Martin Luther Kings Letter To The British Parliament

Translated by Ahmed Alatenumo Sule

suleaos@gmail.com
http://www.scribd.com/Alatenumo/documents

19th January 2015

Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,

I guess some of you may be puzzled at receiving a letter
from me, as it has been forty-six years since I left this
world. Dont be alarmed. Last week, I appeared to
Alatenumo in a dream and asked him to write these words
to you in commemoration of my posthumous birthday,
which is being celebrated in the United States.
I hope you will take on board many of the issues raised in
this letter.
Please accept my apology for anything that Alatenumo
might have misinterpreted or lost in translation.

Kind Regards,
Martin Luther King, Jr.
19 January 2015

Martin Luther Kings Letter To The British Parliament

My Lord Chancellor, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Prime Minister, My Lords, and Members of the House
of Commons,
For the past couple of months, I have been pondering on what message I should deliver on
my birthday. Initially I wanted to write a letter to the American people, but since I devoted my
life towards trying to make America a better place, I opted to deliver a message to those
outside of my home country. I then deliberated on whether I should write to the people of
Africa or Europe. After deep contemplation and analysing the events of the past six years, I
decided to deliver my message to the British Parliament. I hope you will act on what I have to
say and relay my message to the good people of Britain. I am also addressing this letter to
you because I never had the privilege of addressing both Houses of the British Parliament
during my lifetime.
Britain has always held a special place in my heart. Im amazed at how a small island country
can give the world so much. In terms of contribution to the world, Britain excels all, including
my own America. Where would the world be without Williams Shakespeare, Charles Dickens,
the English language, the industrial revolution, football, the telephone, the Beatles, Isaac
Newton, the Rule of Law and of course the Magna Carta?
Despite all these positive contributions, all is not well with Britain. She has become a thingoriented society rather than a person-oriented society. For Britain to be part of the beloved
community, she has to do away with the giant triplets of racism, economic exploitation and
militarism. In the next couple of pages, I will discuss the ways these evils manifest and what
can be done to make Britain an integral part of the beloved community -- a community based
on justice and equality where the lion and lamb; the rich and poor; the classes and the
masses shall lie down together and every person shall sit under his or her own fig tree and
none shall be afraid.
Economic Exploitation and Poverty
A number of you may find it strange that the first evil that I address is economic exploitation
rather than racism. This is understandable especially as I am famed for my fight against
racism and the I have a Dream speech, which I delivered in 1963. Just as I was passionate
about fighting racism, I was equally passionate about fighting poverty and militarism because
all these three evils are interlinked. To paraphrase what I once said to the Southern Christian
Leadership Conference, a nation that will racially abuse its citizens of colour will "thingify"
them and make them things; It will also exploit poor people economically. As a nation exploits
the poor, it becomes attractive to foreign and domestic investments, and it will have to use its
military and police might to protect these economic interests. So you can see that all of these
problems are tied together.
Since the onset of the Great Recession, the British political establishment has fought tooth
and nail to bring the economy back on its feet. However, in the process of resolving the
crisis, the government has resulted in using a sledgehammer to crack a nut on the head of
the downtrodden.
Prior to the financial crisis, a number of financial institutions, motivated by greed engaged in a
series of unethical behaviour, which led to the worst economic crisis since 1930. As
unemployment, property foreclosure and despair became the order of the day, the so-called
City fell to its knees and the government came to its rescue by using 1 trillion of hard-earned
taxpayers money to bail out financial institutions. The public became enraged against the
banks with the latter accusing the former of banker bashing. Shortly after, the narrative
changed from the irresponsible behaviour of the so-called Masters of the Universe to the socalled irresponsibility and immorality of the poor. As the governments fiscal position
deteriorated, words like austerity, scrounger and benefits began dripping from the lips of the
political elite. Rather than acknowledge the plight of the poor impacted by the crisis, the
political elite embarked on the biggest assault against poor folks since the implementation of


