In re-creation of famous 1965 march, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s family prepares to once again ‘embrace' Boston
Advertisement
'Boston obviously holds a special place in my heart,' King III told me a few days ago. 'Because their love story began there.'
Obviously the re-creation - don't call it a reenactment - comes at another fertile moment for social protest. Spearheaded by Embrace Boston, in collaboration with a large coalition of social justice organizations, the march Saturday will protest the ongoing attacks by the Trump administration on diversity, equity, and inclusion.
'In the midst of the world on fire and the shaking of the foundations of democracy, nothing speaks to MLK's legacy like peaceful marching and assembly in honor of democracy, justice and community,' said Imari Paris Jeffries, president and CEO of Embrace Boston.
Martin Luther King lll (center) and his wife, Arndrea get an up close look at The Embrace during the dedication in 2023.
John Tlumacki/Globe Staff
Embrace Boston and the other groups sponsoring the march are part of
Advertisement
'Boston is one of the OG American cities - along with New York and Philadelphia - that have a right to tell the American story,' Paris Jeffries said. 'And the more expansive we can tell the story, the more we can model what it's like to not lose our colonial history while telling a more holistic history.'
King's trip to Boston 60 years ago came at a pivotal moment, both for his movement and for Boston. The passage of major civil rights legislation had led King to expand the map of his efforts, so to speak, as he began to grapple with racial and economic ills beyond the South.
Meanwhile, in Boston, anger and frustration at the city's segregated and unequal schools had begun to coalesce into a serious movement. King's trip to Boston helped rally support for the legal efforts that would eventually culminate in court-ordered segregation in 1974.
Lew Finfer, a longtime civic activist and historian of the school desegregation, said King's trip gave crucial support to the battles already being waged by local heroes like Ruth Batson, Paul Parks, and Mel King.
'It was a big shot in the arm to have 25,000 people marching around a shared agenda,' Finfer said.
Both Paris Jeffries and King III noted that the issues that consumed Rev. King in the last years of his too-short life are present today. Economic inequality, racial and gender equity, and America's role in the world are all hot-button topics right now. Even if they are framed somewhat differently, none of them feel historical right now.
Advertisement
'I'm glad to be coming to Boston,' King said. 'But the sad part is that it isn't for a celebration.'
Paris Jeffries said the march will be a chance for many people looking for a way to protest to get connected to like-minded people and organizations. The hope is that it will contribute to a critical mass of activism.
Though the initial controversy following the installation of 'The Embrace' has dissipated, I couldn't resist asking King how he feels about the sculpture.' Not only is he fond of it as a piece of art, but he said it's also meaningful for its location, and what it represents.
'I believe that it captures the essence of what the artist was attempting to do, in showing, you know, a love story,' King said. 'In Boston Common, the oldest park in the nation, there's a symbol of love, of respect, of justice, which is this memorial dedicated to my father and mother and what they represented in our nation and world.'
Adrian Walker is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Military Crackdown Is Starting To Dent His Poll Numbers
As Donald Trump launched his militarized crackdown in Los Angeles, the president and many of his advisers were convinced that deploying troops to the streets of a major American city would be good politics for them. They maintain, three people familiar with the matter say, that immigration was one of Trump's strongest issues, that it helped get him back in the White House, and that his mass deportation program has polled well since the 2024 campaign. No matter the pushback to Trump sending in the troops (likely illegally) from Democrats, the media, or protesters, the administration's brain trust saw this as a winner for them — and something they wish to replicate. 'If it works out well in L.A., expect it everywhere,' a Trump administration official said of the president's desire for militarized Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids across the nation. (This official and the other three sources spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss internal deliberations.) But just days into Trump's deployment of National Guard troops and Marines to quell anti-ICE protests in L.A., new public polling suggests that Trump's recent deportation operations, and his decision to use the military against his domestic enemies, are not boosting his approval ratings. In fact, Trump's latest power grab is tanking his latest numbers. Trump's general platform of federal immigration crackdowns polled well in the build-up to his election and second term; 2024 polling showed Trump's calls for grand-scale deportations of undocumented immigrants enjoyed majority support. (However, that majority support diminished when voters were pressed on specific policies and methods.) In April of last year — to the alarm of Democratic operatives and Biden officials — a Harris Poll survey showed 42 percent of Democrats warming up to the idea. According to a polling analysis by data journalist G. Elliott Morris, Trump entered office with a strong positive