Martin Luther King Jr. felt that blacks should use non-violent civil disobedience and employ the principle of “turn the other cheek”. King thought blacks should transcend their humanity and received more support from those with more conservative views. This was likely attributed to King’s upbringing in the seminary. Now Malcolm X felt King’s philosophy was feeble. He employed the biblical principle of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”. Growing up on the streets, attributed to Malcolm X encouraging his radical followers to seek revenge and reserve their love solely for other blacks. This distance between Martin Luther King Jr’s thinking and Malcolm X’s was the difference between the American dream and the American reality.
In contrast, Dr. King believed in the change through nonviolent methods, influenced by Gandhi. He also showed his readiness to work with whites toward social justice. However, X and Dr. King, with their two different ideologies, wanted to attain the same goal, Afro-Americans’ freedom (Malcolm X).
The 20th century was a definitive time period for the Black civil rights movement. An era where the status quo was blatant hatred and oppression of African Americans, a time when a black son would watch his father suffer the indignity of being called a “boy” by a young white kid and say nothing in reply but “yes sir”. Where a Black person can be whipped or lynched for anything as little as not getting off the sidewalk when approaching a white person, for looking into their eyes, or worse, “for committing the unpardonable crime of attempting to vote.” In the midst of the racial crises and fight for social equality were Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. who despite their difference in philosophies were “icons of social justice movement both in the United States and around the world” .
The Civil Rights movement was a movement against racial segregation and discrimination in the southern States that became nationally recognized in the middle of the 1950s. Though American slaves were given basic civil rights through the Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments of the Constitution, African Americans still had a hard time trying to get federal protection of their newly found rights. A man by the name of Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the American Civil rights Leaders who used nonviolence in order to reach a social change. He used nonviolent resistance to overcome injustice against African Americans like segregation laws. He wasn’t just fighting for the equality of all African American but was also fighting for the equality of all men and women. Malcolm X is another great leader who fought for what he believed in. He was a black activist who, unlike King, promoted a little violence. Malcolm X wanted the nation (African Americans) to become more active in the civil rights protests. Both Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. had different methods for gaining civil rights. I believe that Martin Luther King Jr. method was more effective thanMalcolm X methods. In King “’Letter from Birmingham Jail” King defends himself on writing about why he is using nonviolent resistance to racism. Throughout the letter he shows his reasoning using logic, emotion, and ethics. Throughout his life King used this same method to reach how to hundred of thousands of African Americans.
In the letter, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King, Jr, and the speech, “The Ballot or the Bullet” by Malcolm X, the authors discuss their very different viewpoints on what form of freedom would it take to accomplished their goal. While King believes that peaceful approaches would allow the black community to achieve equality with the white Americans, Malcolm X thinks achieving equality with white Americans is nearly impossible; therefore, he preaches a separatist doctrine. Although King and X are both fighting for the black community’s rights and their integration into the nation’s system, their approaches differ significantly. King and X differ in three main areas: their ultimate goals, the strategies to accomplish those goals, and their use of rhetoric.
Martin Luther King and Malcolm X were both African American civil rights leaders wanting to bring freedom to black people during the 1960s. Even though both leaders wanted to liberate black people; their philosophies were drastically different. Malcolm X was wanted racial separation, while Martin Luther King wanted to both races to coexist. Religion is also a major part of this situation because most African Americans including MLK in America were Christian while Malcolm X’s goal was to turn all people who follow his path to convert into Muslims. Martin Luther King’s philosophy would’ve made more sense to 1960s America because most people who wanted freedom in society would rather consider coexisting than more racial
...artin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X approach the same problem differently. They both use pathos, a central metaphor, and give a warning. However, Martin Luther King Jr. uses pathos to create a welcoming and patriotic feeling whereas Malcolm X uses fear. Martin Luther King Jr. uses a check, used on a daily basis, as the object of his central metaphor; Malcolm X uses a powder keg, a very damaging and dangerous object, as the object of his central metaphor. Lastly, Martin Luther King Jr. warns his audience that the people of color will revolt passively. On the other hand, Malcolm X warns his audience that the people of color will revolt violently with bloodshed. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X both achieve their goal. After reading both speeches, Malcolm X seems, in my opinion, to have made a greater impact on the white community because fear is stronger than joy.
Martin Luther King and Malcolm x are both strong representations of two different approaches to a common goal. Martin Luther King Jr. preferred a nonviolence approach to the situation. Whereas, Malcolm X handled racism in a violent approach. However, both man believed African Americans deserved their human rights and equal say. Martin Luther King Jr. believed in an integrated society while Malcolm X wanted African Americans to have their segregated neighborhoods just as good as the whites.
