- My name's Dan Snow and I wanna tell you about History Hit TV. It's like the Netflix for history. Hundreds of exclusive
documentaries and interviews with the world's best historians. We've got an exclusive offer
available to fans of Timeline. If you go to History Hit TV, you can either follow the
information below this video, or just Google History Hit
TV and use the code TIMELINE, you get a special introductory offer. Go and check it out. In the meantime, enjoy this video. (suspenseful orchestral music) (lively orchestral music) (gentle orchestral music) - Good evening and welcome to "Open End." My name is David Susskind. Tonight, one of the great
Americans of our time, Dr. Martin Luther King. Our conversation with him will begin after this brief message. Dr. King, I want to thank you very deeply for taking time out
from an arduous schedule to come to New York and do
this program with me tonight. - Thank you. - I'd like to begin by asking you what significance does
the Birmingham story, the Birmingham struggle
that has just been concluded have in your view on the
overall Negro-white struggle in the United States? - Well, I think it has
a great significance in that Birmingham has been for many years the symbol of hardcore
resistance to desegregation, and I would say it has been the toughest city in the
country in race relations. It's been the most thoroughly
segregated city in America. It has had a terrible
record of police brutality and there have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than any other city. Now, in the movement, in the particular
movement that took place, I think we were able to dramatize the indignities and the injustices which Negroes confront in Birmingham and other places in the hardcore South. And by doing this, I think we were able to bring the issues so much to the surface that
everybody could see it. And after we reached the point
of getting basic agreements from the economic power structure, I think it said to people all over that the barriers or
the walls of segregation are crumbling in Birmingham
and they can crumble anywhere. By tackling the most difficult city, it seems to me that we were able to give impetus to other movements and say to people everywhere that it's just a matter of time now. - I wonder if you believe, Dr. King, that the Birmingham issue, the Birmingham violence
was the specific trigger which has set off the
explosions around the country, North and South. Was its violence, the attack on children, the use of police dogs
and police truncheons, were those the triggers that have ignited Englewood, New Jersey, and
other Southern communities and other Northern communities, more than any other incident to date? - Well, I think it's a
combination of two things. I think, on the one hand, the large number of people who
engaged in the demonstrations had something to do with it. In fact, more people were arrested for standing up for civil
rights in Birmingham than any other city in the country. Some 3,200 were arrested. So I think the mass
quality of the movement had its arousing effects and its repercussions
in other communities, along with the indignities, the brutality, and the violence
perpetrated against Negroes. I think these two things arouse Negroes all over the country, and all people of
goodwill, for that matter. And I'm sure that things
that are happening in other communities, North and South, at this very time, to a
large extent came into being as a result of the mass quality of the movement in Birmingham and the violence
perpetrated against Negroes. - Dr. King, subsequent to
the Birmingham situation, we have read a lot about the
behind-the-scene maneuvering of the attorney general, Robert Kennedy, and Mr. Burke Marshall. How effective was our Justice Department and, specifically, Mr.
Kennedy and Mr. Marshall, in effecting a final
resolution in Birmingham? You were on the scene. You
were the pivot of the action. How effective were they? - Well, I would say that
they were quite effective in at least making it possible for us to have open channels of communication. We had not had any real dialogue prior to the coming of Mr. Burke Marshall. We had made some approaches and some attempts had been
made to open negotiations, but it never got off the ground. And I do think that with the coming of
the Justice Department and Mr. Marshall in the picture, some channels of communication opened that wouldn't have opened as soon. Now, I'm sure they would
have eventually opened because of the persistent power of those engaged in the movement. But I think it helped to
bring it about earlier. - [David] Were they,
in your view, Dr. King, late in anticipating the
extent of the violence? Were they delinquent in
getting there soon enough? - Well, I think they
could've gotten there sooner. All along, we had called to the attention of the Justice Department many of the things that were taking place that were symptoms of grave injustices and we had many things happening. In fact, the whole process, we felt, was a tragic deprivation of
basic constitutional rights and we constantly called
these to the attention of the Justice Department and they did-
- How did they respond? - At first, they said that there was nothing that they could do because constitutional
questions were not involved. At least, the attorney general
did not have the power, the legislative power, the power backed up by the
legislative branch of government to move in. The attorney general
has the power to move in and initiate suits in
the area of voting rights when denials are made in that area, but they contended that they had no power in the other areas. And it went on like this until things started getting out of hand in terms of the violence on
the part of the police force. And this is when they
came in the situation. - I wanted to ask you, in your view, is the Negro community
of the United States aflame as never before? And is the suspicion or the fear of some that we are on a collision course between the impatience of the Negro and the procrastination
of the white community. Is that fear well-grounded? - Well, I think there is
no doubt about the fact that the Negro is more determined now than ever before to be free. I think that that is a discontent
in the Negro community, a frustration and an impatience,
if we can use that word, that we haven't seen before. I've been around the country
for the last few days speaking for freedom rallies and I don't think I've ever seen the Negro population of our nation more aroused and more determined as I have seen on these particular trips. And I think it has reached the point now that there will be no stopping points short of justice and freedom. And I think the great challenge ahead is for the people of goodwill to see that the Negro is through with tokenism, through with gradualism, and through with
see-how-far-you've-come-ism. And he's determined now to
gain these basic rights, which have been guaranteed
by the Constitution and God-given rights, and yet
they've not been carried out. It really grows out of blasted hopes because we all responded to
the Supreme Court's decision of 1954 with a great sense of hope. This came to us as a great
beacon light of hope, and yet, after eight years or more, we've come to see that integration has moved about 1% a
year, of students a year. And moving at this pace,
it will take 92 more years to integrate the schools, the public schools of the South. And then, outside of the South, we see de facto segregation
growing every day. The ghetto continues to exist and the endless frustrations that develop as a result of economic deprivation and social isolation will naturally cause the kind of discontent that we now have in the Negro community. And I think it is colliding
with another force that must ultimately give and recognize the urgency of the moment. - Do you fear that if
the pace of desegregation and integration is not sufficiently swift that violence is inevitable and that your own nonviolent movement may be overridden by the
militancy of the Negro community? - Well, realism impels me to admit that if we cannot speed up
the process, so to speak, if we can't move on and
break down these barriers of segregation and discrimination, out of frustration and despair, many Negroes may turn to violence and other courses of action that they wouldn't ordinarily respond to, that they wouldn't ordinarily
use as a technique. And I think there is an
urgency about the situation and I think if the nonviolent
movement is not supported and if there are not
attempts made at every hand to give support to those
who are trying to work out something through the creative
