NationStates Jolt Archive

Or more commonly known as Malcolm X.

The more I read about him the more interested I am in him and the more admiration I gain for his ideas.

Just wondering what anyone thought of him

"I don't mean go out and get violent; but at the same time you should never be nonviolent unless you run into some nonviolence. I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go insane, and I'm not responsible for what I do."

http://www.malcolm-x.org/media/pic/mg44.jpg

Not a big fan or racism either way.

So you disregard all of Malcolm's words because he held a reactionary view of white people at certain points in his life, the root of which seems fairly obvious considering the racism of the day.

Didnt he advocate for blacks returning to Africa or something?

Didnt he advocate for blacks returning to Africa or something?

At one point in his life he advocated black seperatism.

At one point in his life he advocated black seperatism.

He's my hero then...:D

He's my hero then...:D

Oh how hilariously racist.

Oh how hilariously racist.

Don't feed the troll.

I know very little about him, other than he was a leader of the black power movement in the USA & he was assassinated in the 60s.

I really don't give a damn about him up until he finally moderated his message after his trip to Mecca. Prior to that, he was waaaaaaaaaaaay out there.

Although the conclusion that the religion of his ancestors was Islam is more than slightly flawed. The religion of his ancestors was most likely some form of animism, and he was probably sold to westerners by Muslim Arabs, or other animists.

DHomme; apparently at some point he wrote an essay urging organisation on class lines. I heard a rumour it would be surfacing last year, but I haven't seen or heard of it since.

I did a small project on Malcolm X a while back. Considering his past, his views and attitudes may be understandable (albiet incredibly short sighted and racist), but I think it was his militant views that turned off many who would have helped him, and it was also the reason that he was ultimately killed.

It was when Malcolm X finally broke with the similarly militant charismatic leader, Elijah Muhammad, and when he traveled on his Hajj that many of his militant view, and views on whites in general changed. He still advocated self-defence, but now, in his own words:

"I believe in recognizing every human being as a human being--neither white, black, brown, or red; and when you are dealing with humanity as a family there's no question of integration or intermarriage. It's just one human being marrying another human being or one human being living around and with another human being."

Unfortunately, it was his past with the militant Nation of Islam, and his eventual breaking with the organization that led to his death, when assassins killed him during a speach in 1965.

It's actually very tragic. El Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, now tempered by a spiritual experience as well as age, could have not only become one of the greatest black civil rights activists the world had ever seen, but he could have also become one of the voices for Muslims in the United States, a voice that could have dispelled myths and broken barriers, which may have had a huge outcome on the future.

Anybody who calls themselves fucking "Shabazz" doesn't deserve to be remembered.

I don't know that much about him, to be honest, but unless I'm greatly mistaken, he was almost a racist himself, until he met whites on a pilgrimage to Mecca.

Black supramecist....hated Whites, was a revolutionary, was a terrorist, was a militant with a kalashinikov...what IS there to like.:rolleyes:

was a militant with a kalashinikov...what IS there to like.:rolleyes:

What's wrong with being a militant with a Kalashnikov? I'm a militant U of Michigan fan and I own a Kalashnikov. Of course, I don't combine the two, as tempting as the idea may be.

Just wondering what anyone thought of him


He's a personal hero.

I liked after he took the Hajj, that militant stance of his was not getting him anywhere, the black population wasn't going to get equality by attacking white majority, that would only give the whites another excuse to discriminate against blacks.

Black supramecist
half truth

....hated Whites
Another half truth

was a revolutionary, was a terrorist,

Two contradictory terms. Please clarify which one you actually mean.

was a militant with a kalashinikov

Heavens forbid somebody arms themselves when they know that their life is under threat everyday.

I liked after he took the Hajj, that militant stance of his was not getting him anywhere, the black population wasn't going to get equality by attacking white majority, that would only give the whites another excuse to discriminate against blacks.

I'm sorry but even at his most radical points he didn't advocate that black people should just randomly attack whites, or imply that those sort of actions would have a beneficial effect on the civil rights movement. He advocated violence as a tactic to deal with violence. Self-defence basically.

"revolutionary" and "terrorist" are not really contradictory terms, they just reflect the different perspectives of those who use the terms.
.

I'm sorry but even at his most radical points he didn't advocate that black people should just randomly attack whites, or imply that those sort of actions would have a beneficial effect on the civil rights movement. He advocated violence as a tactic to deal with violence. Self-defence basically.

Aye ... and he also constantly preached to stay within the bounds of the law.

I'd suggest everyone get the book "Malcolm X Speaks" edited by George Breitman. Read his speeches. Powerful stuff.

