upworthy

martin luther king jr.

Popular

A teacher's historic 1968 racism experiment on third graders is still incredible today

“I watched what had been marvelous ... children turn into nasty, vicious discriminating little third graders in the space of 15 minutes.”

Jane Elliott conducts on experiment on her students in 1970.

On April 4, 1968, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee, and the news devastated Jane Elliott, a third-grade teacher in Riceville, Iowa. In the wake of King’s death, Elliott heard people on the news and work colleagues making racist remarks about the slain civil rights leader. So, she scrapped her lesson plans for the next day and, instead, gave her students a two-day lesson on racism. A version of this lesson was later filmed in 1970 and shown on PBS as the documentary The Eye of the Storm.

What is the Blue Eyes/Brown Eyes Experiment?

The next day, she told the children in her overwhelmingly white and protestant school that they would be divided by their eye colors, brown and blue. The blue-eyed people would be privileged, and the brown-eyed people would be treated like second-class citizens. "Since I'm the teacher and I have blue eyes, I think maybe the blue-eyed people should be on top the first day. I mean, the blue-eyed people are the better people in this room. Oh yes, they are all right. They are smarter than brown-eyed people,” she told her classroom. “This is a fact. The brown-eyed people do not get to use the drinking fountain; you'll have to use the paper cups. You brown-eyed people are not to play with the blue-eyed people on the playground. The brown-eyed people in this room today are going to wear collars so that we can tell from a distance what color your eyes are ready."

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

When lunch rolled around, the blue-eyed children began insulting the brown-eyed children, and "Brown eyes" became an insult. The brown-eyed children felt hopeless because they had no power over their treatment.

“It seems like when we were down on the bottom, everything bad happened, and uh, the way they treated you, you felt like you didn't even want to try to do anything. It was like Mrs. Elliott was taking our best friends away from us,” one of the brown-eyed children said. “I watched what had been marvelous, cooperative, wonderful, thoughtful children turn into nasty, vicious discriminating little third graders in the space of 15 minutes,” Elliott recalled.

The next day, the roles were reversed. The brown-eyed children were given all the privileges, and the blue-eyed kids wore collars. Interestingly, the brown-eyed children who experienced discrimination on the first day were kinder to the blue-eyed people when they were in charge because they understood how they felt.

The teacher also discovered that when a group of students were told they were superior, they worked through their phonics lesson faster than when they were part of the group deemed inferior. They even claimed that they couldn't think as well with the collars on, which gives some insight into the yoke of living under prejudice. The children deemed superior on the first day underperformed the next day in their lessons.


On the third day of that dreadful week following Dr. King’s assassination, the kids had learned a big lesson in life about discrimination, evidenced by a call and response Elliott had with her students where they agreed that it was wrong to judge people by the color of their skin. “Now you know a little bit more than you knew at the beginning of this week,” Elliott concluded her lesson.

Let’s hope that the children from Riceville, Iowa, in 1968 took Elliot’s lesson to heart and led a life where they, as King said, “Judge people by the content of their hearts instead of the color of their skin.” After the exercise made headlines, Elliott left teaching at the elementary school and became a full-time anti-racist speaker, conducting the experiment throughout the world. In 1992, she performed it in a controversial episode ofThe Oprah Winfrey Show.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Sometimes simple speeches can be as impactful as the grand ones. A simple, but powerful handwritten note from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on love speaks volumes, despite its brevity.

Memorabilia company Moments in Time is selling the note for $42,000. King's handwriting is both hard to come by and valuable, hence the high price tag. "It is extremely rare. Other than inscriptions in (typed) letters and books, finding a handwritten note is very rare," Gary Zimet, CEO of Moments in Time, told CNN. "This note encapsulates the philosophy of King's life and that's why it's so important."


RELATED: The 15-y.o. who refused to give up her bus seat for a white woman—9 months before Rosa Parks

The note was penned to someone who asked King about the meaning of love. "Love is the greatest force in the universe. It is the heartbeat of the moral cosmos. He who loves is a participant in the being of God," the note reads. The note is believed to have been written in the mid-1960s and is signed by King.

The note was found by a memorabilia dealer in England who didn't know how valuable the item was. Zimet told CNN he compared the note to other examples of King's handwriting to verify its authenticity. However, he believed it was real as soon as he saw it, thanks in part to his 40 year experience working with memorabilia.

The note isn't the only MLK memorabilia for sale on the Moments in Time website. The company also has a letter from King to Sammy Davis Jr. listed on their website. The typed letter has a handwritten postscript. The letter discusses the contributions of the black artists to the Civil Rights movement. "Today greats like Harry Belafonte, Sidney Poitier, Mahalia Jackson and yourself, of course, are not content to merely identify with the struggle. They actively participate in it, as artists and as citizens adding their weight and enormous prestige and thus helping to move the struggle forward," the letter reads.

RELATED: Disney's black Ariel isn't just about diverse representation. It's also about undoing past wrongs.

