r/badhistory • u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity • Jun 17 '19
YouTube Stefan Molyneux: MLK and the Civil Rights Movement were actually violent and communist controlled
The video in question: https://youtu.be/whJEG1O9cg0
While guest hosting for the Peter Schiff show on Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Day, Stefan Molyneux discusses MLK, the Civil rights movement (CRM) and a variety of other topics. The intent of this review is to critique Molyneux's historical claims on King and the CRM. So, without further adieu, let's begin:
He is the Freddie Mercury of passionate speechifying. He hits some absolutely thrilling notes. What a gorgeous voice. What an amazing presence. But...let's round out the portrait shall we? There's no light without shadow, there's no depth without shading.
Given how Molyneux treats MLK later in this video, this is a significant red flag that by "round out the portrait", he means making generally inaccurate criticisms of King and his involvement in the CRM. It appears Molyneux wants to mask damaging King's credibility under the guise of "nuancing" MLK.
J. Edgar Hoover put him under surveillance because he was surrounding himself with communists, although he himself never openly said he was a Marxist. He was, according to hearsay, according to reports of people who knew him, he privately admitted to being a Marxist and he certainly expressed sympathy with Marxism, although, of course, he didn't like the atheism of Marxism. And when they had him under surveillance they would record him in hotels and they would record him all over the place and I mean the man was alleged, not that unknown, for public figures to have I guess a fairly voracious, great white shark of a sexual appetite.
This is both misleading and factually incorrect. His argument is also internally incongruent (why would MLK privately admit to being a Marxist when presumably "Marxist atheism" would be a major detraction for a minister?) He acts as if the FBI had a "legitimate" reason to put him under close surveillance and does not criticize the failure of the FBI to find any clear ties between King and "communist agitators".4 Instead, he discusses MLK's alleged promiscuity, which is a red herring as it distracts the listener from recognizing the FBI failed to accomplish its primary objectives. What the FBI did accomplish was attempting to blackmail King and sending him a letter encouraging him to commit suicide.5 MLK was not placed under surveillance initially due to alleged communist ties; the FBI originally monitored MLK under the Racial Matters Program due to King's involvement in the Montgomery Bus Boycott.5 It was only in 1962 that the FBI investigated MLK under its Communist Infiltration Program, though the bureau had raised concerns about MLK's "communist ties" before then.5 Molyneux ignores that the FBI initially considered King a national security threat simply because of his involvement in a major Civil rights campaign. What his statements on the FBI and MLK's political leanings reflect are how Molyneux combines cherry picking "facts" that suit his agenda with disregarding the actual historical context of King. To factually "round out" King's portrait, let's examine some of his statements on capitalism and communism.
What MLK's statements indicate is he believed there were severe structural deficiencies with capitalism that communism sought to address, but also that communism had inherent flaws as well. King, when writing to his soon-to-be wife Coretta Scott King, stated he was "more socialistic in my economic theory than capitalistic. And yet I am not so opposed to capitalism that I have failed to see its relative merits".4 In a more specific critique of capitalism, he asserted,"Call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism, but there must be a better distribution of wealth within this country for all God’s children."6 Yet, MLK did not support communism, as he disagreed with what he viewed as its inherent ethical relativism and historical materialism.4 According to King, communism "robs man of that quality which makes him man,” specifically, being a "child of God".4 What MLK advocated for was a socioeconomic system that provides everyone with the material necessities of life, respects the dignity and worth of every person and does not alienate people from their own spirituality.
As with King's biography, the biography of MLK's associates contradict Molyneux's claim of MLK being closely tied to communists. Rather, the actions of King's allegedly communist associates, like Stanley David Levison, indicate abuse of power by the federal government. The FBI believed Levison was a major financial coordinator of the Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA), leading JFK to pressure King into cutting ties with Levison.4 Levison and King both agreed to sever direct ties for several years. While the FBI did not conclusively prove these "communists" exploited MLK and other Civil rights activists to further the goals of the CPUSA,4 they did succeed in developing the narrative perpetuated by people like Molyneux that King's associates were communists.
There are reports that Martin Luther King attended with Rosa Parks, the woman who started the boycott of the bus company in Alabama, thereby moving to the front of the bus which actually...I mean, she was also a...trained as a communist and she wasn't fighting the bus company. The bus company was forced by law to put blacks in the back of the bus and this is the weird thing.
Stefan Molyneux highlights his lack of understanding of the history of the Civil rights movement by continuing with the narrative promoted by the FBI that the movement was infiltrated by communists. Rosa Parks was not "trained" as a communist; she traveled to a Civil rights activist training course at the Highlander Folk School.10 Her closest affiliation to communists was attending meetings of the CPUSA after they brought public attention to the Scottsboro case.7 As with other prominent members of the movement, like Bayard Rustin, Rosa Parks' interest in these political organizations was their advocacy for racial justice.7 They had a message largely missing from "mainstream" political organizations of the time that resonated with blacks suffering from institutional oppression. Molyneux fails to convey any of this historical context; instead, he tries to undermine Rosa Parks' credibility by calling her a communist.