On the other hand, Malcolm X believed in the utilization of any denotes indispensable to reach his goals. The one area is the kindred attributes between the two. In fact, one could verbalize that Martin Luther King and Malcolm X were consummate antitheses. Martin Luther King was able to enlighten the world an edification. He showed us that goals can be reached without violence. Although , Malcolm X may have reached his goals, but he engendered nonessential violence along the way.. You may argue that even though Martin Luther King’s protests were halcyon, violence still occurred. The difference in my opinion is that the Hangings and attacks that African Americans faced were out of their control. It was the decision of those that they were protesting against to bellicosity beat them and kill them. Malcolm X on the other hand was many times the initiator of violence. He brought violence to his protests and ergo engendered extra violence, which can be deemed to be nonessential. At the terminus of the day many would favor of the lessons which Martin Luther King Jr uplifted as his decisions and outcomes can influence the decisions of future generations in times of conflict. Malcolm X’s conception of doing anything to reach his goals is not a good representation for future generations as it remotely
In history we know that no two men are alike but, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were phenomenal people and leaders. Both had visualized some type of change in the future, yet were not literally able to see it. Both Dr. King and Malcolm X set out to bring a sense of confidence to blacks all over the United States. Their main purpose was to help instill black’s power and strength so that they could overcome racial disparity and prejudice that surrounded them, but both of them had very unique and distinct different ways of promoting their message. Martin was more geared and focused on equality and wellness of the world as a whole, a Malcolm X’s personal interpretation of the world was very well blinded by anger, bitterness, and the desire to get revenge at the expense of the world that he thought treated him unfairly.
African Americans are fortunate to have leaders who fought for a difference in Black America. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X are two powerful men in particular who brought hope to blacks in the United States. Both preached the same message about Blacks having power and strength in the midst of all the hatred that surrounded them. Even though they shared the same dream of equality for their people, the tactics they implied to make these dreams a reality were very different. The background, environment and philosophy of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X were largely responsible for the distinctly varying responses to American racism.
Until the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., his life’s work was dedicated to the nonviolent actions of blacks to gain the freedoms they were promised in the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 by Abraham Lincoln. He believed that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (King, 1963). These injustices had become so burdensome to blacks that they were “plunged into an abyss of despair” (King, 1963). The nonviolent actions of the sit-ins, boycotts, and marches were so the “individual could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths…to help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism” and ultimately lead to “inevitably opening the door to negotiation” (King, 1963). Not only was King’s approach effective with the older black generation, it was also successful with white people. They did not feel threatened when approached by King. White people gained a sense of empathy towards the plight of black freedom as King’s promise of nonviolence did not threaten their livelihood. Malcolm X viewed the world similarly to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., however; his beliefs to changing the status quo were slightly different from his political counterpart. Malcolm X realized that “anger could blind human vision” (X, 1965). In realizing this, X knew that in order to achieve racial freedom blacks had to “forget hypocritical politics and propaganda” (X, 1965). While Malcolm X was more so an advocate for violent forces against white people than King, X merely used force when it became necessary for defense. According to X, “I don’t go for non-violence if it also means a delayed solution. I am for violence if non-violence means we continue postponing a solution to American black man’s problem” (X, 1965). However, this le...
The main primary difference focused on their willingness to employ violence to achieve their end goals. While Dr. King suggests a civil disobedient approach in “Give Us The Ballot” and “Pilgrimage to Non Violence,” Malcolm X believed otherwise, expressing his belief that the black community needed to rise up and organize. Malcolm X articulated his view on the necessary use of violence and retaliation in “The Ballot or the Bullet”.
black woman) refused to give her sat up to a white person on a bus.
Martin Luther King, his views and ideas were very far from Kings. Malcolm X states his views on how to stand up for himself and the just of the African Americans in Message to the Grassroots. Malcolm X’s and King's views were very different, in that Malcolm X states in his speech that people like King were “Uncle Toms” and speak as though they were traitors to their race. Malcolm X makes a clear statement how he believes that African Americans have a right to self-defense. He also agrees that there should be a call for a revolution, but he disagrees that there cannot be a non-violent revolution; rather, drastic action needed to be taken. He then goes on to say that all blacks need to unite against a common enemy, which is the "white man". Not only does the "black man" need to go against the whites but so also does every other man. He backs up his argument with facts about the revolution against colonial rule throughout Africa, where the rulers were white Europeans. He also mentions the revolutions in the Middle East and Asia, which were also against white
Minority writers from the mid- and late-twentieth century focused on the struggles facing African Americans. Many writers used speeches to address these issues while others focused on their culture and heritage to bring awareness to the issue.