the Poor Laws of 1834. Instead of declaring war against poverty, war was declared against
the poor through the governments austerity programme.
In order to press through these austerity measures, the political establishment embarked on a
campaign to demonise what Franz Fanon calls the Wretched of the Earth. Once the media
joined the bandwagon in bashing the poor, the lame and the homeless, the tide of public
opinion began to turn against the downtrodden thereby making it easier for the government to
implement its reforms. The vulnerable segments of British society have become the principal
targets of the governments spending cuts. Benefits for the unemployed and the disabled
have been slashed, youth centres around the country have been closed while students have
to incur excessive debts in order to get a quality education. Some of the victims of the war
against the poor have paid with their lives like Mrs. Linda Wootton, a woman with a heart
condition who died shortly after the government declared her fit for work. Her husband
expressed the feelings of many of the least of these when he said, I sat there and listened to
my wife drown in her own body fluids. It took half an hour for her to die and thats a woman
whos fit for work. The last months of her life were a misery because she worried about her
benefits, feeling useless, like a scrounger."
As the poor, the underclass, the least of these, the downtrodden and the 99 per centers
experience the British nightmare; the rich, the upper class, the most of these, the uptrodden
and the 1 per centers are experiencing the British dream. I also find it strange that the
downtrodden are portrayed as scroungers of the state. If the political elites engage in deep
analysis, they would find out that the real scroungers are much closer home. Besides the
financial sector, which was bailed out with 1 trillion of taxpayers funds, other scroungers
include but are not limited to the nuclear and defence sectors, and rich farmers who enjoy
government subsidies worth billions of pounds. Members of Parliament who fiddle their
expenses also fall into the scrounger category. In modern day Britain, there is a kind of
socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor. It is a tragedy that while financial institutions
are too big to fail, the downtrodden are too small to save.
When the legal rules in Britain were written, a strange formula to determine who was a
criminal declared that the influential and mighty shouldnt be criminalised. While it is illegal for
a British teenager to steal a bottle of water worth 50p, it is not illegal for a British Oligarch to
use a special purpose vehicle domiciled in a tax haven to avoid paying taxes running into
millions of pounds ; while a person who claims unemployment benefit when working is liable
to go to jail, a bank dealer who fixes LIBOR, which references financial instruments with
notional values of hundreds of trillions of pounds is not liable to go to jail; while a homeless
person can go to prison for begging, a high frequency trader who bribes an exchange to flash
information relating to buy and sell orders before the information is publicly available walks
freely on the street.
As the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, there has been a lack of political will to address
the unsustainable level of inequality in the land. I wonder how Britain can justify the richest
1% having as much wealth as the poorest 55% of the population and I also wonder how
Britain can justify 36,000 landowners owning 50% of the rural land in England and Wales.
Britain prides herself on being a developed country, she prides herself on being a civilised
country, and she prides herself on being a rich country, yet in the midst of plenty, there is so
much lack. Many Brits are living on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of
material prosperity. In the last year, nearly a million people had to rely on food banks while
400,000 of Gods children are currently homeless. How can this be? Its time to say NO to
poverty. There is enough wealth for everyone in Britain to be well fed and housed; the wealth
of the land ought to be used to satisfy the needs of many as opposed to satisfy the greed of
few. There can be no real wealth without commonwealth. If Britain does not use its wealth to
bridge the gap between the haves and the have not, it could be on its way to a spiritual death.
I understand that the Bank of England committed a total of 375bn to Quantitative Easing.
Instead of using this money to purchase assets, which favour financial speculators and
continue to reinforce inequality, may I suggest where this money can be deployed? It can be
deployed into the wrinkled stomachs of the millions of Gods children who go to bed hungry
at night; it can be deployed towards ensuring a guaranteed income for all Britons; it can be