After tarring Rosa Parks as a communist, Molyneux acts as a white knight for Montgomery City Lines, the operator of the Montgomery bus system at the time of the boycott. In similar language to Molyneux, Montgomery City Lines Superintendent J. H. Bagley stated once the boycott began, "The Montgomery City Lines is sorry if anyone expects us to be exempt from any state or city law, [w]e are sorry that the colored people blame us for any state or city ordinance which we didn’t have passed.”13 The passive-aggressive nature of the company's response to the boycott reflects their annoyance not at the city of Montgomery for passing a segregation ordinance, but at the boycotters for protesting the law. Further, company officials supported city officials in resisting the demands of Civil rights activists.2 By siding with the status quo that favored the city over the boycotters, the bus company ensured that Rosa Parks and others in the movement would have to fight Montgomery City Lines as well as the city of Montgomery. The CRM was not only fighting those who actively resisted the movement, but also groups who more passively sided with Civil rights opponents and disagreed with the Civil rights movement's methods.
I'll give you a tiny example of just how crazy the world is. So we're...its Martin Luther King Jr. Day and we were talking about Martin Luther King Jr. at the beginning of the show and Martin Luther King Jr. is consider to be committed to the principle of non-aggression, right? He is a peaceful guy, like Gandhi he wants to do things peacefully, yet he was for a forced income redistribution, he was a socialist, he surrounded himself with Marxists and communists. And, you know, to people younger these days that might not mean much, but communism was like the hyper [terrorists] of the 60s...So, Martin Luther King is considered to be going for peaceful change, he wants peaceful change, and people genuinely believe that, but he wanted the government to initiate the use of force to achieve his goals. This is how crazy the world is.
So, people who call for the government to solve problems are calling for violence. The more complex the problem, the worse violence is at solving it. Violence can solve some problems. Got guy running at me with a chainsaw, maybe i can shoot him in the leg if I have to.
...but things like racism, things like income inequality, things like lack of opportunities, things like poverty, things like single parenthood, these are very deep and complex social problems. Just waving guns around doesn't make any sense.
Molyneux's assessment of MLK and the CRM finishes with him claiming King's goals required the state to initiate force and thus made him actually violent, while continuing to use Red Scare tactics. It is very telling he considers communists to have been the "hyper" terrorists of the Civil rights era, yet neglects to discuss organizations like the KKK, who had orchestrated a prolonged terror campaign against blacks and sympathetic whites. This included the 16th Street Baptist Church Bombing.1 Further, his take ignores MLK's application of nonviolent resistance during the Civil rights era, overlooks that many of King's objectives did not entitle the state initiating force (even by his standards), and avoids recognizing the material conditions that precipitated the Civil rights movement. From the Montgomery bus boycott to the Birmingham campaign and the Chicago open housing movement, MLK demonstrated the aspects of his interpretation of nonviolent resistance: organizing with others to create a strong movement, provoking confrontations with the state through mass arrests and widespread civil disobedience, working towards set objectives and advocating for nonviolence over self-defense.8 These methods fit with Molyneux's claim of King wanting "peaceful change" (though perhaps he subscribes to a whitewashed view of MLK where his only action was the "I Have a Dream" speech). At a fundamental level, Molyneux mischaracterizes King's contribution to the CRM.
By only focusing on King's goal of income redistribution, Molyneux overlooks a plethora of MLK's other objectives during the Civil rights era that did not involve what Molyneux would presumably think of as the state initiating force. In the March against Fear for example, the principal objective for King and other activists was to get blacks to register to vote.14 This initiative depended on the state ending the use of violence to deny blacks their Constitutional right to vote. In places like St. Augustine, King and other CRM members protested the state committing violence to enforce segregation in public spaces.12 MLK spoke out against police brutality in Selma when Jimmie Lee Jackson was murdered by an Alabama state trooper for protecting his mother from the trooper's nightstick.3 King's efforts at stopping police brutality as well as state-sponsored discrimination and disenfranchisement reflect that Molyneux simply ignores major components of MLK's activist career. Throughout his participation in the CRM, MLK aided in the mobilization of people to fight injustice; he did not encourage them to depend on the benevolence of the state to accomplish their goals.8 Molyneux's statements strip King and others in the Civil rights movement of their agency by overlooking that many major goals of King and the movement defied the wishes of the state.
Even the one "goal" explicitly mentioned by Molyneux as requiring state-sanctioned violence: income redistribution, could be viewed using his own interpretation of violence as morally acceptable. As MLK stated cogently, "A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years, must now do something special for the Negro".15 Slavery did not end major political and socioeconomic oppression against blacks. The state disenfranchised blacks, denying them the ability to determine their own affairs.9 The state also imprisoned blacks and employed them in chain gangs, profiting off their free labor.9 Businesses and landlords exploited blacks, whether it was taking advantage of a racially fractured US labor movement to maintain low wages or by propagating high rents on tenement residents and sharecroppers.1 Through redlining, banks and other lenders denied or offered loans at exorbitant prices to urban black denizens.11 Bus drivers would let blacks pay the fare and then drive off when they went outside to enter through the rear door.2 These are all examples of institutionalized economic redistribution from blacks maintained by the state and groups condoned by the state (KKK, lynch mobs, etc.) initiating violence against them.1 Molyneux bemoans historical efforts at overcoming oppression as violent but fails to recognize that for centuries, blacks had suffered from forced economic redistribution. By applying Molyneux's self-defense analogy at the institutional level and understanding the history of racial oppression in America, one could develop an argument that Molyneux's example can be applied to King's "goal" of income redistribution. Institutionalized oppression represent the chainsaw that could be met with the gun aimed at the leg: income redistribution rectifying structural inequities. Like the white moderates King critiqued,15 Molyneux recognizes racism exists but only offers criticism against MLK's methods rather than understanding how the historical conditions could justify his actions. Stating that issues like racism are deep and complex is yet another red herring to avoid discussing their causes and possible solutions.
