What would the world be like if Martin Luther King had not been assassinated in 1968? If he had continued to lead the civil rights movement? If he were alive today, he would be celebrating his 94th birthday with his extended family. It is hard to know what his thoughts would be on the Black Lives Matter movement or the Biden administration, for example, but he would definitely be a fan of the rising trend in support for labor unions in recent years in the United States.
Although only 16% of US citizens are either union members or live with one, a recent study shows that about 71% of the citizens of the United States show a positive attitude towards the labor unions, the highest figure since 1965.
But while support of unionization has grown, the gargantuan employer Amazon worked vigorously to prevent its workers in the United States from unionizing, and is now in the midst of mass layoffs despite years of record profits. Stories about humiliating working conditions have leaked from the company in recent years, and just this week it was announced that Amazon employees in Colorado were ordered to continue working after the death of one of the workers from a heart attack, with his body still lying on the factory floor.
Ironically, this does not prevent Amazon and other corporations like it from celebrating Martin Luther King Day with a series of promotions and special sales days. How did King, who vigorously supported labor unions, become a symbol of the consumer culture of the very corporations who work against what he represented?
Sending the oppressed to war
When King chose to focus his political action towards social and economic justice in the second half of the 1960s, the public sympathy he received suffered significantly. In those years, he worked on the "Poor People's Campaign," which demanded an investment of 30 billion dollars a year from the federal budget to fight poverty, a government commitment to full employment, and the annual construction of 500,000 affordable housing units.
In 1967 at Riverside Church in New York, King gave one of his most controversial speeches wherein he severely attacked the United States' military policy in Vietnam. The harsh criticism King received for it even included the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), who argued that the civil rights movement should not interfere in issues related to the war.
King criticized the war from the standpoint of racial discrimination: “We were taking the Black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem.”
King not only criticized the moral injustice, but also the economic cost of the war that came at the expense of social programs: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."
About a year after his scathing speech, King went to protest with sanitation workers in Memphis. On April 4, 1968 he was assassinated.
Solidarity against poverty
The fight to preserve his memory began the day after the murder, and was led by a coalition of social forces: members of Congress, family, religious organizations, civil rights organizations, entertainers, and especially trade union members.
It is very symbolic that King's last public action within the civil rights movement was during his visit to support the sanitation workers' strike in Memphis. It's not accidental. In all the years of his activism, King was a clear supporter of the trade unions, and preached cooperation and solidarity between the trade unions and the struggle for Black rights in the United States.
A day before he was murdered, he told the sanitation workers: “You are demanding that this city will respect the dignity of labor. So often we overlook the work and the significance of those who are not in professional jobs… But let me say to you tonight, that whenever you are engaged in work that serves humanity and is for the building of humanity, it has dignity, and it has worth.”
King realized that Black people and trade unionists had common interests and common enemies. Throughout the years of his extensive activity (1957-1968), he gave 2,500 speeches, many to labor unions all over the United States. King also addressed white poverty and understood the importance of connecting the struggles.
When he met in 1967 with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Union, one of the largest unions in the country, King emphasized the common interest of black and white people in social justice. He explained that there are twice as many poor white people as black, and encouraged a joint fight for basic economic justice.
King continued to focus on issues of economic injustice alongside racism, which earned him many enemies in the government and the FBI. Contrary to the mainstream image of King today, in the 1960s he was considered a radical and controversial figure, shrouded by rumors of communist sympathies due to his connection with the labor unions.
King was assassinated on April 4, 1968 at the age of 39, just a few months before the sanitation workers’ first demonstration, which was part of a huge campaign against poverty involving many organizations. President Lyndon Johnson took advantage of this national crisis to pass the Fair Housing Act, an anti-discrimination act to ensure more equal access to housing property, signed a week after King's assassination. But this was only the initial stage in shaping King's legacy – from a social justice leader and trade unionist to a universally beloved figure who deserves his own holiday.
