I refused to cooperate in any way whatsoever and later was a beneficiary of this,
en.wikipedia.org
I had no way of foreseeing that the majority of U.S. voters would ever elect such a POTUS between Nixon and Reagan. In hindsight,
even if President Carter had not been elected, I cannot see myself doing anything different than what I committed to at age 18.
Each of us has to find his or her own way AFA working out an arrangement in which we can live with ourselves.
https://www.cambridge.org › core › journals › article › co...
by BM Terry · 2021 — The racial injustice of
draft deferments, on Rawls's account, ... here is
Martin Luther King Jr's reaction to the crisis around the
war and ...
https://historynewsnetwork.org › article
... after the assassinations of
Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy. ... Richard B.
Cheney began his ascent up the ladder of Republican Party ...
On July 2, 1964, Martin Luther King Jr. stood behind President Lyndon Baines Johnson as the Texan signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Although not the first civil rights bill passed by Congress, it was the most comprehensive.
newhampshirebulletin.com
January 17, 2022
"...And on April 4, 1967, he publicly rebuked the president’s war policy in Vietnam at Riverside Presbyterian Church in New York City in a speech titled “Beyond Vietnam.”
“I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam,” he told those gathered in the majestic cathedral. “I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home, and death and corruption in Vietnam.”
King was initially optimistic that
Johnson’s Great Society program, which aimed to make historic investments in job growth, job training, and economic development, would tackle domestic poverty. But by 1967 the Great Society appeared to be a casualty of the mounting costs of the war in Vietnam. “I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such,”
King said in his speech.
King saw the grinding poverty facing Black people at home as inseparable from the war overseas. As he
noted, “If our nation can spend 35 billion dollars a year to fight an unjust, evil war in Vietnam, and 20 billion dollars to put a man on the moon, it can spend billions of dollars to put God’s children on their own two feet right here on earth.” King could no longer ignore that military force ran contrary to the nonviolence he espoused. As
urban revolts in Watts and Newark in the late 1960s rocked the nation, he pleaded with people to remain nonviolent.
“But they ask – and rightly so – what about Vietnam?”
King said in the same 1967 speech. “They ask if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today – my own government.”
