Democratic Party Establishment finds fault in everyone except themselves

Dear Friends,

The leadership of the Democratic Party has not changed much since Bill Clinton was elected President in 1992.  Unfortunately the Democratic Party and its influence has been greatly diminished since that time.  Here is a little comparison of political control by the Democrats.

Senate Seats:              1992               Democrats 56  Republicans 44
                                   Post 2016       Republicans at least 51
House Seats:              1992               Democrats 267 Republicans 167
                                   Post 2016       Democrats 193 Republicans 239
Governorships           1992               Democrats 28 Republicans 20
                                  Post 2016        Republicans at least 33
State Legislatures     1992                Democrats 26 Republicans 7  Split 16
                                  Post 2016       Democrats 14 Republicans 32 Split 3
Since 2008, the Democrats have lost control of 30 State legislative chambers (910 seats) and 11 Governorships.

During that same period the Democratic Party Establishment led the Democratic Party further and further to the right as it became Republican lite and courted and did the bidding of Wall Street and the economic elite.  The Democratic Party Establishment became more and more out of touch with the traditional base of the Democratic Party.  It ignored the rapidly diminishing middle class and the working poor.  It failed to fight for unions and trade policies that established level playing fields.  It embraced the military industrial complex and the constant pressure for more militarization to feed the profits of that complex.

When the Democratic Party Establishment had the opportunity to return to its roots and embrace its historic values by endorsing Bernie Sanders, it doubled down on its move to the right and selected Hillary Clinton, one of the leaders of the Democratic Party Establishment who epitomizes the rightward movement of the Democratic Party and its too cozy relationship with Wall Street and the military industrial complex.  Now that she has been defeated by a racist, misogynist, homophobic, islamophobic, egotistical demagogue, the Democratic Party Establishment is finding fault in everyone else except themselves.

In an interview with Chris Hayes (here) Senator Harry Reid, retiring Democratic leader in the Senate for years, said,

She would have won this election without any problem if Comey had not been the Republican operative that he is...He is the reason she lost the election.

He went on to say, "I want everybody in America to understand if Harry Reid can make it in America, anyone can...it doesn't matter what your race is, it used to but it shouldn't anymore".  Harry Reid was born into a very poor family and has been a great success, but he was born a white man in America.  For him to say that because a white man can overcome birth into a poor family any black man can do the same shows how out of touch with the real America he is.

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House for the last 16 years said

...We cannot be taking the full responsibility for what happened in the election. We have to do our after-action review thoroughly and see what we could have done differently. But a lot of it was beyond our control.

Senator Chuck Schumer who will replace Harry Reid as the Democratic leader in the Senate was probably the most honest when he said, "we needed a much sharper, bolder, stronger economic message".  Senator Schumer was not taking any responsibility for the fact that the Democratic Party has "needed a much sharper, bolder, stronger economic message" for a long time during which he was in a position to promulgate that message but instead he helped move the Democratic Party to the right.  He voted for NAFTA, he voted to get rid of Glass-Steagall, he voted for the Iraq War, he voted for the Patriot Act, he protected Wall Street, etc.

The Clinton campaign continues to refuse to acknowledge that Hillary and her campaign were completely out of touch with the economic woes and anxiety of the country.  Sure, they moved to the left when forced to by Bernie Sanders, but it was not believable particularly in light of the decades during which the Democratic Party Establishment ignored the middle class and working poor.  In an interview on CNN (here), Karen Finney, a spokesperson for the Clinton campaign had a whole list of reasons why Hillary Clinton lost, including sexism, voting rights act, third party candidates, FBI Director Comey, media coverage and Bernie bros.  Interestingly enough, she did not mention the lack of an economic message to address the economic woes of the middle class and working poor.  When she was pointedly asked what mistakes the Clinton campaign made, there were none of significance.

