Africa, for example, all kinds of racism prevail. Shades of skin become markers of social position and status, and differences in sexual orientation are verboten. Many of these societies are not yet modern in the sense that racism and bigotry are some of their key cultural values and social structures, too. They are illiberal, not yet mature and modern democracies. America is very much on this list.

But that’s not some kind of pronouncement of social doom or moral damnation, either. People can change. Their attitudes and values can grow and evolve. To say that someone is a racist isn’t to say that they will be one forever. The only way that societies mature and develop is when widespread social attitudes do.

Hate — in all its forms — is not something that’s fixed. It’s something that’s learned. It sounds like a cliche, but its true — when I was young, nobody hated me for the colour of my skin. That came later. We minorities all know that hate is something that’s learned, passed down from grandfather to grandson, and there is a time in a child’s life where, suddenly, they stop talking to their friends who they have been told are not like the, good for them, to be associated with anymore. Hate is a kind of ignorance, in other words.

Why does that matter?

To say that “71 million Americans still appear to be deeply hateful” isn’t an insult. It’s an observation. A grim one, to us minorities. One that affects us deeply — how do you live in a society that’s so hateful? How do you trust the stranger on the street? How do they feel about you, and what are they capable of? It’s an exercise in trauma — but I digress. It’s not an insult. It is a factual and empirical observation about levels of ignorance.

In America, white people — the majority — seem to be transmitting the same old cultural attitudes and values to their children. Those minorities aren’t like us. They’re dirty, impure, unclean. We’re the pure ones. This country belongs to us. They are less than us. Are they really people at all?

Trump might be gone, but Trumpism survives, among America’s white majority. I can’t redeem them. It’s not my job to make excuses for them, like pundits do, asking rhetorically, “But 71 million people can’t be racists, can they?!” Sure they can. The white majority was badly racist before 1971, and they appear not to have ever changed. That is because the intergenerational transmission of hate goes on and on, father teaching son, mother teaching daughter, how, why, and whom to hate.

Only White Americans can stop that. Only they can redeem themselves. The question is whether they want to.

The Trump Campaign’s Chaotic Closing Strategy

Its “election-security operation” has the potential to wreak havoc next week

Last month, Donald Trump Jr. squinted grimly into a camera — his hair slicked, his voice hoarse — and issued a call to arms for MAGA nation.

“The radical left are laying the groundwork to steal this election from my father,” he declared in a video posted to the Trump campaign’s Facebook page.

“Their plan is to add millions of fraudulent ballots that can cancel your vote and overturn the election.” To defeat these scheming radicals, he warned, they’d need “every able-bodied man [and] woman” to join an organization called the Army for Trump: “We need you to help us watch them.”

Like so much of Donald Trump’s presidency, the recruitment video straddled the line between menacing and self-parodic.

Don Jr.’s claim was preposterous on its face (no, a massive voter-fraud conspiracy is not under way in America), and his militaristic rhetoric had the faintly silly quality of cosplay.

But the “election-security operation” he was pitching is actually a key element of the Trump campaign’s closing strategy — and its capacity to wreak havoc next week could be significant.

In the coming days, thousands of pro-Trump poll watchers are set to fan out across battleground states — smartphones in hand — and post themselves outside voting locations to hunt for evidence of fraud.

This “army” has been coached on what to look for, and instructed to record anything that seems suspicious.

The Trump campaign says these videos will be used in potential legal challenges; critics say their sole purpose is to intimidate voters. But in recent conversations with a range of unnerved Democrats and researchers, I was offered another scenario:

If the president decides to contest the election’s results, his campaign could let loose a blizzard of misleading, decontextualized video clips as “proof” that the vote can’t be trusted.

“The goal here is really not producing evidence that stands up for any length of time,” Laura Quinn, a progressive researcher monitoring election disinformation, said.

“They’re interested in sowing just enough doubt … to develop this narrative of fraud — not only so that he can contest the election, not only so that he can refuse to concede a loss, but also so that some portion of his supporters will remain embittered and be able to say the results were illegitimate.”

(A spokesperson for the Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment on this story.)

Partisan poll-watching has a long history in American politics — Trump did not invent it. But this is the first presidential election since 1982 in which the Republican National Committee is allowed to organize such activities without permission from a federal court.

For nearly four decades, the party was restricted by a consent decree issued after a New Jersey election in which Republicans allegedly hired off-duty police officers to patrol minority neighborhoods wearing “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands. The decree expired in 2018.

This history, combined with the president’s support among militias and other extremist groups, has fueled fears that the Army for Trump could lead to confrontation and even violence at the polls.

In September, a noisy crowd of Trump supporters was accused of intimidating voters and disrupting an early-voting location in Fairfax, Virginia.

(The Virginia Republican Party responded to these complaints on Twitter: “Quick! Someone call the waaaambulance!”)

But the poll watchers’ real influence may not be felt until they go home and start uploading their videos.

Three Democratic strategists who are involved in post-election “scenario planning” told me that — barring a blowout on Election Night — Americans should expect a last-ditch disinformation blitz from Trump and his allies to create the impression of wide-scale cheating. (The Democrats requested anonymity to candidly describe strategy discussions.)

“This Election Day poll-watching will be part of a whole campaign to dispute, delay, and bring into doubt the counts in various states,” one Democrat told me.

“[Trump] has been setting up the rigged-election narrative for a while,” another said, “and he needs tools to show that the votes that are rolling in are probably these rigged votes: So here’s the video evidence!”

Some of the Democratic hand-wringing had a slightly panicked, paranoid quality, rooted in the trauma of 2016.

“Will there be photos and videos purporting to be, for instance, Chinese intelligence agents stuffing ballot boxes?” one Democrat mused. “Probably, yes.

And even if the quality of these videos is poor and the provenance is suspect, they will have at least some audience.”

Of course, Trump could simply win or lose the race outright, without any of the drama that many are anticipating.

But it’s not far-fetched to expect a spike in unsubstantiated voter-fraud claims around Election Day.

Such rumors often gain traction in the final days of a presidential race — and Trump and his media allies have been especially invested in amplifying them this year.

Nate Snyder, who served as a counterterrorism official at the Department of Homeland Security under Barack Obama, told me that if Trump contests the election results, things could quickly “converge into a perfect storm of disinformation.”

In the already-overheated political environment, foreign adversaries could circulate conspiracy theories online, while domestic trolls and extremist groups amplify their own toxic messages. Chaos would be the goal — and Snyder says United States intelligence agencies are preparing for it.

“But I’ll be pretty blunt about this,” he added. “We have a unique situation now where we have to worry about what we’d call, in security terms, an ‘insider threat.’

You have a president who is focused on pushing out whatever kind of information, from whatever sources, to help his narrative.”

It might not just be Russian trolls and “boogaloo boys” trying to “sow discord,” he said — the president himself may be part of that effort.

There are reasons to doubt the sophistication of Trump’s operation.

