Martin Luther King Jr Role Model
Born in 1929 Georgia, Dr. King was exceptionally gifted. His intellect and strong academic performance allowed him to skip two grades of high school (MLK Timeline) and begin college at the age of 15. King graduated from Morehouse College and began studies at the Crozer Theological Seminary, becoming an ordained Baptist minister at the age of 19. Receiving his Doctorate in Philosophy and Systematic Theology from Boston University, Dr. King’s educational and spiritual background had well prepared him to become an exemplary transformational leader. In 1955, Dr. King was elected president of the Montgomery Improvement Association (Montgomery Bus Boycott 1955 n.d.). The MIA had been formed to provide direction and leadership for a year-long
…show more content…
bus boycott after Rosa Parks had been arrested for refusing to give her seat up to a white male. King was only 26 at the time, but had already established clout within the black community of Montgomery. King advocated for nonviolent protests and encouraged the black community to avoid the buses, carpool, and even utilize taxi’s if necessary. Presenting himself as a role model, King endorsed the transformational leadership style of leading by example (Bass, 1999). His methods were clearly discernible and effective, as he led a successful boycott that lasted 381 days. Ultimately, in the federal court case Browder v. Gayle, the ruling found Alabama’s segregated bus laws unconstitutional (Browder v. Gayle: The women before Rosa Parks). The boycott and first court ruling against segregation gained notoriety for Dr. King and accelerated the demand for action within the Civil Rights Movement (CRM). During his period as president of the MIA and emerging as a face of the CRM, King and his family became targets for violence – his home being bombed (Montgomery Bus Boycott 1955 n.d.) Understanding that violent retaliation would only instigate further violence, King abstained.
He presented himself as a role model and expected his followers to turn the other cheek. Not everyone within the CRM believed this to be effective, however. After being told to enter a bus by the back door, a black Virginian man had, “picked up the driver with one hand and said bluntly: Know two things. I can break your neck and I ain’t one of Martin Luther King’s non-violent Negroes.” (Ling, 2003, p. 1) Dr. King had been told this anecdote during the 1960s, illustrating dissent within the movement. Black separatists had never adopted King as their leader and even those within Dr. Kings ranks were occasionally dissuaded by his actions and failures. In 1962 Georgia, Dr. King faced defeat of a local protest. Ling (2003) stated the organization of the protest was too quick and didn’t have clearly defined goals, which “damaged King’s credibility as a leader.” (p. 3) Fortunately, Dr. King had learned from this mistake and created simpler motives for his successful 1963 Birmingham campaign – a true credit of his leadership character to be knocked down and get back up. This is further exemplified, when we consider King’s biggest enemy: the
FBI. In 1964, Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) Director J. Edgar Hoover stated the FBI’s goals were, “to neutralize or completely discredit the effectiveness of Martin Luther King Jr, as a Negro leader.” (Boykoff, 2007, p. 738) Exacerbated by fear of change and bigoted political figures, Dr. King spent years fighting against oppression, while simultaneously being threatened by an authoritarian era FBI. The goals were to intimidate, harass, and discredit King. Leaning on McCarthy era doctrine, the FBI made the, “attempt to smear the movement on the basis of Communist influence.” (Boykoff, 2007, p. 735) and installed wiretaps on his phones and conducting immoral and illegal surveillance. Although Dr. King was aware of his surveillance by the FBI, he maintained his resolve and continued to speak about oppression. Illustrating a larger picture beyond the Civil Rights Movement, King was critical of the Vietnam war and American militarism, in general. Alexander (2013) states, “things like terrorism and drugs” (¶ 3) make it easy to shirk responsibility for the people affected. Dr. King saw a greater influence not just against minorities, but everyone subjected to imperialism. “He did not play politics to see what crumbs a fundamentally corrupt system might toss to the beggars for justice. Instead, he connected the dots and committed himself to building a movement that would shake the foundations of our economic and social order.” (Alexander, 2013, ¶ 6) King’s vision and charismatic ability to inspire others was based on a superior moral outlook (Becker 2015). This is discernible through many of his speeches, but perhaps his most optimistic was I Have a Dream. King spoke to over 250,000 citizens at the 1963 March on Washing for Jobs and Freedom (Wegner 2013), stating, “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.” (Freedom’s Ring “I Have a Dream” Speech n.d.) King’s articulation and call for action is still heard today, even decades after one of the largest rallies for human rights. The March on Washington and Dr. Kings I Have a Dream speech were a critical component in passing both the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act. Weber (2013) wrote the prior legislation granted every American the right to access public accommodation, decent housing, the right to vote, and adequate/integrated education. King’s vision and words were finally materializing, thanks to his ethical leadership embodiment. “Transformational leadership in the civil rights movement was about a commitment to a vision of democratic living where equality and freedom not set at odds with one another but sought balance in public policy and law.” (Fluker, 2015, p. 1226) The overall dream of social justice
Conclusion
In a time where ethno-racial struggles were at their peak, Dr. King embraced inspiration and ….. Though threatened with violence, increasingly discontent supports and government surveillance, King maintained his status as a calm, collected leader. Adhering to a higher level of morale and motivation (Transformational leadership…), Dr. King aided in transforming a nation. The challenge that faces us now, as Dr. King predicted, is our ability to maintain our empathy toward one another. The signing of legislation is only worth as much as those who follow it. It is left up to every one of us to embrace one another with open hearts and provide an example for all humanity.
