Amazon.com Widgets

Was Martin Luther King Jr. a better civil rights leader than Malcolm X?

  • A Peace Keeper

    Even though he was peaceful it was very effective.Malcolm X wanted African Americans to govern themselves ,but did not allow them to grow as an ethnicity or expand their mind to forgive.In order to live somethings your forgive but do not forget.We are exceptional people when we are joined as one.

  • MLK Appealed to what every human has; a heart and a sense of right and wrong.

    Malcolm was good with what he knew but he thought too materialistically. While he wanted to remain segregated and taught to fight against the bodies of whites and produce fear, Martin appealed to something that all of humanity has; a heart and a sense of right and wrong. He knew that there were whites who did not like the evils that where being committed against blacks. He appealed to those people's consciouses. His death was seed for growth. A innocent, loving man was slain unrightly. This stirred people's heart in a way Malcolm would not. Martin's death brought into perspective the hatred that innocent blacks faced.

    Martin's method had more weight behind it. Black and white abolitionists appealed to the people through the Bible and Christ's message of love and equality to win against slavery. Martin used the same method to advocate equality and it was successful even after his death.

    Malcolm's method would have not have worked in our favor as we would be living in a very divided nation where fighting would be rampant to this day. Both sides would assume themselves superior and this superiority would be tested day by day through fierce violence and competition. No one would be safe and being that whites were the majority, it would have been impossible for blacks to build anything as nothing could stop whites from taking it. Some believe that integration was what destroyed black businesses but my question is, would the racist not have taken them regardless? Integrated or segregated, America was conquered by the Europeans and they surely would not just let blacks easily segregate and grow to be powerful.

    It is more possible for a black man to become powerful today than it would have been if Malcolm's ways were followed. A black man can gain the respect and monetary support from a much larger group of people and America would not be the powerful, diverse and influencial nation it is today.

    While his method would have made things worst in my opinion, his extreme views were necessary in order to push Martin's views. Malcolm pushed self-sufficency and pride, Martin pushed tolerance and peace. Blacks of that time became proud, self-sufficent yet peaceful and tolerant. Malcolm did a great job promoting racial pride and esteem, but he would never have created real change and the freedoms that we all, regardless of ethnicity, enjoy today. Martin was the true catalyst for change.

  • Achieved More For Blacks, Although X Was Just As Significant

    I believe MLK was a better CIVIL RIGHTS leader as he achieved more than X. X did well to promote the phrase 'by any means necessary'. He didn't believe in violence, but instead self-protection. X was also a motivational speaker and gave some very iconic speeches which were appreciated even by whites, likewise with MLK.

    MLK on the other hand led mass movements such as Selma, Birmingham and the March on Washington. He promoted peaceful protest and was 100% against violence. He achieved change for Black Americans and helped them fight for their rights. Such examples include the passing of laws such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

  • Because i say so

    I dont know he just is. Believe me (being the king of swaziland) king was a better leader, but at the same time X was a brilliant person , but king achieved a lot more in his life, evem before king emerged on the scene.

    Yours truly your mother :D

  • He was best.

    He was better at the peaceful approach and was better altogether because he took a much much better job at being peaceful and not violent like Malcolm X even though he was better at being violent he needed to be nicer in that approach to freedom for the black people.

  • Love and Non-Violence

    Through Martin Luther King, Jr.'s non-violent protests, he not only helped to pass laws in America, but taught people that violence kills and love heals. Although it is important to recognise the strategies of Malcom X, Martin Luther King, Jr. Helped to create racial equality in a much more peaceful manner, using his God-filled heart and voice rather than his hands as his powerful weapons.

  • A takes far restraint engage in non-violent protest than using divisive rhetoric and violent action. We have to show the world we are better.

    People are inherently good, the few bad apples are bent on spoiling the entire crop. Others will rally on your side especially when you take the high road. Right is the argument of the oppressor, righteous is the right of all. Slavery was right to the colonists (whites) but deep down they knew it wasn't righteous. It might take a while but righteousness always prevail.
    Malcom X wasn't on the wrong side he was there to ensure MLK's message had an audience. Similar to being a nuclear country, albeit you are a small nation but super powers will always show you respect. We needed both King and X, there opposing views captured the world's attention.