In fact it is probably true that the Clinton campaign did not make too many mistakes.  The problem was that Hillary Clinton was the wrong candidate, and she could not overcome the fact that the Democratic Party Establishment had ignored the middle class and working poor and moved the party to the right for the last several decades.  Probably the best analysis of the election that I have seen was the op-ed in The New York Times by Naomi Klein entitled "Trump Defeated Clinton, Not Women" (here).  You should read it, if you have not already.  I selected some of my favorite paragraphs.

Voters chose a loose cannon of a man with zero government experience over a calm, collected and supremely qualified woman. The root cause of this injustice, many have suggested, can only be sexism — proof that the glass ceiling protecting the highest reaches of power cannot yet be shattered.
The reaction is understandable. It’s also wrong and unnecessarily demoralizing.

...

Yes, she had a gold-plated résumé that more than qualified her to be president. But that overlooks an important fact: Virtually everything about Mrs. Clinton’s biography made her uniquely unsuited to draw blood where Mr. Trump was most vulnerable.
This election needed a Democrat who could call out, again and again, the myriad hypocrisies and absurdities of Mr. Trump’s claim to be a hero for the downtrodden working class. In the debates, Mrs. Clinton landed points when she exposed Mr. Trump’s history of outsourcing and tax dodging. But by then Mr. Trump had already spent the summer mocking his opponent for her private parties with oligarchs, painting her own lifestyle as profoundly out of touch with ordinary Americans (which it is).
In short, she landed on many of the right messages, but she was the wrong messenger.

...

Here is the biggest problem with elevating sexism to the defining explanation of Mrs. Clinton’s loss: It lets her machine and her failed policies off the hook. It erases the role played by the appetite for endless war and the comfort with market-friendly incremental change, no matter the urgency of the crisis (from climate change to police violence to raging inequality). It erases the disgust over Mrs. Clinton’s coziness with Wall Street and with the wreckage left behind by trade deals that benefited corporations at the expense of workers.

...

That Mrs. Clinton could be defeated by the likes of Mr. Trump remains disgraceful. But Mrs. Clinton was too flawed a candidate for this disgrace to go down in history as a defeat for her gender.

The Democratic Party needs new leadership and needs to return to its core values.  Keith Ellison is running for head of the DNC and even Senator Schumer understands that he needs to support him.  Tim Ryan is challenging Nancy Pelosi for leadership of the House Democrats.  The traditional values of the Democratic Party should not simply be relegated to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, they should be the values of the entire Democratic Party.  We need new leadership to reclaim the Democratic Party.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

The Democratic Party needs to look inward to understand why we lost

Dear Friends,

The United States of America is a country where racism and misogyny are fully institutionalized and rampant.  This racism and misogyny existed long before this election cycle, and long before Donald Trump said things out loud that had only been said with dog whistles and in private before.  These pre-existing conditions and their exposure to all those who had previously ignored them cannot explain Hillary Clinton's loss in this election.  The mainly white, more often males, who voted for Donald Trump were no more racist and misogynist this election cycle than they were in prior ones.  So why did so many of them desert the Democratic Party this time when they had not done so in such huge numbers in the past?

My thesis is that historically the Democratic Party was the champion for these people, and they voted their economic interests over their racist and misogynist feelings.  The Democratic Party lost most of these people in the South with the voting and civil rights legislation of the early 1960s.  Unfortunately, the Democratic Party Establishment since the election of Bill Clinton in 1992,  has  attempted to become Republican light and do the bidding of the monied interests and has deserted the poor and middle class.

It was Bill Clinton who fought for and signed the revised NAFTA into law in August 1993.  NAFTA caused a significant loss of good jobs in the United States.  Since NAFTA, low wage workers have seen their compensation decline.  It was also Bill Clinton who supported and signed the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act which was one of several steps at deregulating Wall Street that helped to produce the Great Recession.