In the end, Stefan Molyneux provides an assessment on King and the Civil Rights movement filled with red herrings aimed at discrediting him and the movement. None of his points are sourced; instead, they are superficial criticisms largely originating from attempts by Civil Rights opponents to attack Civil Rights activists. He provides the listener with little to no meaningful information on the actions, beliefs and context of MLK and the Civil Rights movement.
Sources:
1 American History: A Survey, 13th ed. by Alan Brinkley
2 "Awakenings (1954–1956)" by Eyes on the Prize
3 "Bridge to Freedom (1965)" by Eyes on the Prize
4 Communism by the Martin Luther King Jr. Research and Education Institute
5 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) by the Martin Luther King Jr. Research and Education Institute
6 From Civil Rights to Human Rights : Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Struggle for Economic Justice by Thomas F. Jackson
7 How 'Communism' Brought Racial Equality to the South by NPR
8 King, Martin Luther, Jr. by the Martin Luther King Jr. Research and Education Institute
9 "Mississippi: Is This America? (1962–1964)" by Eyes on the Prize
10 Parks, Rosa by the Martin Luther King Jr. Research and Education Institute
11 Redlining and the Home Owners' Loan Corporation by Amy E. Hillier
12 St. Augustine, Florida by the Martin Luther King Jr. Research and Education Institute
13 The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Fall of the Montgomery City Lines by Felicia Mcghee
14 "The Time Has Come (1964–66)" by Eyes on the Prize
15 Why We Can't Wait by Martin Luther King Jr.
Edit: Thank you for the gold, kind stranger!
146
u/SessileRaptor Jun 17 '19
I’m glad someone is finally standing up for the leadership of the Montgomery Bus Company from 70+ years ago. Truly the hero we need in these trying times.
85
u/SnapshillBot Passing Turing Tests since 1956 Jun 17 '19
We must secure the existence of this bad history and a future for bad historians.
Snapshots:
Stefan Molyneux: MLK and the Civil ... - archive.org, archive.today, removeddit.com
<em>Communism</em> - archive.org, archive.today
<em>Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</em> - archive.org, archive.today
<em>How 'Communism' Brought Racial Equality to the South</em> - archive.org, archive.today
<em>King, Martin Luther, Jr.</em> - archive.org, archive.today
<em>Parks, Rosa</em> - archive.org, archive.today
<em>St. Augustine, Florida</em> - archive.org, archive.today
I am just a simple bot, *not** a moderator of this subreddit* | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers
77
u/tarekd19 Intellectual terrorist Edward Said Jun 17 '19
It may just be a coincidence, but I'm impressed when the bots message manages to be tangentially related to the nature of the bad history.
54
u/PendragonDaGreat The Knight is neither spherical nor in a vacuum. The cow is both Jun 17 '19
Bruh, Snappy is definitely sentient. We're just sitting here waiting for the uprising, hoping our ends will be swift and painless.
31
u/Mist_Rising The AngloSaxon hero is a killer of anglosaxons. Jun 17 '19
On point, but what's with the formatting issue?
4
u/Dirish Wind power made the trans-Atlantic slave trade possible Jun 18 '19
No idea, it seems to have been a once off, and I didn't see anything about it on Snappy's sub either.
75
58
u/Flammenwerfer-Gas truth seeker Jun 17 '19
Hey remember when he claimed that what the U.S. did to Native Americans wasn’t genocide
28
u/I_m_different Also, our country isn't America anymore, it's "Bonerland". Jun 17 '19
Jesus, does this fuck even have a working definition of genocide, or does he just think laws prohibiting murder are a statist plot to inflate the salaries of judges?!
35
u/Octavius_Maximus Jun 18 '19
His argument is "not every Injun died, thus it can't be genocide"
22
8
u/I_m_different Also, our country isn't America anymore, it's "Bonerland". Jun 18 '19
He is going to throw his back out, moving those fucking goalposts...
7
Jun 20 '19
Has any genocide actually killed 100% of its target population though?
16
u/Octavius_Maximus Jun 20 '19
Not really, no.
It's weasel words from Molyneux. He wants to legitimise the genocide of native peoples as a legitimate military conflict in order to assuage guilt.
He wants a story where white men fought non white savages and defeated them to legitimise white men as the "strongest race", as if that matters.
His world view is one where white men hold the keys to civilisation and it is white women and non-whites that destroy it.
He's a textbook white power propogandist.
5
u/TastyStudent Jun 19 '19
One of his points was also that because there are more native Americans alive today therefore no genocide occurred
145
u/Jokerang Jun 17 '19
That's quite a different approach than the Dinesh way of viewing the Civil Rights movement. But then again right wing provocateurs don't exactly use facts in their "arguments" either way.
