To the editor:

Thank you for your thoughtful and diplomatic response to Mr. Currie's

January 29 letter and for refreshing our memories with the beautiful

Langston Hughes poem. We, too, are America... all of us. Whether we are

black, white, American Indian, Iranian American, or "mutt;" we too are

America. We are men, women, children, married, single, gay, straight, faith

believers, or agnostics. We are temporarily able-bodied or face physical

and mental challenges. We live in crowded cities or depressed rural areas.

Our special bond was formed in our Declaration of Independence and in our

Constitution. Our founders were white men, but they were onto something

huge. We have taken several centuries and hit roadblocks galore on our

crooked journey to get it right. Dr. King's famous speech and President

Obama's recent signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Play Act are just two

examples of our hunger to get it right.

Deep in our hearts, we know what is right. Thank you for reminding us.

Anne Todd

Laurinburg

--------------------------------

To the editor:

Thank you for printing my letter in your Jan. 29 edition.

And thank you for your accompanying response, which proves that you and I epitomize the term “generation gap.”

You asked why I thought Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would be so shocked at the election of a mixed race candidate. The answer is that in the South of Dr. King’s day, the only people more unjustly mistreated than minorities were those born to parents of two different races, especially if one of the parents was Caucasian. To the iron-fisted racists ruling the southern voting block, with the support and cooperation of law enforcement officers, being minority race members, associated with them, or sympathetic to them was no source of pride, regardless of how the victims of unjustified discrimination saw themselves.

Why not a candidate with a Muslim or African, rather than an Anglo-Saxon Christian name? Using Mohammed Ali as an example, he was not an honored athlete during Dr. King’s lifetime. Cassius Clay was the despised, smart-mouthed draft dodger whom prejudiced whites could not understand was spared military service due to a conversion to Islam and the resulting name change. That excuse worked, and defamed the “religion of peace” as a result, but clever boxing promoters, who did not care to see the prospect of countless millions of dollars in profits riddled with bullets in Vietnam, paved the way for Mohammed Ali to become the heralded champion even some still prejudiced whites see him as today.

Yes, Barack Hussein Obama’s election is truly the ultimate manifestation of Dr. King’s dream, but it could not have been in the original dream’s scope because Dr. Kings dream was “deeply rooted” in, not based on the real American dream of that time. The American dream of Dr. King’s day was not “…based on this nation’s long-held ideal that we are all equal under the law regardless or race, religion, or creed.” If all had been considered equal regardless of those factors, and treated accordingly, there would have been no need for a civil rights movement and a courageous leader like Dr. King.

Yes, Langston Hughes wrote the beautiful poem, “I, too, am American.” But the hate-mongering racists of the South saw no beauty in Langston Hughes, his race, or his poetry. Especially the White Citizens Council’s severe scorn of Dr. Frank Porter Graham for inviting Poet Hughes to speak at the University in Chapel Hill.

My intent was not to indicate that Dr. King was short-sighted. Had he lived, I am positive he would have led the charge to elect Barack Obama. My intent was to point out what a wonderful nation we have become due to Dr. King’s courageous effort and sacrifice. The divided nation that simultaneously mourned and rejoiced over Dr. King’s assassination, just elected a candidate who would not even have been allowed to register, much less vote or run for the highest office in our land when Dr. King was dreaming a dream rooted in, but not based on the hypocrisy of immature American democracy, which so degraded our nation in the eyes of the world.

I sincerely hope this letter at least narrows our generation gap.

---------------------------------------

Editor's response:

Mr. Currie,

While we had hoped to put this issue to rest (and will after today), we didn't want to shelve your follow-up letter.

We also didn't want many of the things you have written to go unchallenged.

The divergent views expressed on Jan. 29 don't represent so much a difference in generations as they do a gap in accurate information.

It is unclear how you reached the assertion that "the only people more unjustly mistreated than minorities, were those born to parents of two different races, especially if one of the parents was Caucasian."

A true reading of history shows that lighter skinned blacks have often had it easier — not harder — than darker skinned blacks. A fact that has sometimes caused friction within the race. You have obviously never heard the school yard taunt — "If are light, you're alright. If you're brown, stick around. If you're black, stand back."

In addition, you write that Muhammed Ali is a poor example of a minority with a unique name because he was not an honored athlete during Dr. King’s lifetime. Our point was that King might be unsurprised by someone named Barack Obama because the use of African or Muslim names was not uncommon during his life. In fact, the trend of giving black children African names began in 1957 as the international spotlight focused on Ghana when it was liberated from Great Britain. Kwame Nkrumah led the independent West African nation from 1960 to 1966 and many blacks in the U.S. named their sons after the African head of state.

Finally, you write that Dr. King's dream is “deeply rooted” in but not based on the American ideal that we should all be equal under the law. According to your letter, "If all had been considered equal regardless of those factors, and treated accordingly, there would have been no need for a civil rights movement and a courageous leader like Dr. King."

Since you describe yourself as an avid reader of King's speeches, we were a little surprised by that last bit of logic. We were unaware that King's vision was either diluted or boxed in by inequality and prejudice.

We thought the purpose of the civil rights moment was point out that inequality and hold our great nation accountable for its principles.

Our contention all along has been that if Obama's election surprised you because of your upbringing or milieu, write about that. But don't muddy the waters by confusing your feelings with what you contend are Dr. King's.

A wise woman at Scotia Village reminded us last week that good writers write about what they know. It may limit your output, but it certainly improves one’s chances of getting it right.