Malcolm X And Martin Luther King Analysis

Out of the turbulent political climate of the 1960s, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. emerged as some of the most prominent voices of the African-American Civil Rights Movement. Both religious ministers took up the fight to advocate for human rights and improve the lot of their fellow African-Americans. The two sought to achieve the same endgame, but differed greatly on the method in which to bring about the change they wanted. A few common threads that linked the activists were their emphasis on human rights, their challenge to the status quo of America, their roles as major spiritual leaders in their respective religions, and the martyrdom they endured for their cause. On the surface Malcolm X and Martin Luther King have many similarities,

but after examining their essays, The Ballot or the Bullet and Letter from Birmingham Jail, respectively, the contrast between the two is evident. By focusing on the authors’ use of religion, language, and force, the texts provide the reader with details on the their respective audiences and means of action. They both represent the very different sides of the coin of the Civil Rights movement. Malcolm X takes up the more violent, radical argument for Black Nationalism and segregation while Martin Luther King embraces the more peaceful, salient approach for integration. Although the two may have their differences, they each respectively made great strides for the betterment of the African-American population.
Religion plays a pivotal role in understanding where each of these men are coming from.

Malcolm X and Martin Luther King arose as key figures in the religion of the their communities speaking as ministers. X was a member of the Sunni Muslim faith and prior to his death broke ties with the Nation of Islam. At the very beginning of his essay he distances the issue of religion in his argument explaining, “I'm not here to argue or discuss anything that we differ about, because it's time for us to submerge our differences and realize that it is best for us to first see that we have the same problem, a common problem, a problem that will make you catch hell whether you're a Baptist, or a Methodist, or a Muslim, or a nationalist. (X 1)” Religion is removed from the equation before he even begins to make his stance for Black Nationalism. He does not intend to justify his reasoning through the will of God or the church because the problem that plagues the black community affects them regardless of what faith they subscribe to. This reveals much about the audience that Malcolm X is speaking out to. The Black Nationalism and segregation he advocates for is aimed only for his fellow African-Americans. By excluding his Islamic faith from the mix, he avoids alienating other blacks of different religions and does not seek to establish a common ground with the overwhelmingly Christian white opponents of the movement. Malcolm X reaches out to the victims of the system and avoids starting a

dialogue with the system itself.
Martin Luther King, on the other hand, does not shy away from employing his background as a Christian minister in his essay. His argument is very much influenced by the teachings of the Church as seen in the text. The religious undertones are brought to light as he frequently uses Christian figures and lessons through out the letter to justify his claims. When responding to the criticism of his actions in Birmingham, Alabama he defends his activities pointing out:
Isn't this like condemning Jesus because His unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to His will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see, as federal courts have consistently affirmed, that it is immoral to urge an individual to withdraw his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest precipitates violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber. (King 3)
Here, King juxtaposes the plight of Jesus, the Christian Messiah, to that of the Civil Rights Movement and its advocates. The reason for using this imagery and religious undertones adds a layer of legitimacy to his cause and forms a middle ground with those the letter is addressed to. Letter from Birmingham Jail is not written to the ones suffering at the hands at the system, but rather to the system itself. The letter is from King to the ones who imprisoned him for his peaceful protest. He attempts to create a dialogue between the white Christian majority. King does this because his end goal is one of integration unlike his counterpart, Malcolm X. In order to make his argument resonate more effectively with the oppressors he realizes the black and white community share Christianity. He uses this mutuality to reason with his opponents. Integration can only be achieved if the system can realize the error of its ways. King illuminates the reasoning of his argument and creates bridge of communication between the two clashing groups through religion.
Language is a key component to analyzing the different perspectives and audiences that Martin Luther King and Malcolm X voice their opinions to.

To further understand the effect of language on audience one can look to the classification of class struggle as posed by Karl Marx in his Communist Manifesto. He boils down all struggles in a fashion that creates a binary distinction between groups that are constantly at odds with one another. In regards to class antagonisms he states, “Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other – Bourgeoisie and Proletariat. (Marx 15)” Marx simplifies class struggle into two separate groups: the oppressor and the oppressed. This helpful in understanding who King and X are attempting to talk to in their respective essays. Martin Luther King uses a nuanced and formal voice in his writing. This establishes a tone he wants to set for his readers to better relate to him. Along with his heavy use of biblical undertones, it is clear he speaking the language of the oppressor. His goal of integration requires understanding on both the black and the white sides so framing his work in a style familiar to the oppressor is advantageous. Malcolm X utilizes an informal style with street slang to communicate to his audience: the oppressed. His employment of informality and abrasiveness does not interfere with his message, but strengthens its accessibility to the black

community. Unlike King, he is speaking not to the system, but to its victims. The language of his speech is catered to promote Black Nationalism. His message is not tailored to convince or reason with the white majority. For Malcolm X, the whites have proven time and time again that they do not have the interest of the black community at heart. His objective of segregation does not require the inclusion or permission of the whites so he presents his view in manner that reverberates most with his target audience.
The use of force to accomplish an end was a topic in which Malcolm X and Martin Luther King differed on greatly. One could relate Malcolm X’s stance on justice with “an eye for an eye” mentality. Justice could and should be attained by whatever means necessary for X. He gives his uncompromising view on the use of force as he writes, “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. And that's the way every Negro should get. (X)” Violence is not the preferred or default mode of action he preaches, but one should not be hesitant to retaliate with force if one is met with it. Malcolm X sees violence with somewhat of a Machiavellian interpretation. It becomes another tool to be used when the situation necessitates it. By advocating for the use of force when needed, he taps into the passionate emotion of his audience. He harnesses the frustration and rage of the black community that had been building up over the generations of discrimination. The Black Nationalist movement aimed to empower the African-American population to rise up from the shackles that white society had imposed on them. As an advocate for segregation one could see why Malcolm X would allow for brutality to be necessary for the cause. They had given up on the majority’s ability to change for the better. He and his followers were fed up with the system and did not want to continue to participate peacefully in a system rigged against them.