His campaign has hemorrhaged money this year, and suffered several high-profile logistical failures. (Remember Tulsa?)

A recent perusal of the #ArmyforTrump hashtag on Twitter revealed that it had been temporarily hijacked by K-pop fans.

Some Democrats, meanwhile, are skeptical that collecting and amplifying video “evidence” of voter fraud will actually benefit the president.

“Nothing has done more to bolster people’s faith in voting early and in person than videos of people perfectly happy to wait in line to vote Trump out of office,”

Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said. Prioritizing conspiracy theories over conventional get-out-the-vote efforts, he added, “would be consistent with every other incompetent Trump strategy.”

Still, if the Trump era has taught us anything, it’s that a well-oiled political machine isn’t necessary to cause chaos.

As I’ve written before, the most effective modern disinformation is defined by what scholars call “censorship through noise” — drowning out the truth with a barrage of lies, distortions, and conspiracy theories designed to confuse and exhaust.

“Bad actors aim to break down trust because it makes us insecure,” Jiore Craig, a researcher who advises Democratic campaigns on disinformation, said.

“When we’re insecure, we’re defensive, and when we’re defensive for a long time, we get tired — and when we’re tired, we’re easy to control.”

In her recent research suggests a level of fatigue in the electorate right now that could easily curdle into apathy, making it difficult to sort out truth from lies if the election becomes a long, complicated, drawn-out affair.

“The danger,” Craig said, “is that you just go with the loudest voice in the room to put it to an end.”

America’s On A Knife’s Edge

There are Four Ways the Election Can Go — and Three of Them End With Democracy Dying

If you’re anything like me, you’re weirdly bipolar these days. You veer between watching too much news — and turning it off, overwhelmed. You swing between despair and hope, dread and mania, panic, and perseverance. You oscillate wildly, and there seems to be little to no middle ground.

You’re not wrong. America’s on a knife-edge. So is civilization as we know it, but I digress.

What I mean by “America’s on a knife-edge” what this weird combination of feelings is trying to tell you is that in the upcoming days and months will be decisive, and yet anything can happen. That’s not a good thing, by the way.

Anything shouldn’t be able to happen in functioning society, a democracy, a civilized nation. An aspiring authoritarian shouldn’t order shock troops to beat and gas people in the streets. A President shouldn’t be able to spread the pandemic he pretended didn’t exist, then caught, then struggled with, to his fanatical base. And what could happen next shouldn’t have any chance of happening whatsoever.

There are four scenarios I can see unfolding in the upcoming election. 

What “anything can happen” means is precisely what it says. It’s futile to try and assign probabilities to these scenarios. It is now in a period of genuine uncertainty, meaning that risk itself is beyond quantifiability. Sure, we can guess — but that’s about all we can do. We can’t say something like, “there’s a 90% chance Trump loses,” the situation America’s in now is abnormal, so it makes a mockery of the very idea of normality, which statistics are based on.

So. The scenarios.

The first is this. Trump loses the popular vote and the electoral college. The margin is overwhelming. 

By the way, the best scenario of all — and yet even this one is still not that good, still profoundly abnormal. If all that comes to pass, what will he do? He’ll probably contest the results anyway. He’ll call democracy into question — just like he’s been doing, harder and harder for the last few months even if Trump loses — especially if he loses.

Not because he has any real chance of winning, but for psychological, cultural, and political reasons. To save face and exact revenge, and mollify his ego. To prove what a big man he is. Also, keep his movement alive as long as he can, even if it means politically martyring himself. All that will throw American democracy into turmoil, regardless — what happens if a President refuses to concede? In short, something like a Constitutional crisis ensues.

Probably, even in this scenario, the GOP will back Trump. 

Sure, they’ll look like fools, but when has that stopped them before? Their behavior pattern is clear — to place power above any norms or rules or codes of conduct or decency. So if Trump refuses to concede, expect some large part of his party and base to back. To what, though? To the brink.

And so even in the best scenario, there are likely to be challenging months of turmoil ahead. It’s not unthinkable to foresee Trump’s fanatical base growing more violent and extreme the closer they come to finally losing their grip on power, not to mention being egged on by him. So even in this scenario, the chances of political violence and unrest are still high.

The second scenario goes like this. Trump loses the popular vote and the electoral college. But the margin is slender. 

And now the strategy that the GOP has so carefully, assiduously put in place over the last years and decades, finally pays off. Legal challenges, one after the other, which have been prepared, erupt at a granular level: city, town, state by state. Ballot after ballot, vote after the vote is contested. Recounts are demanded; the legitimacy of the election, in short, is thrown into severe and serious question. The results are left to the courts to decide. And because the GOP has focused heavily on stacking and tilting courts hard to the right, that favor is repaid. The courts determine Trump’s election, all the way up to the Supreme Court, which makes the final decision.

But even the road there is long and arduous. 

Chaos reigns for months while ballots are counted and recounted. Legal case after case is fought, in a kind of war of attrition, which takes time. Meanwhile, America has no real President. No leadership. Amid at least four concurrent crises, a pandemic, a major recession, a disintegrating society, and an imploding middle class.

Those months are best summed up in one word: chaos. 

Trump supporters hold rallies in the streets, where they mock and taunt their opponents. Violence and unrest become everyday events. Nobody quite knows who is in charge of what, and so the rule of law begins to break down in even more brutal ways. Militia and paramilitaries and whatnot make even more extreme and violent plans to eradicate the opposition — like kidnapping Governors — and carry them out, or at least try to. American life goes right to the edge of a hardcore failed state. 

What happens then? Then the back of American democracy is finally broken. 

It was one thing when the Supreme Court handed the Presidency to George W Bush. 

It’s quite another to hand it, Donald Trump, for a second term. Trump has a pattern of authoritarian fascist behavior, from camps to raids to purges to bans to his paramilitary disappearing people. 

The Supreme Court will have effectively legitimized and licensed that.

Americans will begin to understand that they don’t live in a democracy. 

And while it’s noble to idealize ideas of resistance and so forth, the truth is that once the back of democracy is broken, people tend to become demoralized, dispirited, and defeated. Even in this scenario, which is the second-best one, Trump lost both popular and electoral college votes. Still, the election decided for him by courts. American democracy is at severe risk.

The third scenario is where things begin to get really grim. In this one, Trump loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college. 

He doesn’t need the courts. He doesn’t need to contest the results. He wins outright. How might this come to pass? You should already know: by convincing electors to go against the norm of voting for the preference of the people they represent. To say that “there’s voter fraud, you can’t trust these votes!! You should give your electoral college vote to us; instead, if you want to save democracy!!

It’s clever. You almost have to admire it: like any right authoritarian approach, it twists reality inside out. The only way to protect democracy from alleged “voter fraud” is…to vote for the authoritarians. Never mind that there is no voter fraud — when has reality ever mattered in American politics?

