The path of Martin or Malcolm?

[Deacs]

Out of curiosity, and due to the contrasting arguments and ideologies that both Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X held for the civil rights of African Americans, which one do you identify with?

In hindsight, I believe the wrong one was chosen. The peaceful revolution which we came under and push for civil rights which got intermingled in the 1960s for a national cause, didn’t change anything for the better which would have taken its natural course. This is said in light to COINTELPROs’ involvement in creating a web of hate and skewing laws against an incoming black messiah as stated in their own documents among other illegal actions. The misnomers and misrepresentation of facts against Africans as a whole but AA for the purpose of this discussion.

In my opinion, it didn't work, the precepts which kept the African American together are close to all destroyed, which is our family and our image as men and women, which I will mention later but I wanted to know what you think instead.

I assert, without taking anything away from President Obama with the job that he is doing; that in this election, that if he didn’t run, anyone would’ve beaten McCain. That was a given due to the years prior years of decadence and poor decision making. The change would’ve happened and this is the natural course which has been taken since. Under either case, an African American President would’ve been elected if the path of Malcolm has been chosen, but depending on the outcome would be basically how much longer/shorter the wait would be.


As African Americans, did we as a whole received a better lot on life since the signing of the acts of 1964 and 1965?

Would a separatist movement been better off for African Americans?

What if we backed Malcolm X instead?

Would our image as it is now be this distorted?


In light of other things, as a starting point of something to watch, here

What Black Men Think
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=BRQYQTOZ


Just... be plain with the debate

 

[World B Free]

ADDITIONAL READINGS:
# Malcolm X and James Farmer, “Separation or Integration: A Debate,” in Dialogue Magazine 3 (May 1962), pp. 14-18.
# LeRoi Jones, “What Does Nonviolence Mean?” Home: Social Essays, pp. 133-154.
# Manning Marable, “Malcolm, Martin and the Mandates of Justice,” Speaking Truth to Power: Essays on Race, Resistance and Radicalism, pp. 134-138.
# Robin Kelley, “House Negroes on the Loose: Malcolm X and the Black Bourgeoisie,” Callaloo 21 (2) 1998:419-435.
# James Baldwin, “Malcolm and Martin,” Esquire 77 (4) 1972: 94-97, 195-196, 198, 201-202.
# James Cone, Martin & Malcolm & America, Chapter 9, “Two Roads to Freedom,” pp. 244-271; Part of Chapter 10, “Nothing But Men,” pp. 272-273, 280-287; Chapter 11, “Making Their Mark: Legacies,” pp. 288-314; and “Conclusion,” pp. 315-318.
# The Playboy Interview: Malcolm X Speaks with Alex Haley (May 1963),” in Gallen, ed., Malcolm X: As They Knew Him, pp. 109-130.
# “Minister Malcolm: A Conversation with Kenneth B. Clark (June 1963),” in Gallen, ed., Malcolm X: As They Knew Him, pp. 131-134.
# Malcolm X, “God’s Judgment of White America,” in The End of White World Supremacy, pp. 121-148.
# “Muslims Press Race Separation,” New York Times, February 26, 1963, p. 3. download
# “X Marks the Spot,” Newsweek, May 6, 1963, p. 28. download
# Handler, “Malcolm X Starting Drive in Washington,” New York Times, May 10, 1963, pp. 1, 14. download
# Handler, “Malcolm X Terms Dr. King’s Tactics Futile,” New York Times, May 11, 1963, p. 9. download
# “Themes and Variations: Coffee with Malcolm X,” Wall Street Journal, May 16, 1963, p. 12. download
# Handler, “Malcolm X Scores Kennedy on Racial Policy,” New York Times, May 17, 1963, p. 14. download
# “Why Black Muslims Are Focusing on the Nation’s Capital Now,” US News & World Report, May 27, 1963, p. 24. download
# Malcolm X Disputes Nonviolence Policy,” New York Times, June 5, 1963, p. 29. download
# Malcolm X, “Muslim Teachings,” New York Times, August 25, 1963, p. SM2. download
# “3 Negro Speakers on TV Hold Kennedy Leadership Inadequate,” New York Times, June 25, 1963, p. 13. download
# Clayborne Carson, “The Unfinished Dialogue of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X,” Souls, Vol. 7, no. 1 (Winter 2005), pp. 12-19. download
# George Breitman, ed., Malcolm X Speaks, pp. 3-17.