channel of nonviolence, then it may open the door for the more extremist groups to come in and really take over to the point that they will serve as
the outlet for many Negroes who become desperately impatient. - Dr. King, we've been led
to believe the president is preparing a civil rights message proposing new legislation. If this legislation is watered down or insufficient for the Negro purposes, or it is killed in
filibuster in the Senate, what would be the
aftermath, in your opinion, among the Negro people in this country? - I think the aftermath would
be a deeper frustration, a deeper discontent, which would inevitably
lead to deeper bitterness on the part of many Negroes. And with this kind of bitterness emerging, it can develop into a
very explosive situation. I mean explosive in terms of violence. And I must make it clear
that I'm not advocating this and I'm not predicting this, but I'm trying to analyze the problem realistically and honestly. I think if we don't get a
strong civil rights message and proposal from the president, and if we don't get an
actual implementation of it on the part of Congress, we will see ourselves in a
deeper situation of chaos. And I think this makes it even more urgent for the forces of goodwill
to really work hard to get it through. This is why I've said in recent days that it's unfortunate that the president may be out of the
country during the period when so many forces need to be mobilized and when the tremendous weight and prestige of the
president will be needed to mobilize these forces because I'm sure the South is thinking now in terms of talking the bill away, filibustering, and this will be tragic. It would be unfortunate. And I think it can lead to
a darker night of terror. - Dr. King, are you optimistic about the effectiveness
of the upcoming message? Will it, in your view, in terms of the political
insights you have, will it be sufficient in
what it asks of the Congress? And are you also optimistic about passage of whatever is proposed? - Well, I think the bill will be a fairly strong bill if it follows what has been reported in the press. I do think we need something like the kind of public
accommodations bill which would prohibit
discrimination in any business that is engaged in interstate commerce. I think this is good and
it would do a great deal to end segregation in many of the hotels and restaurants and other
businesses throughout the South. And I think there is a great need to speed up the process of
public school integration. As I said a few minutes ago, this has really been a frustrating
and a very slow process and something has to be done. Now, if the bill calls for a speed-up in the integration process in the schools, I think this will be very
good and very helpful. Now, as far as the possibility of passage, I am not optimistic about it passing if certain things aren't done to bring the necessary moral
and creative pressure to bear so that congressmen will
see the necessity of this. For instance, I think, as
I said a few minutes ago, the president himself must
do more than issue a call, make certain recommendations. - What would you
recommend he do, Dr. King? Should he give fireside chat on it? - I think so. I think he should give
fireside chats on it and I think more than
one would be necessary. I think the president
should also have conferences with congressmen and get them, try to persuade them to see the necessity of passing this bill. And I think he would need to talk with certain groups across the country so that it will create a climate, a civil rights concern will be created and people all over the country will be writing their senators and their representatives
in Congress on this issue. I think these things
are absolutely necessary and I think the devotees of civil rights will have to do something. I mean, I think the civil rights leaders and all of the Negroes in the country, as well as our allies
in the white community, will have to do something. And I don't throw out the idea of the necessity of a march on Washington, even sit-ins in Congress,
to get this issue dramatized so much that
it cannot be ignored. - March on Washington
by Negroes and whites? - Yes.
- All citizens? - Yes, I'm thinking now of all people of goodwill who are concerned about the American dream and the implementation
of the basic principles of our democracy. And this would include Negroes and whites, and I think it would have more power if it is an interracial
march calling upon our nation to bring into being these just laws which will take us on a long, long way toward the American dream. - In the recent meeting
between James Baldwin, Lena Horne, Harry Belafonte, and other prominent Negroes
with the attorney general, the suggestion was made that the president could make a very dramatic
contribution to the issue by taking the University
of Alabama Negro applicants to the school himself. The attorney general was reported to have recoiled at this idea, to have been stunned or
horrified, or taken aback. Do you think the president
of the United States should go to that dramatic degree by way of using moral power of his office? - Yes, I think so. I have said on several
occasions in recent days that this would be the
kind of meaningful act and the kind of dramatic thrust that would make it
clear all over the world that we mean business when we talk about basic human rights and democracy and guaranteeing these basic
rights to all citizens. And I think we have come
to the point in our nation that we need this kind of moral witness on the part of the highest official and the most respected
citizen in our nation. It would give a sense
of hope to the Negro. It would give a sense of support to the many, many white
people of goodwill, North and South, who have
been working in this area. And it would do a great deal to lift the image of the United States in the eyes of the world, people of all countries who are looking and they are seeing all
of these bad things. But to see this as a great moral act would do a great deal, I think, to give us a better
image all over the world. - Dr. King, we must pause
for just a brief moment. We'll be right back. Find the president of
the United States to date wanting in the way in which he has used the moral power of his
office, moral suasion? And if you do find him wanting, and your remarks up to this time seem to suggest that you do, what has been his motive do
you think in holding back? - Well, I must honestly confess that the president hasn't
done all that he could do and that we would like to see him do in the area of civil rights. I don't want to be unfair in my criticism. I want to say, on the one hand, that the president has done some significant things in civil rights. And I think he is basically
a man of genuine goodwill who wants to do the right thing and I could point to some
of the things that he's done that have been helpful. On the other hand, President
Kennedy has not yet given the leadership that the
enormity of the problem demands. He has failed to live up
to his campaign promises. He has not gone on record calling for any meaningful
civil rights legislation up to now, and if he
does in the coming days, we will welcome this, but he has not done it in the past. And, of course, there is still the need to use the power of moral persuasion to a greater degree
than he has in the past. This is one area where the
president has not moved with a great sense of urgency. - Why has he hedged do you think? Political considerations? Southern votes? - I think it boils down to a fear of arousing the ire of
Southern congressmen, many of whom hold the leadership in basic and important
committees in Congress. And it may be that the president feels that his other legislative
program can't get through if he makes these senators
and congressmen too angry on the civil rights issue. My position has been that this
issue is a basic moral issue, I mean, the civil rights issue. And that many of the Southerners
are going to take a stand against the president's
legislative program, I mean, other phases of his
legislative program anyway. And it is better to go down
taking a strong moral position than to lose out when you have hedged on a basic moral principle. And I think this is a
choice before the president. He must start now making moral decisions rather than purely political decisions. And I think in the final analysis, he will be supported in the country. It's very seldom that an
individual in the political world has an opportunity to do
that which is morally right and politically expedient simultaneously. But I think this is one