Pundits are underestimating this scenario’s potential to set American democracy on fire. If even a handful of electors are agreeable — or gullible or corrupt — enough to get on board, that’s game over.

There are rules and norms they’re supposed to follow, true. And there might even be legal challenges if electors don’t vote the way the popular vote in their state has gone. But those will come after the fact.

When a new head of state has already been installed, what chance do they have to succeed? Significantly when the highest courts have already been tilted?

This is incredibly clever also because it attempts to cut democracy away at its very feet. The electoral college is the Achilles heel of American democracy, its greatest weakness. Targeting it is how to get maximum leverage for minimum effort.

What happens if all this succeeds? Even more unrest and violence. 

It’s not much of a stretch to say that many Americans would feel cheated because they would be fooled. There would likely be riots in city after city. And guess what that would invite? Crackdowns from Trump’s shock troops, who’d be called in to do what they did in Portland (where one of my cousins lives) and Chicago and elsewhere: to beat, gas, and disappear protesters.

America would have crossed the brink into real authoritarianism. 

And things would only get worse from there. If the shock troops are beating and disappearing people on day one, what do you think they’ll be doing on day 365 of a four-year term? How much likelihood do you give another election? In this scenario, American democracy ceases to function, its legs chopped off. And this isn’t even the worst one yet.

That brings me to the worst one. Trump wins the popular vote and the electoral college. 

You might think that’s unlikely — but I don’t necessarily mean outright. And I don’t mean that Trump “wins.” I mean that the election is manipulated enough so that he doesn’t lose.

I mean, after all the counts and recounts and so forth are done, Trump emerges victorious. Imagine that the allegations of voter fraud are successful — successful enough to have enough ballots thrown out, especially in crucial areas, to give Trump an outright victory. Biden’s margin is chipped away at, by the day, until suddenly, Trump is the winner.

What happens then?

This is the Belarusian scenario. 

Did you see what happened there? A head of state “won” an election that people considered corrupt. So mass protests erupted. They lasted weeks.

But it was too late.

The protests go on, but their spirit, it seems, has been broken. They are petering out slowly. Masked men abduct and beat moms and grandmas in public. Sound familiar? It should. Americans should take a lesson from what happened in Belarus.

Mass protests after an authoritarian seizes power are usually too late. 

They can express anger and fury and rage and disappointment — even from the vast majority. But the authoritarian controls the levers of power. He controls the institutions of the state, from law enforcement to internal security to courts and justice. And so no matter if even a massive amount of people are out on the streets protesting — it’s all too easy for an authoritarian to send shock troops out to intimate and brutalize them. Authoritarians aren’t scared of such a thing; by the way, they relish it: it proves how powerful they are.

In this scenario, Americans finally begin to understand what authoritarianism is. 

It is precisely what is referred to euphemistically as “minority rule.” It means that most people — usually by a long way — don’t want any of this to happen, don’t want to live this way, and don’t consent. But their voices no longer matter because they were silent too long. They are brutalized and repressed and silenced and subjugated. Protest carries no meaning, and speaking up is a thing that comes with severe consequences.

Authoritarianism doesn’t mean what many Americans seem to think it does: society’s democratic choice to consent to dictatorship. It means that the majority of people don’t approve, but that no longer matters. It means that the majority want democracy but don’t get to have one any longer.

That’s the grimmest scenario. And yet it has every chance of coming true, too. 

These are abnormal times, and neither statistics nor polls tell us very much. It could be that — just like last time — all those nice, polite soccer moms and suburban dads who said they’d never vote for Trump go right ahead and, in the heat and secrecy of the polling booth…do. It could be that they don’t, but it doesn’t matter because there weren’t enough of them. It could be that they reject Trump en masse. But all those alleged strategies to subvert the election, from legal challenges to arm-twisting electors — count more and pay off bigger.

Anything can happen now. That means: I’d give each of the four scenarios above roughly equal odds. That’s not a good thing. It’s a terrible one because three out of those four scenarios end with American democracy dying, whether slow or fast or suddenly. That means that overall, thinking it through, we arrive at this. There’s roughly a 75% chance that American democracy goes into cardiac arrest, dies on the table, or before it reaches the hospital. Or just a 25% chance that it survives what a lasting and severe heart attack is.

Let me put that another way. Democracy is not a place where anything should be able to happen. It should be a place where we know what we can’t. 

But we don’t. And that is precisely why the authoritarians are winning: they thrive on the chaos uncertainty brings.

This is your last chance. These are the last warnings available to us. You could be living in a failed state like Russia meets Iran, with fascists and “handmaids” as the arbiters of justice and freedom, faster than you know, in the blink of an eye. That is not hyperbole — it is a grim and terrible fact.

After reading “The Handmaid’s Tale,” I feel that I understand the authoritarian government and how ugly it can and will be.

Trump might be on the ropes, but that doesn’t mean what you think it does. 

The chances for American democracy are not good. That means: it’s up to all of us to change them. So on November 3, 2020, please go and vote.

20/20/20 Rule of Productive Mornings

How to not waste the first hour of the day

You lose when you snooze because sleep fragmentation hurts your body’s ability to recuperate.

Every time you fall asleep, your body starts going through a 5-stage sleep cycle. The later the stage, the deeper the sleep — and the more restorative it becomes.

When you wake up at 7 AM after 7 hours of sleep, you’ll be closer to the end of the cycle and in a state where your body is already preparing to wake up.

If you hit the snooze button, however, your body starts going back in the opposite direction. It’ll gear up to sleep more — and it really won’t like being rattled 9 minutes later. As a result, you’ll feel more tired than before, even though, technically, you slept longer.

When it comes to good sleep, getting up after one consistent stretch is more important than how long that stretch was. This is counterintuitive, but it’s true.

Similarly, if you “take excellent care of the front end of your day, the rest of your day will take care of itself.” That’s Robin Sharma’s thesis in The 5 AM Club, a book he wrote to share his morning routine of 20 years.

The idea is that if you invest the first hour of the day in yourself, that hour will pay returns for the remaining 23. “Own your morning, elevate your life,” Sharma says.

The book teaches via metaphor — a fictitious billionaire helps a struggling artist and a young entrepreneur. Here are 3 lessons from the story that’ll help you wake up earlier, start most mornings productively, and get as much as you can out of every single day.

1. Your brain has a creative edge early in the day.

In a classic student-teacher move, the billionaire tells his two disciples that he holds the key to their success — and in order to receive it, they must meet him very early the following morning.

When his students arrive, the master explains: “You have already received the key by waking up at 5 AM, because in doing so, you’ve given your brain an advantage in succeeding throughout the day.”

The scientific concept behind this edge is called transient hypo-frontality. When in this state, your brain is more likely to go into “flow.” You’ll be less prone to worry and over-analysis, more daring in your choices and ideas, and better able to focus.

