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.
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.
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.
Now despite Mlk having his flaws in ideologies he remained a more important stance in history simply because he was able to start the civil rights movement whilst using non violent methods. Now he may have taken a longer time to get points across but he was assassinated because he was found to be more influential and a threat to the whites.
Both had contrasting ideologies but king was clearly a better leader and did more for the black community. Malcolm X rose to prominence in the 1950's merely because of his political statements meanwhile king sought to improve the standard of lives through HISTORICALLY PROVEN and practical methods introducing the voting rights act/ civil rights act and so forth. He supported countless campaigns like the bus boycott which was mainly successful because of his work. Also individuals that say peaceful methods did nothing really need to research in depth because the extremism that Malcolm x advocated in practise experienced short lived success. Its also worth noting that Malcolm X did not take part in any of the violent methods he preached and would prevent them sometimes in complete contrast to king. Malcolm X also rejected integration so his beliefs were pretty much useless to black Americans who wanted to live normally with white people at the time.
The love of God instead of hate. Everything in the Bible is centered on love. If everyone truly followed and understood the Bible there won't be all this evil and crap in this world. Everyone is on the same level. No one is above another, even the sinful. It is never a war against people but evil.
And the education part allowed King to foster relationships in higher places that ultimately led to real changes being done. His education also allowed him to see the power of education. Education was and still is a tool for freedom and success.
In short, the attitude and way of life King preached was direct contrast to the stereotypes of Black people. Therefore, it showed how much a fallacy the beliefs of racists really was. It shamed the racists as the racists quickly became a minority as other Whites saw the White racists as fools.
History has shown that the methods used by Martin Luther King are a more effective way of creating change. Non violent approaches prompt less radical reactions, help break down conservative viewpoints, and generally serve to shame your opposition into realizing that their point of view is not the correct one to have.
MLK didn't use violence or aggresion Malcolm X did but both are marytrys because they both died for what they believed in but MLK is more influential even though they have an equally as tough backgroud. Also he had better and more excitable and insparational speeches where as Malcon X didn't. :)
Although violence can solve it isn't right as Dr King said non violence is the most potent weapon. He is saying it is the most powerful and effective weapon it is, because non violence teaches but also shows love and equality for all races, black or white. MLK is an inspiration
He managed to intimidate his opponents cleverly, and because black people were known beginning to look after and defend themselves, the government began to pass acts in the senate which would eventually lead to the position of black people in society increasing. So although people just mainly talk about MLK, we should also remember Malcolm x for what he did to help black people
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.
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.
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.
I believe that due to the evidence already presented by the others who believe the same as me, Malcolm X is either just as significant as or more significant as Martin Luther King. If you would like to try and persuade me otherwise then please comment. Thank you for reading.
We had tried to protest the non violet way for far too long. After all that time, no real justice. All the blacks had gotten was tokenism. One or two Negros got a job, here or there just to make everyone believe that change actually may be occurring. It took the almighty federal troops just to let a few kids go to school. It took the entire American Army just to get one negro into a university. Were they supposed to be content with this? The white folks wont change their view on them, even 10 years after the supreme court law banning segregated schools so obviously, the blacks must have been the ones to change. In fact, 10 years after this federal law being made only 1/10 of the negro students in the south are in integrated schools. Change had to be made with their methods of protest. This is why Malcolm X had introduced and campaigned the new way of protest...Black power.
Martin Luther King was an extraordinary civil rights activist. I strongly believe that his commitment to non-violence and deeply Christian morals were truly commendable, and he was a very effective leader at challenging the legal segregation in the South. He was also very good at winning the support of the white public (which some criticised him of) which whilst some feel showed he was just a suck up and an 'Uncle Tom', actually benefitted the black community a lot as it meant the federal government was a lot more sympathetic to the civil rights movement.
However, King did not understand what the majority of the Black Community was going through. He came from a middle class, well educated family and in many ways was not a elate able character. Malcolm X, however, understood the sufferings of his people perfectly (I think his father was killed by The Black Legion? Not sure). He was an amazing orator and his transformation from being a lowlife criminal to a self educated, quick witted and relatable leader was an inspiration to many. Also, unlike King, he always practiced what he preached about self discipline and morals. He also understood that battling legal segregation wasn't the only thing that could help Black Americans, and that it was also an issue of pride, reaffirming their identity and standing up to the de facto discrimination of white racists.
Honestly, I think they're both amazing and if they combined their ideas we would have had something truly extraordinary.
Malcolm's argument for black self sufficiency and black empowerment through black nationalism has been proven not only in other communities that practice group economics, but by the failures of integration itself. Today more black youth are unemployed than in the 1960s, black people do not even own the vast majority of the businesses in their own communities and black people have actually economically regressed since integration. MLK was a complete failure and the results are in to prove it.
I don't care what you say, Malcolm was just a lot more truthful in his arguments. Although he said some things most people didn't want to hear or accept, they were still true. MLK's arguments just seemed a little more convenient for the white man. MLK (although a great leader in his own right) argued that the black man needs to move into the house of the white man (of course that's going to be a more popular opinion). Whereas Malcolm argued that the black man needs to build his own house; and by building his own community he will gain the self-respect needed to truly integrate with whites. However, if you let integration happen without the wounds being healed/fixed first, then the wounds will always be there. As we seen in today's world from the amount of racism still present. And for anyone who thinks that Malcolm preached violence is simply uneducated on the matter. That's what the media wanted people to think, but the only time Malcolm was pro violence was in defense of racist attacks on black people; and what's wrong with that?
I don't think its fair to put both of these amazing African american leaders against each other.They both stood up for what they believed in and they both wanted equality.Yes,they had different ways on going about it but they were different people and had different opinions views and perspectives but like I said they wanted the same thing.They both have amazing quotes and both of their legacies will live on.I do wish that more people would learn about Malcolm x and see he was a great leader as well although he did have his flaws.Malcolm stood by what he believed in and that alone made him a great civil rights leader just as well as Martin Luther King Jr.I feel the reason that a lot of people will say Martin Luther king was the better leader because he wanted everyone to get along and be together and he was a man of peace and Malcolm was a man that was a little more violent.I learned a lot from the both of them.Which is another reason why I think they are equal because both of them had some good knowledge although again they had different ways on going about it.Both of them are my heroes.I have so much respect for them and is so grateful to them both.Both of these amazing men helped to make a difference.
Here, we go yet again! It's not about what Black leader was better, or worse. It's really all about where is the so-called Black leadership that is willing to be held accoutable as Black leadership...Period! Sorry, but there's no one on the radar that fits that model. And, pray tell....Why doesn't Black "so-called" leadership even willing to address "head on" the continuing issues that confront the African American community? It's strange that people like both Sharpton, and Jackson are so willing to show up when a black man is killed yet again, by the police, but at the very same time are for the most part "missing in action" when a black person is killed, or shot down in the streets at the hands of another Black person!