If you don't have $42,000 on hand, you can still gain inspiration from King's handwriting. Atlanta's National Center for Civil and Human Rights currently has handwritten sermons and speeches on display as part of the museum's We Share the Dream: King's Beloved Community exhibit. The exhibit is open until June.

Every year around Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, social media feeds get flooded with memes bearing Dr. King's face and words—snapshots of the man with a snippet of his message, wrapped neatly in a square package, easily digested by the masses.

We get bombarded by the "not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character" quote we all know and love. We get hit with "darkness cannot drive out darkness" memes that keep us feeling cozy in our comfort zones. We see "I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear," over and over, and nod our heads in placid agreement. People of all stripes share MLK quotes that give us all the warm fuzzies, and we think, "Wow, what an amazing, peaceful, universally beloved man."


Credit Unknown

But there are two big problems with such memes.

1) Sharing one or two sentences drastically dilutes Dr. King's legacy, turning his core message into a socially neutral, politically palatable, let's-all-hold-hands-and-skip-together philosophy—one that challenges no one and betrays the radical reality of his work.

2) Such a whitewashing of King's message enables people to share his words in a way that actually upholds or overlooks the very injustices he was trying to fight.

RELATED: Steve Bannon claimed MLK would be proud of Trump. King's daughter shut him down.

For example, I've seen people say that people should be "judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character" as an argument against Affirmative Action-type programs. I've seen people say "hate cannot drive out hate" while mischaracterizing a calling out of racial injustice as hatred. I've seen people quote King's "I have a dream" speech while asserting that talking about racism just perpetuates racism—an assertion King simply didn't abide.

People frequently twist King's words to fit their worldview, and in doing so, dishonor the man and his fight for true justice. The radical nature of his message seems to have been watered down into what people think he was—a gentle leader who advocated a non-violent approach to fighting for equality—instead of what he actually was—a passionate disrupter who constantly pushed boundaries and pulled no punches when calling out injustices of all kinds. Many Americans today would undoubtedly call him a "race-baiter" at best, and an "extremist thug" at worst.

We mustn't forget that King was considered a radical and a criminal, by both the U.S. government and much of mainstream America, during his lifetime. At the height of his activism, nearly two-thirds of Americans had an unfavorable opinion of King. And that disapproval didn't just come from the openly racist South. After being hit with a rock at a desegregation march in Chicago, King remarked, "I have seen many demonstrations in the South, but I have never seen anything so hostile and so hateful as I've seen here today."

King had strong words for those of us who think we're not racist. When I first read King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail—his response to a group of clergymen who agreed with his antiracism sentiments but criticized his "extreme" methods—I was blown away. I remember thinking that my education about Dr. King had been sorely lacking, that I'd never learned how much criticism he'd faced and how frequently he was considered an extremist by white moderates, and that I had no idea how he had directly challenged white Americans of goodwill. (In other words, people like me.)

The least we can do to honor King's life is to go beyond popular one-liners, take the time to read one of his most important works, and to meditate on the challenges he presented to us. You can read King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail in its entirety here, but I've included some excerpts below that highlight some of its main points.

For example, this passage explaining how peaceful activism doesn't mean avoiding tension and crisis:

"You may well ask: 'Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?' You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word 'tension.' I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation."

RELATED: Ad execs probably should have read the full MLK speech before making that commercial.

Or this passage about the "timing" of taking action against injustice:

"We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was 'well timed' in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word 'Wait!' It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This 'Wait' has almost always meant 'Never.' We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that 'justice too long delayed is justice denied.'"

Many people who praise Dr. King would have called him a criminal if he were still alive today, as he advocated breaking unjust laws:

"One may well ask: 'How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?' The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that 'an unjust law is no law at all.'"

He added that a just law can sometimes be applied unjustly, and that how one violates a law matters:

"Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.

I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law."

In addition, he pointed out that some of history's most unjust acts were legal, while some of the most righteous acts were illegal:

"We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was 'legal' and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was 'illegal.' It was 'illegal' to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country's antireligious laws."

One of the most important points King makes in this letter is how white moderates who put law and order over justice do as much, if not more, harm to the cause of justice as outright racists:

"I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action'; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a 'more convenient season.' Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured."

How about this bit about "the appalling silence of the good people"?

"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right."

And finally, some words about law and order and the role of the police in "preventing violence":

"Before closing I feel impelled to mention one other point in your statement that has troubled me profoundly. You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping 'order' and 'preventing violence.' I doubt that you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes. I doubt that you would so quickly commend the policemen if you were to observe their ugly and inhumane treatment of Negroes here in the city jail; if you were to watch them push and curse old Negro women and young Negro girls; if you were to see them slap and kick old Negro men and young boys; if you were to observe them, as they did on two occasions, refuse to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. I cannot join you in your praise of the Birmingham police department...

I wish you had commended the Negro sit inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes."