You can trigger transient hypo-frontality in different ways, for example by taking a walk or exercising, but the early morning environment is also conducive to it. You brain is just “booting up,” and the extra dopamine and serotonin from daybreak tranquility will make you feel energized and peaceful at the same time.

2. Balance your mind, health, heart, and soul.

After explaining the mindset advantage of waking up early, the billionaire explains there are three other “interior empires” the students need to master.

Your “health-set” is your physical health. Use the emptiness of early mornings to get in a little exercise to reduce stress, gain energy, and be happier, all of which will, in turn, help you live longer.

Your “heartset” is your emotional wellbeing. Journaling in the morning can be a space to express feelings you can’t share elsewhere — the insights of which you can later use to communicate better with others.

Finally, your “soulset” is your spiritual balance. We all believe different things, but whatever we do have faith in allows us to connect with ourselves and the world at large. Writing down your values and briefly looking at them each morning will help you remember why you’re doing what you’re doing.

For a balanced, successful life, ground yourself in mindset, healthset, heartset, and soulset every day.

3. Productive days begin with the 20/20/20 formula.

When the students ask him what exactly to do at 5 AM, the billionaire shares his formula: The 20/20/20 rule divides your first hour of the day into three equal blocks of exercise, reflection, and learning.

Exercising for 20 minutes will not just get your blood flowing, it’ll also make you sweat. Sweating decreases cortisol, a hormone related to stress and fear. It also releases BDNF, which helps create new neural pathways faster and repairs brain cells.

20 minutes of reflection will plant your feet firmly on the ground, no matter what the day ahead brings. You can use them to meditate, visualize your big goals and to-dos for the day, or journal and write down any ideas or inspiring thoughts. Quiet in the morning makes for patience later in the day.

Lastly, 20 minutes of real, interested learning go further than hours of social media, news, and mindless entertainment. Read a book, study someone you admire, or take a free online course. Whatever you learn, make sure it’s something you’re really interested in, something that’ll make your brain shoot sparks rather than go numb.

20 minutes of exercise, 20 minutes of reflection, and 20 minutes of learning. The 20/20/20 rule will maximize your chances of having a productive day, every day.

Summary

The 5 AM Club will motivate you to get up earlier, build a morning routine, and prioritize the internal work that’ll lead to external success.

Here are 3 lessons worth remembering:

  1. Waking up early gives your brain a competitive edge because it makes it easier for you to get into a flow state.
  1. Balance your mind, health, heart, and soul for true self-mastery.
  1. To not waste the first hour of the day, use the 20/20/20 rule; dedicate 20 minutes to exercise, reflection, and learning each for productive days.

Recommended Reads

TitleAuthor
The 5 AM ClubRobin Sharma

Sources & Links For This Post

TitleLink
Does sleep fragmentation impact recuperation? A review and re-analysishttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1365-2869.1999.00161.x
The Transient Hypofrontality Edgehttps://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/the-edge-peak-performance-psychology/201703/the-transient-hypofrontality-edge
Flow Summaryhttps://fourminutebooks.com/flow-summary/
The Way You’re Communicating Might Be Messing Up Your Relationshipshttps://forge.medium.com/the-4-ears-model-of-good-communication-bf46c39cdf50
How My Values Give Me Direction in Lifehttps://medium.com/mind-cafe/the-12-values-i-live-by-aba9e7d5cb73
Brain-derived neurotrophic factorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-derived_neurotrophic_factor
Learn Proper Meditation in 2 Minuteshttps://medium.com/@ngoeke/learn-proper-meditation-in-2-minutes-e7d1b63bfb14

Life As We Know It Will Forever Be Changed

Here’s a tiny question. What is the lesson COVID is trying to teach us? As much of the world now enters the second wave of lockdowns, thanks to the second wave of the virus –– or, in America, faces the grim situation where the first wave never really crested, and became a tsunami of death –– what should we be learning?

I think of COVID as a message backwards, from the future.

And it says something life as you know it is now over. The future is now going to become a bitter and bruising battle for the basics. The basics. Air, water, food, medicine, and energy. Things that many of us took for granted, would simply be around as if by magic.

That age is now coming to an end. Did you ever think that breathable air would be in short supply? It’s already being marketed as a luxury in (where else) California. The very same California which is on fire, on the one hand, and wracked by COVID, on the other. Result? Air itself has become a luxury in a collapsing America. That is what the future looks like, except for all the basics.

Another way to say that is that a certain way of life is now coming to an end.

To make that point, let me ask the question: why have Eastern countries done better on COVID than the ones in the west? What does this teach us that money, power, and history are no guarantee for success in this battle for basics that the future is now about. Maybe the rich and 1% can buy clean air –– but what about society as a whole? Forget it.

People have to work together to provide one another the basics.

And that is where the western response to COVID has fallen down. Western nations are still fixated on the illusory notions of freedom. But freedom itself is what is going to change radically in this age –– if not by choice then by force of nature’s revenge.

Consider the example, as usual, of America. Americans wouldn’t cooperate with lockdowns. Governors revolted and made it illegal to make people wear masks. Meanwhile the red states–– states that are republican led –– became the world’s worst COVID belt, because people refused to stop… going to bars… having barbecues… eating at restaurants. Their President –– who’s now been hospitalized for COVID –– encouraged them NOT to take it seriously. The result was that COVID exploded, and has probably become a permanent fact of life –– another dystopian one –– in a collapsing America, hence, even air itself will be a luxury for the rich.

Americans in other words, were obsessed with “freedom.”

One certain idea of it.Freedom is an individualistic exercise in consumerism, in status and pleasure seeking. What Americans don’t tend to understand is that the “old” list of American “freedoms” is now badly obsolete.

What good is it carrying around a gun… when a tsunami or megafire is approaching?

What good is it being able to battle over whose God is stronger… when you can’t breathe the air anymore?

Life as the American set of freedoms is over now.

Let me enumerate a few of those. The freedom to waste and squander. The freedom to believe in any old malarkey you like, no matter how ignorant. The freedom to abuse and exploit. The freedom to make the point of your life as shallow, foolish, and stupid as you may want to, like just making more money. None of these this were ever really “freedom.”

What such freedoms really were and are is the toxic hangover of centuries of brutality.

Americans think they should be free to waste –– while half the world still goes without decent food, water, or sanitation. They imagine they should be free to carry guns to Starbucks – while much of the world has been enslaved to pick those coffee beans. I’m not trying to moralize, just making a point. The world largely thinks of the American idea of freedom as a folly and a bewildering form of self-destruction.

COVID is trying to teach us, in no uncertain terms, that we are not really free in these old ways – and never were.

They’re just paths to self destruction. When we waste and squander, we pollute the skies, and the planet heats up. When we abuse the natural world, it bites back in the form of everything from pandemics to wildfires to floods.

