Discussions in Haywood County over a holiday in honor of Martin Luther King Jr. continue — flowing into the present from years gone by. “Same old thing, warmed over,” as my mother use to say.

This holiday, the third Monday of January, was declared as a national holiday in 1986 by President Ronald Reagan. As a national holiday, it didn’t matter whether communities in, say, South Dakota, had no African-Americans, the federal offices, including the post office, were still closed there. That is the point we seem to be missing.

Haywood County is 97 percent Caucasian, thus some may question why the county should take this day (off) to celebrate an African-American leader. “What does that have to do with us?” they ask.

My response is: a lot.

First, Haywood County is a part — one patch — in the metaphorical quilt that makes up this country. Dr. King and the resulting holiday is a personification of something higher and grander — the realization of the truths in the Declaration of Independence (“... all men are created equal ...”) and the guarantees in the U.S. Constitution.

Through the efforts of Dr. King and others, we, collectively, are a freer society, and are more true to the underlying principles that our country was founded on. Dr. King galvanized people around central ideas and ideals, with such ideas and ideals championed on the foundation of non-violence.

As one reflects on the 1950s and 1960s, as contrasted with today, the former seems so surreal. Some of our citizens, many who fought in foreign wars on behalf of their country, could not vote, get a mainstream job (how many African-Americans had the opportunity to work at the mill with John Edward’s father?), eat in a restaurant, rent a room at a motel, or even use the restroom. African-Americans in Haywood County were subjected to much of this, together with segregated schools and being relegated to the balcony in the courtroom.

We did indeed have two Americas, and without these leaders, I shudder to think about what sort of society we would live in today. Yes, my world is a better place because of Dr. King and what he stood — and died — for. He could have easily let this be someone else’s fight. Those who led the civil rights movement exercised considerable courage —f ar more than I could have mustered. In that regard, they were heroes, pursuing something larger than themselves, at great peril, when they did not have to do so.

Medgar Evers was shot in the back walking to his house from his car. Dr. King was shot while standing on a motel balcony, from the window in a boarding house. Neither shooter had the courage to show their victim their face. Civil Rights workers were murdered in Mississippi.

But yet, the leaders kept going, moving the message forward. Even with all this violence, Dr. King clung to the mantle — and example — of non-violence. Even today, watching Dr. King’s “I have a Dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial — with the sea of people in the sight line — is still as inspiring as it was then. It still gives me goose bumps every time I watch it. Surely, we all can learn something from this.

Those of us who follow must remember the way things were. We must strive toward common understanding, inclusiveness and sense of community, as this is a continuing, never-ending, task.

But, if you look at the matter from a practical sense, then, not having a diverse population and workforce is a weakness in the eyes of a number of companies looking to relocate or expand. For many companies, workplace — and community — diversity is important. We can’t, of course, radically change the demographics of Haywood County, but we can affect the signals that we give off. Fighting against a holiday well accepted across the country will do nothing to further our cause of, and for, economic development. Even Greenville, S.C., has succumbed.

So, we could be a 97 percent White community who blocked a holiday for Dr. King — putting us in the vast minority, nationwide — and who fought to keep from naming or renaming a prominent road in his honor. We could do this when so many — arguably the vast majority of communities in the U.S. — have honored Dr. King in this manner.

What sort of message does this send? Are we a welcoming, open-minded, inclusive, progressive community, or, well, something else?

In terms of naming a street after Dr. King, well, we have streets named after states, Ivy League schools (how many Princeton graduates do we have?), developers, sons and daughters of developers, and so on. Thus, naming or renaming a street in Dr. King’s honor should not be such a big ordeal. Again, so many communities across the country have done it, so why the controversy? Some folks just seem to like a good fight. One (novel) approach would be to have government officials meet with the proponents for naming a street or stretch of road for Dr. King in a formal (non-binding) mediation session conducted by the folks from Mountain Mediation. It may be an eye-opening experience for both, and I am confident that a good result would come from it — something both sides would support.

If it were left up to me, I would name the proposed stretch of the old Asheville Highway in honor of Dr. King. Just think of the sign that this conveys. We are 97 percent Caucasian, but we have named a prominent road in honor of a civil rights leader. To me that would speak volumes to those outside Haywood County who take a look at us and tell them who we are — that we are inclusive, open-minded, progressive and welcome diversity; and all that from just a street sign. Seems like a good value to me.

(Lee Shelton lives in Maggie Valley and can be reached at lshelto@gsb.uchicago.edu.)