deployed towards providing affordable housing for every homeless person; it can be deployed
towards subsidising students tuition fee and it can be deployed towards making sure that no
old person goes to bed cold. If there is enough political will, poverty in Britain can be
consigned to the dustbin of history.
It is time for the political establishment to be in tune with the yearnings of the masses. At the
moment, the political class does not speak or understand the language of the least of these. I
guess this is because many of you come from more privileged backgrounds. Because the
political elites are out of reach from poor folks, they have become out of touch with the pain of
poor folks, hence poverty deliberations are now out of scope for poor folks.
Some may ask, How can I empathise with the marginalised? The best way to appreciate the
sufferings of the masses is to step into their shoes. In short there needs to be a
compassionate revolving door between the political establishment and the marginalised
constituency, rather than the well-oiled revolving door that currently exist between the political
elites and financial firms. When I wanted to understand the plight of the poor in Chicago, I
moved into one of the Chicago slums with my family. I suggest you do likewise; perhaps you
could spend the summer recess along with your family members in the deprived areas of
Britain. Not only will it bring you closer to the people but it will also allow you to have a better
appreciation of their plight. Once the political elite is in sync with the masses, politicians will
stop sending derogatory tweets like Image from #Rochester targeted against the working
classes or making vile statements against the disabled like, There is a group (people living
with disabilities) . they are not worth the full minimum wage and actually Im going to go
and think about that particular issue, whether there is something we can do nationally without
distorting the whole thing, which actually if someone wants to work for 2 an hour.
The political establishment should strive to come to the defence of the marginalised. For too
long, politicians have supported the classes to the detriment of the masses. When the
European Union imposed a cap on bankers bonuses, the British Government filed a lawsuit
against the EU to reverse the cap. The Treasury spent 65,000 of taxpayers money in
preventing the EU from imposing a ban on short-selling of financial products and another
41,669 on suing the European Central Bank for discriminating against UK clearing houses.
In 2011, the Prime Minister vetoed the EU treaty so as to protect the City from over 20
financial regulations. Shouldnt the government stand up for poor folks just as it stands up for
rich folks?
Some of you may say, I am really disappointed with Martin Luther Kings economic analysis.
My response to such people is that they have not really known me, my commitment, or my
calling. I am also conscious that I might be called a communist because of my suggested
radical economic reforms; for the sake of clarity, I am not a communist. Communism is
based on an ethical relativism, a metaphysical materialism, a crippling totalitarianism, and a
withdrawal of basic freedom that no Christian can accept. In addition, as Pope Francis rightly
pointed out, The communists have stolen our flag. The flag of the poor is Christian. Poverty
is at the centre of the Gospel.
Militarism
There is no doubt that Britain is a military super power possessing some of the most
sophisticated weaponry. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute,
in 2013 Britain spent $57.8 billion on military expenditure, which translates to 5.2% of total
th
government expenditure thus making Britain the 6 highest military spender in the world. The
UK government also provides the arms industry, export subsidies to the tune of $1bn per
annum. I cannot remain silent as the British government commits billions of dollars in military
expenditure while Gods children queue for food at the various food banks flooding the
country. Neither can I remain silent as cuts are made to public services that benefit the least
of these. I have read about the funding crisis in the NHS and I ask myself why cant financial
resources be diverted from the Military Industrial Complex, which benefit a few to the NHS
Compassionate Complex which benefits all?