issue that is morally right, on the one hand, and politically
expedient on the other. I think the president will discover that if he took a forthright
courageous stand on this issue, he would get great support from
people all over the country, particularly in the big,
industrial urban areas of the North and the West, and in the final analysis,
will elect the president. - Dr. King, will the coming showdown between Governor Wallace
and the federal government on the admission of the two Negro students to the University of Alabama, in your view, will that lead
to new violence in Alabama? There are a thousand
troops stationed there. The Negro community
probably awaits the event. If Governor Wallace were to
do a Governor Barnett act and attempt to prevent the
entry himself physically with his troops, would that lead to an
outbreak of new violence? - Well, I think there is this danger that there's a real possibility. Now, in recent days, Governor
Wallace has backed up a bit and he has gone on television
calling for nonviolence and calling for peace and orderliness. And how much influence this
will have, I don't know. I feel now that Governor Wallace has been under so much pressure from the political power
structure of the state, the economic power structure,
the business leaders, and the ecclesiastical power structure. The ministers from all over
have said to Governor Wallace, "This is the wrong course of action," the attorney general of the
state, the lieutenant governor. And I think he's been
under so much pressure that he may change his course of action and try to follow through on some token political
promise that he made yet at the same time, try to
keep violence from erupting. If this happens, it may be
possible to prevent violence. On the other hand, if the
governor over the next few days persists in his determination
to stand in the door and place the troops, the state troopers of
Alabama, over against, trying to block the entrance
of the Negro students and then a showdown comes between the state and
the federal government, there is a danger that the
violent forces of the state will become so aroused that
they will resort to violence and will unconsciously
and consciously feel that they are aided and
abetted by Governor Wallace in all that they are doing. So it's difficult to say. I think we must realize that
it's a dangerous situation and Governor Wallace has
done a grave injustice not only to Alabama
but to the whole nation by embarking on such an
irresponsible course of action. - Dr. King, has the pressure of events and the frustration of the
Negro, in seeking his rights, made your philosophy, your
doctrine of nonviolence, more difficult to preach effectively? Within your own people, is there now a militancy that is damaging your theology of nonviolence? - Well, at this point, I don't think so. I must make it clear that
I don't advocate a weak and a sort of complacent nonviolence. I advocate a militant nonviolence, a movement that moves on, a resistance movement that does resist, but it does it nonviolently. Now, I am as impatient as anybody about the slow pace of
the desegregation process, and I feel that we've got to
move on in a very vigorous, forthright, and determined manner. My only insistence is that
it would be both impractical and immoral to try to make violence our major thrust or to try
to make violence a method that we will use to get to
the goal of integration. And, as I said, I think it's
just downright impractical, even if one doesn't take the moral questions under consideration. Now, it is true that
because of the failure of the forces of goodwill to rally around the democratic ideal and the whole process of integration, many people in the Negro community have become so impatient
that they've become bitter. And it is more difficult to get over in a situation like this the
philosophy of nonviolence. It makes the job much more difficult. When we are moving on and
people see this creative outlet, it's easier for them to remain
true to the nonviolent creed. But when things are slow and even those who are leaders
in the nonviolent movement are considered
rabble-rousers and agitators, then it does make the
job much more difficult to get this philosophy over. And I would be the first one to admit that with the growth of the movement and with it rising to such
astronomical proportions in terms of numbers, and with all of the communities
that are now rising up, it means that we're gonna
have to spend more time and get more hands to help
us work in these communities so that we will be sure that at least we've tried to get over the meaning of the whole
philosophy of nonviolence. - What was your reaction
to the reported reaction of Attorney General Kennedy at the meeting with Mr. Baldwin? The reports were in The New York Times and other reliable papers, that the attorney general was stunned at the extent of militancy,
anger, and impatience that he found among these Negro artists. Was this an ingenuous reaction? Had he so misread the temper
of the American Negro? - Well, I think this is a real possibility and I think many white people of goodwill, many who are even fairly
close to the Negro community, fail to realize the
seriousness of this problem and the mood of the Negro, the impatience and the
discontent of the Negro. I think that many people
failed to see this and it isn't that they are
not people of goodwill. On the whole, they understand the depths and dimensions of the problem, but they just haven't been able to see this new determination
on the part of the Negro and the new determination
itself has grown out of this impatience and
this great discontent so that I'm not surprised to know that some left with the conclusion that the attorney general
didn't realize this because I've seen others
who have been very concerned about the problem of racial injustice but somehow had not been able to understand or to see
this growing militancy in the Negro community. - Does the reaction of the
Northern and Western Negro against de facto segregation in housing and lack of equal job opportunity contain the same elements
of violence potential as we are seeing in the South today? - I think so and sometimes even more. Because, in the South, the system of segregation
is legal and therefore overt and it's easier to get at at points. It's out in the open so
you can tackle it legally. You can tackle it through
nonviolent demonstrations and other forces, and you can see pockets
of progress here and there in the South. You can look back and say, well, a year ago, I couldn't
go to the lunch counters, but now we can go. A year ago, I couldn't go in the hotels in this particular city, but now I can go. A year ago, we could
not go in the theaters, but now we can go. So you do see progress at certain levels. It's just token progress,
but it can be seen. Now, in the North, it's different. Since segregation is not legal, it has to be subtle, it has to be covert. And because of the growing
problems around this, often the Negro can only see retrogress. If he lives in a city like Detroit, he recognizes that he is about
28 or 30% of the population and yet almost 70% of the unemployed. Because of discrimination and the fact that
Negroes have been limited to unskilled and semiskilled labor, a force called automation comes into being and these are the jobs that pass away, so that the Negroes are the ones who suffer most at this point in the large industrial
areas of the North. And I think because of this unemployment, because of the continued
existence of the ghetto, and these things are
involved together, you see. The evils of employment discrimination and housing discrimination
are caught together. If a man doesn't have
enough money to live, he certainly can't get adequate housing. And even if he has money,
in so many instances, he can't get it. - Is he ready to march, to demonstrate? To do the kind of thing that
the Southern Negro has done? Is he at that point, in your opinion?
- Oh, yes, I think so. I've been in several
Northern communities recently and I would say that the vast majority of Negroes in these communities are so concerned about this issue and so frustrated about it that they are willing now more than ever to take this issue to the
point of engaging in mass, nonviolent demonstrations. In fact, we've seen some of it in Philadelphia in recent days where they had mass picketing
and mass demonstrations. Some of it even erupted into violence. Now, I think this is a real possibility in cities all over the North where the Negro is just caught up in the crippling shackles of frustration and even despair.