Oh how hilariously racist.
So when Malcolm X advocates apartheid it's not racist but it is when Nordingmark does?

Or more commonly known as Malcolm X.

The more I read about him the more interested I am in him and the more admiration I gain for his ideas.

Just wondering what anyone thought of him

"I don't mean go out and get violent; but at the same time you should never be nonviolent unless you run into some nonviolence. I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go insane, and I'm not responsible for what I do."

http://www.malcolm-x.org/media/pic/mg44.jpg


He lost me when he said I was a devil .

I'm sorry but even at his most radical points he didn't advocate that black people should just randomly attack whites, or imply that those sort of actions would have a beneficial effect on the civil rights movement. He advocated violence as a tactic to deal with violence. Self-defence basically.
I thought he advocated blacks acquiring equality "by any means necessary", including violence.

So when Malcolm X advocates apartheid it's not racist but it is when Nordingmark does?
Nobody said, or implied that.

So when Malcolm X advocates apartheid it's not racist but it is when Nordingmark does?

When Malcolm X advocated black separatism he came from an oppressed black community. His dealings with whites tended to place then in authority situations and he subsequently began to see whites and the ruling class as one and the same. He advocated a form of "apartheid"(nice strong emotive word there) he said it should happen to give power to black people who were oppressed and needed to build their own system and put power back in the hands of those who had none. While his beliefs were based along the reactionary lines of race and religion, they had an anti-racist context with an emphasis on community self-empowerment and equality.

The kind of apartheid Nordingmark advocates is not for the benefits of a downtrodden group, but for the further improvement of the already priveliged white position. People like Nordingmark see the loss of White privelige as a huge mistake- they want the return of whites to their former position of unquestionable authority over blacks. It's highly racist.

So in conclusion, yeah. You're right.

I thought he advocated blacks acquiring equality "by any means necessary", including violence.


That doesn't equate to "attack white people, maybe that'll help us".

half truth


Another half truth



Two contradictory terms. Please clarify which one you actually mean.



Heavens forbid somebody arms themselves when they know that their life is under threat everyday.



I'm sorry but even at his most radical points he didn't advocate that black people should just randomly attack whites, or imply that those sort of actions would have a beneficial effect on the civil rights movement. He advocated violence as a tactic to deal with violence. Self-defence basically.
I'm not even ABOUT to argue about a armed revolutionary racist with a guy who has "ONE SOLUTION- REVOLUTION

Arm the workers! Arm the poor!

Beirut, Baghdad, Kabul, Gaza
Victory to the Intifada! ".......in his sig:rolleyes:

I'm not even ABOUT to argue about a armed revolutionary racist with a guy who has "ONE SOLUTION- REVOLUTION

Arm the workers! Arm the poor!

Beirut, Baghdad, Kabul, Gaza
Victory to the Intifada! ".......in his sig:rolleyes:

If your argument has de-evolved into making Ad Hominems about your opponent's signature, I believe further debate is unnecessary.

Black supramecist....hated Whites, was a revolutionary, was a terrorist, was a militant with a kalashinikov...what IS there to like.:rolleyes:

He did not end up hating whites, terrorist is a matter of opinion, and since when did Americans judge people badly because of their ownership of a gun? Or is the sight of a black hand holding it that bothers you?

Being "militant", particularily in the era he was, just shows he had a pair.


I'm not even ABOUT to argue about a armed revolutionary racist with a guy who has "ONE SOLUTION- REVOLUTION
Arm the workers! Arm the poor!
Beirut, Baghdad, Kabul, Gaza
Victory to the Intifada! ".......in his sig
:

He wasn't a racist later in his life. Your country was founded by Armed revolutionaries, many of whom never overcame their racism. Obviously he was a more open and developed person.

And if you refuse to argue because of somebodies "sig" you really musnt have much of an argument.

A nasty man, with some very nasty opinions.

I somewhat doubt whether he really changed after his Hajj.

Can't we agree on one thing?

Malcolm X grew up oppressed, understandably, but somewhat shortsightedly returned the attitude as an adult, reformed later in his life, and his death robbed us of a potentially great human rights activist.

I'm not even ABOUT to argue about a armed revolutionary racist with a guy who has "ONE SOLUTION- REVOLUTION

Arm the workers! Arm the poor!

Beirut, Baghdad, Kabul, Gaza
Victory to the Intifada! ".......in his sig:rolleyes:

Ok, will you agrue with me then, since I appear to bear none of those?

Whats the difference between terrorist and revolutionary/freedom fighter?

