1968

When you are a Conservative like me, you are trying not to be a Progressive primarily because you don't think human beings and human society should be tinkered with too much. You are against social engineering, but simultaneously you are fairly welcoming of change and progress. The fundamental premise of modern liberty is non-racial and non-sectarian. My favorite aphorism of this meritocratic notion is that you never know from where nobility will arise.

In 1968, America burned. It burned because MLK was assassinated. King represented a great deal in terms of the pace of meritocratic change America needed. A man like King was inevitable given the conditions of blacks in post-war America. What was clear was that in many parts of the nation, a certain aristocracy was not meritorious and it blocked the liberty of millions. A sleepy and intransigent America needed a wake-up call. But was the violence inevitable? I say that it probably was but I want to know more.

All this was a timeline I did not appreciate as a child and was never sufficiently instructed as a student. It was all still happening, and in many ways it still is.  The historical context of nationwide riots gives us the kind of perspective necessary. To my way of reckoning, the political force of a Tea Party movement is picayune as compared to the political sentiment that, once denied can spark the torching of cities. I see people getting bent out of shape by Olbermann and Limbaugh and yet still laughing with Maher and Stewart - there's a sort of fake political outrage in the air these days. Yes people are griping and complaining but nobody is going to murder Rush. 

I'm looking for the book. The best one on the era. Because I'm curious. Eyes on the Prize is no longer sufficient.