Martin Luther King, Jr. and Poverty
Please excuse my long delay between posts! I suffered a bout with the flu and a few complications, but with the right drugs, I hope I have now turned the corner… Thanks for your patience and continued support!
“There is no deficit in human resources; the deficit is in human will.” MLK, Jr. in his Nobel Peace Prize lecture presented December 11, 1964, where he addresses the failure to end poverty.
If you’re wondering why nearly 60 years later, the United States and the world have not yet solved the debilitating, twin evils of hunger and poverty, Martin Luther King, Jr. told us the answer: the lack of will of those in positions of power. We had the resources — the food, the money and the know-how in 1964, and we have these resources in even greater abundance in 2024.
Yet a 2022 Census Bureau report, released in September 2023, showed nearly 38 million people live in poverty in the United States, and nearly 700 million people live in extreme poverty worldwide, with half of that number residing in Sub-Saharan Africa, according to World Bank statistics.
After the many “wars on poverty” in the U.S. alone, why hasn’t poverty been eradicated, banished forever from the supposed wealthiest nation on earth? This analysis of President Johnson’s 1964 Economic Opportunity Act that funded the War On Poverty, published by the National Institute of Health and National Library of Medicine is important reading, if you want to understand the political forces that work against the elimination of poverty.
In line with many contemporary accounts and retrospectives, our analysis suggests that the Economic Opportunity Act OEO funding generated backlash and appeared to hurt Democrats in the late 1960s and early 1970s—especially relating to the politics of race in the South. Unlike the New Deal, which engendered good will for decades, the War on Poverty generated resentments—and, in the shorter term, votes for Republicans, especially in areas with more African American voters.
A Substack post titled, “Unraveling Poverty’s Grip: Lessons From The Great Society and The War on Poverty” written on the newsletter
also provides an excellent study of President Johnson’s War on Poverty by breaking it down into its various components and analyzing the successes and failures of each part.I am re-sharing with you part of the post I wrote last year to introduce my tribute to Dr. King and his focus on both education and public service. It’s also important to reiterate that two states, Alabama and Mississippi, still, in 2024, celebrate “King-Lee Day”.
I don’t feel worthy to write about Dr.King, or try in any way to interpret his words or place them in the context of what is happening today. He was a child prodigy who graduated from Morehouse College at 19, and promptly set out to make change, and did so beyond what even he might have imagined during his short life.
I’m also not particularly thrilled to join the chorus of those who extoll his virtues on this one day in January, the approximate day of his birth, 94 years ago on January 15, 1929. And I can’t help but remember those many members of Congress who fought against marking the day of his birth with a national holiday and a day of service to our nation. It took nearly two decades of marches, petitions and Congressional wrangling for President Reagan to finally sign the bill into law in 1983, and the first MLK Day was not celebrated until the third Monday of January, 1986. Yet today, two states, Alabama and Mississippi, embarrassingly celebrate “King-Lee” Day, insisting on putting the Confederate general, Robert E. Lee, a slave owner and traitor to his country on par with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Two years ago in mid-January, I wrote about Dr. King’s advocacy of a basic income to eliminate poverty in the United States, and today it has proven successful in numerous pilot programs across the country. In 2017, The Seattle Times published a brief portion of MLK Jr.’s last book published in 1967, Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?”, in which he highlighted the need for a guaranteed income to eliminate the poverty trap. Here is what Dr. King stipulated about basic income in 1967 :
Two conditions are indispensable if we are to ensure that the guaranteed income operates as a consistently progressive measure. First, it must be pegged to the median income of society, not the lowest levels of income. To guarantee an income at the floor would simply perpetuate welfare standards and freeze into the society poverty conditions. Second, the guaranteed income must be dynamic; it must automatically increase as the total social income grows. Were it permitted to remain static under growth conditions, the recipients would suffer a relative decline. If periodic reviews disclose that the whole national income has risen, then the guaranteed income would have to be adjusted upward by the same percentage. Without these safeguards a creeping retrogression would occur, nullifying the gains of security and stability.
Recently, PBS Newshour published an interview with Michael Tubbs, former Mayor of Stockton, California, and founder of “Mayors for a Guaranteed Income” where Tubbs explains how and why guaranteed basic income programs have been successful, and why he sees this monthly income as supplementing rather than replacing government assistance programs.
Although amounts given to the poor for the guaranteed income pilot programs across the country appear to differ dramatically, they don’t seem to align with Dr. King’s vision of being “pegged to the median income of society, not the lowest levels of income… and automatically increase as the total social income grows.” The programs to date give a small amount (in the case of Mayor Tubbs’ pilot, $500/month) to a small portion of an area’s population for a limited period of time. I’m sure an extra $500/month, for example, helps tremendously in case a small repair or emergency comes up, but it hardly allows a permanent break from the poverty cycle.
In 2020, Time Magazine published one of a series of articles on economic equality in America and hailed Martin Luther King, Jr.’s call for economic justice as “revolutionary”. And indeed it was. In order for our elected officials to have the “will” to permanently eradicate poverty, we have to think and feel differently about the poor — we have to manifest “a revolution of values”. As Dr. King saw the problem, poverty, like unemployment, lack of education and lack of hope are as violent as shooting someone.
To address interrelated evils, King called for a revolution of values. He saw violence as not coming just from the barrel of a gun. Poverty is violence; unemployment is violence; lack of education and hope are violence. Non-violence, in contrast, seeks to appreciate and value the humanity and work of every person, and to build coalitions with all who seek a better life.
Dr. King and the people who were part of his non-violent movement also saw the incredible value in “building coalitions” among like-minded groups of people to achieve a single goal. Earlier this month,
published an interview with one of Dr. King’s close confidants and speech writer, Clarence Jones, who recently turned 93. He is adamant that little of what was achieved would have been possible without the coalition formed between the Black and Jewish communities in the 1950’s and 1960’s:“As powerful as he was at moving the country, I tell everybody, there’s no way in hell that he or we would have achieved what we achieved without the coalition support of the American Jewish community.”
Jones especially gives credit to Stanley Levinson, who also advised King and helped write his speeches, and Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, who marched alongside King in Selma, Alabama. He remembers being on the picket lines and talking to Jewish protesters who told him about their own families’ experiences in the Holocaust.
“There would have been no Civil Rights Act of 1964, no Voting Rights Act of 1965, had it not been for the coalition of blacks and Jews that made it happen,” Jones says.
It’s not just our leaders who must form coalitions to achieve their goals, it’s we the people, too. Isn’t it obvious that our only hope for change is working together, not against one another?
_________________________________________________________________
What are your thoughts on Martin Luther King, Jr.’s call to eliminate poverty? How are we doing nearly 60 years later? Leave your ideas in the Comment Section below.
And if you are not already a subscriber, don’t forget to sign up for a free subscription to The Poverty Trap and/or upgrade to paid!
Glad your feeling better and I believe MLK was an extraordinary visionary and practical leader that if not been assassinated would have achieved many more memorable and achievable goals. May his memory stir the souls of like minded people who continue in his quest for a more perfect Union.