Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was one of the most influential people of the 20th century, and his legacy still has a tremendous affect on American society and the world. Countless politicians quote him, and the third Monday of every January, America recognizes his life accomplishments, and how he pushed the conscience of America towards justice and equality. Today, however, I find popular culture’s understanding of Dr. King incomplete. It seems to focus solely on his “I have a dream speech,” and his quest for civil rights, neglecting the fact he also spoke out against the war, in support of unions, and for blacks to have respect for themselves. These topics directly challenge the power structure that controls our society. In Dr. King’s “Why I’m opposed to the Vietnam war” speech he spoke about the inconsistencies of the media:

America and most of its newspapers applauded me in Montgomery. And I stood before thousands of Negroes getting ready to riot when my home was bombed and said, we can’t do it this way. They applauded us in the sit-in movement–we non-violently decided to sit in at lunch counters. They applauded us on the Freedom Rides when we accepted blows without retaliation. They praised us in Albany and Birmingham and Selma, Alabama. Oh, the press was so noble in its applause, and so noble in its praise when I was saying, “Be non-violent toward Bull Connor”; when I was saying, “Be non-violent toward [Selma, Alabama segregationist sheriff] Jim Clark.” There’s something strangely inconsistent about a nation and a press that will praise you when you say, “Be non-violent toward Jim Clark,” but will curse and damn you when you say, “Be non-violent toward little brown Vietnamese children. There’s something wrong with that press! (audio)

For this reason, it should come as no surprise this side of Dr. King has also been glossed over.