As King's daughter, Bernice, pointed out on his birthday, January 15, "The authentic, comprehensive King makes power uneasy & privilege unhinged." Such a description makes one wonder how Dr. King would be regarded today if he had lived and continued to directly call out the racial injustice that still exists in our society.

Steve Bannon said that Martin Luther King Jr. “would be proud” of Donald Trump. Umm, what?

In predictable, reality-bending fashion, Trump’s former strategist and adviser Steve Bannon made a bold claim about how King would feel about Trump’s performance thus far in his presidency. Speaking to BBC Newsnight’s Emily Maitlis, he said, “If you look at the policies of Donald Trump, anybody ... Martin Luther King would be proud of him, of what he’s done for the black and Hispanic community for jobs.”

Maitlis clarified — somehow with a straight face — “You think Martin Luther King would be proud of Donald Trump as president?”


Bafflingly, Bannon charged straight ahead:

“You don’t think Martin Luther King would be proud? Look at the unemployment we had in the black community five years ago. You don’t think Martin Luther King would sit there and go ‘Yes, you’re putting young black men and women to work. There’s the lowest unemployment we’ve had in history. And wages are starting to rise among the working class. And you’ve finally stopped the illegal alien labor forces coming in and competing with them every day, and destroying the schools and destroying the healthcare.’ Absolutely.”

Mmm 'kay.

Before we get to what King’s daughter had to say about that, let’s quickly review those unemployment numbers.

Indeed, the black unemployment rate is the lowest it’s ever been. But that rate has been dropping steadily since the middle of Obama’s term as president. Bannon specifies the change in the rate from five years ago, but neglects to acknowledge that the vast majority of that drop happened under Obama.

Here's the government's own Bureau of Labor Statistics chart for black unemployment since 2008:

[rebelmouse-image 19533368 dam="1" original_size="600x300" caption="Black unemployment rate in the U.S. Graph via Bureau of Labor Statistics." expand=1]Black unemployment rate in the U.S. Graph via Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The same goes for Hispanic unemployment. Yes, it's the lowest it's been in 25 years, but it's also been steadily dropping since 2011:

[rebelmouse-image 19533369 dam="1" original_size="600x300" caption="Hispanic or Latino unemployment rate in the U.S. Graph via Bureau of Labor Statistics." expand=1]Hispanic or Latino unemployment rate in the U.S. Graph via Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Trump’s policies have not created some kind of dramatic turnaround in unemployment — the trend is simply continuing. There have been no miracles performed here, unless you consider riding on someone’s economic coattails a miracle.

Now, on to King's response.

Martin Luther King Jr.'s daughter Bernice shut Bannon down — real quick.

Bernice King, Martin Luther King Jr.'s youngest child, reacted to Bannon's interview, and let's just say she's not having it.

Bernice King shared this image on Twitter the morning after Bannon's interview. I imagine that's exactly the face she made when she saw it. Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images.

"#SteveBannon has dangerously and erroneously co-opted my father's name, work and words," King wrote on Twitter. "Bannon's assertion that my father, #MLK would be proud of Donald Trump wholly ignores Daddy's commitment to people of all races, nationalities, etc. being treated with dignity and respect."

She then explained how her "father's concerns were not sectional, but global."

[rebelmouse-image 19533371 dam="1" original_size="792x470" caption="Screenshot via Bernice King/Twitter." expand=1]Screenshot via Bernice King/Twitter.

Setting the record straight on what her fatheractuallywould and wouldn't do, King wrote, "Further, he would not refer to people as 'illegal aliens.' The term is degrading and does not reflect his belief that we are all a part of the human family." She added that he'd never pit one group against another.

[rebelmouse-image 19533372 dam="1" original_size="782x356" caption="Screenshot via Bernice King/Twitter." expand=1]Screenshot via Bernice King/Twitter.

But she wasn't done. She called Bannon's comments "empty calories," and explained how her father would be "extremely disturbed" by the current political climate that emboldens people to "easily express and demonstrate cruelty, predominantly toward people of color and immigrants."

[rebelmouse-image 19533373 dam="1" original_size="790x374" caption="Screenshot via Bernice King/Twitter." expand=1]Screenshot via Bernice King/Twitter.

King capped off her commentary with how her father would actually view those unemployment numbers:

[rebelmouse-image 19533374 dam="1" original_size="782x156" caption="Screenshot via Bernice King/Twitter." expand=1]Screenshot via Bernice King/Twitter.

Well, there you have it, Mr. Bannon.

People of all political stripes try to mold Martin Luther King Jr. to fit their agenda. It's a problem.

While usually more subtle and less blatantly ridiculous than Bannon's assertions, people often choose small pieces of King's message to suit their narrative. But such simplification dishonors the man and his accomplishments. At the core, King was a radical humanitarian. He championed not only the black American, but the poor person, the immigrant, and every human being experiencing oppression and injustice.

Thank goodness for Bernice King's perspective in the age of cherry-picking MLK quotes and whitewashing his legacy. We need to keep defending truth and shut down those who try to bend reality to justify prejudice and fear-mongering.