If there is money for war, there is money for MLK Day
The first attempt to establish Martin Luther King Day was led by Democratic congressman from Michigan John Conyers, who had submitted his proposal by 1968, just four days after King's assassination, and submitted it repeatedly every year hence. Another figure who played a decisive role is King's widow, Coretta Scott King, who is considered the architect of the holiday and the founder of the King Center for Nonviolent Social Change.
The days after the murder were turbulent for the American public. Protests and riots broke out all over the United States, and while the political establishment focused on maintaining societal calm, it showed no willingness to establish a national day for the assassinated leader. Despite this, various organizations, commercial companies, public institutions and significantly, labor unions, held demonstrations of protest or solidarity immediately after the murder.
Many union leaders instructed their workers to strike. The head of the port workers' union commanded that ports on the East Coast and in the Gulf would strike for six hours. In many cities, including Chicago, Houston, New York, Detroit, Boston and New Jersey, teachers closed schools.
In the 1970s, the public protest actions continued, mainly led by the trade unions. Although Congress continued to drag its feet, several states from 1973-1979 declared their support for a federal holiday, including Illinois, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York.
When the bills were put to a vote, the opponents cited many reasons – mainly economic. These focused on the fact that a federal holiday would be too expensive; an unnecessary day off that would cost the government hundreds of millions of dollars. In contrast, the supporters argued that King's contribution to American society cannot be evaluated according to indicators of monetary cost.
Opponents saw this claim as a valuation of King's legacy against military issues, which received budgetary priority. At a demonstration in 1982 in Washington, DC, one of the demonstrators held a sign that read "We can't afford the military budget – We can afford Martin Luther King Day.”
The unions remember
Legislative attempts failed in the 1970s, but the dream of a federal holiday for King remained alive thanks to the extensive activity of his greatest allies – the labor unions. The legislation would probably have remained stuck in the various committees without the joint efforts of thousands of unionized workers, mainly Black, but also white, Jewish and Latino, who protested and striked extensively.
In the beginning, these protests were relatively small and geographically limited. In 1969, General Motors management threatened a small group of workers who refused to work on King's birthday, but backed off after a larger group of workers walked off the job a few days later.
In the fall of that year in New York, several thousand hospital workers decided to strike, and returned only after agreeing with management on a pay rise, improved job benefits and a paid day off on King's birthday. A few months later, similar collective agreements were signed by 25,000 workers in other hospitals and by 80,000 textile workers.
Unions provided public financial support to expand the movement throughout the United States. The efforts were coordinated by Cleveland Robinson, a union leader from New York who was close to Coretta Scott King. King invited Robinson to the 1969 campaign launch conference for the holiday legislation in Atlanta. After talking about the failed legislative efforts, Robinson took the stage and stated that regardless of Congress action, Black people would refuse to work on this day.
In the early 1970s, many workers continued to strike on King's birthday. The workers not only rested, but also used the day off to protest and show support for issues that aligned with King's legacy. Robinson urged union members to celebrate King's birthday regardless of management approval, and promised the committees' support in punitive cases.
In 1976, the King Center strengthened its union alliance by centering King's birthday celebrations around a demand for full and direct employment, a demand that was central to the AFL-CIO trade union agenda. That year, thousands turned out to march in memory of King in Atlanta, and labor unions made up the largest representation. The coalition formed around the struggle for the holiday gave political support to Jimmy Carter and aided his election. Later, in 1979, Carter expressed support for legislation, although he had previously opposed it.
From the unions to the corporations
After a decade of significant struggle led by the trade unions, the campaign dramatically changed direction. Following the political weakening of the unions, the King Center decided to turn its efforts to corporate and popular support in order to garner backing for the establishment of the holiday. In the early 1980s, the King Center secured donations from companies such as Coca-Cola, Miller Brewing and other corporations. They managed to obtain a legal status which allowed them to raise funds directly from federal and military employees.
Another element that was a key part of the final success of the campaign was the success of Stevie Wonder’s participation in the King Center's public campaign. In 1979, Wonder released the song Happy Birthday dedicated to King's memory, and dedicated his album Hotter than July to the campaign efforts.