- Do you see Washington D.C. as a particular danger point? With Malcolm X having moved there, with the Negroes being the
majority of the population, with job discrimination, and ghettoizing being so deeply embedded in the nation's capital, do you see Washington as a
particular point of explosion? - Well, this is a
community that can explode like many others. And I don't think it will only be because of Malcolm X moving there. My contention is that if we keep moving and if we can solve the problem by a continued working at it, then Malcolm X and the Muslims
won't have an influence. I don't think they've
had anywhere as near, I mean, as much influence
as many would think. At points, his movement have
been a sort of paper tiger. But I would say that these communities, like Washington, and
Washington, as you say, is a majority Negro population, has a majority Negro population, these communities can explode into a terrible racial nightmare
if something isn't done. And I think it can be warded off by vigorous programs on the
part of the federal government and on the part of
local state governments. In other words, it will be
determined by the degree to which the political leaders and other leaders will meet the problem head-on and Washington is a good example. If the leaders in Washington,
backed up by the president, will see the dangerous possibilities and set out to deal with the problem of housing discrimination
and employment discrimination and, certainly, the Negro confronts this in Washington and all over, then there will be a ray of hope. Now, the president is considering doing something about
eliminating discrimination in federal construction programs. This is just one level, but it
does represent some progress if he can get an executive
order through on that. And this will make new jobs for Negroes. And where you have new jobs and the Negro sees that he's moving from the periphery of American society to the point of being involved and knowing that he has something to lose, then he will not feel the need of responding with violent reactions. - Dr. King, we have to
pause again very briefly. We'll be back in a moment. Dr. King, you have been
reported very recently as saying that you no
longer fear the Ku Klux Klan or the White Citizens' Council as much as you have begun
to fear the white moderate, that he is the bone in the
throat of Negro progress. Would you implement that statement and tell us what you mean by that? - Yes, well, I guess
I entered this period, I was catapulted into the leadership of the civil rights struggle during the Montgomery bus boycott. And I entered the struggle at that point having great faith in the moderates in the White community feeling that the
moderates would understand and that we would have
great allies in our struggle from the so-called moderates. But in recent years, I've come to see that
these are often the people who stand in the way of progress because they are committed
only in a lukewarm manner and every time you move to
try to solve the problem, they will respond by saying,
"You're moving too fast. "You oughta cool off. You
should put on brakes." And they end up more devoted
to order than to justice and are more devoted to maintaining a sort of negative peace, which is merely the absence of tension, than gaining a positive peace, which is the presence of justice. And they can always say to you that you should wait for
a more convenient season. And I've come to see
that these are the people that often stand in the way because they get close enough to you to at least discuss your plans and they become friendly
enough to talk with you, you at least have dialogue with them, but they want to stand in the
way of every move forward. And this has been my disappointment. I think, at times, it is better to have outright rejection and misunderstanding from people of ill will than to have lukewarm acceptance
from people of goodwill. It is better to have
absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will than to have partial understanding
from people of goodwill. And this is what we're seeing every day in our struggle in the South, that many of the moderates
of the white South and many of them mean well. And I shouldn't only say the South. But the moderates all over
stand in the way of progress because they refuse to
understand the problem and they live by the myth of time, failing to realize that time
will not solve the problem and there is a danger that the moderate will live by this myth believing that if you just leave things alone and not push too much, time
will solve the problem. It has always been my contention that this is an invalid view because it goes out with the idea that there is something in the very nature and structure of time that will miraculously solve all problems, and time really is neutral. It can be used either
constructively or destructively. And at times, I think
the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than the people of goodwill. - Many astute and experienced observers of the Washington scene describe the mood of the administration in the area of racial relations
as one of bleak despair because they feel, the
administration, say these reporters, that they cannot possibly
legislate or executive order or innovate enough fast enough to accommodate the surging expectations and want of the Negro community. That they could not possibly keep up with the appetite for progress that the Negroes want in this country. Would you comment on that? - Well, I think they can. I don't think that despair needs to exist. I think the administration must recognize that the harvest of disruption that we now see over the country is here because of seeds of inaction planted over the last several years. If, for instance, the president
had taken a real stand on the moral issues of integration in 1954 after the Supreme Court
rendered its decision, things would be different now. But because of the failure
of President Eisenhower to take a forthright moral stand, a vacuum set in, and
the forces of opposition were able to organize and
crystallize our position, and this set us back for a period. I think the new administration will have to see the
necessity of making up. It's just as simple as he
who gets behind in a race must forever remain behind or run faster than the man in front. And we've got to see that we
have gotten behind in the race of really following
through on the executive and the legislative levels, even on the things that have been done through the judicial
branch of the government. Now, I think through a
combination of efforts, this problem can be solved. I think the new administration
must see the necessity of moving through executive orders, through legislative channels,
and through moral persuasion. And I always keep that at the forefront because I think there's a great
deal that can be done here. I was in India some few years ago and I had spent a good deal of time studying the problem of
caste untouchability, which is quite similar
to our problem here. It was very interesting to me to notice that India had made much more progress in grappling with this
problem than we've made. And I came to the conclusion that this progress had been
made for two or three reasons. First, when the new
nation came into being, when they received independence, it was placed in the Constitution that to discriminate
against an untouchable was a crime punishable by imprisonment. But not only that, India
always had great symbols standing up in a moral way against it. For instance, Mahatma Gandhi
adopted an untouchable as his daughter against
the will even of his wife. And when I was in India some six weeks, Prime Minister Nehru made
four different speeches in which he morally condemned
caste untouchability. And yet, we very seldom, if ever, hear the president of the United States speaking to the nation on the
moral issues of integration. When they speak, it's usually, "This is the law and we must obey the law. "We are a nation of laws and not men." Never saying that James Meredith should go to the University of Mississippi because integration is right
and because he's your brother. And I think that with all of
these forces working together, the legislative, the executive, and moral persuasion on
the part of the president, we can do this catching up. But the danger is that we will just do a few token things here and there, and it's just like applying
Vaseline to a cancer. We must move away from
the approach of tokenism and see the necessity
for a vigorous program. - Dr. King, Mr. James Baldwin
has emerged very recently as an important spokesman for the Negro community in America. I'm sure you would attest to his eloquence and his brilliance. But I wonder whether
you feel he does damage with such remarks as his
comment on the Black Muslims. "It's the only movement in the country "you can call grassroots. "I hate to say that, but it's true. "They talk and articulate
for all the Negroes. "They articulate their suffering." Or this comment on you,
on Martin Luther King, "A rare and great man. "He has great moral
authority in the South. "He has gone through hell to
awaken the American conscience, "but he has reached the end of the road. "Martin is undercut by the country." Now, is he doing a disservice in his backhanded support of the Muslims? And is he doing a
disservice when he suggests that your nonviolent
creed, credo is passe? - Well, I think James Baldwin is certainly an eloquent writer and a profound thinker and I think he has analyzed
the depths of this problem in a very fine way. Now, this doesn't mean that I agree with everything that he says. I wish he could see not only the negative reaction
of the Muslim movement but the very beautiful and creative way that thousands and thousands
of Negroes are using to get out of the dilemma
of racial injustice. And I do think that this
is a grassroots movement. The real grassroots movement is a movement that is taking
place all over the South today where thousands and thousands of people have a new sense of dignity and destiny, and they feel that there
is a creative channel through which they can
channelize their legitimate and healthy discontent. And I think it is
necessary to be discontent, but I think it's a healthy discontent. - Doesn't Jim Baldwin seem to
be saying, on the one hand, destiny dictates progress and
equality now, which is fine. But doesn't he, on the other hand, seem to be waving a fist in the air and saying, if you don't, the Black Muslim solution is inevitable and beware because it means real, serious, violent trouble for you. Is that not a disservice by
raising the flag of the Muslims? - Well, I wouldn't want
to falsely represent him. I don't know if he's advocating this. Speaking as a social analyst, I think we would all agree
that if something isn't done and done in a hurry, there is
a danger that, out of despair, Negroes will turn more and more to Black nationalist ideologies. I'm not saying all Negroes, but more of them have turned
in the last few years. Now, that's one thing but
to advocate this is another. And I'm not able to say whether James Baldwin is advocating that the Negro will turn
to the Muslim movement to have things resolved.
