Thanks for the feedback, Blake. And Brad, I think you've addressed Blake's point well.
I am indeed addressing a modern audience, but even in 1960, I would be making the same points. MLK's movement was right and good not because he was perfect, but because what he was saying and advocating for was right and good on its own merits. One need…
Thanks for the feedback, Blake. And Brad, I think you've addressed Blake's point well.
I am indeed addressing a modern audience, but even in 1960, I would be making the same points. MLK's movement was right and good not because he was perfect, but because what he was saying and advocating for was right and good on its own merits. One need only point to the Founding Fathers and their obvious, sometimes horrifying flaws to make a concordant point and show just how destructive and limiting this line of argumentation would be for anyone—"White America" included.
Good is good and right is right, and the imperfection of the messenger has no bearing on the message itself.
Thanks for the feedback, Blake. And Brad, I think you've addressed Blake's point well.
I am indeed addressing a modern audience, but even in 1960, I would be making the same points. MLK's movement was right and good not because he was perfect, but because what he was saying and advocating for was right and good on its own merits. One need only point to the Founding Fathers and their obvious, sometimes horrifying flaws to make a concordant point and show just how destructive and limiting this line of argumentation would be for anyone—"White America" included.
Good is good and right is right, and the imperfection of the messenger has no bearing on the message itself.
Well said.