Many of the Trump voters lost their jobs, theirs houses and their self-respect in the Great Recession.  Wall Street was bailed out, and there were no prosecutions for any of the wrongs that were done, even when President Obama took over. While many jobs have returned under Barack Obama, they are lower paying jobs with little or no job security or upward mobility.  In 2007 Candidate Obama promised to walk the picket lines with the workers whenever the right to organize was being challenged.  He broke that promise in 2011when Governor Walker in Wisconsin was passing legislation designed to kill unions and thousands of people were protesting.  President Obama, along with the rest of the Democratic Party Establishment, remained silent and certainly did not join the picket lines.  He let them fight alone.  Is it any wonder that Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania all voted for Donald Trump?

Not only has the Democratic Party Establishment turned their backs on the working people of this country, they have sent their sons and daughters to unpopular wars where both sides are using arms supplied by the US arms industry with support and encouragement from the United States government and in particular from President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.  To make matters worse, the Democratic Party Establishment supports and nominates Hillary Clinton who is clearly a hawk.

The Democratic Party Establishment courts the oligarchy and takes their money in the form of political contributions, charitable contributions and paid speaking engagements at the same time that it ignores the plight of the working class.  The wealth and wage inequality continues to rise and the rich and powerful are treated differently from the working class.  Is it any wonder the working class is angry?

It is not just old white men that the Democratic Party Establishment has turned its back on.  Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities most of whom are working class have been hurt even more than the old white males.  As hard as it is to believe, Donald Trump did better with these groups than Mitt Romney did.  Hillary Clinton got 6 percentage points less of the Hispanic vote than President Obama did and 7 percentage points less than Bill Clinton did. I am convinced that part of this reduction in support is the result of the failure of the Democratic Party Establishment to stand up for and with these minorities.

The former white Democrats who flocked to Donald Trump in this election did so because they could no longer see any hope of the Democratic Party Establishment helping them economically.  While at the same time they saw a "strong" man who was standing up for them and giving voice to their racism, misogyny and economic fear and anxiety.

What can I do?  First and foremost, as a person of great white privilege, I must actively, publicly and boldly stand with my brothers and sisters who are the focus of Donald Trump's racism, misogyny and hatred, and I must actively, publicly and boldly protect the earth.  I must also work and organize to reclaim the Democratic Party.  It must be restored to the party that protects those least able to protect themselves, that fights for justice for all, that protects the earth and that demonstrates true love, compassion and empathy.  The Democratic Party has lost its way, and Donald Trump's victory is just the latest proof of that fact.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Privilege, Hatred and Division

Dear Friends,

I have been overwhelmed by the graphic videos of the killings in Baton Rouge, Falcon Heights and Dallas and am writing this blog in an attempt to clarify my thoughts.

I was born and have lived a life of extreme privilege.  I am a white, male, financially well off, well educated, straight, raised Christian person.  In this country it does not get any better than that.  I was raised in an environment where there were no people of color.  It was not until I got to college that I had any classmates who were persons of color and then they inhabited a world different from mine.  It was ok to have Jewish friends, but Jewish doctors needed to start their own hospital because they could not get privileges at the "Christian" ones.  In fifth grade while writing a paper, I spoke with my father about hiring black people.  He said that he would be worried about hiring a black lawyer at his firm because many clients would object.  There was, of course, no talk of being gay, and I never saw the ghettos of North Minneapolis.

Overt racism, anti-sematism, homophobia, etc. has been eliminated from visibility in polite society, and our society has made progress at eliminating legal discrimination; but our society continues to be rife with racism and fear of "others".  Those of us with privilege and hence power in our society must be held accountable for permitting the continuation of this institutional fear of others.  The question is what can I do.

I do not know and cannot really imagine what it is like to be black (or gay or female or of some other persecuted class of people).  How can I learn to see the world as I would if I had been born a black male in a poor family in north Minneapolis without the privilege and opportunities that I have had?  I know I would not be where I am today.  While the video by Diamond Reynolds of the aftermath of the killing of Philando Castile is sickening and heartbreaking, it has done more to help me understand what it might be like to be black than any other thing I have seen or read.  But there must be a better way for me to understand.

