MLK's "content of character" quote inspires debate

Civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. (C) waves to supporters from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on August 28, 1963, on the Mall in Washington D.C. / AFP/Getty Images

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

This sentence spoken by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. has been quoted countless times as expressing one of America's bedrock values, its language almost sounding like a constitutional amendment on equality.

20 Photos

Martin Luther King Jr.

Play Video

Martin Luther King III talks his father's legacy

Play Video

King, Civil Rights Act remembered

Yet today, 50 years after King shared this vision during his most famous speech, there is considerable disagreement over what it means.

The quote is used to support opposing views on politics, affirmative action and programs intended to help the disadvantaged. Just as the words of the nation's founders are parsed for modern meanings on guns and abortion, so are King's words used in debates over the proper place of race in America.

As we mark the King holiday, what might he ask of us in a time when both the president and a disproportionate number of people in poverty are black? Would King have wanted us to completely ignore race in a "color-blind" society? To consider race as one of many factors about a person? And how do we discern character?

For at least two of King's children, the future envisioned by the father has yet to arrive.

"I don't think we can ignore race," says Martin Luther King III.

"What my father is asking is to create the climate where every American can realize his or her dreams," he says. "Now what does that mean when you have 50 million people living in poverty?"

Bernice King doubts her father would seek to ignore differences.

"When he talked about the beloved community, he talked about everyone bringing their gifts, their talents, their cultural experiences," she says. "We live in a society where we may have differences, of course, but we learn to celebrate these differences."

The meaning of King's monumental quote is more complex today than in 1963 because "the unconscious signals have changed," says the historian Taylor Branch, author of the acclaimed trilogy "America in the King Years."

Fifty years ago, bigotry was widely accepted. Today, Branch says, even though prejudice is widely denounced, many people unconsciously pre-judge others.

"Unfortunately race in American history has been one area in which Americans kid themselves and pretend to be fair-minded when they really are not," says Branch, whose new book is "The King Years: Historic Moments in the Civil Rights Movement."

Branch believes that today, King would ask people of all backgrounds - not just whites - to deepen their patriotism by leaving their comfort zones, reaching across barriers and learning about different people.

"To remember that we all have to stretch ourselves to build the ties that bind a democracy, which really is the source of our strength," Branch says.

• MLK III "honored" Obama will take oath on father's Bible
• Marthin Luther King Jr. balcony opens to public for 1st time in years
• Complete coverage: President Obama's Second Inauguration

Bernice King says her father is asking us "to get to a place - we're obviously not there - but to get to a place where the first thing that we utilize as a measurement is not someone's external designation, but it really is trying to look beyond that into the substance of a person in making certain decisions, to rid ourselves of those kinds of prejudices and biases that we often bring to decisions that we make."

That takes a lot of "psychological work," she says, adding, "He's really challenging us."

For many conservatives, the modern meaning of King's quote is clear: Special consideration for one racial or ethnic group is a violation of the dream.

The quote is like the Declaration of Independence, says Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, a conservative think tank that studies race and ethnicity. In years past, he says, America may have needed to grow into the words, but today they must be obeyed to the letter.

"The Declaration of Independence says all men are created equal," Clegg says. "Nobody thinks it doesn't really mean what it says because Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. King gave a brilliant and moving quotation, and I think it says we should not be treating people differently on the basis of skin color."

Many others agree. King's quote has become a staple of conservative belief that "judged by the color of their skin" includes things such as unique appeals to certain voter groups, reserving government contracts for Hispanic-owned businesses, seeking more non-white corporate executives, or admitting black students to college with lower test scores.

In the latest issue of the Weekly Standard magazine, the quote appears in the lead of a book review titled "The Price Was High: Affirmative Action and the Betrayal of a Colorblind Society."

Considering race as a factor in affirmative action keeps the wounds of slavery and Jim Crow "sore and festering. It encourages beneficiaries to rely on ethnicity rather than self-improvement to get ahead," wrote the author, George Leef.

Last week, the RightWingNews.com blog included "The idea that everyone should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin" in a list of "25 People, Places and Things Liberals Love to Hate."

"Conservatives feel they have embraced that quote completely. They are the embodiment of that quote but get no credit for doing it," says the author of the article, John Hawkins. "Liberals like the idea of the quote because it's the most famous thing Martin Luther King said, but they left the principles behind the quote behind a long time ago."

• no previous page
• next

1/2

[ugacrew]

A REPOST:

HandyAndy5 replies:

Tell you what--I hear the same old Tea-Party-type refrain in your comments. And your assumption is that everyone has a equal playing to start. The problem is that they just don't.

