Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Hot on the Blog
Raffi Cavoukian
Anthony Morgan

GET UPDATES FROM Anthony Morgan
 

Where is the Black Outrage Against Williamson's MLK Remark?

Posted: 04/10/2012 12:24 pm

While delivering a speech in support of the Senate's recent vote to scrap the long-gun registry last Thursday, Tory MP John Williamson stood up in the House of Commons and with the supportive cheers of a number of other Conservative MPs, triumphantly proclaimed, "Free at last, free at last, law abiding Canadians are finally free at last!"

If Williamson's declaration seems familiar, it is because his words are an adaptation of a portion of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s famous speech, "I Have a Dream." At the end of this speech, King trumpets that once America achieves his vision of a country that is free of race-based and religious-based discrimination, all Americans will proudly declare: "Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!

One can't help but to note how shockingly ironic and disappointing Williamson's stunt truly is. Only a day before Williamson chose to rhetorically defecate on the memory and legacy of King, the world marked the 44th anniversary of the day this leading civil rights leader was shot and killed.

On that day, April 4, 1968, an assassin's bullet burst from the barrel of a Remington Model 760 rifle, ripped into the round and well-known face of King, shattered through his jaw, smashed into the base of his neck and ultimately crushed the very windpipe that gave MLK the powerful baritone that most famously roared the words that Williamson chose to brazenly mock on the floor of the Commons.

Without question, Williamson should be taken to full account and pushed by the Canadian public to answer for why he thought it appropriate to diminish the words and legacy of King, demean the history and memory of the Civil Rights Movement, and degrade the meaning and spirit of King's vision in such an unscrupulous way -- and that, just to score a cute and gloating sound bite for the evening news.

I think we as Canadians deserve politicians with stronger character and much better judgment. Indeed, all Canadians should not only be disturbed by Williamson's tasteless jest, but also publicly demand better from him as one of our representatives in the House of Commons.

I can only imagine the great embarrassment Canadians would feel if his quip were played and scrutinized in the U.S. media now, at a time when the American public is struggling to deal with an all-too-recent set of high-profile shooting tragedies; that of Trayvon Martin, and that of five innocent African-Americans who were unsuspectingly gunned down over the Easter weekend during an anti-black shooting spree by two white men in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Even considering all of the above, I can't help but to feel that, at some level, the collective population of black Canadians also has some responsibility to take for the reckless regard Williamson was allowed to show for the most important figure of the Civil Rights Movement.

While there is absolutely no denying that, in general, black Canadians are still subject to a considerable and unacceptable degree of racial profiling, discrimination and socio-economic disenfranchisement in the fields of education, employment, and business, there is simply no credible excuse that in 2012 there is an absence of an active, respected and united political class of meaningfully influential black Canadians. Period.

Many people, especially a high number of individuals from the black Canadian community, may balk at this latest statement. They're likely to be quick to retort that many blacks are already deeply and variously engaged in a long-fought battle to correct the over-representation of blacks in statistics about school-related discipline, drop-out rates, unemployment lines, deportation cases, and the Canadian prison population.

This a very legitimate point, but it stands as all the more reason why a much higher number of black Canadians should be demonstrating not only a more heightened and sharpened political consciousness, but also much greater engagement in formal Canadian politics. How can change occur without meaningful participation in Canada's more mainstream political structures?

In other words, instead of being an excuse for not playing a bigger role in the Canadian political system, the fact that the average black Canadian finds him- or herself pushed to the socio-economic margins of Canadian society should be what motivates capable black Canadians to work with and on behalf of their communities by playing a much more influential role in the formal political process in Canada.

By this I mean taking up membership in any one of Canada's political parties, attending and participating in party meetings and business, or at the very least, organizing or taking part in letter-writing campaigns to political representatives, writing letters to the editor or even submitting opinion editorials for publication in media sources that are read within and beyond black Canadian communities throughout Canada. Voting alone is simply not enough.