- Seems to be a warning. - Yes. - I wonder, in a recent
television interview, he said that President Kennedy would have a difficult
time enlisting Negroes in an invasion attempt
should one become necessary, for they were not prepared to
fight and die for a country that would not grant them
freedom and equality. In your view, at this point, are many Negroes unwilling to support our country militarily? - Well, I don't think that at this point, the Negro has reached a
position of utter despair. I think the amazing thing is
that the Negro hadn't turned to movements that really
thrive on despair. This is the amazing thing to me, that out of 20 million Negroes in America, all of the Black nationalist
movements together haven't been able to get hardly
more than 100,000 members. This is the amazing thing and this reveals that
the Negro has not yet turned to the point of
giving up altogether and given up with a sense of hopelessness. I think there is still
a great sense of hope and a basic faith in America on the part of the American Negro. - [David] If we were faced with a military crisis at this moment, the Negro would render unto his country that which he has always rendered. - Oh, I think so. I don't think the vast majority of Negroes would turn against the
country in the time of war. I don't see that kind of
despair at this point. I don't know what it would turn out to be if events go the other way and we see more retrogress than progress. But I don't think that there
is this kind of despair at this point that the Negro
would turn against the nation. - Malcolm X recently, very recently, said that "any Negro who
teaches other Negroes "to turn the other cheek
is disarming that Negro." Will you comment on that? - Well, I think he
would have to understand of turning the other cheek and
the strength of nonviolence. I think too often we think
of this as a weak approach and a sort of philosophy
that means you get caught up in stagnant passivity
and deadening complacency where you just sit down
and accept injustice. Now, there is a world of difference between nonresistance to evil
and nonviolent resistance. Now, I do not advocate
nonresistance to evil. I advocate nonviolent resistance, which means turning the other cheek in a very powerful and creative way. And really this approach ends
up disarming the opponent. It has a marvelous strategy
even beyond the moral question. Now, I think the reason
one should be nonviolent is for moral reasons in the final analysis because this is morally right. But it has a power of
disarming the opponent. It exposes his moral defenses.
It weakens his morale. And at the same time, it
works on his conscience. - It's a powerful dosage.
- And I think that Malcolm X is altogether wrong if he thinks that we can do
this by turning to violence. I'm not saying that he's saying that. But if this is even implied, I think we would get the other results. If we would turn to violence, we couldn't do these other things. It would really lead to the position of having state militias being
used by Southern governors to kill and destroy a
lot of innocent Negroes under the pretense that
Negroes are inciting a riot. But with the method that
we've used up to now, it so frustrates the opponent that he just doesn't know how to react. If he doesn't put you in jail, wonderful, because nobody with any
sense loves to go to jail. But if he puts you in jail, you somehow in a creative
manner transform that jail from a dungeon of shame to a haven of freedom and human dignity and he doesn't know how to handle it. - We must pause again very briefly. Dr. King, Richard Rovere, in an article in The New Yorker magazine, said that "this is the
first administration "which viewed racial inequality
as morally reprehensible." First, I wonder, is this in your view the first administration? It seems to me that the
Eisenhower administration equally viewed with alarm, but was equally hedging in
the use of moral powers. But Mr. Rovere then went on to say that "it's unfortunate
that the Negro rebellion "has occurred during such
an administration's reign." In other words, he sorta
sanctifies this administration and thinks it's something of a pity that this explosion has occurred during the Kennedy administration. Has the Kennedy administration been any more morally alarmed than the Eisenhower administration? And is it unfortunate that the violence and dramatic explosion has occurred during the Kennedy administration? - Well, I think it may be true that the Kennedy
administration has done more in civil rights than the
Eisenhower administration, but this still doesn't say that the Kennedy
administration has done enough and that the moral
concern has been so great that it doesn't merit Negroes continuing to press on
in a very determined way. It merely means substituting
an inadequate performance for a miserable one. And I think that we all have, I mean, we all know that
there are many areas that have not been touched
by the new administration and things that could be
done to solve the problem that have not been done. So I would say that it is as necessary to stand up vigorously
against racial discrimination now and under the present administration as it was under any other administration. I don't think it is true that the Negro can afford
to relax his efforts simply because you have
a new administration that may have done a little more but still hasn't done enough. For instance, I think the president has done some very significant things that touched a certain segment
of the Negro population. But now there is need for
the kind of strong program that will improve the life
of all the masses of Negroes, so to speak, and this is a great concern
of all people of goodwill because if we don't get
this it will just be a sort of crystallization
of what we call tokenism where you get token gains here and there, you get appointments
of Negroes in positions that they've never been in, but the plight of the
vast majority of Negroes remains the same. And now we need the lift the life and make better conditions
for Negroes generally. - Do you think that the
appointment of the occasional Negro to a position of authority and
importance in the government, isn't that political window dressing? It doesn't really matter in the deep sense of creating a broad job equality or an all-out campaign
for voter registration or integration of schools. Isn't that a form of political chicanery? - Well, again, I wouldn't want to question the motives of the administration, the president, at this point. It may very well be that, but I don't want to question that. But I do feel that in the long run, it would be much better to
grapple with the problem from the causal source than to make a few
appointments here and there that may appease Negroes generally and make them feel that
a great job is being done when, at bottom, the
problem is still there. This becomes little more than a sort of tranquilizing approach that removes the emotional
stress for a moment but doesn't really get at the basic ill. - Dr. King, you have shaken a
warning and righteous finger at the whites of the United
States on many counts and rightfully, but I
wonder if the Negro himself has been active enough,
intelligent enough, and functional enough in the
use of his economic power? If a chain store system in
this country discriminates in the South, if a drug chain, if a theater chain discriminates, hasn't the Northern, Western,
and Middle Western Negro got enormous power of retaliation by withholding his patronage by boycotting such establishments? Why hasn't he been more effective in the use of his economic power? - Well, I think the Negro is recognizing more and more the power of
his own economic resources and the power that
develops when he withdraws his economic resources from businesses and industries that
discriminate against him on the basis of race. We've done this to a degree in most of our movements in the South. Most of the sit-ins, for
instance, have been followed by a strong economic boycott of the particular stores involved. Recently in Birmingham, we saw this and I'm convinced that one of the things that brought about the agreement and the final agreement to
integrate lunch counters, was that we had a boycott
of the downtown stores that was more than 97% effective. And this has existed in many communities where we've had sit-ins. Now, I think that this will
be broadened more and more on the question of employment. I have advocated a nationwide
selective buying program whereby we will go down the
list from industry to industry, business to business and
we will make it very clear that if our persons are not respected, then our dollar will no longer given. - Are there prime manufacturing offenders? Are there prime store offenders that the Northern and Western
Negro should know about and do something about? - At the present time,
studies are being made. We don't want to move out
and unjustly criticize or victimize anyone. We want to be sure that we have evidence of discrimination. And I have talked with
several people about this, people who are in positions of authority and who have the research facilities to determine which industries should come under this kind of attack because of discrimination in employment. I might say that we aren't satisfied with most of the industries in terms of their employment policy. Some are certainly doing
better than others. But there are very few industries- - [David] Are there are
some that are implacable, intransigent that you would wanna name? - Well, I wouldn't wanna
name a national one now because we are still in
the process of studying. Now, we've had selective buying campaigns going in local communities
for quite a while now. Philadelphia had a very strong
economic withdrawal program, a selective buying program. We've had it in Atlanta, Georgia, where the Southern Christian
Leadership Conference has its headquarters and
there were one or two. We started with the baking industry and there were one or two
bakeries that we had to boycott. But they finally came in line because of the power of the boycott. Now, this will be extended
on a national level so that there may be, say, 20 cities, we are thinking of something like this, that will boycott a particular product where there is outright discrimination and they refuse to do anything about it. Now, we will seek to negotiate first and if, through the
channel of negotiation, we can't get the situation rectified, we will have no alternative
but to tell our people that this particular business discriminates against