I used to live in Chicago. I can tell you that the poor kids from the bad neighborhoods didn't choose to be born there. They didn't choose to go to the underfunded schools. They didn't choose to develop an accent that would give their poor origins away later on when they went to compete against hundreds of others for a decent job.

So many of the people from those neighborhoods then couldn't get out. Their educations weren't good enough to get into the decent colleges--even if they could afford it. They couldn't get a decent job with inner-city accents. They couldn't even move out of the bad neighborhoods. I once personally heard an African-American co-worker try to move to the suburbs only to be told that all the apartments she called on were suddenly and mysteriously rented.

So, you know, that's still the sad reality.

I'm white, too, and I can tell you that, for many of us, the starting line is far ahead of where other people's are. You are privileged because you are white and (presumably) male.

Don't forget it on this MLK day.



ugacrew replies TO HANDYANDY5:

First, you are wrong on all accounts as to what I am and who I am.

Secondly, YOU interjected RACE into this equation, I did not.

Read this entire statement again and REMOVE RACE from the entire equation, and rethink what it says.

The notion that everybody wants the best for their dollar applies to every individual, not just to whites, blacks, reds or blues.

The message tells you that whatever you are, be the best that you can be of what you are, as "CHARACTER" is an indispensible part of the equation when you want anyone to reach out and help you do anything.

It doesn't matter how poor you are, or what color of skin you have, CHARACTER can make all the difference in the world in how others react to you.

Many a poor man, despite his poverty, has exuded such a character that opportnities were made available that otherwise would not have been.

You have read many times over where great men were born and raised in poverty. That poverty did not prevent them from becoming great, it was their CHARACTER that made them standout.

Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks,.......and this list goes on became great because of their CHARACTER, certainly not their wealth or privilege in society.

This is one of the primary reasons why Martin Luther King says that if you must be a street sweeper, be the best street sweeper you can be. Striving to be the best you can be at whatever you are, has NOTHING to do with race but everything to do with CHARACTER.

You can take the richest man on earth, and though he be rich, he may not be great. Why? CHARACTER may be his downfall.

That said, ask yourself WHY you chose to focus on race? Why did you automatically ASSIGN me to a TEA PARTY? Why did you assume I was a male and a caucasion?

It was YOU who automatically assigned negative characteristics to a race of people, and those assignments were based on your perceptions. It is a perfect example of how people often make judgements on race and may not even be aware of it.

If you will allow yourself to think honestly about it, there is nothing you said that could not apply equally to any poor person of any race.

[ugacrew]

MY ORIGINAL STATEMENT:

Unfortunately, too many people, even those who consider themselves a "leader" fail to speak the truth. The truth is, it is impossible to achieve a "color-blind" anything, when "character" is the sole focal point.

Dr. King stated that he wanted to be judged by "character," not first and foremost as a man of color before any consideration was given at all to his individual talents and capabilities. Such was the intensity of hate for people of color at one time in history, it was completely acceptable to dismiss entirely anyone of color for any and every thing. That is no longer the case. Many, many people want to do the right thing. They want to be fair, but too many more people who want to be given all entitlements without "character" ever entering the equation.

I teach my now adult children what I call my "dollar store" concept. Assuming that everything in the dollar store costs a dollar, when shoppers go to the dollar store to make a purchase, they will still "pick and choose" the best item among the same item they are buying, even when all of those items cost the same one dollar. This is the way it is with people. We all want the best that we can get for our hard earned money.

If the jelly in the jelly jar all costs a dollar, and one jar has a blemish in its label, we will pick the jar without the blemish. If we want a pair of shoes and they both cost the same but one pair is packaged neatly but the other pair has been opened and they cost the same, we will pick the one packaged neatly and leave the other.

So, in the interest of time, I will just say, people in this country must accept the truth and the truth is too many people want to argue they should have equality, but they refuse to accept that those willing to give it to them want individual responsibility, individual accountability, and individual self-discipline in return. In essence, "character" represents an indispensible part of their equation. One's skin color can be irrelevant, but it is the character of that individual that will largely make that determination.

Just think of yourself as being in the "dollar store."

[fredgold52]

Let me rant for a moment, please. We used to celebrate George Washington's birthday as well as Lincoln's birthday. I guess we lost interest in them and jammed them all together into an anonymous President's day thing. But we will celebrate the individual birthday of a well spoken and influential black man who did help move the country in the correct direction. But other than run his mouth, he DID nothing.