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ccbh/mxp/mlk.html

 

[SamSneed]

"Look at all them damn words,I will not read all this,by any means necessary"

j/k thats a good one ,i couldnt tell you which one.im just glad they did what they did.

 

[Deacs]

Thanks World!!

Ok then my brothers/sisters, anything to add?

 

[Deacs]

"Look at all them damn words,I will not read all this,by any means necessary"

j/k thats a good one ,i couldnt tell you which one.im just glad they did what they did.

I'm happy with them too, well, one more than the other. Malcolm rings clear better with me.

Seeing our plight here and now, our people and what has been done since we were co mingled with hippies and the national concerns which he predicted... which one

one was violent

one was non violent,

and we took the easy path, door number 2

would we be better under door number 1?

 

[SamSneed]

I'm happy with them too, well, one more than the other. Malcolm rings clear better with me.

Seeing our plight here and now, our people and what has been done since we were co mingled with hippies and the national concerns which he predicted... which one

one was violent

one was non violent,

and we took the easy path, door number 2

would we be better under door number 1?

Brother Malcolm(pbh) wanted change by force,then once he came from his pilgrimage he was for a peaceful change.

Dr.King was always for peace.

someone will knock what i've said

 

[Jordan Diddy Buk]

What is sad people cling on who X used to be and the message he was leaving behind. It is like he change and died so people could misuse what he was striving for.

 

[Deacs]

he was open to assistance, but still, the disease didn't change, he still also lectured on innate protection of what is yours, which in a revolution other than what he had, would not be a slice of pie. In not once did he say turn the other cheek if struck. He never negated that, only the fire and brimestone, while King never advocated any protection of self, full peace and strength in it.


We know King was for peace, that is the path we took, full on integration of morals and living conditions. right

Ok Buk. what do you have to say?

 

[RunawaySlave]

Hard to walk the path of Malcolm X. BPP for Self Defense started off trying it and J Edgar Homo turned them inside out.

btw, Malcolm was NOT "violent". He simply did not believe in turning the other cheek or praying for people that oppress you

 

[Logikal]

MLK - Unity is strength for all.

 

[TCapone]

As African Americans, did we as a whole received a better lot on life since the signing of the acts of 1964 and 1965?
Some yes but as a whole no





In light of other things, as a starting point of something to watch, here

What Black Men Think
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=BRQYQTOZ


Just... be plain with the debate

Would a separatist movement been better off for African Americans?

Yes... first we would have unity & family, more fathers in the home, no welfare, less jails drugs abused. Second we would own our neighborhoods, banks, stores, ... we already the strongest race physically & once blacks come together globally, financially & use our brains intellectually we would be 100x more richer than the usa & israel combined!

What if we backed Malcolm X instead?

We would be more respected, because Malcolm mentality was mind over matter nothing gets done unless you fight & take it.

Martin on the other hand with that same old preacher bullshit of build a church on every corner that prays to a false white god who teaches you to be docile, pray & everything will be alright. to your enemy, while he rapes our women, murders the men, & paralyzes the mind of the child not to grow but to stay a child, by his/her actions.


Would our image as it is now be this distorted?

Hell NO! We would have 100% control our images no more of this bullshit thats on the news & radio. Control of our image is a top 2 priority, with a strong black family being #1!

 

[xxxxxxxxxllllllllllllll]

1.Malcom X did not have a credible solution to the problems facing America during the civil rights era. He knew how to eloquently describe the problem but he did not have a solution which would satisfy both blacks and whites.

2. Malcom X was into black liberationist whilst Martin Luther King was a civil rights leader . I hope you understand the difference.

 

[TCapone]

Brother Malcolm(pbh) wanted change by force,then once he came from his pilgrimage he was for a peaceful change.