Negroes in employment and then we will urge them not to patronize these businesses. - Dr. King, a Danish reporter, Hans Ruben, in The Reporter magazine said "that if Dr. Martin
Luther King had been murdered "it would've stopped presses
all around the world. "But how do you explain to your editor "that the most amazing story "is that Dr. King is still alive?" Do you consider that a miracle? Is that a sign of some
form of negative progress as he seems to suggest? - Well, I don't know. I get threats every day
and they don't stop. They even grow greater
when movements develop like the Birmingham movement. I don't know what this
can be attributed to. I don't have any bodyguard
or anything like that. I don't even request protection
from the federal government although when I go into cities for large meetings to
speak and things like that, the communities usually
provide protection. - [David] Has the federal government ever offered you protection,
personal protection? - Yes, in some instances
when we've been in situations like the Freedom Rides in Montgomery when great threats came. Not in Birmingham because
the federal government hasn't been in in the
same sense that they were in Montgomery during the Freedom Rides. They had federal marshals there. In Birmingham, FBI men
are usually on the scene when I'm coming in or leaving. But I can only say that
nothing has been done as far as my life being taken. I guess I'm religious enough to say that this is the grace of God. But, as I said, there are
threats continue to come and we continue to go on knowing
that this course of action is in line with that
which is morally right. - Dr. King, do you think
that either political party has any particular medal of honor to wear in the civil rights? The Negro invariably gives his support to the Democratic Party, yet
it is the Democratic contingent from the South in the House and the Senate that invariably gives
the Negro legislation the most difficult time. This automatic wedding of the Negro vote to the Democratic Party, is that earned, and is it a healthy thing? - Well, I don't think
either political party can boast of clean hands in
the area of civil rights. I think both parties have
betrayed the cause of justice. The Democratic Party has
betrayed the cause of justice by capitulating to the
undemocratic practices of the Southern Dixiecrats. And I think the Republican
Party has betrayed the cause by capitulating to the blatant hypocrisy of many right-wing Northern Republicans. And it has been this coalition of right-wing Northern Republicans and Southern Dixiecrat
that has stood in the way of every progressive step
in civil rights legislation. So neither party can boast
of clean hands in this area. Now, I think, more and more, the Negro will vote for that
candidate and that party which will take a definite
stand on the basic issues of human rights and all the
issues that go along with it and that will do something about it, not just verbal affirmation but
in terms of concrete action. And I don't think any political party will be able to boast
that it has the Negro in its vest pocket. And I think this is good. - But it has. The Democratic Party has, in fact, had and continues to have the
Negro vote in its vest pocket. 70, 80% of the Negro
community in the big cities, Detroit, Chicago, New York, vote straight down the Democratic line. Isn't the Negro, in voting that way, doing himself a disservice? - Well, I think the Negro is caught in a very difficult position here. On the one hand, the Democratic Party has been a little closer
to the masses of people on bread and butter issues. And outside of the South, Negroes have been able to see a degree of progressive liberalism within the Democratic Party. And here is the dilemma that you have this schizophrenic personality
at the center of a party, wherein, on the one hand, you see a progressive liberal thrust and on the other hand,
you see this backward reactionary thrust on the part
of the Southern Dixiecrats. And it presents a dilemma of the Negro choosing between
the issue of civil rights and the social welfare issues on the other hand.
- Medicare and school education bill and so forth.
- Yes. - But I wonder, for example,
whether the Republican Party wins any votes for the
effort, for example, in the House of Representatives recently of John Lindsay and other congressmen to initiate on their own resources effective civil rights legislation, not waiting on a presidential message. Do they earn Negro accolades? - Well, I think this could
become increasingly true if the Republican Party would somehow throw the yoke of division from its own shoulders. Now, there again, the Negro face dilemma because just as you have an Eastland in the Democratic Party, you have a Goldwater
in the Republican Party who will come down south
and make a speech and say that the Supreme Court's decision
isn't the law of the land and who just yesterday made it clear that he's not sure whether he will support civil rights legislation. So it is a dilemma for the Negro. When he looks to the Republican Party, he sees the same schizophrenia, he sees the same division between the progressive
Javits and the Cases and in the middle Dirskens and the reactionary Goldwaters so that you do run into a real- - Then the Negro should
begin to vote for the man and not the party. Wouldn't that be the
more effective solution? - I think this will happen more and more. And this has been true
that in many communities, Negroes in the North have
voted for liberal Republicans over against what they
considered a Democrat who didn't quite come up to this person. - Does your being a minister give you the ultimate
conviction that your mission of equality of opportunity,
equality of education, and so forth, is going to
be accomplished peacefully where the facts of history
are that human rights are almost always won in
violence and bloodshed and a manifested impatience
by taking up arms? Do you grow a little bit pessimistic about the philosophy of
nonviolent resistance, however militant that nonviolence is? - No, I am more convinced now than ever before that nonviolence, a nonviolent resistance,
is the most potent weapon available to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom and justice. I think the aftermath is much greater for everybody involved. The aftermath of violence is bitterness and you've got to spend another 100 years getting rid of the bitterness created as a result of the violent revolution. Wherein, the aftermath of nonviolence is redemption and the possibility of the creation of the beloved community. Now, in recent years we have seen nations gain their independence where
colonialism was a problem. And we have seen groups within nations gain better opportunities
without violence. Examples would be India. There are nations in
Africa that came into being not out of on the basis of violence but on the basis of nonviolent protest. Ghana would be an example, Nigeria, and many other nations in Africa. They have come into being as a result of the persistent agitation on the part of the masses of people who followed a nonviolent
course of action. And I think the best and
largest example was India. Now, I think that it is even more urgent to follow nonviolence in a situation where you are seeking to gain your rights within a nation that you're
gonna have to live in even after these rights come. In the colonial struggle or
the struggle for independence, you're seeking to drive
a foreign invader out. Wherein when you're seeking integration, you are seeking an adjustment
and better conditions in a situation where you will be living with the very people the next morning. And I think it is even more necessary in such a situation to follow nonviolence because the one thing
that nonviolence says is that your aim is not
to destroy or annihilate the opponent but to win his
friendship and understanding. And you engage in your protest activities in order to arouse the
conscience of the opponent and in order to bring
the issue to the surface so that everybody can
see it and deal with it, but you are not trying to get rid of him. And this is why I think it's so important to remain true to nonviolence. - Excuse me for just one
minute. Another intermission. Representative Adam Clayton Powell observed a few days ago that
there's very little difference between the North and the South in the matter of race relations "except, that I would say," he said, "that there is more hypocrisy in the North "and more honesty in the South." Would you agree with that? - Well, I would certainly
say there's some truth in the idea that there is a great deal of hypocrisy in the North and the Southern white man is more honest in coming right out and saying openly what
he feels about the Negro. On the other hand, I think
there is a difference and I would not want
to give the impression that the problem is the same in degree in the South and the North. In the South, as I said earlier, the problem is that of
getting rid of segregation and bringing into being
a desegregated society as well as an integrated one. So that we've got to get desegregation as well as integration. In the North, by and large,
you have desegregation and the real job of the North
is to become integrated. You have the legal sanction of the system in many areas of the South. And because of this,
it means that you have the job of getting rid of
the system of segregation which is legal as well as
moving onto that higher system which deals with attitudes,
deals with mutual acceptance, genuine inter-group, and
inter-personal living so that there is this difference. Now, I do feel that the North
must be eternally vigilant and it must not become complacent because if this happens, many of the subtle types of discrimination will continue to grow and develop and they will become as great, the de facto segregation of the North, will become as great as the
legal segregation in the South. - Dr. King, don't you honestly feel that Representative Adam Clayton Powell is a terrible millstone in the sense of his
appalling absentee record as a legislator, in the sense of his flagrant personal behavior, and in the sense of his almost
incessant racial mongering for self-serving political purposes? Doesn't he do your community poor service? - Well, I wouldn't like to pass judgment on Congressman Powell. I'm sure that there are many things that he does and sometimes
things that he says that we would question and there
are points of disagreement, but I wouldn't want to
pass judgment on him. I think this is something
that he has to face with his own conscience and- - He has a lot of conscience-
- With his own commitment.