approval rating on immigration. But those ratings peaked in February at a high of +11.3 percent. Now, for the second time since April, Morris' polling average shows Trump's immigration approval rating in the negatives. It appears the militarized incursion into Los Angeles is not playing well with the public at large. A recent YouGov survey shows 47 percent of American adults disapprove of Trump ordering the Marines to L.A., compared to 34 percent who support it. In the same poll, 45 percent disapprove of the president's use of National Guard troops, with 38 percent of respondents backing it. This aligns with a Wednesday Quinnipiac poll that found 54 percent of respondents disapprove of Trump's handling of immigration, and that 56 percent disapprove of his handling of deportations. (This is a markedly negative turn from an April Quinnipiac poll that found only 50 percent of respondents disapproved of his handling of immigration issues.) Similarly, a Thursday AP/NORC poll found that 53 percent disapproved of Trump's handling of immigration, compared to 46 percent who approve. A text survey conducted by The Washington Post and George Mason University's Schar School found that the public rated Trump's immigration and deportation policies 'negatively by a 15 percentage-point margin, 52 percent to 37 percent.' A Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Thursday shows a stark disconnect between the public's general approval for strong action to restore order, and disapproval of what Trump is doing in Southern California. It found that 48 percent of respondents theoretically agree with the statement that the president should 'deploy the military to bring order to the streets.' But only 38 percent of respondents actually approved of how the president is responding to protests in Los Angeles. Those numbers are likely to continue trending downward as the Trump administration continues to behave badly in L.A. On Thursday — during a press conference in which Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem declared her department would be staying in Los Angeles to 'liberate this city from the socialist and burdensome leadership' of Democrats — Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) was tackled to the ground and handcuffed by FBI agents when he attempted to ask a question of Noem. Video of Padilla's detention quickly went viral on social media. After being released without charges, the senator told reporters that 'if this is how DHS responds to a senator with a question you can only imagine what they're doing to farm workers, to cooks, to day laborers out in the Los Angeles community and throughout California.' Without a doubt the videos and stories of teenagers, pregnant women, and everyday working people being chased and detained by ICE is reaffirming what polling and surveys have long showed to be true: Americans generally believe that undocumented migrants with criminal records should be deported, but they are generally put off by indiscriminate immigration raids and deportations that disregard the circumstances of the individual. There's a silver lining, perhaps, for Trump and his party in some of this data. Democrats in Congress are also wildly unpopular, driven by dissatisfaction from their own liberal voters. 'The public supports keeping America safe and secure, and they don't like the concept of people here illegally — the issue is how it's administered,' says Frank Luntz, a longtime pollster and a conservative Trump critic. 'They have an agenda the American people support; their problem is the way they execute it and articulate it.' Voters do want immigration laws enforced, he says, but they 'don't want senators beaten up at press conferences. This has been the challenge of the Trump administration from the beginning,' Luntz adds, 'because they think they are on the right track, but the way it's being administered right now, they're not.' Even the president himself — who wrote on Thursday that 'all' undocumented people 'have to go home' — seems to be oscillating on the issue, at least from a public-relations standpoint. Earlier in the day Trump posted on Truth Social that 'farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them. This is not good,' Trump wrote. 'We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!' For the time being, however, the Trump administration is barreling ahead on its vision of his very American police state. 'In November, the American people resoundingly rejected the Democrat vision for immigration — open borders and millions of unvetted illegal aliens — and endorsed President Trump's vision for immigration — deportations and enforced immigration law,' White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement to Rolling Stone. 'President Trump is keeping his promise to the American people and violent left-wing rioters won't stop that.' Asked about the recent slate of negative polls for Trump on immigration, John McLaughlin, a top Trump pollster, simply replies: 'You mean the fake polls?' He points to rosy results for Trump in his own surveys and conservative-leaning polls: 'We did a national poll for Club for Growth yesterday among 1,000 likely voters and Trump's approval was 53-44 Rasmussen Reports poll today is 53-45,' McLaughlin says. More from Rolling Stone Kim Gordon Has Words for Donald Trump on Re-Recorded 'Bye Bye 25!' Trump Calls on Iran to Agree to Nuclear Deal 'Before There Is Nothing Left' Is Trump's Troop Deployment to Los Angeles Illegal? Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Planned protests revives question: When was the last time the U.S. had a king?