While at first glance it may be hard to see, there is a most certainly a direct and important link between Williamson's dishonourable and appalling misappropriation of King's words and legacy, and the lack of political participation of blacks in the mainstream of Canada's political process.

The link is this: It is highly unlikely (at least one hopes) that Williamson would have even thought to so callously debase King's and the Civil Rights Movement's legacy if he knew that upon doing so he'd immediately have to answer to an effectively critical and vocal mass of blacks in his own party, in any of the opposition parties, and/or in the public where a chorale of black political commentators, journalists, and politically engaged community members would be sure the he were fairly, fully, and frankly taken to task for slighting blacks across North America (if not beyond) in shrewd attempt to score inconsequential political points against his opponents in the Commons.

But alas, such a politically engaged and formally implicated political class of black Canadians does not yet exist. So where does this leave us? Well, ultimately it just means that we Charter-fearing Canadians are stuck with a state of affairs where our politicians are given carte blanche to score pathetic political punches that diminish the historical struggles (and by extension the humanity and dignity) of blacks in North America, and free to do so without facing any meaningful consequence.

It was the African-American writer Audre Lorde who once said, "Your silence will not protect you." That seems about right...

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 20
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
07:37 PM on 04/21/2012
Because black Canadians are not culturally African Americans, meaning we did not have to protest and march and show out anger to be heard. We have never had to burn down city blocks in anger to get the right to vote. That infrastructure of black leadership was never established, with a MLK remark there is no go to guy for a soundbyte. On top of that there is no such thing as black people, it's black people's. In the u.s the word black is used interchangeably to describe people of the African American ethnicity. A person there will say they are Brazilian and black, meaning they are brazilian and African American so on and so forth. While we as a collection of black peoples respect and love Martin Luther king as a great African American leader. His affect on our well being was indirect and the majority of black Canadians weren't in canada when he was alive and he did not visit. Being that the majority of black canadians are of Caribbean origin you would more likely to hear an uproar if the gaffe was made using Marcus garveys name, he actually attempted to do something for us. Malcolm x was half Grenadian his parents were married in Montreal but the contrast between conditions here and in the u.s was so different that in his CBC interviews he did not address any issues here and never visited his mothers home country. We share a kinship our brothers and sisters south
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EQ8Rhomes
01:20 AM on 04/21/2012
Tory MP Williams is never going to be free. I am Canadian, Asian, father-in-law to a French Canadian daughter-in-law, and a Jamaican son-in-law, and grandfather to four lovely grandchildren of united Nations proportions.
I claim the right to tell Williams that he is a prisoner of his narrow-minded ideology and political pandering to NRA and Canadian gun lobby. He will never be free.
01:36 PM on 04/13/2012
Well said, Anthony.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SayBlade
This micro bio intentionally left blank.
11:17 AM on 04/12/2012
Someone, some party is going to use this in an attack advert in Williamson's riding next election and he will have to wear it.
photo
SeeTheFnords
Look out - there's one behind you!
09:32 PM on 04/11/2012
Ok, then. Speaking as a white, Canadian born and raised, woman, I was outraged and dismayed by this politician's choice of words. I expressed my feelings to various levels of government, and took this guy to task in a fairly polite yet strongly-worded message. I did not go protesting or picketing, didn't rampage on facebook, but did talk about it with my friends - and they did the same thing I did.

Yes, perhaps a bunch of Canadians seem low-key when expressing displeasure, but we still do make our thoughts known to those who need to know them. We're not the same as the USofA.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tokenblackman
01:36 PM on 04/11/2012
If people in Canada are not going to become upset over being lied to the tune of $10 Billion, do you think we are going to get upset over this statement?
11:07 AM on 04/11/2012
I think the black people's "outage" is in check. Williams intoning the dr king is embarrassing yes, causing rage? Really? I don't think so. Let's save rage for something rage worthy.
11:52 PM on 04/10/2012
I totally agree - and am most appreciative of your article.