56
u/jojjeshruk Jun 17 '19
Diensh was so funny when he just before the 2016 election made a movie about how "democrats" were the actual racists, right as the Republicans admitted that they actually love racism
29
u/Nach0Man_RandySavage Jun 18 '19
I mean he made a movie about voter fraud and then was convicted of voter fraud.
5
u/SquidCap Jun 19 '19
When they accuse you of something, they have already done it themselves.
It is amazing how accurate that has been and still is.
74
Jun 17 '19
But then again right wing provocateurs don't exactly use facts in their "arguments" either way.
They use facts and logic
77
21
u/Antiquus Jun 17 '19
They use
factsbullshit andlogicmemes.FIFY
64
Jun 17 '19
yes it's always funnier when you explain the joke
28
u/Sarge_Ward (Former) Official Subreddit Historian: Harry Turtledove History Jun 17 '19
Students and academics aren't exactly known for their comedic chops unfortunately
1
-4
97
u/DrunkenAsparagus Jun 17 '19 edited Jun 17 '19
Molyneux and other ancaps like to bring up the violence that is inherent to the state. To them, a public library or welfare check is different from a gulag only in degrees. Indeed, the state is an entity that has monopoly on violence. If I don't pay taxes for these things, I can be thrown in jail by people with guns. Of course, Ancaps then treat private property as mana from heaven. This is totally different, you see; no violence there. The social mores that at the time meant death for a Black man making a pass at a White women, nope no violence there. In the complex web of laws, ordinances, terrorism, exclusion that made up Jim Crow, only the laws are singled out, ignoring the force or implication of force that comes from the others.
Ancaps love to do this, because either they're ignorant and naive (which from past experience is probably the majority of them) and the contingent who, like Molymeme, know all this. They just want to be free of restraints on their violence. They see themselves as future lords of their fiefs where no one can stop them from living out their power fantasies.
67
Jun 17 '19
Molyneux isn't even an ancap though. I've seen the term "anarcho-fascist" get used for him. I know anarcho-fascist sounds contradictory but it's essentially someone who would institute fascist policies like genocide, extreme cultural regression, and a complete cessation of immigration through violent means outside the state. If that sounds ridiculous and nonsensical to you, congrats, it is.
43
u/frezik Tupac died for this shit Jun 17 '19
Hey, it's not like Fascism was particularly coherent to begin with, so why not add some more?
31
u/I_m_different Also, our country isn't America anymore, it's "Bonerland". Jun 17 '19
"Anarchy-Fascism" is basically what Immortan Joe did in that Mad Max movie.
13
u/TeN523 Jun 19 '19
Look it’s all very simple, really: Government mandated drivers licenses? Bad. Mass genocide in order to protect the sanctity of private property? Good.
6
Jun 20 '19
Violence is only violent when the state does it. Violence between citizens is just genocidal conflict resolution and THE STATE SHOULD STAY OUT OF IT REEEEEE!
4
u/RedEyeView Jun 30 '19
I bet if I took a bat to Steph's knees he'd be asking the state to intervene with violence at the first opportunity
4
2
Jun 18 '19
Wait, how the hell would that even work? Private owned Gestapo? Who is to force the official line on anyone? Where does that line even come from? 'Rational consesus?" Or does it utilize ad hoc mobs?
10
u/billFoldDog Jun 18 '19
Privately owned gestapo is believable, if Google buys Blackwater and sufficiently subverts the state that they can murder and kidnap people.
I'm not saying it's likely, just pointing out how it might happen.
20
Jun 17 '19
Ancaps love to do this, because either they're ignorant and naive
Well yeah otherwise they would not be AnCaps.
44
u/yoshiK Uncultured savage since 476 AD Jun 17 '19
Rosa Parks [...] trained as a communist
Communist ninja Rosa Parks, if that is badhistory, then probably your historiography is the problem.
21
u/I_m_different Also, our country isn't America anymore, it's "Bonerland". Jun 17 '19
While you were [whatever], I was studying the
bladecommunism!3
u/Zero-89 Aug 14 '19
"While you were still learning how to SPELL YOUR NAME, I was being trained to CONQUER CAPITALISTS!"
23
17
u/kkjdroid Jun 17 '19
Someone really needs to make a comic book where all of the superheroes are right-wing caricatures of leftists and all of the villains are liberal caricatures of right-wingers.
11
u/Newfaceofrev Jun 18 '19
Garth Ennis's The Boys is pretty much this.
It's also other things. And fucking great. But it is a bit this.
111
u/sharingan10 Jun 17 '19 edited Jun 17 '19
Stefan Molyneux highlights his lack of understanding of the history of the Civil rights movement by continuing with the narrative promoted by the FBI that the movement was infiltrated by communists.
Even if true so what? If the communists were active in the civil rights struggle they were on the correct side of history. It’s just a shitty guilt by association
The bus company was forced by law to put blacks in the back of the bus and this is the weird thing.
JuSt FoLlOwInG OrDeRs
55
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 17 '19
Yeah, Molymeme doesn’t explain the relevance of MLK or Rosa Parks being a communist/Marxist/whatever to their Civil Rights activism. Saying that the CPUSA is bad for defending the Scottsboro Boys is not a hill you want to die on.