I, and the rest of the society, must see, feel, believe and truly know that we are all human beings of equal worth who deserve respect, compassion, love and empathy.  It is possible that over time we can achieve that result as we all know and love people who are "other".  Unfortunately we do not have time.  We have squandered so many decades and so many opportunities to become one.  In recent years, we have become less of a community not more of one.  We think too much of ourselves and too little about each other.

I believe that the vast majority of people in our society want peace, justice, equal opportunity, love and happiness for all people.  Unfortunately, we in that group are failing to hold others accountable for their actions that fracture and divide our society.

For years the fringes of the Republican party have used racial dog whistles and other fear of "other" tactics to gain and maintain control.  The vast majority of the Republican Party who want an inclusive society have not held the fringe accountable and now they have Donald Trump and many of the Republican leaders are endorsing him.  The "good" Republicans must reclaim their party and put the fringe back on the fringe.

The vast majority of the people on the police forces are people who want an inclusive society and are members of the police force because they want to serve and protect the entire community.  Unfortunately, they have failed to hold the small minority of police officers who thrive on power, hatred, fear and division accountable for their actions.  The "good" police must reclaim the police forces everywhere and hold each other accountable.

The privileged white liberals (I include myself in this group) in general believe in an inclusive society free from hatred and fear of "other", but have failed to confront the issue with the full force of their privilege and power.  It is not enough for us to say and believe that we are all human beings and deserve respect, equal opportunity, etc.  We must use our privilege and power to rid our society of institutional racism and fear and hatred of "other".  We let the Democratic Party move to the right, to be controlled by monied interests.  We have failed to hold ourselves accountable for a government and a society that continues to be run and controlled by division, fear and hatred.

Governor Mark Dayton made history when he said of the killing of Philando Castile

Would this have happened if those passengers or driver were white? I don’t think it would have. 

Why is it that by saying what everybody already knew was true, Governor Dayton is making news?  I am afraid the answer is that we liberals have for some reason not been willing to fully acknowledge that driving while black can get you killed by the police because our society continues to be racist.  While I will never know what it is like to be black, I can stand up with all my whiteness and privilege and speak truth to power, and I can truly and intentionally listen to my fellow human beings who do not have the privilege that I do and join with them in their struggle because it is my struggle as well.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Racism

Dear Friends,

We hear a lot about institutional racism in the United States, but it is primarily in connection with the racism against minorities in the United States.  Every time there is a terrorist attack somewhere in the world, I am reminded of how deep, broad and insidious racism is in the United States.  Of course a terrorist attack in the United States gets our full attention for days on end.  A terrorist attack in Europe also gets our full attention for days.  But as this cartoon I saw in the Minneapolis StarTribune this morning illustrates, terrorist attacks in other places (read places where the majority of the population is not white) get very little media coverage.

I was struck by this headline on the PRI website today (here), "Since Paris, there have been hundreds of terrorist attacks — many that have gone unnoticed".  Even the headline is rather racist, because I am quite sure those attacks were noticed where they occurred. The article shows a map of almost 20 major attacks and specifically lists 11 after the Paris attacks in November but before the Brussels attacks.  I am embarrassed to admit that I really did not know anything about these attacks other than the one in San Bernardino.

It is not just the media who demonstrate their racism by the coverage (or lack thereof) of terrorist attacks, it is our own politicians.  After the Brussels attacks, President Obama and all of the candidates for President in both parties made statements of solidarity with the people of Belgium.  I do not recall seeing any similar statements about the others on this list except for San Bernardino.

