In this reading, Carson describes Dr. King in a very different manner than he is often thought of today. I liked how Carson emphasized just how much of a controversial figure King really was, and that if he was still alive today, he would not nearly be as popular as modern scholarship and history perceive him to be. This gives readers an idea of just how radically different Dr. King’s ideology was in the 1960s and helps us understand that he risked, and ultimately lost his life in order to preach and spread the ideals he believed in. While history today looks at King’s movement as an example of courageous activism and praises the ideals he was fighting for, I think Carson’s piece explains that if the modern people of today who praise him actually lived in King’s time, they would not see him as this static, mythically constructed figure who can do no wrong. When Carson explains the way history today views King, he compared him to larger than life figures such as George Washington, people who are seen as untouchable in American history. This metaphor helped me understand the difference between modern scholarship about King, and the actual perception of him in the 1960s, two very different schools of thought.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
I think it is also important to note that King had an understanding of his shortcomings, and he was adamant about having his followers think for themselves as opposed to blindly following him. This is an example of leadership that deviates from the traditional charismatic model, and I believe that differentiating between these models of leadership can have serious implications when evaluating the ethical and moral values and intentions of our future leaders.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In this reading, Carson describes Dr. King in a very different manner than he is often thought of today. I liked how Carson emphasized just…<\/p>\n