I am also concerned that the military industrial complex like the financial sector has captured
the political class. At the height of the Arab Spring, the Prime Minister led a high-powered
business delegation to the Middle East. A third of the people in the Prime Ministers
entourage were senior executives from leading British defence and aerospace companies
such as BAE Systems, QinetiQ and The Thales Group. Around the same time of this visit, the
British Defence Minister was attending a military arms fair at Abu Dhabi along with executives
from ninety British companies. These companies were exhibiting their wares including
armored vans for riot control and rubber bullets.
In another instance, shortly after the British led NATO operation had dislodged Gaddafi from
Libya, the then Defence Secretary issued a rallying call for British companies to seize the
moment saying, Libya is a relatively wealthy country with oil reserves, and I expect there will
be opportunities for British and other companies to get involved in the reconstruction of Libya.
I would expect British companies, even British sales directors, to be packing their suitcases
and looking to get out to Libya and take part in the reconstruction of that country as soon as
they can. Instead of being captured by the military industrial complex, the political elite
should allow itself to be captured by the poverty compassionate complex.
In its 2013 Human Rights and Democracy Report, the Foreign Office published an overview
of its activities in defending human rights and promoting democracy around the world.
Included in the report were 28 countries of concern involved in gross human rights violations.
Of the 28 countries, 23 have contractual arrangements to purchase arms from the United
Kingdom. Isnt it ironic that as Britain preaches with one side of her mouth freedom and
democracy, with the other side of her mouth she urges some of the worlds most brutal
despots to buy arms, which they sometimes use to suppress the people they govern?
I also have to talk about an issue, which many of you might find uncomfortable; please be rest
assured that I am doing this in love. A couple of centuries ago, Britain was the pre-eminent
colonial power whose empire stretched from Australia to Zambia. It was an empire so wide
that Kings and Queens could boast that the sun never set on the empire. Since the collapse
st
of the empire in 1947, there are still some remnants, which prevail in the 21 century. There
are currently 14 so-called British Overseas Territories for which Britain still retains
sovereignty. Since many of these territories are located far away from the UK, it is no surprise
that countries like Spain, Argentina and Mauritius dispute Britains sovereignty over Gibraltar,
the Falkland Islands and the British Indian Ocean Territory respectively. While Britain calls
these areas - British Overseas Territories, the United Nations refers to them as Non-SelfGoverning Territories. According to the UN, there are 17 Non-Self-Governing Territories still
under colonial rule. Of the 17 territories identified, Britain accounts for 10 of these. To put it
bluntly, Britain is currently colonising 10 territories with a combined population of 235,259
people. By acting as colonial masters to a quarter of a million people, Britain is in breach of
UN General Assembly Resolution 2621 (XXV) which states, The further continuation of
colonial cases in all their forms and manifestations is a crime which constitutes a violation of
the Charter of the United Nations, the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to
Colonial Countries and Peoples and the principles of international law. When a permanent
member of the United Nations Security Council that claims to champion democracy and
human rights breaches such a fundamental principle of freedom, how can it have the moral
justification to tell people like Putin or Saddam Hussein not to invade Crimea or Kuwait? I
urge you to put the necessary mechanisms in place to grant independence to these territories
and to give back the land to the original inhabitants.
Racism
Britain has come a long way from the type of racism that prevailed when I visited Britain fifty
years ago. Gone are the days when a person could publicly make racially explicit comments
against ethnic minorities or when a landlord could boldly tell a black tenant that hed prefer
renting his house to a black dog than to a black man. In todays Britain, racism has not
disappeared in its entirety. Racism has shed its de jure skin and put on a de facto skin. The
individual racism in Britain has morphed into institutional racism. Evidence of the institutional
form can be seen in the British judiciary system where Negroes and Asians get tougher
sentences relative to their white counterparts; it can be seen in the British media where


biased coverage against people of colour prevail; it can be seen in the British educational
system where Negro scholars are excluded from the ivory towers; it can be seen in the British
police force where Negroes are stopped, searched and arrested at an alarming rate; it can be
seen in the British work place where people with funny sounding names dont get shortlisted
for interviews and where the unemployment rate for Negroes and other ethnic minorities are
at elevated levels. In spite of the rhetorics emanating from the political class about tackling
racism, little has been done. As far as racial issues are concerned, the political elites exhibit
a high blood pressure of creeds and an anemia of deeds. For the purpose of this letter, I will
not dwell much on this issue of institutional racism; I am only bringing it to your attention to
remind you of your responsibility to the people on the less privileged side of the colour line.
However, I will dwell on another manifestation of racism i.e. the treatment of immigrants.
I am deeply disturbed about UKs attitude towards its immigrant population. Since the Great
Recession, the political establishment has turned its back on immigrants. The emergence of
parties like UKIP has resulted in a battle among the political elite to outdo each other in
demonising and ostracising immigrants. Scripture tells us, when a foreigner resides in your
land, you must not mistreat them. Britain once used to be tolerant towards immigrants. Where
did it all go wrong? Politicians are scaremongering and blaming every woe that befalls Britain
on those who do not look or speak like true Brits. The comments coming out from politicians
range from:
The Bad - GO HOME OR FACE ARREST,
The Ugly - In some areas of the UK, down the east coast, towns do feel under siege, with
large numbers of migrant workers and people claiming benefits,
The Outrageous - "Any normal and fair-minded person would have a perfect right to be
concerned if a group of Romanian people suddenly moved in next door."
The rhetoric coming from the political elite can be linked to the increase in racism prevailing in
the land as the demonisation of immigrants only serves to trigger the latent racial instinct in
the hearts of many people. As the media continues to poison the mind of the general
population against immigrants, the Office of Communication (Ofcom) turns a blind eye. Every
rape, murder, theft, arson is attributed to one immigrant group or the other. The Roma
community in particular has been the principal target of these attacks. Programmes like My
Big Fat Gypsy Wedding, My Big Fat Gypsy Christmas and My Big Fat Gypsy Christening
reinforce stereotypes about members of the Roma community. Ever since politicians and the
media turned up its verbal assault against Eastern European immigrants, should it be any
surprise that there has been an uptick in violent attacks against these children of God?
Many of the governments anti immigration policies have not been well thought out.
Thousands of immigrants are detained in deplorable conditions, while there is a proposal to
expel foreign students from Britain after their graduation. The governments immigration
regulation, which shifts responsibility on landlords to check the residential status of
prospective tenants could result in housing discrimination against non-white people. More
shocking is the recent consultation paper issued by the Home Office on terrorism, which calls
for nursery school staff and registered child minders to report toddlers who are at risk of
becoming terrorists. I find it absurd that a toddler who can barely walk could be a terrorist.
This proposed policy has the potential to criminalise Arab and Muslim toddlers. I thought
nothing could be as disturbing as the criminalisation of Negro youths until I heard of the
proposed criminalisation of Muslim toddlers, which is reckless at best, and callous at worst.
Is Britain gradually morphing into a Gestapo society where landlords, teachers and child
minders are co-opted as spies?
Politicians must reassess their attitudes towards immigrants. Whenever the political elites
complain about the influx of immigrants, they must bear in mind that there are over 5.5 million
British emigrants permanently living abroad; whenever British politicians suggest immigrants
are lazy and live on benefits, they must also bear in mind that there are a number of Britons
who go to poor countries around the world and prey on vulnerable young boys and girls and
use financial inducements to sexually exploit their victims. In framing the debate about
immigration, the political class has developed a historical amnesia by failing to anchor
immigration to Britains role in meddling in the affairs of other countries. Centuries ago, Britain