Let me summarize what I am trying to say here. The economist in me will put it this way. The global economy has been predicated on one simple transaction. The west and north –– and particularly America –– overconsumes, and the east and south is who and what is exploited to make that possible. That transaction is now over. The age of western overconsumption is now at an end. Even the west is starting to suffer shortages of the basics –– beginning with air. By the next decade, water, food, and energy will be in shortage, there, too.

The west can continue to pretend it can overconsume –– by which I mean spend too much on consumerist toys which cost the reefs, rivers, forests, animals, skies, not to mention the potential of people in the east who are mostly stuck in assembly lines making stuff for it. Since that stuff is artificially cheap, those in the east are exploited –– never fighting climate change, mass extinction, ecological collapse themselves –– or even to give themselves decent food, water, sanitation, and medicine, which means pandemics that then affect the globe erupt at an increasing pace now.

That is why the whole world is coming to a standstill.

This fatal bargain is now coming to an end. One great economic age is ending –– the age of western overconsumption. In hard terms, that means the west is consuming more than the entire planet can provide sustainably. Which is precisely why catastrophes from climate change to mass extinction to pandemics are now ripping our lives apart.

So where do we go from here?

Well, we must ask the question: how did that age come to be, the age of western overconsumption? If we want to fix it, that is. The answer, though, is ugly and difficult, and many people don’t want to hear it, much less understand it.

The age of western overconsumption is really a consequence of a simple, brutal, dismal truth: 20% of the world is rich and white, the other 80% is poor and not white. The 20% of the world that is rich and white is precisely that portion which enslaved, brutalized, and colonized the part that is 80% poor and not white.

Those centuries of abuse and exploitation led the rich and white societies to enjoy a generous surplus.

You can think of that as everything from gold in bank vaults to all those hundreds of kinds of coffee, tea, and sugar that you can find today in the aisles at Walmart. The age of western overconsumption is the product of the previous age of western slavery, colonialism, and empire. That age allowed the west to get rich –– and the west then spent its riches on consumption.

Economists once upon a time argued all this was a good thing. That buying stuff from poor countries would allow those countries to prosper, too. And that has been the case to a minor degree –– there have been some successes, like South Korea and Japan, and some half-successes, like China and Malaysia. But “externalities” dominated even this effect. What that means in plain English is that while the rich westerners buying stuff from poor easterners might have balanced back the scales of empire and slavery –– hey, at least they were being paid now, right? –– nobody much noticed the effects on the planet.

This central transaction of the global economy, rich westerners buying stuff from poor easterners, was flawed in one central way. It was artificially cheap.

Because it was still OK to exploit poor easterners –– to pay them the least that rich westerners could get away with, instead of enough, say, to have decent water, food, sanitation, medicine, income –– why wouldn’t it then be perfectly OK to abuse and exploit nature too?

The east lost wars, and ended up enslaved. Nature has never really fought back at all –– until now. And finally we are seeing how terrible its fury can be. Even the west can’t outrun an age of catastrophe like the one we face now –– like I said, it’s already doing worse than the east when it comes to COVID.

So how do we fix all this? Well, the truth is that “we” probably can’t.

I can tell you how but westerners by and large aren’t interested. What they seem to be interested in is never changing. In ways to be able to go on living in wasteful, harmful, toxic, abusive, exploitative ways, like Americans are –– if you tell them how to do that, they will admire and respect you. Gentle and wise Europe has made some progress, it’s true. But mostly when you tell people like Americans that they must change NOW, and change fast, they give you the look: their eyes go dead and their jaws tighten. They’re holding in the anger of having to hear something that they don’t want to, aren’t equipped to, can’t handle.

“We” aren’t going to fix the age of western overconsumption.

What it would take is something like this: the rich west agreeing to pay nature. After all, nature works hard for us –– it provides us everything from water to air to food to medicine. If the rich west were ready to agree to pay nature for the work it does –– instead of exploit and abuse it –– then treaties could be made to compensate eastern countries and their people. To pay them living wages for doing things like caring for rivers, reefs, forests, oceans, animals, and so forth, instead of just toiling away on assembly lines to make cheap junk for rich westerners.

But that is not going to happen, probably. I say that for a simple reason.

One topic nobody much in the west wants to hear about is fixing the future. They say they want to hear about it. They are constantly asking what to do about the state of things but when people talk or write about it, only a handful truly listen. Not even a handful. So what I think the majority of westerners mean when they ask what to do is: “tell me a way to never have to change. I want to live the old way –– the wasteful, exploitative, abusive way.”

Having a serious discussion with westerners, especially with Americans in particular, about fixing the future has become impossible.

That should be self-evident, though. They are not willing to change their lives even when a lethal pandemic is ripping through their societies.

And yet the rich west is the only part of the world with the money to really allow the future to be fixed. What does that tell you? It tells me it won’t be. And so what will happen probably is this. The world will go on spiraling headlong into the new Dark Age its entered. The fools and fanatics and extremists will go on rising to power, because the average person is incapable of change, but the old way of life is collapsing, and in that vacuum is where EVERY fascism is really born.

Life as you know it really is coming to and end, my friend.

The problem? Not enough of us can face that simple fact with courage, grace, truth, kindness, love and goodness. And so what do you expect to happen? If change can’t, then only collapse is left.

My Grandpa, John “Poppa” Tracey

Grandpa & Me

Yesterday, was a very difficult day for me as I said goodbye to my grandfather, my Poppa, John Tracey. He lived 84 beautiful years and raised 6 incredible children, including my own father. His nicknames for me were Carrot Top- I was his first redheaded grandchild, or Squirt- because I was short as child.

We developed a bond that is really hard to explain, as a child when I would sit on his lap I would just trace his panther/jaguar tattoo – and I did the same as I said I love you to him for the last time I saw him I chose not to say goodbye to him because it was too hard for me. He has always called me Squirt– all the way to the end I will always be his Squirt.

I remember him telling me stories of his days growing up, we shared a love of westerns– African Queen, we loved doing the crossword puzzle together, and when attending family parties- inside or in the backyard I always kept my eyes out for Poppa because I loved his hugs they were always warm, tight (not too tight), and full of love; he always gave the perfect hug. I could go for one of those right now.

He loved family, fishing, golfing, New York Yankees, and talking about his Troy days. I loved watching him tinker, every summer he and Nana would come visit us during the Tracey Family Camporee, our annual 3 day camping trip on Saturday they would bring fresh bread and the clams for our big cookout that evening, and when I moved into the place I live now he brought over some stuff to seal up my driveway its still sitting in my basement. Poppa always loved to help out.

Seeing him at my college graduation in 2013 with a smile on his face I could tell that he was proud that through my disability I succeeded – he always had a smile on his face, that is what I loved about him is even when he was hurting or not feeling well – he was smiling.

He was a soldier for the US Army, in the Korean War came home and married my beautiful grandma, and raised 6 incredible children and 13 grandchildren.

It is the hardest to lose those who loved and nurtured us, and who we loved and cared for most. I have a treasure trove of memories that I will hold on to forever, that will make me laugh and smile. I will miss him so much but I will never forget his beautiful smile. I keep hearing his voice. I miss him terribly, I miss his hugs and will love him and miss him for a long time.