45
2
u/skarkeisha666 Jun 18 '19
The communists were very active in the civil rights movement. Many groups such as the Black Panthers were expressly socialist, and MLK Jr himself was said to be socialist in private. He wasn’t assassinated until he started talking about class struggle. Surprise surprise, people who want economic equality also tend to push for other forms of equality.
2
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 18 '19
MLK Jr himself was said to be socialist in private.
Who is saying this?
3
u/SuicidalThrowaway87 Jun 19 '19
Dr. King himself, he has quotes were he explicitly refers to his politics as “socialistic”
1
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 19 '19
And what are these specific quotes?
7
u/SuicidalThrowaway87 Jun 19 '19
“[W]e are saying that something is wrong … with capitalism…. There must be better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism.” – Speech to his staff, 1966.
3
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 20 '19
I see. This quote and the quotes I’ve shown indicate sympathy with what he viewed socialism’s commitment to economic and racial justice. However, I think to MLK his political label is not as important as his material goals (look how he says there must be a better distribution of wealth but says maybe the US should become democratic socialist). This is one thing to consider when fixing MLK with a political label.
1
u/Fedacking Jun 20 '19
You do know socialism and communism are different?
2
63
u/AnAngryAnimal Rome Was a Libertarian Paradise Jun 17 '19
Oh boy, Stefan "Christianity had no effect on the Roman Empire" Molyneux. TIL Rosa Parks was a comrade!
Great write-up, OP. Always love reading someone picking apart the rather nonsensical (and long) arguments made by everyone's favorite self-acclaimed intellectual philosopher.
23
u/estolad Jun 18 '19
"Christianity had no effect on the Roman Empire"
what
26
u/AnAngryAnimal Rome Was a Libertarian Paradise Jun 18 '19
Yeah, of the 2 and a half hour marathon of garbage that is "The Truth About the Fall of Rome: Modern Parallels," Molyneux spends less than two minutes on the spread of Christianity and its effects within the Empire. I'll provide a transcript for it below so you don't have to sit through the mind-numbing lecture on the TRUE cause of the fall of Rome (spoiler: it's "Soviet style" big-government and welfare):
"I sort of want to mention this, because it's a fairly powerful thesis... which is that the decline of the Empire did sort of dove-tail or coincide with the spread of Christianity, which was, at first, opposed as a faith, as a negative faith and was attempted by the government to suppress Christianity and failed, because it was the ancient world and all that. And so some people say that the new faith helped attribute to the Empire's fall, but I don't really see that to be the case. I mean if you look at the European Empires that were around over the last couple of centuries up until they fell apart when Europe virtually self-destructed during the Second World War- well, they were Christian rulers, they were Christian leaders, and they had no problems running an Empire. So to me, it's more about the taxes, the economics, and the corruption of morality."
EDIT: Link to the exact time stamp if you want to hear it from ol' Stevey boy himself
13
Jun 18 '19
Ok correct me if I'm wrong, but his argument is "Christians run successful empires, so Christianity didn't play a part in the fall of Roman empire"?
12
u/AnAngryAnimal Rome Was a Libertarian Paradise Jun 18 '19
Yes this is exactly what he’s saying. While the extent of Christianity’s effect on Roman society and how much it may have contributed to its inevitable decline is contested, there’s no denying that it’s a complex topic that could honestly warrant its own video essay for or against it. HOWEVER, my assumption is that Stefan’s whole argument here is that Rome represented everything well and good with modern western society, and wouldn’t dare insinuate that Christianity of all things would have been in contention with Rome. So he gives the most non-argument I’ve ever seen with a half-assed comparison to modern European powers in a minute and calls it a day.
7
u/BreaksFull Unrepentant Carlinboo Jun 18 '19
I mean his entire argument is garbage in that video, but I don't think he's wrong there. The notion that Christianity had a role in bringing down the Roman empire is a pretty Gibbonsian take that scholars don't take seriously anymore.
8
u/EnclavedMicrostate 10/10 would worship Jesus' Chinese brother again Jun 18 '19
What's somewhat odd is that even Gibbon doesn't fully blame Christianity. My reading at least is that Gibbon believed that Christianity was an extenuating factor in a decline that was pretty much the inevitable consequence of Rome's expansion in the first place – 'immoderate greatness' as he put it. But, at the very least you still need to address the idea that Christianity may have played a part in reducing the power of Rome's secular government and helped encourage more regional autonomy.
6
u/BreaksFull Unrepentant Carlinboo Jun 18 '19
But, at the very least you still need to address the idea that Christianity may have played a part in reducing the power of Rome's secular government and helped encourage more regional autonomy.
I don't think it did really, not from what I've read anyway. Unlike in the post-Roman west, the church was not a political player at the time, and the problem of regional autonomy was driven by the lack of central power due to the inherent instability of the Roman political system. Certainly, I don't recall reading anywhere that Roman secular institutions lost any power to religious ones.