went uninvited to many countries to enslave the people, take their lands and plunder their
resources. In his book titled All the Countries We've Ever Invaded: And the Few We Never
Got Round To, Stuart Laycock argues that Britain has invaded 90 per cent of the countries in
the world; he cites that only 22 countries have never been invaded by Britain. Since the
wealth of Britain was built on the bent and broken backs of the black and brown people of
Africa and the Indian Subcontinent, Britain has no moral justification to stigmatise
hardworking immigrants who come to this country to seek better opportunities than they can
find at home.
Other Matters
As a minister of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ and also as the son, grandson and greatgrandson of Baptist ministers, I must say something about the treatment of Christians in
Britain. The United Kingdom has a rich Christian heritage. Britain played a major role in
spreading the Gospel to the four corners of the world. Thanks to King James I, the Bible is
now accessible to the masses. Britain gave us great Men of God like John Wesley, Smith
Wigglesworth, William Booth, Charles Spurgeon and George Jeffreys. However in todays
Britain, the environment is becoming hostile to Christians who are ridiculed and in some
cases persecuted because of their faith. Some laws have been enacted which put pressure
on Christians to compromise their faith. I also understand some people say that God is dead
in Britain. I would like to talk to them about it because it disturbs me to know that God died
and I didnt have a chance to attend the funeral. They havent been able to tell me yet the
date of his death. They havent been able to tell me yet who the coroner was that pronounced
him dead. They havent been able to tell me yet where hes buried. I appeal to you to make
Britain more conducive for Christians and provide them with the protection that you provide
followers of other faiths.
Conclusion
It is not my intention to be hostile or to make you feel guilty, so if I come across as hostile or
preachy, please accept my apology. Prior to dictating this message to Alatenumo, I
considered titling my letter Why Britain May Go To Hell? But I thought this would be unfair to
the British people as the masses are already experiencing hell on earth. I decided it was not
the British masses that needed addressing but those in high places. As rulers in the highest
place in the United Kingdom, the buck stops with you.
When I see the despair on the faces of the least of these, I see people whose voices have
been silenced and whose cries have failed to reach the ears of those in high places. As
lawmakers in the land, you are in the privileged position of making a positive impact on the
lives of the downtrodden. You need to realise that Britain can never be a first class nation as
long as she has second-class citizens who are stripped of their dignity and humanity. When
the history books are written say a hundred years from now, how would you want to be
remembered? Would you want to be remembered as that generation of politicians who
restructured Britain on the symmetric foundation of justice and equality, or would you want to
be remembered as that generation of politicians who structured Britain on the asymmetric
foundation of injustice and inequality? The choice is yours and history is watching.
Selah.
Yours in love
Martin Luther King Jr.
(Translated by Ahmed Alatenumo Sule)
19 January 2015