Only when we see all people as human, understand our similarities and celebrate our differences will the world be free of racism.  For now, a start would be to treat all terrorist attacks the same way we treat those against primarily white populations.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Racist Terrorism in America

Dear Friends,

The news of yet another act of terrorism against black people in America seems to come as a shock each time it happens.  There is always hand wringing and the usual denial of racism and terrorism in America by the Republicans and the usual call for gun control by the Democrats, but as Jon Stewart said, "We still won't do jack shit."  Rick Perry calls it an "accident" later corrected to an "incident", but it was not just an incident.  It was a racially motivated terrorist attack by an American on other Americans.

People say it was a single person who assassinated those nine people in Charlestown.  It was one person who pulled the trigger, but he was created, supported and encouraged by a community of racist terrorists.  His white supremacy website was just one of thousand on the internet. This community thrives on and encourages each others' hatred which ultimately, predictably and obviously leads to somebody carrying out a violent act of racist terrorism.

But it is not just the white supremacy community that creates, supports and encourages racist terrorism.  It is our leaders who use dog whistles to gain the votes and the support of the racists among us.  It is the institutional racism in America that is exemplified by the inherent racism in our justice system.  When blacks are stopped and harassed by the police far more frequently than whites, when blacks are arrested far more frequently than whites, when blacks are killed by police far more frequently than whites, when blacks receive sentences far longer than whites, all not because of what they have done but because they are black, our racist justice system provides a perfect example for the racists among us and encourages their terrorism.

Our racist justice system terrorizes the black community every day and destroys more lives than just the lives of the blacks killed by the police or a racist, terrorist gunman.  We, as a society, are destroying lives by not providing equal opportunity and a level playing field for all.  We deny the poor and particularly minorities a good education, good healthcare and real opportunities for them to attain their true potential.  Our society continues to treat them as "other" and therefore not entitled to the same treatment as "us".

Our first black President makes essentially the same speech each time the racist terrorism surfaces in the form of the violent assassination of black people.  He calls for minimal gun control, but lobbies harder for an ill-conceived trade agreement than for those minor controls.  Certainly gun control is important, but the availability of guns just makes committing the acts of terrorism easier.  The reason for the terrorism is much deeper.  It is embedded in the institutional racism in America.

Our leaders will not be the ones that end this monstrous evil that afflicts our country.  We must act.  We must join with all of our brothers and sisters to create an active community of people who name racism and terrorism wherever it exists, who work to change our racist justice system, who demand that all people are given a chance to attain their potential, who denounce acts of racism, terrorism and violence regardless of who the perpetrator is and who strive to provide a living example of the best of humanity.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

"What's Wrong With 'All Lives Matter'?"

Dear Friends,

Today I read an interview in The New York Times by George Yancy, a professor of philosophy at Duquesne University, with Judith Butler, a philosopher and professor in the department of comparative literature and the program of critical theory at the University of California, Berkeley, entitled "What's Wrong With 'All Lives Matter'?" (here).  I wish everyone would read it.

Ms. Butler discusses the implications of and background behind the racism that makes the phrase "Black Lives Matter" so important.  While the phrase is obviously true, we have never realised that fact in American life.  She demonstrates in many ways how we have failed to realise that truth.  While the phrase "All Lives Matters" is equally true, it is critical that we focus on those lives that we have treated as not having validity and worth, e.g. the lives of black people in the United States.  Ms. Butler posits that since the society, among other ways through police violence against blacks, demonstrates over and over again that black lives to do not matter, it is becoming or perhaps remaining the norm.  She also posits that by protesting and publicly grieving the lost lives of blacks, we are speaking against the white power system that has for so long made clear that black lives do not matter.

I would like to reprint the entire interview but it is quite long.  Here is one of the best paragraphs:

Whiteness is less a property of skin than a social power reproducing its dominance in both explicit and implicit ways. When whiteness is a practice of superiority over minorities, it monopolizes the power of destroying or demeaning bodies of color. The legal system is engaged in reproducing whiteness when it decides that the black person can and will be punished more severely than the white person who commits the same infraction, when that same differential is at work in the question, who can and will be detained? And who can and will be sent to prison with a life sentence or the death penalty? Angela Davis has shown the disproportionate number of Americans of color (black and Latino) detained, imprisoned and on death row. This has become a “norm” that effectively says “black lives do not matter,” one that is built up over time, through daily practices, modes of address, through the organization of schools, work, prison, law and media. Those are all ways that the conceit of white superiority is constructed.

