Question: In Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream," what does it mean, a "rude awakening?"? ----------------------------------------------------------\nIt would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment and to underestimate the determination of the Negro. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. 1963 is not an end, but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.\n----------------------------------------------------------\nParagraph 5 of "I Have a Dream" by Martin Luther King Jr.\nin MODELS FOR WRITERS\nWhat does it mean, a "rude awakening?"

Answer: Generally, when we sleep, we sleep at nearly perfect peace.  Our bodies go into a state where our dreams take over our minds and we are unsure what is real and what is a figment of our imaginations.  Our heart rates and our breathing are perfectly controlled. There is a sense that nothing can harm us.  Then, suddenly and without warning, something occurs in the real (external) world that is so loud or otherwise disconcerting that, rather than easing back into consciousness as we normally do (absent an alarm clock or wake-up call), we are shocked back into alertness.  The shock and fear and annoyance that we feel then is what Dr. King alluded to in his speech.  Those citizens who expected that civil rights activism was a "phase" and that the downtrodden would eventually lose interest in being treated as equals were going to eventually have to confront their own shock and fear and annoyance when they suddenly realized that their presumption was false.\n\nIt almost sounded as if Dr. King's words were intended as a thinly-veiled threat of physical violence which, if so, would be an ironic choice for someone intimately associated with non-violent change.  But I believe that he was actually illustrating that non-violent change should never be confused with complacent inaction.  In other words, although he would never have incited the people to use physical force to achieve any means, the sheer power of non-violence non-cooperation could have an explosive impact on the nation as a whole if the people's demands were not met.\n\nLanguage and allusion was all part of Dr. King's genius.
This question from the Yahoo Q&A forum is categorized in the topic: Computers & Internet