- Facing to do, you'll agree? - Well, I think that there are some things that he should face and I'm sure there are
mistakes that he has made. I think, on the one hand,
he has done some good things and he has been a voice for civil rights and he
has tried to keep the issue before the forefront of
the national community. On the other hand, he has done some things that there could be improvement on. But, as I said, I'm not
one to pass judgment. I think Congressman Powell will have to face this
problem with himself. And I think that there
are areas of agreement and there are areas of disagreement as far as things that
he has recently said. - I wanted to ask you to comment on the most frequent and deepest concern of the average white person in the North as well as the South, that all of this, apart from the morality of the Negroes' strive for equal rights and equal opportunities, at the base of it lies
a deep sexual concern. At the base of it lies
the fear of miscegenation. I've increasingly heard supposedly enlightened Northern whites say, "Well, the inevitability "of a total integration of the races "is extensive miscegenation." Is that really any problem
of size or consequence, in your view? Isn't that an old wives' tale? - Well, I think, at many points,
this is a groundless fear. I always have to determine whether those who talk about this most, and I hear it a great deal in the South, are referring to illicit miscegenation or whether they're
referring to intermarriage on a legal basis. Now, the fact is that we have much more illicit
miscegenation in the South where there are rigid
barriers of segregation than we do in the North where
you have no such barriers. And sometimes the persons
who have talked the loudest about intermarriage and miscegenation have actually fathered Negro children which means that, apparently, they believe in segregation by day and
desegregation by night. This has just been the
fact of the situation. And from a psychological point of view, these people may be battling
with a deep sense of guilt and a fear of retaliation. The fact is that in communities
where you've had integration to a degree for many years, there have been very few
interracial marriages. Now, I don't think this question should be a basic one in this period because, properly speaking,
individuals marry and not races. And I have made it very clear that I don't think any
state should have a law which prohibits individuals of different racial groups from marrying. I think marriage is an individual matter and, in a democracy or
in a free, good society, this is a right that that
society must preserve. And I think when America
rises to its full maturity, this will not be a basic issue that is constantly brought
up and constantly mentioned as we hear it today all over
the country, in general, and the South, in particular. And I've also said that even after making these general statements,
as I said in my book, "Stride Toward Freedom,"
in the final analysis, the Negro's basic aim is to
be the white man's brother and not his brother-in-law. And I think that has been revealed by the very events of
contemporary history. - There is nothing more specific by way of an overriding
statistic, for example. Well, there have been
very few intermarriages, but it's such a basic psychological fear that it seems to me that
someone should acquaint the white community with the
fact that the Negro community has as much pride of race as Catholics have pride of religion or Jews have pride of religion. That no matter what the
degree of integration, isn't it likely that it
would always be the exception that would result in an intermarriage? - Yes, I don't have the statistics on it. And I don't know whether
we can say that... Well, to put it another way, I would have to admit that if you have a
thoroughly integrated society there will be some interracial marriages. There's no doubt about that. But I do not think this will rise to great and large proportions. I think that there can be a
thoroughly integrated society where you have equality of opportunity and yet the vast majority of Negroes will continue to marry
Negroes and vice versa. So that I think this is
basically a groundless fear. And I always say that having
to bring out the other side that I have no opposition
to interracial marriages and I think this is a freedom
that must be preserved for individuals who wish to engage in it. - Dr. King, what do you think of the Civil Rights
Commission's recommendation that President Kennedy
look into the possibility of finding a way to choke
off the flow of federal funds into the state of Mississippi
or such other states as may practice rampant
discrimination and prejudice? - I think this is a good recommendation and I'm sorry that the
president threw it out so soon without giving it some study. In a state where you have no
redress through the courts or through other channels, I can see economic sanctions
as a very powerful force that can bring about the
kind of moral coercion that is desperately
needed in the situation. Now, let us take Mississippi as a point. There isn't a single federal judge in the state of Mississippi
who will render a decision in line with the Constitution
of the United States. The Justice Department has gone into federal
courts in Mississippi with exactly 18 suits, I believe, to rectify the situation
that Negroes confront with reference to voting inequalities. They haven't even had a
hearing on a single case yet. They just refuse, these judges
refuse to bring the cases up, they sit on them. And in a case like Mississippi, I think by withdrawing federal funds, taking these economic sanctions, it will bring about the kind of pressure that will bring the state into line. Mississippi gives, I think, about 32 cents for every dollar it gets
from the federal government. New York gives about $1.78 for every dollar that it gets
from the federal government. It means that New York is
supporting Mississippi. Alabama gives 38 cents for
every dollar that it gets, wherein, Connecticut
gives a dollar, I think, and 95 cents for every dollar it gets from the federal government, which means that Connecticut
is supporting Alabama. And I think the time has come
for the federal government to engage in the kind of vigorous action that will cause states like Mississippi, which refuse to do anything in line with that which is right,
that which is moral, and that which is constitutional. It would bring a force to bear. I wouldn't call on this... I wouldn't think this drastic step would be taken in other
states in the South that are trying to
adjust to the inevitable, but I'm speaking now of
a state like Mississippi and a state like Alabama. - Dr. King, there's a
considerable debate raging now over whether this life of
the Civil Rights Commission should be extended for another four years. In your view, has it done an effective job and should its life be extended? - I think so, I think it has
done a very effective job and I think its life should
definitely be extended. Although this commission
has no power to act, it does have subpoena power and it can bring out to
the open and to the public things are not known and
that have not been known. And I think they have made
some excellent studies on discrimination in housing and education and the court system
and in all of the areas where we have glaring
expressions of discrimination both North and South. And I think they have made
some very fine recommendations to the president and recommendations to the legislative
branch of the government. I think it's very unfortunate
that the president has not seen fit, and this
is true of President Kennedy and also President Eisenhower, they have not seen fit to take a stand for any of the recommendations that have been made by the
Civil Rights Commission that they appointed. - Dr. King, we have to
pause again very briefly. We'll be right back. Dr. King, what of Paul Zuber's suggestion that the NAACP, CORE, the Urban League, and the followers of yourself should merge so as to combat the increasing force of more militant violent groups
within the Negro community? - Well, I wouldn't say that
these groups need to merge. I think- - [David] They'd be more effective merged to you?