The interview ends with these three paragraphs by Ms. Butler:

Whiteness is not an abstraction; its claim to dominance is fortified through daily acts which may not seem racist at all precisely because they are considered “normal.” But just as certain kinds of violence and inequality get established as “normal” through the proceedings that exonerate police of the lethal use of force against unarmed black people, so whiteness, or rather its claim to privilege, can be disestablished over time. This is why there must be a collective reflection on, and opposition to, the way whiteness takes hold of our ideas about whose lives matter. The norm of whiteness that supports both violence and inequality insinuates itself into the normal and the obvious. Understood as the sometimes tacit and sometimes explicit power to define the boundaries of kinship, community and nation, whiteness inflects all those frameworks within which certain lives are made to matter less than others.

It is always possible to do whiteness otherwise, to engage in a sustained and collective practice to question how racial differentiation enters into our daily evaluations of which lives deserve to be supported, to flourish, and which do not. But it is probably an error, in my view, for white people to become paralyzed with guilt and self-scrutiny. The point is rather to consider those ways of valuing and devaluing life that govern our own thinking and acting, understanding the social and historical reach of those ways of valuing. It is probably important and satisfying as well to let one’s whiteness recede by joining in acts of solidarity with all those who oppose racism. There are ways of fading out whiteness, withdrawing its implicit and explicit claim to racial privilege. 

Demonstrations have the potential to embody forms of equality that we want to see realized in the world more broadly. Working against those practices and institutions that refuse to recognize and mark the powers of state racism in particular, assemblies gather to mourn and resist the deadly consequences of such powers. When people engage in concerted actions across racial lines to build communities based on equality, to defend the rights of those who are disproportionately imperiled to have a chance to live without the fear of dying quite suddenly at the hands of the police. There are many ways to do this, in the street, the office, the home, and in the media. Only through such an ever-growing cross-racial struggle against racism can we begin to achieve a sense of all the lives that really do matter.

For me these last paragraphs provide a way for me and I hope others to work to make sure that "Black Lives Matter" and also the lives of all of those that are seen as "other" matter.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

[K] Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dear Friends,

The Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial was suppose to be officially opened this weekend but the opening has been delay by hurricane Irene.  Nevertheless, I have been thinking about Reverend King, and how I wish we had more leaders like him.  They would be especially useful today.  I just read his "Where do we go from here" speech given to the Southern Christian Leadership Conference on August 16, 1967.  At that time, I was getting ready for my senior year in college, the Vietnam war was ripping both Vietnam and the United States apart, albeit in very different ways.  Looking back I am appalled at how little things have changed and how applicable Reverend King's words are today.  You can read this speech in its entirety here.  Below I have several quotes from this speech with some of my own thoughts.

In our country today, we use power as a weapon, primarily against the poor and the "other".  We have not heeded Reverend Kings' words on this subject.

What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love.

Reverend King was hopeful that we were past the place where we believed that the poor deserved to be poor, we have unfortunately probably gone backwards.  Certainly the Republican Party has.  I cannot imagine the reaction that today's Republican leaders would have to this suggestion.  

We must develop a program that will drive the nation to a guaranteed annual income. Now, early in this century this proposal would have been greeted with ridicule and denunciation, as destructive of initiative and responsibility. At that time economic status was considered the measure of the individual's ability and talents. And, in the thinking of that day, the absence of worldly goods indicated a want of industrious habits and moral fiber. We've come a long way in our understanding of human motivation and of the blind operation of our economic system... Now our country can do this. John Kenneth Galbraith said that a guaranteed annual income could be done for about twenty billion dollars a year. And I say to you today, that if our nation can spend thirty-five billion dollars a year to fight an unjust, evil war in Vietnam, and twenty billion dollars to put a man on the moon, it can spend billions of dollars to put God's children on their own two feet right here on earth.  

