Tomorrow, all across America, the observance of Martin Luther King Day will be marked for the first time by not only social “service” but by strong social activism, demanding an end to renewed racism, in the model of “Black Lives Matter.”

 In Philadelphia, for instance, an MLK March will condemn not only racist behavior by the police but also the disemployment of millions of Americans, especially Blacks;  the enormous increase in economic inequality; and the  devastation of public education  by taking money away from urban public schools and removing them from democratic control.

Last night, Phyllis & I saw the film "Selma." It is a Godsend that the film is appearing right now, as a Black-led multiracial movement to move forward toward demoracy in America once again gathers strength.

There has been a hullabaloo over its portrayal of President Lyndon Johnson (mostly stirred by Johnson’s claque). Some have argued he was a strong supporter -- even the initial planner -- of the Selma campaign for voting rights. The film portrays him as a reluctant politician, forced into action by the movement.

I was in Washington then, working at the Institute for Policy Studies, and we were close in touch both with liberal Congressmmbers and with SNCC –-- the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.

My sense then and now was & is that Johnson absolutely had to be pushed hard by the street actions to make the '65 Voting Rights Act a priority.

Those who say he supported the Selma March &  Voting Rights forget, along with many other things, that nine months before the Selma events, he had the FBI tap the phones in the Misssissippi Freedom Democratic Party's hotel rooms in Atlantic City to derail their challenge at the Dem Natl Convention. (Illegal & unConstitutional actions,  taken to protect his own political career.)  

Similarly with Selma — he held back as long as he thought the protests didn’t threaten his political future while his action would, and when it became clear he had no choice, he acted.