This is a continuation from my review of The Mist, where I mention Stephen King’s use of his work to denounce the U.S. government. As a matter of fact, I learned of the assassination of Black Panther leader Fred Hampton through 11.22.63.

While I was familiar with Hampton himself, I was unaware that his death was notoriously orchestrated by the FBI and the Chicago police—to be clear, this is not a conspiracy, you can look up his death for yourself and among the first pictures that result, you will see officers rolling his body out of his apartment with smiles on their faces. He was 21 years old at the time, younger than me and I am still a student. His crime? Unifying communities and bridging economic disparities. I personally knew him for this quote:

“Why don’t you live for the people. Why don’t you struggle for the people. Why don’t you die for the people.”

Finishing The Institute did make me a bit paranoid about secret government projects in all honesty, but I also don’t think the possibility of its storyline was all that outrageous. After all, we witnessed similar human experimentation during the Holocaust through the likes of the monstrous Josef Mengele, who I believe King also referenced in this book.

I must appreciate King’s vocal opposition to the government in his work for a few reasons. For one, it is very refreshing to see a prominent artist, especially one raised alongside the generation of Jim Crow, encouraging such speculation of our government. I am not particularly ‘political’ in the outwardly vocal sense, but I say that based on the foundational belief that human rights have no business being political in the first place.

For example, I do not believe the words of the aforementioned Hampton, “We’ve got to face the fact that some people say you fight fire best with fire, but we say you put fire out best with water. We say you don’t fight racism with racism. We’re gonna fight racism with solidarity.“, were the words of a radical terrorist. I do not believe equal opportunity and equal access should be political debates, and I will not argue with anyone who can justify a society where the basis of our Declaration of Independence—the “unalienable right to strive for a meaningful life, liberty, and personal fulfillment”—only applies if you were born with the means and status to do so.

I think King does an excellent job of making these critical innuendos just as that: innuendos, instead of pushing his opinions; it is an excellent way to get people thinking about another perspective instead of turning them off altogether.

This is another reason why it is so important to read: an illiterate society is so feasibly misled, and controlled. No matter your stance on any particular matter, it is important to remember that ignorance is compliance. Frankly, King is a recurring favorite of mine because it shows in his work that he at least makes an effort to be neither ignorant, nor compliant.