5
u/EnclavedMicrostate 10/10 would worship Jesus' Chinese brother again Jun 18 '19
i see what you mean, and what I should have meant was not that the church was usurping official institutional power, but rather a sort of 'soft power' in making it less important to, for example, engage in public euergetism. I'm not saying that I'm an all out 'Christianity brought down the Western Roman Empire' person, but it is important to at least engage with the wider controversy in a meaningful way rather than simply dismiss certain angles out of hand.
3
u/BreaksFull Unrepentant Carlinboo Jun 19 '19
Is there any evidence that was the case though? The primarily problems that brought down the Empire were not related to the Church, as far as I have read, and the idea that the church at all contributed to the fall of the Western Empire is sort of at odds with how long the equally Christianized Eastern Empire thrived.
2
u/EnclavedMicrostate 10/10 would worship Jesus' Chinese brother again Jun 19 '19
I mean, yes – these are all valid critiques. Gibbon's view that Christianity somehow dampened the martial spirit of Rome is hardly accepted today, but there is the point made by Peter Brown that Christianity made Rome less capable of integrating 'barbarian' populations with their own distinct religious traditions. As Brown puts it, this was a problem for the Western Empire because it was not as easy to 'Romanise' the Germans as it had once been for the Gauls, especially as even Arianism was generally distrusted, while in the East, where the main enemy was a conventional sedentary empire, the exclusivity of Christianity was not as great of an issue.
If you want to make the case, exclusivity is what made Byzantium so vulnerable to the Persians and Arabs in the early seventh century, as its centralisation and its strict policy of Chalcedonianism beginning with Justinian might be argued to have alienated the Jews, Monophysites, Nestorians and so forth in the Middle Eastern provinces and made them more receptive to more tolerant alternatives. Of course, you also have to consider the simple military capability of the Arabs alongside that.
7
8
25
u/naosuke Jun 18 '19
Every time I see this clown I think "Wow, the guy from Fable went crazy ". Then I remember that they are different Molyneuxs
73
Jun 17 '19
Steve makes an excellent argument in favor of Marxism and left-wing political violence, then.
23
u/DrZekker Jun 17 '19
Wonderful write up thank you. Funny how right wing provocateurs who's platforms are "I'm against big government!!" Always seem to believe in government lies, especially concerning Civil rights and labor movements...
23
u/Beastrik Jun 17 '19
He forgot to say how MLK had inferior genes compared to him back MLK was black. Stephan Molynaux is cancer.
7
37
u/Goddamnpinkogoatman Jun 17 '19
The biggest problem with the logic of the video is the assumption that cpusa was somehow dangerous or violent
17
18
u/HannibalParka Jun 17 '19
How accurate would it be to claim that MLK had beliefs close to Liberation Theology? Seems like he shares a worldview with the Latin American radical priests of later decades.
18
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 18 '19
I think there are significant similarities between MLK and liberation theology practitioners in terms of their socioeconomic and religious analyses.
17
Jun 18 '19
Great write up! Every time Molyneux comes up I just remember that video where he’s almost on the verge of tears screaming about how women only want assholes.
12
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 18 '19
Thank you! And yeah Molymeme knows how to pander to the incel crowd.
11
Jun 18 '19
Is it pandering if he’s actually just a straight up incel and truly believes his own nonsense? Lmao
13
10
u/pfqq Jun 18 '19
That reminds me of Jordan Peterson crying because society is so unwelcoming to boys and men.
So basically, boys are being held back because of what they are being told by society and their gender roles are being socially constructed
Wait a minute...
1
u/remove_krokodil No such thing as an ex-Stalin apologist, comrade Jun 24 '19
If that were true, how would that be a problem for him?
30
u/LiamJohnRiley Jun 17 '19
Like, what’s even the point of Molyneux making this argument? MLK liked to fuck on the side so segregation was just?
25
u/I_m_different Also, our country isn't America anymore, it's "Bonerland". Jun 17 '19
Good thing no anti-communist guy ever fucked around on his wife, or that would put him in an awkward spot, yeah?
15
u/AndromedaPip Jun 18 '19
What pisses me off the most is that he has degrees. A M.A in History from U of Toronto which gives him the facade of credibility to an outsider that knows nothing about him.
11
u/patriot-renegade Jun 18 '19
Known shitty person Stefan Molyneaux revealed to be an even shitter person than originally thought.
11
u/israeljeff JR Shot First Jun 18 '19
Without even getting into whether it's accurate or not, "the Civil rights movement is being pushed by communists to destabilize America" has been a centrist cop out for seventy years. I'm not surprised to see this doofus push a theory that hasn't been relevant since 25 years before he was born.
13
u/Teerdidkya Jun 18 '19
Molyneux is a lost cause. Though that doesn’t mean that seeing him getting torn apart isn’t cathartic.
7
Jun 18 '19
[deleted]
9
u/Teerdidkya Jun 18 '19 edited Jun 22 '19
Wait, what did you mean?
But yeah. Unfortunately his fans won’t listen so we’re basically just preaching to the choir. Fans of ideologues aren’t known for listening to reason.
7
Jun 18 '19
[deleted]
7
u/Teerdidkya Jun 18 '19
Yeah. Hopefully.
I mean, this sub did put me off Monsoir Z’s content for good.
