Malcolm X

Growing up through the 70's and 80's all you ever heard about was MLK in school. As I have got older and learned more about the world, it is Malcolm X who impresses me the most of the two. Both MLK and Malcolm X were ultimately killed because they were a threat to the establisment in this country.

 

I know in at least the schools that I have worked at, both Public Elementary and High Schools they do teach about Malcolm X. I also took classes in college that studied him.

He was terrific. I think sometimes he is too often portrayed as in favor of violent change. That isn't what he said.

What Malcolm X sayd in his famous quote was "by any means necessary." By any means necessary does not mean violence. It may not preclude violence, but it certainly doesn't automatically mean violence either.

 

This may end up derailing the thread but you leave me no choice: Who do you think killed Malcolm X? It may not have been the "establishment".

 

I'm not saying you are doing this, but I am sometimes bothered when people choose MLK over Malcolm X or Malcolm over Martin. They are often compared, even in the Spike Lee movie he did that.

There is no need. I think both can and should be appreciated for their contribution. We don't have to like one more than the other. Folks don't say "Both Washington and Lincoln were Presidents, but Lincoln's way was really better than Washington's."

There doesn't have to be just one good guy in the civil rights movement.

 

malcolm x repeatedly stated he was a target of the black muslim movement and elijah muhammad. he was trying to establish true islam and not the bs in the black muslim movement. so if by "establishment" you mean the black muslim movement then i agree.

 

the story of Malcolm is one of redemption, to me. he left prison and embraced reactionary hate...he advocated separation of the races...then he went to mecca and worshipped with people of all different colors, and realized that God didn't create us to be separate.

 

I agree with you for the most part, but let's just be honest that compared to MLK, Malcolm X has been the 'forgotten man'. He's not NEARLY as celebrated as MLK is, so to somehow insinuate that they're both on equal footing is completely false.

I consider Malcolm X the greatest American that has ever lived. Having studied Black history and American history as a whole, I absolutely believe that there was no one person more central to the civil rights movement than Malcolm. He was a man of courage and conviction and put it all on the line to challenge racist, bigoted America. He FORCED the American establishment/society to come to grips with the fact that change must come about, 'or else'.

IMO, Malcolm X and MLK played off one another perfectly. Malcolm was the more unrelenting, forceful civil rights leader that not only challenged racism/segregation in America, but went beyond that and questioned the very identity of Black America. He preached that Blacks should cleanse themselves from the 'slave mentality', he challenged the moral deprivation and cycle of violence/poverty in the Black community, he wanted Blacks to question everything around them and strive to be the best. In that sense, Malcolm X was not merely a 'civil rights' activist, he was much more than that.

IMO, he scared the establishment in America more than anyone else, he was 'stirring up a hornet's nest' -- so to speak -- and that probably led to MLK being granted a seat at the table with White America. At the end of the day, White America was much more comfortable dealing with MLK, his agenda wasn't as 'threatening' or 'revolutionary' as Malcolm's was, AND he was a Christian leader, so he was a safer choice.

IMO, MLK needed a Malcolm X so that he could have the ear of White America, because White America was terrified with the prospect of having to deal with Malcolm X.

 

That's another reason why he was such a great figure, because he admitted his mistakes and changed his ways. He was only a stubborn man when it came to demanding justice.

 

yeah..that's very rare in a man...particularly in a leader. how often do you hear a leader today say, "yeah, i was wrong...."

 

Pretty much never, unless that leader has been proven a liar and is forced to apologize or resign.

 

I see what you are saying, but in my opinion the playing off one another was done more after their deaths. It seems textbooks grabbed hold of MLK and ignored Malcolm.

At the time I think what brought people to MLK's cause was his non-violent protests, media, and violent actions of the whites. I think the avg. white American may have felt there was some injustice but still believed in segregation, and all of the other stuff, until they saw protestors being completely peaceful, at the same time they saw whites beat them, turn attack dogs loose on them, turn the hoses on them, etc. Those images are what really started a change in society. I believe at the time it was going on, that these images were more important than one leader being played off of another leader, though that might have helped to confirm the direction things were going in.

I do agree white America went with the safer choice.

But my problem comes with why there had to be a choice at all. Why not hold both Malcolm and Martin in reverence. They both were great men, who stood up to injustice. I think Malcolm did fill in a different role than King, but I don't think it is necessary to hold one in higher esteem than the other. I believe the movement was and is big enough to have more than just one hero.

 

I agree since Malcolm X was assasinated by black Muslims. Although there is a conspiracy theory that the FBI allowed it to happen because they were tracking Malcolm X and also the Nation of Islam so they knew it was going to happen but did nothing to stop it.

 

I agree with most of what Tigermission says. I also think that if Malcolm X had lived his views might've ended up being more prominent than MLK and he might've ended up being the more recognized figure. A lot of the racial issues today deal more with Malcolm X's views than MLK because they are pertaining to understanding how much of separate identities to African-Americans maintain in a pluralistic society rather than a complete integration into a majority society.

 

Malcolm X is an intriguing man with an important American story. I think perhaps more crucial than his work trying to establish a deserved place in American society for blacks is his effort towards creating a black identity unassociated with slavery. Malcolm insisted on wearing his masculinity on his sleeve, something whites were not comfortable with in those days. A strong belief in himself and his mission were the most important attributes instilled by the Nation. When he learned humility and gained a certain sense of brotherhood later in his life he really had the total package.

Great movie, too.

 

i think as far as influence we are losing a bit of perspective. its not as much as martin being a safter choice for blacks, its really that martin was a christian and therefore more people followed him. he worked in a network of black christian churches in the south that gave him his political power.

outside of ny, I don't believe malcolm x had that much influence on blacks, other than black muslims.

 

amen. That's what I take away for his story as well.

 

Honestly, which is sad to say, I only briefly heard of Malcolm X by name only until the movie...

Not sure if the establishment took him out, but he definitely rocked the boat and he paid the ultimate price...

 

read "the autobiography of malcolm x"....it is one of the best books i have ever read.

 

He really doesn't compare to MLK. There's a difference between giving speeches in Harlem and leading boycotts in Alabama, IMO. My personal disposition is to like Malcolm more since he eventually was a no nonsense personality vs MLK, but I think there is little doubt that MLK was the more significant figure. Malcolm's life should definitely be celebrated, however. No denying his imprint.