RIP Poppa 1936–2020

From left to right: Uncle Matt, Uncle Jay, Aunt Jude, John (Poppa), JoAnn (Nana), my father, Aunt Kris, Uncle Mark

Letter to A Younger Me

Dear 6 Year Old Me,

Right now life might not make any sense and you might be thinking that you are crazy reading a letter from yourself when you turn 30 years old, but I am about to drop some knowledge on you. You have soo much life left to live… enjoy it.

You are 6 years old –– so the year is 1996 your going have a new baby in the house– a little sister in a few months time. You have a little brother– he’s 3 and cute as a button. Your mom and brother walk you down the street to school

You still live in the house that you were brought home from the hospital to. Your bedroom is Barney- purple and you love to read –– EVERYTHING… which is a good thing, never stop reading– ever.

Your mom is awesome and she will always help you don’t be afraid to ask for it no matter what and if she asks you to go do something go it will be fun because when you get older you will be more like her than you will ever know.

Ask your dad if you can go with him to the grocery store –– whenever you can because he loves you, wants to spend time with you and cares about you. He believes in you more than you will ever know. Take time to help your parents, you may be a kid but you are awesome.

When your sister arrives you to will eventually become the best of friends be there for her, she will be there for you too.

Love,

30 year old you

February By the Numbers

This is a new monthly series that I have been planning out for a while so here we go let’s see how it goes. This is where I will add some number facts about the month of February or the date of the post ie. February 4. Let me know what you think. This was a tough one to find information on.

About the Month Of February

  • The Name of The Month: Februa was a Roman purification ritual and was considered as early Rome Spring Cleaning Festival. Februs, the Roman god was named after this festival.
  • The original 10 month, 304-day Roman calendar didn’t work for long because it didn’t align with the seasons. King Numa Pompilius reformed the calendar around 713 BC by adding the months of January (Ianuarius) and February (Februarius) to the original 10 months, which increased the year’s length to 354 or 355 days.
  • February is of the most commonly misspelt words in the English language. People seem to forget the first “r”.

February is known as…

  • American Heart Month
  • Bird-Feeding Month
  • Black History Month
  • Canned Food Month
  • Cherry Month
  • National Children’s Dental Health Month
  • Chocolate Lovers Month
  • Creative Romance Month
  • Grapefruit Month
  • Hot Breakfast Month
  • Potato Lovers Month
  • Return Shopping Carts to the Supermarket Month
  • Snack Food Month

Things You Don’t Know About Me

Today I will be giving you a list of things you don’t know about me. I am not sure how this is going to go but lets see where this goes. And this is going to be all fun and good times. So here we go

Number 1- Genealogy

I am fascinated with my family’s genealogy and have been working on it for sometime now. I find that as I go further back it becomes more interesting. My family members dispute some of the stuff I find but that is because it is like a puzzle you just have to start putting the puzzle pieces together to figure out what is true and I start with what I know has been proven by multiple sources.

Number 2- History

I love learning about history. I love thinking about what would happen if the opposite of what had happened occurred or if the chain of events occurred differently and so on. It is fun to think back and learn about the time long ago. I also like looking at old photos.

Number 3- Crocheting

I learned how to crochet a long time ago and ever since then i have loved crocheting ever since.

Number 4- Music

I love listening to music all the time anything and everything.

Number 5- Favorite Things to Watch

I love watching documentaries and movies based on history.

Honoring Martin L. King Jr.

Today is Martin Luther King Day, a day where we honor the memory and legacy of MLK. Who was ahead of his time. Today I am going honor him here and talk about him and how he impacted me. I will be using some different events, quotes, and sayings as reference and commenting below. My comments will be italicized… here we go!


Portrait of King
Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

King is best known for advancing civil rights through nonviolence and civil disobedience, inspired by his Christian beliefs and the nonviolent activism of Mahatma Gandhi.

Even though Martin Luther King was a Christian minister he believe in Mahatma Gandhi’s teachings of using your voice to send a message… and avoiding violence. Which I thought was very wise of him.

He helped organize the 1963 March on Washington, where he delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” speech on August 28, 1963.

Martin Luther King’s I Have a Dream speech is one of my favorite speeches of all time.

On October 14, 1964, King won the Nobel Peace Prize for combating racial inequality through nonviolent resistance.

MLK recieving the Nobel Peace Prize was much deserved because he wanted to send a message that racial inequality existed then and the African American race was tired (and 56 years after his I Have A Dream speech still exists) and knowing that bothers me.

In his final years, he expanded his focus to include opposition towards poverty and the Vietnam War.

I want to say that his war on poverty is still ongoing. Martin Luther King wanted to have a world of peace and find diplomatic solutions until all diplomatic options have been exhausted.

He alienated many of his liberal allies with a 1967 speech titled “Beyond Vietnam”. J. Edgar Hoover considered him a radical and made him an object of the FBI’s COINTELPRO (syllabic abbreviation derived from COunter INTELligence PROgram) FBI agents investigated him for possible communist ties, recorded his extramarital liaisons and reported on them to government officials, and on one occasion mailed King a threatening anonymous letter, which he interpreted as an attempt to make him commit suicide.

His “Beyond Vietnam” speech was about his anti war stance. As a result this speech rubbed some of his allies the wrong way, also the FBI started investigating him as a threat to the country. That is crazy that they would deem a man who is using peaceful protests as a message a threat. I understand that times were different then.

King was posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal. Martin Luther King Jr. Day was established as a holiday in numerous cities and states beginning in 1971; the holiday was enacted at the federal level by legislation signed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986. Hundreds of streets in the U.S. have been renamed in his honor, and a county in Washington was rededicated for him. The Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., was dedicated in 2011.

We have Martin Luther King Day exists because of another Republican president.

In March 1955, Claudette Colvin—a fifteen-year-old black schoolgirl in Montgomery—refused to give up her bus seat to a white man in violation of Jim Crow laws, local laws in the Southern United States that enforced racial segregation. King was on the committee from the Birmingham African-American community that looked into the case; E. D. Nixon and Clifford Durr decided to wait for a better case to pursue because the incident involved a minor.

Rosa Parks

Nine months later on December 1, 1955, a similar incident occurred when Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat on a city bus. The two incidents led to the Montgomery bus boycott, which was urged and planned by Nixon and led by King. The boycott lasted for 385 days, and the situation became so tense that King’s house was bombed. King was arrested during this campaign, which concluded with a United States District Court ruling in Browder v. Gayle that ended racial segregation on all Montgomery public buses. King’s role in the bus boycott transformed him into a national figure and the best-known spokesman of the civil rights movement.

I am happy that MLK organized the bus boycott that resulted it the Browder v. Gayle ruling that helped to end segregation on all Montgomery, Ala. buses. King’s role in the bus boycott made him a national name and spokesman of the civil rights movement.