  • Martin Luther King was about everyone coming together. Malcolm X was more on the lines of "we're us, and you're them".

    I don't know much about Malcolm X, so I could be wrong. But from what I've heard, it seems like he was more on the lines of "if you're not us, you're them", like as Ewan McGregor (as Obi-Wan Kenobi) said "only a Sith deals in absolutes".

    1.) After the big event that happened in Nov 1963, Malcolm basically said "The white men get what they deserve". That's terrible, not all "white men" think the same, there's a different between Democrat and Republican, North and South.

    2.) And as a Roman Catholic, the line "Christianity is a white man's religion" if offense. It's not the "a white man's religion", it's the religion to follow Jesus, doesn't belong to any one race. Same with every religion. Christians, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslims, exc; they all have whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, exc who are members of the faith.

    With all that said about Malcolm X, do I need to explain Martin Luther King? He was a righteous man who believed we need to come together as one, not judge people by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. Martin Luther King is someone we should all admire for he believed in unity.

  • Got real, long lasting results

    Malcom X was probably the best at bringing about change within to black community, but X didn't do much for ACTUAL civil rights. Im not saying he didnt do anything, he did influence change but not to the degree that King did. MLK was way better for getting laws passed...Civil rights.

  • Is this even questionable?

    I did a survey in my college, asking this very question. Along with other related questions, I asked "who do you think impacted America more and changed it for the better? " - 57.14% said MLK, 3.57% said Malcolm X and 39.29% "I don't know". Apart from the obvious observation of not enough of black history is being taught in English schools, I saw that a massive 67.86% of people said that agree with MLK's way of doing things too (including peaceful protests and passionate speeches.)

    Malcolm X was undoubtedly an incredible leader for the black people of America and he achieved massive change, impacting America for the better. But part of his achievements SHOULD be focused on how much of him is being taught in schools today and who actually knows about him? If he was better than MLK surely he would be more heard of? Who HASNT heard of MLK? When asked "on a scale of 1 to 10, how much do you know about Malcolm X?(10 being a lot and 1 being never heard of him). 8.14% of people knew a lot about him and 24.42% of people had never heard of him. This, compared to the same question but this time referring to MLK, 0.00% of people had never heard of him and 15.29% knew a lot about him. More needs to be taught about them both, as these are embarrassing statistics, but in fairness, the question needs to be asked, why have so many people never heard about Malcolm X?

    All in all, Malcolm was an outstanding representative of black civil rights, but MLK out shone him, achieving more and impacting America forever.

  • Only white people think Martin Luther king Jr. Was a better leader

    Because Martin Luther King used harmony and passive ways to address his message while Malcolm X used violence because he thought it was necessary, it was better for the white people that black people use peaceful protest because that wouldn't have any pressure on them. Instead Malcolm X used violence to get his point across. By the way, the anti-Malcolm X answers will come from people who never heard any of his speeches and who sadly assume he was just some racist guy. He taught blacks that they could stand up tall and be men and women who are intelligent and self-sufficient.

  • Malcolm X was a better leader than Martin Luther King Jr.

    Malcolm X was more articulate in explaining the condition of the Afro American in America, not only to whites but to people all around the world. He stood by his principles (unlike King who cheated on his wife) no matter how unpopular they may seem, and cared deeply for the black race.

  • Malcolm X was the Embodiment of the trials and hardships of the African American Race