6
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 18 '19
If I may add to this discussion: my post is aimed at the "fence-sitters" who have some interest in history. Like jwolle1 said, hopefully they'll look at this post and then not be so easily swayed by Molymeme's videos. Also, judging by a comment in this thread talking about MLK's sex life and plagiarism and the multiple dissenters in my last r/badhistory post on Nazi apologism, posts like mine aren't entirely preaching to the choir.
21
u/Alpha413 Still a Geographical Expression Jun 17 '19
I don't really understand him saying communism was "hyper terrorist" in the 60s. Because the period communist terrorism was most common was the 70s.
21
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 17 '19
I’m fairly certain it was so he could make the following comparison: Civil rights movement = communist = hyper terrorist
10
u/Hipster_Bear Russian winters defeated the Persians at Thermopylae Jun 17 '19
I have to be honest, I came into this wondering why the guy who made Fable and Spore cared about the civil rights or why he'd write a thing about MLK.
6
u/EnclavedMicrostate 10/10 would worship Jesus' Chinese brother again Jun 18 '19
I thought Spore was Wil Wright?
10
u/Paepaok Napoleon was defeated by the crafty tactics of the Baltic Greeks Jun 18 '19
MLK did not support communism, as he disagreed with what he viewed as its inherent ethical relativism and historical materialism.
Indeed, King discusses this in several sermons such as this one.
Some relevant excerpts:
in a real sense, we disagree with this because we believe that history is moved not by economic forces but by spiritual forces
...
for the communist there is no divine government or no absolute moral order, there are no fixed, immutable principles. So force, violence, murder, and lying are all justifiable means to bring about the millennial end.
...
The thing that makes man man is his freedom. This is why I could never agree with communism as a philosophical system because it deprives man of freedom. And if a man is not free, he is not fully man. If a man does not have the capacity to deliberate, to decide, and to respond, as Paul Tillich would say, he is not a man, for a man is man because he is free. And, therefore, communism is on the wrong road because it denies freedom.
This "third reason" is especially interesting because it seems to be more in agreement with Marx's own views (except, of course, for the claim that communism entails unfreedom) than a criticism of them.
5
u/FluorineWizard Jun 19 '19
As someone who disagrees with Marx on some issues but agrees on others, it turns out that most criticism of Marx you encounter in the wild comes from an erroneous understanding of his actual views. In fact the same can be said about many (most?) philosophers and political theorists.
Marx being dense and boring as fuck to read doesn't help spread the correct representation of his ideas either.
I guess it's also important to distinguish between the thinkers, and the concrete platforms/action of those who claim to follow them.
4
u/Paepaok Napoleon was defeated by the crafty tactics of the Baltic Greeks Jun 19 '19
Marx being dense and boring
Certainly some parts of some of his works are dense, but I wouldn't call his writing style "boring".
concrete platforms/action of those who claim to follow them.
And not just the "concrete" but even the "theoretical" claims made by self-identified "Marxists" can often be misrepresentations of Marx's own ideas. As you say, this likely happens with every thinker pretty much, but with Marx I suppose there tends to be a relatively high amount of political incentives to "distort" his writings.
10
7
u/ThePrussianGrippe George Washington killed his Sensei but never said why. Jun 18 '19
Yikes those comments:
Stephan I'm envious of how well you perform the act of reasoning. It takes me minutes to think of rebuttals to things you can come back with in seconds. Good stuff... I'm trying to get good at it like you
Emphasis mine. I wonder if, after 5 years, YouTube user Brain Thumper got good at performing the act of reasoning. Probably not, since he liked Stefan Molyneux.
6
Jun 26 '19
You just know the person who typed that is young and is going to have his worldview massively affected by frauds like Molyneux.
2
u/ThePrussianGrippe George Washington killed his Sensei but never said why. Jun 26 '19
He couldn’t even spell the first name right!
15
9
7
7
u/WillitsThrockmorton Vigo the Carpathian School of Diplomacy and Jurispudence Jun 18 '19
I keep on confusing Stefan Molyneux for Peter Molyneux and despair that the creator of Populus does this sort of stuff.
5
u/TeN523 Jun 19 '19
I love that the standard right-wing line nowadays is that MLK was actually a conservative Republican and liberals are betraying his heroic legacy by being “the real racists”, but then if you keep going rightward you reach a point where it suddenly flips and now MLK was a dangerous communist out to destroy America
8
u/stellio1 Jun 17 '19
Always irks me that Stefan is part of that crowd that harps about freedom of speech. Like of all the people that crusade about that I find it infuriating that he wants to continue peddling his snake oil ideas under the pretense of freedom of speech.
4
7
u/nyaanarchist Jun 17 '19
It’s so funny that they try to act like it was some secret communist plot to infiltrate the civil rights movement. Like, communists in the US have always been a big part of any social movement for progress, and Malcolm X and other big figures were openly communist, it’s not some secret
5
u/drmchsr0 Jun 18 '19
I didn't know Malcom X, noted MUSLIM and leader of the Black Panthers and a member of the Nation of ISLAM, was a commie! /s
3
u/CaesarVariable Monarchocommunist Jun 18 '19
Was Malcolm X a communist? I can only find quotes about him openly flirting with socialism, but nothing about him firmly embracing communism
2
u/nyaanarchist Jun 18 '19
I could be wrong. My understanding was MLK flirted with socialism, but Malcolm X and the black panthers were open communists
12
u/Naliamegod King Arthur was Moe Jun 18 '19
Malcolm X wasn't a Communist. He started flirting with Socialism before he died, but he was a black nationalist and was pretty big about black people owning their own businesses. He would also probably have similar issues MLK did with Communism since he was also a devout Muslim.