(FOX 5/KUSI) — This Saturday, thousands across the U.S. are expected to take part in the 'No Kings' protests—a national day of action against what demonstrators view as authoritarian overreach and a growing concentration of power in the executive branch. The protests coincide with a massive military parade in Washington, D.C., marking the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary and President Donald Trump's 79th birthday. This comes as a recent AP-NORC poll shows some feel the parade, which Army officials say could cost as much as $45 million, is not a good use of funds. In a video highlighting the upcoming demonstrations, organizers claimed the parade portrays President Trump to be 'acting like a 'wannabe' king.' Those same organizers say their message is simple: America was founded on the rejection of monarchy, and the traditions of democracy must be defended. Some key issues in their stance include aggressive immigration enforcement, the militarization of Los Angeles, and federal job cuts from recent executive orders. On the contrary, President Trump and his supporters have dismissed these criticisms, arguing that he is simply fighting a corrupt establishment and using the tools available to him as an elected leader. They claim the accusations are politically motivated and meant to distract from policy issues. The President himself recently stated, 'I don't feel like a king. I have to go through hell to get stuff approved.' What is the difference between democracy and authoritarian rule? Some signs and chants at the upcoming protests are expected to reference King George III of Great Britain, the last king to rule over the American colonies. As history shows, his reign ended during the American Revolution in 1776 when he was cast as a symbol of tyranny. The Declaration of Independence listed his offenses, which included imposing taxes without consent, dissolving representative bodies and obstructing justice. Though a constitutional monarch in Britain, to the colonists King George III represented absolute control and colonial oppression. The Declaration of Independence marked the birth of the U.S. as a republic but also a bold rejection of monarchy and hereditary power. In the years following the war, the framers of the U.S. Constitution deliberately built a system designed to prevent the rise of another king. In fact, in 1782, when some proposed making General George Washington the new nation's monarch, he firmly declined, as noted in the National Archives. Instead, he chose to serve under the principles of republic government. His decision helped set a standard: power in America would derive from the people, not a throne. Fast forward nearly 250 years, and that founding principle is once again in the spotlight, though backtracking to monarchy seems unlikely. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
American Press
43 minutes ago
- American Press
Israel strikes Iran's nuclear sites and kills its top generals. Iran retaliates with missile barrage
An explosion is seen during a missile attack in Tel Aviv, Israel, Friday, June 13, 2025. (AP Photo/Tomer Neuberg) DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Israel launched blistering attacks on the heart of Iran's nuclear and military structure Friday, deploying warplanes and drones previously smuggled into the country to attack key facilities and kill top generals and scientists — a barrage it said was necessary before its adversary got any closer to building an atomic weapon. Iran retaliated by unleashing scores of ballistic missiles on Israel late Friday, with explosions flaring in the skies over Jerusalem and Tel Aviv and shaking buildings below. 'Don't think that they hit and it's over. No. They started the work and started the war,' Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a recorded message. 'We will not allow them to escape safely from this great crime they committed.' An Associated Press reporter saw smoke rising in Tel Aviv after an apparent missile strike. Israeli paramedics reported a handful of injuries in the Tel Aviv area. Israel's ongoing airstrikes and intelligence operation and Iran's retaliation raised fears of all-out war between the countries and propelled the region, already on edge, into even greater upheaval. Israel had long threatened such a strike, and successive American administrations had sought to prevent it, fearing it would ignite a wider conflict across the Middle East and possibly be ineffective at destroying Iran's dispersed and hardened nuclear program. But a confluence of developments triggered by Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack — plus the reelection of U.S. President Donald Trump — created the conditions that allowed Israel to finally follow through on its threats. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the U.S. was informed in advance of the attack. On Thursday, Iran had been censured by the U.N.'s atomic watchdog for not complying with obligations meant to prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon. Countries in the region condemned Israel's attack, while leaders around the globe called for immediate deescalation from both sides. The U.N. Security Council scheduled an emergency meeting for Friday afternoon at Iran's request. In a letter to the council, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the killing of its officials and scientists 'state terrorism' and affirmed his country's right to self-defense. Israel's military said about 200 aircraft were involved in the initial attack on about 100 targets. Its Mossad spy agency positioned explosive drones and precision weapons inside Iran ahead of time, and used them to target Iranian air defenses and missile launchers near Tehran, according to two security officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. It was not possible to independently confirm the officials' claims. Among the key sites Israel attacked was Iran's main nuclear enrichment facility in Natanz, where black smoke could be seen rising into the air. It also appeared to strike a second, smaller nuclear enrichment facility in Fordo, about 100 kilometers (60 miles) southest of Tehran, according to an Iranian news outlet close to the government that reported hearing explosions nearby. Israel said it struck a nuclear research facility in Isfahan, too, and said it destroyed dozens of radar installations and surface-to-air missile launchers in western Iran. Iran confirmed the strike at Isfahan. Israel military spokesman Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin said the Natanz facility was 'significantly damaged' and that the operation was 'still in the beginning.' The first wave of strikes had given Israel 'significant freedom of movement' in Iran's skies, clearing the way for further attacks, according to an Israeli military official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss details of the attack with the media. The official said Israel is prepared for an operation that could last up to two weeks, but that there was no firm timeline. Among those killed were three of Iran's top military leaders: one who oversaw the entire armed forces, Gen. Mohammad Bagheri; one who led the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, Gen. Hossein Salami; and the head of the Guard's ballistic missile program, Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh. Iran confirmed all three deaths, significant blows its governing theocracy that will complicate efforts to retaliate. Khamenei said other top military officials and scientists were also killed. Netanyahu said the attack had been months in the making. In a video statement sent to journalists Friday, he said he ordered plans for the attack last November, soon after the killing of Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah in Lebanon, one of Iran's strongest proxies. Netanyahu said the attack was planned for April but was postponed. In its first response Friday, Iran fired more than 100 drones at Israel. Israel said the drones were being intercepted outside its airspace, and it was not immediately clear whether any got through. Israel's military said it called up reservists and began stationing troops throughout the country as it braced for further retaliation from Iran or Iranian proxy groups. Trump urged Iran on Friday to reach a deal with the U.S. on its nuclear program, warning on his Truth Social platform that Israel's attacks 'will only get worse.'