Whats the difference between terrorist and revolutionary/freedom fighter?A beholder's own position on the matter.
.

So when Malcolm X advocates apartheid it's not racist but it is when Nordingmark does?

It is, but it's only half the story. It neglects the fact that Malcol X seriously moderated his views by the time he was killed, and was neither the separatist or the racist he had once been.

Or more commonly known as Malcolm X.

The more I read about him the more interested I am in him and the more admiration I gain for his ideas.

Just wondering what anyone thought of him

"I don't mean go out and get violent; but at the same time you should never be nonviolent unless you run into some nonviolence. I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go insane, and I'm not responsible for what I do."


I'm no fan of anyone who advocates for violence in Civil Rights. I haven't got time for people who beleive that they are morally superior, and then go out and kill people. While Malcom X showed some amazingly good judgement towards the end of his life, you seem to be glorifying the part of his political life that I would deem to be the worst.

Bottom line is: He not only advocated for violence, he made excuses for his own violence. Being violent is no ones fault but you own, and it is dishonest, and childlike to blame someone else for your own choices.

Ok, will you agrue with me then, since I appear to bear none of those?

Whats the difference between terrorist and revolutionary/freedom fighter?

Well, technically, there's a distinction made between them.

Terrorists are best classified as people who use "War as theater." Where they do not make use of targets for their intrinsic strategic value, instead they attack targets for their visibility and shock value. Revolutionaries and freedom fighters tend to attack targets for their intrinsic strategic and tactical value. They break stuff so the enemy can't use it, and that's what's important to them. A terrorist doesn't give a damn about how much is broken or destroyed, just how much attention it gets. A terrorist can succeed in his goals even if the attack is thwarted, and he is able to cause fear. Something more important to recognize is that terrorists are very ineffective against closed societies.

Furthermore, there's a difference between a revolutionary and a freedom fighter. Revolutionaries can fight for virtually any cause, Nazionalsozialist, democratic or communist. Freedom fighters, on the other hand, have to fight against (varyingly) autocratic regimes and closed societies to be classified as such.

He was just a lowlife criminal who decided to utilise his obvious intelligence and leadership skills to try and get back at whitey.

I'm no fan of anyone who advocates for violence in Civil Rights.

Do you believe in violence in self-defense?

I know very little about him...http://www.cmgww.com/historic/malcolm/about/quotes.htm

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

"If you're not ready to die for it, put the word 'freedom' out of your vocabulary."

"Without education, you're not going anywhere in this world."

"I believe in the brotherhood of man, all men, but I don’t believe in brotherhood with anybody who doesn’t want brotherhood with me..."

"If violence is wrong in America, violence is wrong abroad. If it is wrong to be violent defending black women and black children and black babies and black men, then it is wrong for America to draft us, and make us violent abroad..."
-- Speech, Nov. 1963, New York City.

-Malcolm X-

Freedom fighters, on the other hand, have to (.......) to be classified as such.classified by whom? you?

someones terrorist is someonelses freedom fighter.
its all about perspective.

Do you believe in violence in self-defense?

In cases where one's life is at risk, yes.

In any other case, it's rarely the case that self defense has much utility (often it puts you at more risk than before).

In cases where one's life is at risk, yes.

In any other case, it's rarely the case that self defense has much utility (often it puts you at more risk than before).

There are plenty of times when Shabazz's life was at risk. Both from white supremicists as well as members of his own organization.

trivia question

who wrote the autobiography of malcolm x?

There are plenty of times when Shabazz's life was at risk. Both from white supremicists as well as members of his own organization.

And in those cases, he was right to act as circumstances required for him to be physically safe.

My problem is with his philosophy of "righteous violence" (there's no such thing) and the excuses he made for violence in his Civil Rights work (statements like "I've gone mad, and I can't be blamed" are, essentially, irresponsible excuses. If you harm some one, it's your fault, and you can be blamed.)

trivia question

who wrote the autobiography of malcolm x?

The same guy that wrote Roots.

Next question? ;)

The same guy that wrote Roots.

Next question? ;)

dont you want your cookie, smarty pants!?

home made chocolate chip right out of the oven!

And in those cases, he was right to act as circumstances required for him to be physically safe.

My problem is with his philosophy of "righteous violence" (there's no such thing) 99.99% of Govs do say there is such a thing..

I am just not going to condemn one man for it.. and close my eyes when my Gov does it all the time.

The same guy that wrote Roots.

Next question? ;)

dont you want your cookie, smarty pants!?

home made chocolate chip right out of the oven!