    While martin Luther king undoubtedly represented some of the values and beliefs of the African American community(and was undeniably an effective leader), king was merely a "notice board" for his race. He brought many of the injustices that blacks suffered to the public's attention and while he did suffer some of the same racism, by and large, martin Luther king lived a comfortable and well-insulated life: he had a wholesome and supporting family and he attended prestigious schools and obtained a remarkable education--while this was in no way "bad" it clearly sets him apart from the down-trodden and unprivileged masses that he supposedly related to. Malcolm X on the other hand lucidly connects to his race, he underwent all of the difficulties that the everyday black person suffered through, and even spiraled down to the unfortunate life of crime that many young blacks of that era unwittingly found themselves forced into from a sheer lack of reasonable options and opportunities, like thousands of other black families Malcolm also witnessed his family fall apart at the hands of the Klan and society, and yet, he still managed to overcome these apparently insurmountable obstacles and better himself and then attempt to do the same for his race. In short, Malcolm x has endured every possible hardship that the average negro faced in his everyday life, therefore he understands and relates better than most civil rights leaders (and certainly more than King) to the underprivileged black masses and his life and past experiences practically represents the lives of most of his race. On a final note I've noticed that many people here argue the point that Malcolm x preached violence and hatred, this is wrong Malcolm x did not preach violence nor hatred-- he was vehemently against it, however he did believe that if you got hit then you hit back (i.E self defense); Malcolm X was just a proactive leader who believed in the advancement of his race FIRST regardless of whether he had white society's seal of approval and he simply felt that sending members of his race to get beaten and mangled on live television for whites to UNWILLINGLY acknowledge the black man was a waste of time and effort when blacks could simply withdraw from white society, unite and better themselves.

  • Malcolm Advocated for Self Defense

    Malcolm X advocated for self defense. He didn't encourage black people to go out and initiate any amount of aggression indiscriminately against whites. He said everyone has a right to do what is necessary to protect their life. He believed in the brotherhood of all people and was against any form of racism and segregation.

  • Malcolm X had guts and ambition, at least more so than Dr King.

    One of the biggest reasons why black people were given civil rights was not because of Dr King and his pacifist ideology but rather the fear of Malcolm X and his followers. The government didn't care if a few people protested peacefully (the Vietnam war for example) but the threat of militant self defence as proposed by Malcolm X was what really kickstarted the revolution. Plus he had more guts than Dr King and was an infinitely better speaker.

  • Malcom X was different.

    He was a great leader. Of course he said some things in the beginning that didn't really make sense or were about African Americans "separating". But towards the end he realized that was not the case. And not many schools teach what he truly wanted they just teach his days at the nation and not what happened afterwards. Both should be respected and the country should acknowledge both for what they did.

  • Mlk was a better but kisser then malcolm x

    Malcolm x had an actual meaning a message all these people say he is violent for standing up for himself standing up for others not appealing to someone last time i checked he has never promoted violence never organized riots unlike the KKK the true message of Malcolm x was we integrate as a society we are separate but equal today in society we are integrated together and unequal today white society rules in america demonstrated by trump and he never promoted racism he came to a conclusion there are good whites and bad whites before you talk take up a book and educate yourself just like Malcolm did remember he said education is key yes he does not like white society in the beginning because of his experiences but changes his views when he goes to hajj and meets very kind white people and realize their is good and bad for a man with a 9th grade education he is allot smarter then an actual college man so go support king who is the promoter of inequality in the 21st century

  • Mlk was a better but kisser then malcolm x

    Malcolm x had an actual meaning a message all these people say he is violent for standing up for himself standing up for others not appealing to someone last time i checked he has never promoted violence never organized riots unlike the KKK the true message of Malcolm x was we integrate as a society we are separate but equal today in society we are integrated together and unequal today white society rules in america demonstrated by trump and he never promoted racism he came to a conclusion there are good whites and bad whites before you talk take up a book and educate yourself just like Malcolm did remember he said education is key yes he does not like white society in the beginning because of his experiences but changes his views when he goes to hajj and meets very kind white people and realize their is good and bad for a man with a 9th grade education he is allot smarter then an actual college man so go support king who is the promoter of inequality in the 21st century

  • Malcolm X wins by far.

    Anyone who dares to speak the truth, promote self reliance and stand up for justice takes my vote. In that regard, Malcolm X wins over MLK. Mlacolm X went through many phases and is thus often poorly understood but he was warrior for the oppressed against the oppressor and gets my RESPECT. MLK's approach has been tried by many across human history but usually does not last long. History is evidence to the fact that today, the truth of the message of Malcolm X is a lot more evidence than that of the message of MLK.

  • Malcolm X >

    King Malcolm X didn't try to please the whites. He basically said listen to MLK or this is what you'll get. That legend. Dare I mention his beauty too. Malcolm X empowered blacks, while MLK looked for white support. That's just the truth, if you didn't already know my friends.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.