Martin Luther King’s Plagiarism

Posted by T on January 21, 2008
History, Politics

And now comes Rev Michael Eric Dyson to defend Martin Luther King’s plagiarism.

The facts can be summarized rather succinctly. (Numbers in parentheses are page number in Dyson’s book.) Starting in undergraduate college, King’s trial sermon was “greatly dependent on a sermon of a well-known white minister” (144). At Crozer Seminary, “citation habits continued to be sloppy” (145).

Throughout his Boston University career, it is now evident that King plagiarized large portions of his course papers and his dissertation, “A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman,” completed in 1955. King plagiarized the two principal subjects of his dissertation, but the bulk of his theft concentrated on large portions of Jack Boozer’s dissertation, “The Place of Reason in Paul Tillich’s Conception of God,” written just three years before King’s thesis and supervised by L. Harold DeWolf, King’s major adviser (145).

Then, King’s speeches and sermons also, ahem, “borrowed” heavily from others, chiefly liberal white preachers.

Rev Dyson defends King along these lines:

1. As to the speeches, the borrowings are customary, and included the personal touch — analogous to what a jazz musician does with musical licks (143).

2. Utilitarianism: “A greater good was served by King’s having used the words of others than might otherwise have been accomplished had he not done so” (144).

3. Copying was poetic justice – it used “orthodox liberal ideas to undermine orthodox racial beliefs” (144).

4. Negroes are just academically inferior: what could you expect? At least, that is the only way I can figure to interpret this passage: “The racial climate that made race a scholarly taboo and encouraged the embrace of already validated European subject matter might have been the predicate for his plagiarism. The aversion to write about race was not accidental, but reflected the dilemma that all black students faced: if they wrote about race, they risked being pigeon-holed or stereotyped; if they avoided it, they risked failing to develop critical resources to combat arguments about black inferiority” (150).

Obviously, these are weak arguments and I won’t tire the reader with hashing over the obvious. (Number 2 is particularly delicious: what other thief, liar, or cheat would not make the same argument?) Dyson himself mainly wants to exonerate for the speeches and sermons, and grudgingly concedes that the dissertation plagiarism is troubling.

Now is the time for some honesty. Negroes love to say “DOCTOR King,” because it feels empowering to have a leader that worked his way through whitey’s system, all the way to the top, on whitey’s terms (149-151). Only, he didn’t.

The main difference between a master’s degree and a PhD is the dissertation. Yes, there is some additional coursework, but that is mostly a matter of not passing away for a couple more years. (Not to mention, King plagiarized his course papers as well.) Without the dissertation, it is “AbD” not “PhD.” So, stop referring to King as “Doctor.” Hereafter, anyone that does refer to him as such must be suspected of being a liar like King himself.

Boston University must work up the courage to rescind the degree, or it should gain the reputation of being a race-pandering degree-mill. This can only hurt the reputation of other graduates of that institution, including other blacks.

The fact that King never confessed his sin publicly, nor renounced his title, must unfortunately weigh as additional evidence against his sainted status.

This is a man that lacked even what the Puritans would call “civic righteousness.”

Tags: ,

6 Comments to Martin Luther King’s Plagiarism

  • Michael Luther is not the only Negro intellectual to have been given a free ride by the judaic media. It looks like Philip Emeagwali is also a fraud. Before reading the linked article below, first read his Wiki bio. Pay special attention to the section entitled “claims” and notice that no citation is given for any of them.

    Now read this brief expose of Mr. Emeagwali.

    The only difference between these two frauds is that the University of Michigan refused to give Emeagwali a Ph.D., even though he took them to court to force them to.

  • Alert Algore! His Internet paternity claim is being challenged!

    The Discussion page for the wiki entry is also amusing: “OK, which White Nationalist wrote this page?” I suppose the same White Nationalist who made Emeagwali’s personal website, since the claims come from it.

  • Wow! Totally laugh-worthy. I love how when you want to criticize blacks you call them “Negroes” and when, in your third-to-last paragraph, you pretend you are really only looking out for their interests, you deign to actually refer to them as blacks. Thanks for letting us know that you write your internet posts from the year 1956. So long, grampaw!

  • Iva — let me make sure I’ve got it. Being a life-long cheat is no big deal; but being a throwback to 1956 is unforgiveable! You are indeed a girl of your times.

  • Number 3 is a classic example of “wordism.” Perhpas Iva should read the linked article from the Gedankenexperiment post.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *