the style of his leadership, how it was formed. how you made sense of it. andy young has suggested that martin was very much the baptist preacher with the authoritarianism that goes with that. and my whole impression was very different. now he worked very closely or my brothers worked very closely with him. the real estate broker, slater. they are on record as saying in the meetings that they held in albany where the guys were really going at martin, you know. i mean, with no let or hindrance. he would sit there for two, two and a half hours and take all the stuff in. and not blink. but not come back aggressively but simply absorb it. you could say, hey, arrogance. you know? walks off and comes back with a decision whereas slater and shabin thought, no, this is a sign of someone who takes his counsel, someone who has respect for the other. someone who knows how to listen and can think on his feet. now there would be the element of mysticism, to detach yourself from yourself s
russia was and a civil war or is there another methodology? and one of the things i was struck by is that at howard at the school of religion was the center of this talk about gandhi. between mordechai johnson who calls gandhi the little brown man and is this this is the way we can have a social revolution that meets up with the idea that we don t want to destroy human personality. we don t want to destroy human personality. if we are religious people, we want to enhance personality. if we have like in russia, we will destroy human personality. there is an extensive discussion going on at howard school of religion that this is the kind of ways that a revolution has to be fought in the long run, a revolution has to be empowered through this force sole force that keeps human personality intact. war destroys relationships, period. how do you bring those back? that was a theological concern for thurman, mays at howard and more for the students. i really want to push that with