His name was Alex Haley. I'll take that cookie. ;)

His name was Alex Haley. I'll take that cookie. ;)

ohhh i think that even though kinda didnt use his name, he knew it. i think he didnt want to spoil the question for others.

no cookie for you!

Once I saw the title of this thread, and knew it was about Malcolm X, I thought flame wars were going to start and the thread was gonna get locked.

It's doing good so far, though...

Once I saw the title of this thread, and knew it was about Malcolm X, I thought flame wars were going to start and the thread was gonna get locked.

It's doing good so far, though...flames about Malcom-X?
nah.. not here.. there is almost no blacks is this forum. (methinks)

you want flames? try starting an anti-feminism thread.. or an anti-Israel thread .. or a pro/anti-avortion thread.

"I don't mean go out and get violent; but at the same time you should never be nonviolent unless you run into some nonviolence. I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go insane, and I'm not responsible for what I do."



QFT! he was awesome.

ohhh i think that even though kinda didnt use his name, he knew it. i think he didnt want to spoil the question for others.

no cookie for you!
I will take that cookie by any means necessary. ;)

I will take that cookie by any means necessary. ;)

FINE

here's a chips ahoy i found when i swept out from behind the refridgerator. i remember buying a bag 2 years ago.

enjoy!





:)

99.99% of Govs do say there is such a thing..

I am just not going to condemn one man for it.. and close my eyes when my Gov does it all the time.

The governments are wrong too.

There is no such thing as righteous violence, merely violence of necessity. Anyone telling themselves otherwise is afraid to admit that they have a selfish and evil core to themselves.

ohhh i think that even though kinda didnt use his name, he knew it. i think he didnt want to spoil the question for others.

no cookie for you!

He can have my cookie, because the name was escaping my mind (even though I read and enjoyed Roots and I didn't have time to search the name before I left.

Or more commonly known as Malcolm X.

The more I read about him the more interested I am in him and the more admiration I gain for his ideas.

Just wondering what anyone thought of him

"I don't mean go out and get violent; but at the same time you should never be nonviolent unless you run into some nonviolence. I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go insane, and I'm not responsible for what I do."

http://www.malcolm-x.org/media/pic/mg44.jpg

I'm a big fan of Malcolm X. Unfortunately, once he started to become an outspoken uniter, rather than more of an easily misinterpreted "divider", and a spokesperson for left-wing causes, he was assassinated.

He can have my cookie, because the name was escaping my mind (even though I read and enjoyed Roots and I didn't have time to search the name before I left.

rats

i was really hoping that you werent the kind of person who would be fair about imaginary cookies in the event that i had it wrong.

sigh

fine

YOU can have the lint covered chips ahoy. its a CHEWY chipsahoy!

nazz gets the homemade chocolate chip cookie still warm from the oven.

rats

i was really hoping that you werent the kind of person who would be fair about imaginary cookies in the event that i had it wrong.

sigh

fine

YOU can have the lint covered chips ahoy. its a CHEWY chipsahoy!

nazz gets the homemade chocolate chip cookie still warm from the oven.

I have imaginary cookie honor (as opposed to real honor, which I haven't a shred of, of course)! I will take the Chewy Cookie with pride (and use it as a cup-holder).

"I don't mean go out and get violent; but at the same time you should never be nonviolent unless you run into some nonviolence. I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go insane, and I'm not responsible for what I do."

Amen.

I'm not even ABOUT to argue about a armed revolutionary racist with a guy who has "ONE SOLUTION- REVOLUTION

Arm the workers! Arm the poor!

Beirut, Baghdad, Kabul, Gaza
Victory to the Intifada! ".......in his sig:rolleyes:

Here we have it folks. The right's approach to freedom of debate and tolerance of other viewpoints.

Black supramecist....hated Whites, was a revolutionary, was a terrorist, was a militant with a kalashinikov...what IS there to like.:rolleyes:

I ask myself that question every single time you and Ny Nordland post.

What's wrong with being a militant with a Kalashnikov? I'm a militant U of Michigan fan and I own a Kalashnikov. Of course, I don't combine the two, as tempting as the idea may be.

Actually, I don't think that's a Kalashnikov. It looks more like my Mini-14.

Actually, I don't think that's a Kalashnikov. It looks more like my Mini-14.

its an M1A1 Carbine with an extended magazine....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Malcomxm1carbine3gr.gif

Malcolm X holding an M1 Carbine and pulling back the curtains to peer out of a window.

its an M1A1 Carbine with an extended magazine....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Malcomxm1carbine3gr.gif

It's pretty much the same design, just higher caliber. I should've known, cause the mini-14 wasn't designed yet when that photo was taken...