Dr.King was always for peace.

someone will knock what i've said

Because it bullshit/ not accurate Malcolm still believed in by any means necessary, his only views that changed was how he saw RACE IN ISLAM!

 

[Raeeb7]

Neither. Martin lead us to sleep and took all the rumble out the movement whities only respect fear. Malcolm ran to the whities with his issues with the nation. Whatever the problems why he run to the enemy to air it out?

 

[malaki]

martin's approach is ultimately where humanity has to go....malcom's approach is what (sadly) is required in many cases to get there.

 

[Garifuna]

Wow! I was just thinking about these two less than two hours ago!

Fact is, they were BOTH martyrs. They died for standing up and speaking out for what they believed. They were assassinated by people that didn't want YOU to get the message. They both knew what was coming, and they didn't let that stop them.

That IS the message, stand up for what you believe, speak out, and practice what you preach. Don't worry about the possible repercussions.

If you think Barack Obama didn't get the message, then pull your head out of the sand.

 

[SamSneed]

Because it bullshit/ not accurate Malcolm still believed in by any means necessary, his only views that changed was how he saw RACE IN ISLAM!

http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=390706 reply # 8

go away

 

[Black A. Camus]

Out of curiosity, and due to the contrasting arguments and ideologies that both Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X held for the civil rights of African Americans, which one do you identify with...

I'm not trying to diss you, really I'm not. You seem very intelligent, and this is a great topic. But any college professor would tell you that (1) you should have edited this more before posting it; and (2) your many grammatical errors make it hard for readers to understand what you're trying to say. When I was in college one of my professors told me that I'll never be where I want to academically until I spend more time developing my writing. So I did. I urge you to do the same.

For example, the following sentence is virtually unintelligible: it's a run-on sentence, and your incorrect use of commas makes the sentence more confusing than it already is.

"The peaceful revolution which we came under and push for civil rights which got intermingled in the 1960s for a national cause, didn’t change anything for the better which would have taken its natural course."

I could post more examples, but I'm not trying to diss you--I'm really not, and this isn’t an English class. All of that being said, I’ll still try to respond to what you wrote based on my understanding of it.

Until he adopted his last--more peaceful--belief Malcolm X was wrong. Adherence to his ideology of violence would have proved ruinous for Blacks in America. Militarily, Blacks did not have a chance against America’s military—which the President would have utilized immediately to maintain order. America’s military would have slaughtered our parents and grandparents had they chosen a violent path. Remember, Blacks have never comprised more than thirteen-percent of the American population, and thus did not, and do not, have the numbers to pose a viable threat against white America.

During the civil rights epoch, our parents and grandparents faced America's prejudice alone. They did not have the military backing of Russia, China, or any other country that could have helped them counter the weapons that the American government would have used to quell a Black Revolution. Assuredly, America would have used overwhelming military force to maintain order. The American military would have slaughtered thousands, if not tens of thousands, of Blacks in a direct military confrontation. Once America restored order, i.e., once we were submissive again, things would only have been worse for us.

Based upon the plights of American Indians and Japanese Americans during WWII, it's not hard to imagine that after an unsuccessful Black Revolution the American Government would have placed us in concentration camps, or some type of reservation. Remember as Blacks we stand out from white Americans, there is no blending into the general population, and given that we comprise less than thirteen-percent of the populace, it wouldn't have been hard to foribly segregate us from the general population. Malcolm X, and all others who advocated violence, would have been responsible for this.

In conclusion, Martin Luther King Jr., nailed it. He knew that violence was a lost cause, and the only viable way to attain civil equality with whites was to show them our humanity, and their lack of it.

 

[TCapone]

1.Malcom X did not have a credible solution to the problems facing America during the civil rights era. He knew how to eloquently describe the problem but he did not have a solution which would satisfy both blacks and whites.

2. Malcom X was into black liberationist whilst Martin Luther King was a civil rights leader . I hope you understand the difference.

NIGGA PLEASE! Slavery, Welfare, is the 1, 2 punch & crack was the knock out motherfucker where you been! In this situation fuck trying to APPEASE whites. They not the victim look around motherfucker we are, they doing good fucking kkkrooks!