Reverend King anticipated the problem of being called a communist or a socialist and deals with it in a way that I wish President Obama would.

I want to say to you as I move to my conclusion, as we talk about "Where do we go from here," that we honestly face the fact that the Movement must address itself to the question of restructuring the whole of American society. There are forty million poor people here. And one day we must ask the question, "Why are there forty million poor people in America?" And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising questions about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth. When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. And I'm simply saying that more and more, we've got to begin to ask questions about the whole society. We are called upon to help the discouraged beggars in life's market place. But one day we must come to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. It means that questions must be raised. You see, my friends, when you deal with this, you begin to ask the question, "Who owns the oil?" You begin to ask the question, "Who owns the iron ore?" You begin to ask the question, "Why is it that people have to pay water bills in a world that is two thirds water?" These are questions that must be asked...

Now, don't think that you have me in a "bind" today. I'm not talking about Communism.

What I'm saying to you this morning is that Communism forgets that life is individual. Capitalism forgets that life is social, and the Kingdom of Brotherhood is found neither in the thesis of Communism nor the antithesis of capitalism but in a higher synthesis. It is found in a higher synthesis that combines the truths of both. Now, when I say question the whole society, it means ultimately coming to see that the problem of racism, the problem of economic exploitation, and the problem of war are all tied together. These are the triple evils that are interrelated. 

In other speeches and writings, Reverend King expanded on the three evils concepts.  This idea is summarized on the website of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change (here) as follows:

Poverty – unemployment, homelessness, hunger, malnutrition, illiteracy, infant mortality, slums…
Racism – prejudice, apartheid, ethnic conflict, anti-Semitism, sexism, colonialism, homophobia, ageism, discrimination against disabled groups, stereotypes…
Militarism – war, imperialism, domestic violence, rape, terrorism, human trafficking, media violence, drugs, child abuse, violent crime…

During the protest surrounding the Vietnam war, the constant refrain from the supporters of the war was "America love it or leave it".  Reverend King offers a far better solution.  One where we face our problems and improve ourselves.

So, I conclude by saying again today that we have a task and let us go out with a "divine dissatisfaction." Let us be dissatisfied until America will no longer have a high blood pressure of creeds and an anemia of deeds. Let us be dissatisfied until the tragic walls that separate the outer city of wealth and comfort and the inner city of poverty and despair shall be crushed by the battering rams of the forces of justice. Let us be dissatisfied until those that live on the outskirts of hope are brought into the metropolis of daily security. Let us be dissatisfied until slums are cast into the junk heaps of history, and every family is living in a decent sanitary home. Let us be dissatisfied until the dark yesterdays of segregated schools will be transformed into bright tomorrows of quality, integrated education. Let us be dissatisfied until integration is not seen as a problem but as an opportunity to participate in the beauty of diversity. Let us be dissatisfied until men and women, however black they may be, will be judged on the basis of the content of their character and not on the basis of the color of their skin. Let us be dissatisfied. Let us be dissatisfied until every state capitol houses a governor who will do justly, who will love mercy and who will walk humbly with his God. Let us be dissatisfied until from every city hall, justice will roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. Let us be dissatisfied until that day when the lion and the lamb shall lie down together. and every man will sit under his own vine and fig tree and none shall be afraid. Let us be dissatisfied. And men will recognize that out of one blood God made all men to dwell upon the face of the earth. Let us be dissatisfied until that day when nobody will shout "White Power!" - when nobody will shout "Black Power!" - but everybody will talk about God's power and human power. 

I am once again inspired by Reverend King and I certainly intend to go out with "divine dissatisfaction" and do what I can to change our world.

Thanks for reading and please comment,

The Unabashed Liberal