King believed that organized, nonviolent protest against the system of southern segregation known as Jim Crow laws would lead to extensive media coverage of the struggle for black equality and voting rights. Journalistic accounts and televised footage of the daily deprivation and indignities suffered by Southern blacks, and of segregationist violence and harassment of civil rights workers and marchers, produced a wave of sympathetic public opinion that convinced the majority of Americans that the civil rights movement was the most important issue in American politics in the early 1960s.

MLK wanted to use peaceful protests to send a message that was loud and clear that would cause the press to take notice.

King organized and led marches for blacks’ right to vote, desegregation, labor rights, and other basic civil rights. Most of these rights were successfully enacted into the law of the United States with the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 1965 Voting Rights Act.


Martin Luther King’s Views

Religion

As a Christian minister, King’s main influence was Jesus Christ and the Christian gospels, which he would almost always quote in his religious meetings, speeches at church, and in public discourses. King’s faith was strongly based in Jesus’ commandment of loving your neighbor as yourself, loving God above all, and loving your enemies, praying for them and blessing them. His nonviolent thought was also based in the injunction to turn the other cheek in the Sermon on the Mount, and Jesus’ teaching of putting the sword back into its place (Matthew 26:52). In his famous Letter from Birmingham Jail, King urged action consistent with what he describes as Jesus’ “extremist” love, and also quoted numerous other Christian pacifist authors, which was very usual for him. In another sermon, he stated:

Before I was a civil rights leader, I was a preacher of the Gospel. This was my first calling and it still remains my greatest commitment.

You know, actually all that I do in civil rights I do because I consider it a part of my ministry.

I have no other ambitions in life but to achieve excellence in the Christian ministry.

I don’t plan to run for any political office. I don’t plan to do anything but remain a preacher.

And what I’m doing in this struggle, along with many others, grows out of my feeling that the preacher must be concerned about the whole man.

MLK’s Birmingham Jail Letter

King’s private writings show that he rejected biblical literalism; he described the Bible as “mythological,” doubted that Jesus was born of a virgin and did not believe that the story of Jonah and the whale was true.


Nonviolence

A close-up of Rustin
Bayard Rustin

Veteran African-American civil rights activist Bayard Rustin was King’s first regular advisor on nonviolence. King was also advised by the white activists Harris Wofford and Glenn Smiley. Rustin and Smiley came from the Christian pacifist tradition, and Wofford and Rustin both studied Gandhi’s teachings. Rustin had applied nonviolence with the Journey of Reconciliation campaign in the 1940s, and Wofford had been promoting Gandhism to Southern blacks since the early 1950s.

King had initially known little about Gandhi and rarely used the term “nonviolence” during his early years of activism in the early 1950s. King initially believed in and practiced self-defense, even obtaining guns in his household as a means of defense against possible attackers. The pacifists guided King by showing him the alternative of nonviolent resistance, arguing that this would be a better means to accomplish his goals of civil rights than self-defense. King then vowed to no longer personally use arms.

In the aftermath of the boycott, King wrote Stride Toward Freedom, which included the chapter Pilgrimage to Nonviolence. King outlined his understanding of nonviolence, which seeks to win an opponent to friendship, rather than to humiliate or defeat him. The chapter draws from an address by Wofford, with Rustin and Stanley Levison also providing guidance and ghostwriting.

King was inspired by Mahatma Gandhi and his success with nonviolent activism, and as a theology student, King described Gandhi as being one of the “individuals who greatly reveal the working of the Spirit of God”. King had “for a long time … wanted to take a trip to India.” With assistance from Harris Wofford, the American Friends Service Committee, and other supporters, he was able to fund the journey in April 1959. The trip to India affected King, deepening his understanding of nonviolent resistance and his commitment to America’s struggle for civil rights. In a radio address made during his final evening in India, King reflected, “Since being in India, I am more convinced than ever before that the method of nonviolent resistance is the most potent weapon available to oppressed people in their struggle for justice and human dignity.”

King’s admiration of Gandhi’s nonviolence did not diminish in later years. He went so far as to hold up his example when receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964, hailing the “successful precedent” of using nonviolence “in a magnificent way by Mohandas K. Gandhi to challenge the might of the British Empire … He struggled only with the weapons of truth, soul force, non-injury and courage.”

World peace through nonviolent means is neither absurd nor unattainable.

All other methods have failed. Thus we must begin anew.

Nonviolence is a good starting point.

Those of us who believe in this method can be voices of reason, sanity, and understanding amid the voices of violence, hatred, and emotion.

We can very well set a mood of peace out of which a system of peace can be built.

Martin Luther King

Another influence for King’s nonviolent method was Henry David Thoreau’s essay On Civil Disobedience and its theme of refusing to cooperate with an evil system. He also was greatly influenced by the works of Protestant theologians Reinhold Niebuhr and Paul Tillich, and said that Walter Rauschenbusch’s Christianity and the Social Crisis left an “indelible imprint” on his thinking by giving him a theological grounding for his social concerns.

King was moved by Rauschenbusch’s vision of Christians spreading social unrest in “perpetual but friendly conflict” with the state, simultaneously critiquing it and calling it to act as an instrument of justice. He was apparently unaware of the American tradition of Christian pacifism exemplified by Adin Ballou and William Lloyd Garrison King frequently referred to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount as central for his work. King also sometimes used the concept of “agape” (brotherly Christian love). However, after 1960, he ceased employing it in his writings.

Even after renouncing his personal use of guns, King had a complex relationship with the phenomenon of self-defense in the movement. He publicly discouraged it as a widespread practice, but acknowledged that it was sometimes necessary. Throughout his career King was frequently protected by other civil rights activists who carried arms, such as Colonel Stone Johnson, Robert Hayling, and the Deacons for Defense and Justice.


Activism and Involvement with Native Americans

King was an avid supporter of Native American rights. Native Americans were also active supporters of King’s civil rights movement which included the active participation of Native Americans. In fact, the Native American Rights Fund (NARF) was patterned after the NAACP’s Legal Defense and Education Fund. The National Indian Youth Council (NIYC) was especially supportive in King’s campaigns especially the Poor People’s Campaign in 1968. In King’s book “Why We Can’t Wait” he writes:

Our nation was born in genocide when it embraced the doctrine that the original American, the Indian, was an inferior race.

Even before there were large numbers of Negroes on our shores, the scar of racial hatred had already disfigured colonial society.

From the sixteenth century forward, blood flowed in battles over racial supremacy.

We are perhaps the only nation which tried as a matter of national policy to wipe out its indigenous population.

Moreover, we elevated that tragic experience into a noble crusade.

Indeed, even today we have not permitted ourselves to reject or to feel remorse for this shameful episode.

Our literature, our films, our drama, our folklore all exalt it.