As someone born and raised in the Deep South and now living in - and a citizen of - this beautiful country, I am adding my voice on a regular basis. I really hate to see the Conservatives in Canada behaving more and more like American Republicans these days. Scary stuff.
09:49 PM on 04/10/2012
Actually, it leaves us with you and more people like you to bring to light such 'disturbances'. To tell you the truth, I read and watch the news daily, and didn't hear of this. And Williamson's remark, is (simply put) embarrassing. I AM embarrass, and not because I am a black canadian but because I am a Canadian. The outrage starts here!
09:45 PM on 04/10/2012
Mr Morgan may be disgusted with Mr Williams comments however, Mr Morgan does not have the ability or authority to question the motives or intentions of Mr Williams comments. Mr Morgan seems to take an immediate stance of victimization instead of being responsible and speaking with Mr Williams to discuss his words.

Mr Morgan discusses about being involved in community and building social consciousness. He should first become personally more aware and understand his own motives and privilege. Going to law school hardly makes him an expert on social relations and the psychology or personal drives of others.

Mr Morgan is only describing his own projections and his own beliefs and has no expertise in the assessment and analysis of another. He should work on himself first before making accusations.
01:48 PM on 04/11/2012
Mr Morgan is entitled to his opinion as are you. But I can't help be feel that your comments come from somewhere else, not too related to the issue at hand. They sound too personal. Perhaps you should question your own intentions and motives before asking that of a citizen simply exercising his own right to express his perception of an event. You dont need a phd in psychology or social relations to do that, last time I checked at least.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EQ8Rhomes
01:21 AM on 04/21/2012
@nanniQc: Great take down of "onthefly22"--Is that a rifle?
06:19 PM on 04/10/2012
Two issues, here: the fact that Dr. King is an esteemed figure, across the political spectrum, and the gun registry (actually, the entire Liberal Firearms Act) was a blatant affront to civil rights.

Non gun owners may be shocked to learn that the Firearms Act negates Charter rights. LEGAL gun owners waive their rights to freedom from arbitrary, warrantless search and seizure. Yes--the cops, or civilian inspectors can 'inspect' your home, WITHOUT A WARRANT. The irony, here, is that the Charter rights of people who possess ILLEGAL firearms are protected by the courts. Many a case against a gun-toting gangster has been tossed, because the illegal weapons were discovered via a warrantless search. Even worse, there is no registry of people with firearms prohibition orders.

The Chretien government disbanded the Ports Police, refused to arm border guards (both useful in the interdiction of gun smuggling), tried to close two RCMP crime labs, and even cut funding for breast cancer research--all for 'cost reasons.' Yet they blew $2B on the gun registry, which was sold as a public safety and 'women's health' tool. Not to mention the fact that gun registry IT contractor CGI Group funded both the Liberal Party, and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.

Invoking Martin Luther King was appropriate, in the sense that Dr. King's focus was civil rights--something which the Firearms Act trampled on. And getting rid of this porkbarrel IT project was the right thing to do.
09:31 AM on 04/11/2012
Canada doesn't have "the right to bear arms", yankee. This isn't a civil rights issue in the slightest.

There's never been some epidemic of government inspectors breaking into people's homes. Now, government agents spying on your bank accounts, internet usage, meetings you attend, etc... is another story...
04:03 PM on 04/11/2012
The U.S. Second Amendment is based on English Common law rights to self-defense--including ARMED self defense. This predates the U.S. constitution. Just because the Charter of Rights doesn't include certain rights (e.g., the right to own property), doesn't mean they don't exist.

As for 'government inspectors breaking into people's homes,' you have been under a rock:

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?nomobile=1&f=45&t=91321&start=0
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
09:37 PM on 04/12/2012
Please read the Canadian Charter of Rights, section 26, which states that the Charter does not dismiss rights that already exist.

Then proceed back into English Common Law, which is part of our constitutional framework, and you will find a clear right to keep arms.

Pay special attention to the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which recognizes an "ancient" right to keep arms "for their defense" and "as allowed by law"
03:43 PM on 04/10/2012
REALLY!? My God!