by MattSavinar » Sun 09 Jul 2006, 10:44:48
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'M')att, Let's look at this from a slightly different angle. What I'm thinking is something like political or human rights activism. That's where it's possible to initiate change for others not for yourself. Look at the enormous influence people like Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Jr have had on human rights. Don't you think that these people had a positive influence on society? .
Not in the absence of an increasing availability of energy.
Take MLK as an example. Would the civil rights movement have been successfull had the economy not been growing at an unprecedented rate during the 1950s and 1960s, fueled by an unprecedented rise in energy availability?
Not likely.
Is it any coincidence that the progress in racial equality as measured by most any economic data has largely plateaued and in some cases actually receeded since U.S. domestic peak in 1971. I can't prove a connection, but I strongly suspect there is one.
As far as MLK's motivation for what he did, it had nothing to do with having a positive influence on society. He did what he did cause it got him laid. From Ralph Abernathy's biography:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')uch has been written in recent years about my friend's weakness for women. Had others not dealt with the matter in such detail, I might have avoided any commentary. Unfortunately, some of these commentators have told only the bare facts without suggesting the reasons why Martin might have indulged in such behavior. They have also left a false impression about the range of his activities.
Martin and I were away more often than we were at home; and while this was no excuse for extramarital relations, it was a reason. Some men are better able to bear such deprivations than others, though all of us in SCLC headquarters had our weak moments. We all understood and believed in the biblical prohibition against sex outside of marriage. It was just that he had a particularly difficult time with that temptation.
In addition to his personal vulnerability, he was also a man who attracted women, even when he didn't intend to, and attracted them in droves. Part of his appeal was his predominant role in the black community and part of it was personal. During the last ten years of his life, Martin Luther King was the most important black man in America. That fact alone endowed him with an aura of power and greatness that women found very appealing. He was a hero — the greatest hero of his age — and women are always attracted to a hero.
But he also had a personal charm that ingratiated him with members of the opposite sex. He was always gracious and courteous to women, whether they were attractive to him or not. He had perfect manners. He was well educated. He was warm and friendly. He could make them laugh. He was good company, something that cannot always be said of heroes. These qualities made him even more attractive in close proximity than he was at a distance.
Then, too, Martin's own love of women was apparent in ways that could not be easily pinpointed — but which women clearly sensed, even from afar. I remember on more than one occasion sitting on a stage and having Martin turn to me to say, "Do you see that woman giving me the eye, the one in the red dress?" I wouldn't be able to pick her out at such a distance, but already she had somehow conveyed to him her attraction and he in turn had responded to it. Later I would see them talking together, as if they had known one another forever. I was always a little bewildered at how strongly and unerringly this mutual attraction operated.
A recent biography has suggested without quite saying so that Martin had affairs with white women as well as black. Such a suggestion is without foundation. I can say with the greatest confidence that he was never attracted to white women and had nothing to do with them, despite the opportunities that may have presented themselves.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/mlking.asp
How old are you? My guess is you're on the young side and are still buying into our cultural myths including cultural myths regarding the social progress of the 20th century. Most of it only occurred because we had an energy pie that was growing, not because "people wanted to make a positive difference."