A review by maestro_cerrotorcido
All Labor Has Dignity by Martin Luther King Jr.

informative slow-paced

2.5

This is a culmination of many of Dr. King's speeches to different labor unions with a small introduction, analysis, etc. before each one. I was interested to read this book as I have heard Dr. King was a socialist. These speeches made me believe otherwise, although I have read that in his private letters he defined himself as a democratic socialist. He publicly opposed socialism and communism which I don't know if that was a smart move. The labor movement was started by communists and socialists and they, and far left-wing unions, were the most pro-civil rights. This fight against communist unions also pitted unions against unions which was what destroyed the labor movement in this country. In fact that was what was ultimately the goal being sought after. The use of the words also shows a confusion among the words socialism and communism that still exists today among people who claim to be socialist by anti-communists. Ultimately, communism and socialism are looking for the same end goal which is a communist society/classless society. You may disagree on how to get there but ultimately the goal is to remove the class system. This is important because people are starting to get mixed up on this understanding and mistaking capitalist societies for socialist ones. Norway, Denmark, Venezuela, etc. are all capitalist countries. I think this is an important discussion in regards to this book because publicly, Dr. King advocated for capitalism. This is unfortunate because there is no opportunity for true civil rights under capitalism. Capitalism is a system defined by disparity and is intertwined with racism. I think Dr. King may have understood this, but for some reason, felt like the right tactic was to be anti-communism publicly. I think this destruction of communist unions and organizations led to the destruction of the labor movement and the reason why we still have so many of the same problem (institutionalized racism, stagnant wages, reductions in the social safety net, etc.). One person who comes to mind who took a different approach was Angela Davis being much more open about stances in regards to communism/socialism. But, alas, I could be wrong. I know it was a dangerous time for communists and perhaps Dr. King would not have as great of a reach today if he had been more public about his socialist views and opposed the ousting of communist factions and members of unions. I can't help but wonder if we would have a better view on these subjects had he supported them more publicly