Martin Luther King, Why We Can’t Wait

King assisted Native American people in south Alabama in the late 1950s. At that time the remaining Creek in Alabama were trying to completely desegregate schools in their area. The South had many egregious racial problems: In this case, light-complexioned Native children were allowed to ride school buses to previously all white schools, while dark-skinned Native children from the same band were barred from riding the same buses. Tribal leaders, upon hearing of King’s desegregation campaign in Birmingham, Alabama, contacted him for assistance. He promptly responded and through his intervention the problem was quickly resolved.

In September 1959, King flew from Los Angeles, California, to Tucson, Arizona. After giving a speech at the University of Arizona on the ideals of using nonviolent methods in creating social change. He put into words his belief that one must not use force in this struggle “but match the violence of his opponents with his suffering.” King then went to Southside Presbyterian, a predominantly Native American church, and was fascinated by their photos.

On the spur of the moment Dr. King wanted to go to an Indian Reservation to meet the people so Reverend Casper Glenn took King to the Papago Indian Reservation. At the reservation King met with all the tribal leaders, and others on the reservation then ate with them. King then visited another Presbyterian church near the reservation, and preached there attracting a Native American crowd.

He later returned to Old Pueblo in March 1962 where he preached again to a Native American congregation, and then went on to give another speech at the University of Arizona. King would continue to attract the attention of Native Americans throughout the civil rights movement. During the 1963 March on Washington there was a sizable Native American contingent, including many from South Dakota, and many from the Navajo nation. Native Americans were also active participants in the Poor People’s Campaign in 1968.

King was a major inspiration along with the civil rights movement which inspired the Native American rights movement of the 1960s and many of its leaders. John Echohawk a member of the Pawnee tribe and the executive director and one of the founders of the Native American Rights Fund stated:


Inspired by Dr. King, who was advancing the civil rights agenda of equality under the laws of this country, we thought that we could also use the laws to advance our Indianship, to live as tribes in our territories governed by our own laws under the principles of tribal sovereignty that had been with us ever since 1831. We believed that we could fight for a policy of self-determination that was consistent with U.S. law and that we could govern our own affairs, define our own ways and continue to survive in this society

John Echohawk, Executive Director and Founder of the Native American Rights Fund

Politics

As the leader of the SCLC, King maintained a policy of not publicly endorsing a U.S. political party or candidate: “I feel someone must remain in the position of non-alignment, so that he can look objectively at both parties and be the conscience of both—not the servant or master of either.”[288] In a 1958 interview, he expressed his view that neither party was perfect, saying, “I don’t think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses … And I’m not inextricably bound to either party.” King did praise Democratic Senator Paul Douglas of Illinois as being the “greatest of all senators” because of his fierce advocacy for civil rights causes over the years.

King critiqued both parties’ performance on promoting racial equality:


Actually, the Negro has been betrayed by both the Republican and the Democratic party. The Democrats have betrayed him by capitulating to the whims and caprices of the Southern Dixiecrats.

The Republicans have betrayed him by capitulating to the blatant hypocrisy of reactionary right wing northern Republicans. And this coalition of southern Dixiecrats and right wing reactionary northern Republicans defeats every bill and every move towards liberal legislation in the area of civil rights.

Martin Luther King Jr.

Although King never publicly supported a political party or candidate for president, in a letter to a civil rights supporter in October 1956 he said that he had not decided whether he would vote for Adlai Stevenson II or Dwight D. Eisenhower at the 1956 presidential election, but that “In the past I always voted the Democratic ticket.” In his autobiography, King says that in 1960 he privately voted for Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy:


I felt that Kennedy would make the best president. I never came out with an endorsement. My father did, but I never made one.” King adds that he likely would have made an exception to his non-endorsement policy for a second Kennedy term, saying “Had President Kennedy lived, I would probably have endorsed him in 1964.

Martin Luther King Jr.

In 1964, King urged his supporters “and all people of goodwill” to vote against Republican Senator Barry Goldwater for president, saying that his election “would be a tragedy, and certainly suicidal almost, for the nation and the world.”

King supported the ideals of democratic socialism, although he was reluctant to speak directly of this support due to the anti-communist sentiment being projected throughout the United States at the time, and the association of socialism with communism. King believed that capitalism could not adequately provide the basic necessities of many American people, particularly the African-American community.


Compensation

King stated that black Americans, as well as other disadvantaged Americans, should be compensated for historical wrongs. In an interview conducted for Playboy in 1965, he said that granting black Americans only equality could not realistically close the economic gap between them and whites. King said that he did not seek a full restitution of wages lost to slavery, which he believed impossible, but proposed a government compensatory program of $50 billion over ten years to all disadvantaged groups.

He posited that “the money spent would be more than amply justified by the benefits that would accrue to the nation through a spectacular decline in school dropouts, family breakups, crime rates, illegitimacy, swollen relief rolls, rioting and other social evils.” He presented this idea as an application of the common law regarding settlement of unpaid labor, but clarified that he felt that the money should not be spent exclusively on blacks. He stated, “It should benefit the disadvantaged of all races.”


Family Planning

On being awarded the Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Margaret Sanger Award on May 5, 1966, King said:

Recently, the press has been filled with reports of sightings of flying saucers. While we need not give credence to these stories, they allow our imagination to speculate on how visitors from outer space would judge us.

I am afraid they would be stupefied at our conduct. They would observe that for death planning we spend billions to create engines and strategies for war. They would also observe that we spend millions to prevent death by disease and other causes.

Finally they would observe that we spend paltry sums for population planning, even though its spontaneous growth is an urgent threat to life on our planet. Our visitors from outer space could be forgiven if they reported home that our planet is inhabited by a race of insane men whose future is bleak and uncertain.

There is no human circumstance more tragic than the persisting existence of a harmful condition for which a remedy is readily available. Family planning, to relate population to world resources, is possible, practical and necessary.

Unlike plagues of the dark ages or contemporary diseases we do not yet understand, the modern plague of overpopulation is soluble by means we have discovered and with resources we possess.

What is lacking is not sufficient knowledge of the solution but universal consciousness of the gravity of the problem and education of the billions who are its victims…

Martin Luther King

Television

Actress Nichelle Nichols planned to leave Star Trek in 1967 after its first season, wanting to return to musical theater. She changed her mind after talking to King who was a fan of the show. King explained that her character signified a future of greater racial harmony and cooperation.[303] King told Nichols, “You are our image of where we’re going, you’re 300 years from now, and that means that’s where we are and it takes place now. Keep doing what you’re doing, you are our inspiration.” As Nichols recounted, “Star Trek was one of the only shows that [King] and his wife Coretta would allow their little children to watch. And I thanked him and I told him I was leaving the show. All the smile came off his face. And he said, ‘Don’t you understand for the first time we’re seen as we should be seen. You don’t have a black role. You have an equal role.'”


I honestly could keep going on and on about the incredible icon that is Martin Luther King Jr. Thank you for reading. I will see you soon.

Irish Queen