bus boycott after Rosa Parks had been arrested for refusing to give her seat up to a white male. King was only 26 at the time, but had already established clout within the black community of Montgomery. King advocated for nonviolent protests and encouraged the black community to avoid the buses, carpool, and even utilize taxi’s if necessary. Presenting himself as a role model, King endorsed the transformational leadership style of leading by example (Bass, 1999). His methods were clearly discernible and effective, as he led a successful boycott that lasted 381 days. Ultimately, in the federal court case Browder v. Gayle, the ruling found Alabama’s segregated bus laws unconstitutional (Browder v. Gayle: The women before Rosa Parks). The boycott and first court ruling against segregation gained notoriety for Dr. King and accelerated the demand for action within the Civil Rights Movement (CRM). During his period as president of the MIA and emerging as a face of the CRM, King and his family became targets for violence – his home being bombed (Montgomery Bus Boycott 1955 n.d.) Understanding that violent retaliation would only instigate further violence, King abstained.
He presented himself as a role model and expected his followers to turn the other cheek. Not everyone within the CRM believed this to be effective, however. After being told to enter a bus by the back door, a black Virginian man had, “picked up the driver with one hand and said bluntly: Know two things. I can break your neck and I ain’t one of Martin Luther King’s non-violent Negroes.” (Ling, 2003, p. 1) Dr. King had been told this anecdote during the 1960s, illustrating dissent within the movement. Black separatists had never adopted King as their leader and even those within Dr. Kings ranks were occasionally dissuaded by his actions and failures. In 1962 Georgia, Dr. King faced defeat of a local protest. Ling (2003) stated the organization of the protest was too quick and didn’t have clearly defined goals, which “damaged King’s credibility as a leader.” (p. 3) Fortunately, Dr. King had learned from this mistake and created simpler motives for his successful 1963 Birmingham campaign – a true credit of his leadership character to be knocked down and get back up. This is further exemplified, when we consider King’s biggest enemy: the
FBI. In 1964, Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) Director J. Edgar Hoover stated the FBI’s goals were, “to neutralize or completely discredit the effectiveness of Martin Luther King Jr, as a Negro leader.” (Boykoff, 2007, p. 738) Exacerbated by fear of change and bigoted political figures, Dr. King spent years fighting against oppression, while simultaneously being threatened by an authoritarian era FBI. The goals were to intimidate, harass, and discredit King. Leaning on McCarthy era doctrine, the FBI made the, “attempt to smear the movement on the basis of Communist influence.” (Boykoff, 2007, p. 735) and installed wiretaps on his phones and conducting immoral and illegal surveillance. Although Dr. King was aware of his surveillance by the FBI, he maintained his resolve and continued to speak about oppression. Illustrating a larger picture beyond the Civil Rights Movement, King was critical of the Vietnam war and American militarism, in general. Alexander (2013) states, “things like terrorism and drugs” (¶ 3) make it easy to shirk responsibility for the people affected. Dr. King saw a greater influence not just against minorities, but everyone subjected to imperialism. “He did not play politics to see what crumbs a fundamentally corrupt system might toss to the beggars for justice. Instead, he connected the dots and committed himself to building a movement that would shake the foundations of our economic and social order.” (Alexander, 2013, ¶ 6) King’s vision and charismatic ability to inspire others was based on a superior moral outlook (Becker 2015). This is discernible through many of his speeches, but perhaps his most optimistic was I Have a Dream. King spoke to over 250,000 citizens at the 1963 March on Washing for Jobs and Freedom (Wegner 2013), stating, “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.” (Freedom’s Ring “I Have a Dream” Speech n.d.) King’s articulation and call for action is still heard today, even decades after one of the largest rallies for human rights. The March on Washington and Dr. Kings I Have a Dream speech were a critical component in passing both the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act. Weber (2013) wrote the prior legislation granted every American the right to access public accommodation, decent housing, the right to vote, and adequate/integrated education. King’s vision and words were finally materializing, thanks to his ethical leadership embodiment. “Transformational leadership in the civil rights movement was about a commitment to a vision of democratic living where equality and freedom not set at odds with one another but sought balance in public policy and law.” (Fluker, 2015, p. 1226) The overall dream of social justice
Conclusion
In a time where ethno-racial struggles were at their peak, Dr. King embraced inspiration and ….. Though threatened with violence, increasingly discontent supports and government surveillance, King maintained his status as a calm, collected leader. Adhering to a higher level of morale and motivation (Transformational leadership…), Dr. King aided in transforming a nation. The challenge that faces us now, as Dr. King predicted, is our ability to maintain our empathy toward one another. The signing of legislation is only worth as much as those who follow it. It is left up to every one of us to embrace one another with open hearts and provide an example for all humanity.