That summer, Wonder embarked on a four-month tour with Bob Marley to raise public awareness. The tour was planned to end with a huge rally in Washington, D.C. as a tribute to King's historic "I Have a Dream" speech.
The concert tour attracted a large audience and included great artists such as Gil Scott-Heron, Michael Jackson, Carlos Santana and many more. Towards its end, in January 1981, the tour reached its final performance in Washington, DC. There were fears that due to the severe cold, people would not come. Despite this, about 100,000 attendees came to watch Wonder along with Diana Ross and Reverend Jesse Jackson. Wonder was able to raise awareness and help collect millions of signatures for a petition to Congress.
Not everyone liked the new direction of the protest movement. Within it, there were many organizations that feared that King's militant image would be lost. Among these organizations was the SCLC, an African-American civil rights organization founded by King after the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1955 (a protest event by black rights organizations in Alabama against racial segregation on buses, which led to a Supreme Court ruling that racial segregation violated the US Constitution).
Coretta Scott King and the SCLC disagreed about which date to mark – his birthday or the date of his assassination. The main debate was not about the actual legislation of a federal holiday, but about its emphasis: the empowerment of King's mythological figure or the continuation of the social activism he championed. Influential publicist Vernon Jarrett, founder of the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ), wrote a powerful opinion piece in 1982 that called for putting aside the struggle for the holiday in favor of an emphasis on social activism. He stated that King himself would have preferred continued social struggle over a mythologised memorial day.
In 1982, King submitted a petition to Congress with 6 million signatures, the largest petition ever submitted to Congress. In preparation for the expected vote in 1983, the debate began to intensify, mainly against the background of the increasing chances of success. At the beginning of 1982, there were already 17 countries that officially or partially celebrated the holiday. The law was put to the vote, and thanks to the support of both parties, it passed with a large majority.
On November 2 1983, after much procrastination, President Reagan signed into law making King's birthday a federal holiday. It is the first federal holiday dedicated to an African-American, and is observed on the third Monday of every January. The law entered into force in 1986 for the first time.
Even after the law was passed, many more years passed before the holiday was accepted and implemented throughout the United States. In 2000, South Carolina was the last state to recognize the holiday.
A day of challenge, not comfort
15 years separated King's assassination and the day when his birthday was designated as a federal holiday. However, when the law was passed, few remembered the origins of the struggle: the wave of protests, demonstrations and strikes in the late 1960s and early 1970s. History has not done justice to the trade unions and social activists despite the fact that largely thanks to them, King became such a beloved figure in the United States and around the world.
It is possible to understand that this forgetting was not accidental, because it did not fit with the narrative adopted by the political establishment and the majority of American society regarding King's political and social legacy. The choice of the trade unions to be the first to stand by King's side was not only due to support for his character as the leader of the civil rights movement, but from a real alliance of essential interests alongside a value identification based on class and economic background.
As the United States moved away from the "glory days" of trade unions after World War II towards a widespread adoption of neoliberal economics in the 1970s and 1980s, the conditions were ripe for the appropriation of King's figure as a liberal reconciler for the era of the "post- race,” and not of a radical leader who chose to connect class and economic oppression with racial and social oppression.
Today it seems that King has received a place of honor in the pantheon of American heroes, but precisely because of this, his actual activity and his political and economic stances are being ignored. Vincent Harding, a historian, social activist, and the first director of the King Center in Atlanta, was a close associate of King and wrote his famous Riverside Church speech for him a year before his death.
As a historian, Harding sought to argue that Black Americans, and therefore Americans in general, cannot understand the social struggles which await them in the future without a deep understanding of the struggles of the past. In a lecture in 2005, Harding claimed that King’s legacy must be a challenge to the current social order rather than a mere celebration of desegregation.
King's real legacy is not that of a holiday on which we celebrate the fulfillment of his dream. His legacy is one of new challenges and sharp criticism of society's injustices – not a symbol designed to appease the conscience of American society.
This article was translated from Hebrew by Hannah Blount.