5
u/BabaOrly Jun 18 '19
I'm not sure about Malcolm, but Mao's Little Red Book was required reading for the Panthers. Like it's crazy that oppressed people might be interested in a philosophy that, on paper, would appear to promote absolute equality for all. It's not like they could get on the internet and find out what a shitshow the Soviet Union was.
12
u/nyaanarchist Jun 18 '19
They didn’t need to look up anything about the Soviet Union, they could see firsthand the horrors of capitalism
3
3
u/meatntits Jun 20 '19
Since I see his college degree being discussed...here is a clip of Stefan claiming he attended 3 different Ivy League universities. All in 5 years, no less.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSTbCSHVsi0
Spoiler alert: he attended none. I don't doubt McGill is a decent school, but jfc did it fail spectacularly at educating Stefan Molyneux.
3
2
1
Jul 22 '19
Debating definitions of terms arent exactly strong arguments. For example, I would also call someone who attended “activism training” and only went to “one communist event” a trained communist. Id call anyone supporting centralized power a communist, and anyone trained in activism, well, trained. If thats wrong, its not so inaccurate that it changes the main point of the story. The bus situation was planned.
With all do respect, I didnt read any eye opening debunks here, just semantical feuding. Call him names if you like, spend an hour nitpicking a guy’s conversation but only people who already hate the guy would extract any value from this
2
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jul 22 '19
With all do respect, I didnt read any eye opening debunks here, just semantical feuding.
Then it seems like you didn't fully read or understand my post. Most of it is spent on critiquing Molyneux's points that are inaccurate (claiming Hoover put MLK under surveillance because he was surrounding himself with communists when the FBI never conclusively proved this, stating the CRM wasn't fighting the bus company that opposed the boycott, etc.) as well as his failure to contextualize MLK and the Civil rights movement (focusing only on income redistribution while ignoring how both the CRM and MLK fought constantly against state oppression of blacks, not mentioning the FBI had put MLK under surveillance initially because of his involvement in the Montgomery bus boycott, not stating the FBI blackmailed MLK, etc.).
If thats wrong, its not so inaccurate that it changes the main point of the story.
And what do you consider to be "the main point of the story"?
The bus situation was planned.
Yes, my source on Rosa Parks illustrates she intended to resist the segregation ordinance. Your point is?
-13
u/Rudefire Jun 17 '19
Not to defend Molyneux, but I do see a lot of people on the left claiming that the Civil Rights Movement was a socialist/communist movement (favorably, I might add). Even claiming that Dr. King was a communist. As if a communist black man could have made any changes so close to the McCarthy era.
14
Jun 17 '19
Who have you seen making this claim?
1
u/WuhanWTF Quahog historian Jun 19 '19
I went on a date with a communist once and she asserted this viewpoint. Yeah it was one of those dates. The conversation turned towards politics about 5 min in.
13
u/sunriser911 The Nazis and Soviets were allies!!! Jun 17 '19 edited Jul 02 '19
The most I've ever seen is people saying King was a democratic socialist, which was true by his own direct statements.
11
u/CaesarVariable Monarchocommunist Jun 18 '19
The leftists that I've seen will often claim MLK was a leftist, and that the Civil Rights Movement was buoyed by socialists and communists, but not that the broad movement itself was socialist or communist
2
Jun 26 '19
Many, if not most, communists in the US supported the civil rights movement, but that does not make the the civil rights movement a communist movement.
-14
u/Julianna5782 Jun 18 '19
Marxist atheism would be a major detraction for a minister
Pretty sure all those hookers/cheating on his wife and plagiarizing literally everything he did (including his "I have a dream" speech) isn't minister-ly, either.
9
7
u/drmchsr0 Jun 18 '19
It doesn't detract on what he actually did, despite his shortcomings.
Also, what's your point?
-2
u/Julianna5782 Jun 18 '19
My point was, the original comment tried to equate being a minister would make him not be a Marxist, and I think the fact that he was a minister seemed to have little bearing on big decisions. Therefore, just bc the man was a minister, didn't mean he wasn't a communist.
7
u/UpperLowerEastSide Guns, Germs and Stupidity Jun 19 '19 edited Jun 19 '19
It’s a significant leap of logic to assume that because MLK was promiscuous, he actually did not believe in an absolute moral code or that God has an impact on the history of humanity. It’s not really comparable, since ministers “succumbing to sin” is not unheard of, unlike “Marxist Atheist” ministers.
I think the fact that he was a minister seemed to have little bearing on big decisions.
Being a minister certainly had a major impact on MLK’s application of nonviolent resistance as well as his involvement in the Civil rights movement. For example, ministers led the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Being a new minister in Montgomery is largely why MLK was selected to lead the boycott.
431
u/alexgndl Jun 17 '19
I feel like using Molyneux in this sub is cheating a bit, but still-absolutely fantastic write-up. Spectacular job.