- That would be difficult. I think there are real difficulties in trying to bring all
of these groups together into one group. There are problems of
constitutions, of bylaws, and all of that. But I do think there is
a need for these groups, these organizations to move out on a more coordinated basis. I think there is more need for unity among these organizations
now than ever before. And I've always felt that
even where there can't be absolute uniformity, there can be unity. I think each of these
groups serves a real need and while there may be differences in emphases, there is an absolute unity
in the goals we seek. So I think that there is a
great deal that we can do on a coordinated basis
which will give them much more powerful movement and which will cause us to have a force that will be able to
combat other developments that are going down a negative path, they're going another way. - I wonder if you would comment
on the Supreme Court ruling on May 27th that unwarranted
delay in school desegregation will no longer be tolerated. Does this ruling implement
to your satisfaction the all deliberate speed
provision in the 1954 decision? Will it take deliberate speed
to here and now, in your view? - Well, I think this was
a most significant ruling and I think it reveals
that the Supreme Court is becoming impatient
with the delaying tactics and the evasive schemes
that are being used by Southern states to keep from complying with the 1954 decision. And I believe this may be the
kind of new course of action from the Supreme Court on this issue that will help speed up the process and I think it has to be done
through getting the president to see the necessity of standing up as firmly as the judicial
branch of the government. But I welcome this decision. And I've said all along that
these new evasive schemes that are being used can just
hold us back many, many years and it will keep us from
really reaching the goal of thoroughly integrated schools. By this decision, the
Supreme Court makes it clear that token integration really is nothing but a new evasive scheme with covered up with certain
niceties of complexity. And I'm sure that as other decisions go up to the Supreme Court where you have these unnecessary delays, it will continue to clarify its position. - Dr. King, earlier in this program, you commented that you
thought the president not being in the country at the point of the civil right legislation
battle getting underway was not right. Would you go further and
say that if the president were to absent himself
during this struggle, you would consider it a
dereliction of his duty to the basic civil rights
struggle in this country? - Well, I would say, I know the president has to be concerned about foreign policy and our whole stance in
international relations, as well as domestic issues. But I, frankly, don't see
what this particular tour will accomplish and I don't see the need to the point of being so great that he should leave at this time. And I think at this
point that if he leaves, he would be doing a grave disservice to the nation and to all of the people that he's representing and
to the civil rights movement. I think he would. Because there is no basic accomplishment that could take place now that could not take place later on. - Perhaps the civil rights
struggle in the Congress could not be won without him. Would you go that far?
- This is my feeling, that this bill cannot get through without the total weight of the president and his prestige behind it
on almost a day-to-day basis making it clear that he wants this and that the nation must
have it and that it needs it. And he can't do it in another country. - I wonder if you'd comment, Dr. King, on a quotation of James Baldwin from his most recent book,
"The Fire Next Time." "White people will have quite enough to do "in learning how to
accept and love themselves "and each other. "And when they have achieved this, "which will not be tomorrow
and may very well never be, "the Negro problem will no longer exist, "for it will no longer be needed." He seems to be suggesting
that the Negro problem in this country is a whipping boy for the frictions of
whites among themselves. Do you feel there's a
philosophical truth in that? - I think there is some truth in that. I would say that problem stems out of a plurality of
causes rather than one and I would say that
this is one of the causes if one would analyze it from
a psychological point of view. This is not an uncommon thing in history for one group having internal, individual psychological problems to shift all of their ills and
all of their disappointments and all of the blame to another
group so that the scapegoat becomes the injured party in the process. But I think there are other
things that must be done. I think, for instance,
there's an economic factor. The white man, at points,
and I'm speaking now of the reactionary whites,
the white man is seeking to preserve a preferred economic position and to perpetuate a system of human values that came into being under
slave plantation system which cannot survive in a day
of democratic equalitarianism. I think also there's a whole
question of social status and unconscious psychological desire to feel that you are
bigger than somebody else so you find a race over
here that you make inferior and it gives a sense of bigness and status to the other group. And then along with that is the thing we discussed earlier, the
fear of intermarriage. And I think all of these
things conjoin to make for a very complex problem. And it means that the
forces of legislation and the forces of education
will have to be used in a very vigorous way
to get many white people to grapple with a problem that they face as a result of the legacy of slavery and segregation with all of these economic and social overtones. - I wonder if you would
discuss for a moment or two a theory or philosophy
increasingly apparent in the work of Mr. Baldwin,
which work I admire very much, where he feels an increasing alienation, personal alienation from
white society, as a man. He says he distrusts the average white, that even the well-intentioned one and the well-spoken
one on serious matters, he views cynically. He doesn't think they mean it. He's suspicious of their
validity of what they say. He's suspicious of their
intention or their ability or their wish to implement the intention with effective action. Are you equally cynical? Do you feel that there is a
growing, deepening alienation between White and Negro on the personal, man-to-man level? - Well, I think that there is some alienation
but it's nothing new. I think it's only coming
to the surface now. It has always been there expressed more in
paternalistic ways in the past and the Negro was often
afraid to come out and say it. I think now he's willing
to say things publicly that he didn't say privately. On the other hand, I find
it difficult to generalize. The world isn't all this or all that. No race is all one way and
another race all the other way. And I cannot push myself to the position of seeing all white
people as the same people or the same way and to see
all with the same attitudes. Sure, there are some whites
that you can't trust. There are some who really
want to do the right thing and don't do it. But I have seen many white people who are thoroughly
emancipated on this issue. And just as I don't want
to see any white people generalize about Negroes
and say that all Negroes are like this, I am becoming
very disappointed with Negroes who are trying to make all
white people the same way. There are some White people
who are downright prejudiced. There are some of 'em who are bad. There's some of 'em who misrepresent all of the ideals of democracy. There are some white people
who have an amazing commitment to the democratic ideals. There's some who have great commitment to moral principles. And there are some who are as concerned about solving the race
problem as Negroes are. So that the only point of disagreement that I would see is that of generalizing. I think that it is true that
are some we can't trust, but I can't go to the point
of saying that about all. - A final question, Dr. King. You have frequently said that what we want can be told in three
words, all, now, and here. Do you think in your lifetime you will see all, now, and here in terms
of equality of opportunity, equality of education and
housing, and employment? - Well, I'm not at all in
despair, at this point, about the future. I have faith in the future. And I believe firmly that with the many forces working together that are now working in our nation and in the world, we will be
able to solve this problem. The rolling tide of world opinion, the growing industrialization
of the South, the sense of conscience on the part of millions of
White people over this country, and above all, the new determination of the Negro himself to be free. I think with all of these
things working together, we will be able in the
not-too-distant future to gain all of our rights. I'm not gonna say that
it's coming tomorrow. I'm not gonna say that
it's coming next year. But I think in between seven and 10 years, we will be able to see all over the South a desegregated society. That is the legal barriers
will be broken down. And I believe that before
the turn of the century, which is less than 40 years, we will have moved a long, long way toward a thoroughly
integrated society in America. - Thank you. We have to
pause one final time. And we'll be back. Dr. King, I believe that
in any period of history there are very few great men and I am totally convinced
that in our time, in the United States, you
are one of our great men. It's been a real privilege
and a great pleasure to talk to you tonight.
- Thank you. - And I thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, our guest has been the Reverend Martin Luther King. I have found it profoundly
revealing and informative. I hope you have. (dramatic orchestral music)