I suggest that without Washington to win our country's independence from England, and without Lincoln actually ending American slavery, MLK would have been a non-entity. So, who owes who? Who actually deserves recognition for something besides skin pigmentation?

[fendferyerself]

regardless of what he meant by character --

in general don't you think that most Americans - black white hispanic etc - would do better in life if they worked a little harder, stopped trying to get free handouts from Obama (Hispanics to obama: "we elected you now WHAT DO WE GET?" free handouts.....) stopped with all the racist (ALL americans this is addressed to regardless of the color of your skin)
learned how to communicate effectively and clearly, not with gibberish
learned how to dress appropriately in order to secure a job
learned that there is more self-fulfillment in working hard and achieving success (not necessarily wealth) than sitting around watching free cable on the free TV and checking their free lottery tickets?
People in general need a lesson on Self Sufficiency 101 and regretfully it does not include the federal government paying your way through life from cradle to grave.

[Kenny_Vee]

Chuck769, he'd probably be pretty pissed about the lack of character from white people too. Don't act like it's only black people, and certainly don't pretend that it's all of them (as you infer by "tell that to MLK's people").

When the right stops ignoring the part where Martin Luther King said "Life's most persistent and urgent question is: 'What are you doing for others?'," then maybe the party that stands against helping others won't look so hypocritical when they try to re-purpose MLK's message regarding content of character.

When white people stop being racist, we can get rid of the laws that force white people to live and work with people different from themselves. When minorities actually HAVE the same opportunities, then we can talk about ending forced equality.

But, as your response citing a lack of character in black people (which completely ignores the fact that it's a problem with a large portion of people of all skin tones) shows, we've got a LONG way to go before people have equal opportunity to pull themselves up by the bootstraps.

You don't get to stand against everything that MLK stood for while claiming one particular quote as a mandate for your own racism.

[nohater]

looked up character. no wonder what mlk is debated. how do you measure it and what are the agreed to characteristics of character, who determines it? what did he mean by "content" which is also nebulous, how is it measured, who determines it?

[gregorio57]

Too bad the Democrats aren't fulfilling MLK's dream, by continuing the racism of affirmative action.

[lonestar9000]

Today we live in a world where we are not judged by the color of our skins, but by the content of our bank accounts.

[Bleddyn71]

Too True...

[jaglenn1]

That's the most concise easy to understand statement ever........

[hdc77494]

One area barely touched here (deliberately I believe), is the current mainstream progressive idea that if you are white you are automatically an oppressor. Never mind that we are all supposedly equal under our skin. That idea helps explain why Dr King's comments, so self evident to most of us, are somehow controversial. Those trying to parse his statement into something else confuse culture with race, and try to ignore the reality that minorities of any color who are disciplined and educated are welcomed at every level of our society. Most of the time, it isn't whites who are slowing the advancement or acceptance of minority children, it is the parents, minority peers and community who discourage achievement. My least favorite tactic is the accusation that a black child who studies hard off the athletic field is "acting white" while adult Blacks who agree with conservative principles are routinely accused of being Uncle Toms or not really Black. Asians and many Hispanics, astute enough to ignore that nonsense do quite well. Asians in fact, have displaced their white peers in academic achievement in most schools across the country. No, most of the problems in the Black community are traceable to the family killing policies of the Democrat's Great Society and issues within the Black community itself. While the redneck racist stereotype still has some validity, few if any of them occupy positions of authority that impact the lives of anyone but their immediate neighbors.

[KB_Cash]

Have to agree, we have moved farther from Dr. King's dream rather than closer. "Content of Character" has become meaningless, while color of skin is more important than ever.

White males are specifically targeted as the "bad guys". Hard work and success are downplayed at least, despised most often. Jealousy and self entitlement drive more than understanding and self improvement.

Racial divisions are sharper than I have ever seen in my life. Anti white discrimination is accepted, the uneducated sense of payback so prevalently substituted for justice.

Why is racism worse today than fifty years ago? Follow the money.

[moshe05]

why would you suspect he'd think that the debt is the most thing? because you do? i've read some and i have never seen such a concern betrayed at all. i guess this whole conversation has been about projecting personal agendas onto this symbol of american virtue. i am sure i do it myself. but at least i am aware of it.

[dcshipman]

Too bad they don't also emphasize that for the last few years of his life he was organizing against class separation and financial inequality, regardless of race.
What he meant by content of your character is not a debatable idea.