This whole slavery/ reparation debacle really shows how whites are, & how feeble, gullible, weak & enslaved most black’s minds are! Unfortunately, some blacks aren't ready to leave the reservation yet, they live their lives trying to gratify whites & feel they can’t survive without the guidance, (father, child relationship) approval of whites!

When whites are losing, even to amend the wrong they change the rules very quickly to stay in power & have total control, vociferously by law or through public opinion through the media to make the victim feel guilt even though these motherfuckers had things their way & been winning for 400 plus years . Weak pseudo intellectual blacks always fall this mind trick.


Now with any other race its ok for the white man to amend his wrongs to that race by instituting laws & making amend through financial reparations. In those cases the oppressor acknowledges his wrongs & makes payments to the oppressed without 40 questions being ask of how & what they gonna do with the money. Jews didn't have to satisfy whites (even though we didn't have shit to do with that) Indians didn't have to satisfy whites( reparations, casinos) Asian didn't have to satisfy whites(reparations) are still being taken care of to this day by the money. But blacks need to satisfy whites get the fuck out of here with that backwards shit.

While whites didn't satisfy us through inheritance like property, life insurances, land, homes, income-producing real estate through fha & other expensive shit.

Shit that the U.S. government prevented blacks folks from attaining, the ones who build this country, suffered the most due to those subhuman racially unjust laws & are still to this day subjugated to 2nd class citizenship by the government.

But some of you niggaz turn your nose up to reparations like you better or some shit, because you live in the suburbs & don’t want to offend whites at your people expense! FUCK WHITEY MAN, FUCK THEIR FEELINGS AINT NO 1 MAN ABOVE THE CREW SHIT WERE ALL NIGGAZ TO THEM, ANY FUCKING WAY!

Where all in the same fucking boat look around you & look at your people a few nigga rich but most not especially when 95% of our people have NOTHING but a leased car, fake designer clothes, a leased apartment in the burbs or a over priced shack, most are a few pay checks away to living in poverty again!

Even though ever other race had some assistance from the government to get where they're are from your tax dollars where the outcry was then you FUCKING COWARDS! It’s hurt to see my people struggle & swallow in helplessness.

I'm doing ok financially but I'm not wealthy (50 plus million) nor do I know any black folks that are. They’re ONLY NIGGA RICH for 5-10 years then broke the rest!

 

[TCapone]

http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=390706 reply # 8

go away

NIGGA GO FUCK YOURSELF!

 

[Nevsky]

I think ultimately that MLK's method was the right on for blacks. Non violent protest was the only way to showcase just how racist and violent this country could be. If fought back like Malcolm X suggested, it would have only given the government and the racists residing in the justification they needed to bring the army in to completely subjugate the black population, and restrict our rights even further. Any armed resistence would have been crushed, and blacks would be rounded up. However with the civil rights movement's non violent protest, we were able to see more fruit from it. Although we still have a ways to go.

 

[stick.man]

I believe that King was fooled by the "illusion of inclusion" he preached a doctrine that blacks should assimilate with white culture. The problem with this philosophy was that blacks hadn't developed the skills or resources in order to be self sufficient.

When blacks finally were able to patronize white establishments the often did so to the detriment of black owned businesses. Had the black community developed their own independent infrastructure they could negotiate with whites as equals and not have to beg for acceptance.

I dont think that whites would have taken King serious if it wasn't for Malcolm. His doctrine was the lesser of two evils compared with Malcom's more defiant posture towards whites.

 

[Mo-Better]

Both paths of both leaders were needed. There were those who could not and refused to follow MLK. The nonviolence approach wasn't in them. The same for those who selected Malcolm opposed to turning the other cheek.

Malcolm never would've managed to get the ear of President Johnson the way King could. King on the other hand did meet with Johnson. Plus I'm sure Johnson was worried about the image of the country worldwide. Images of black people being beaten and washed down the streets with high powered hoses was not the image Washington wanted broadcast worldwide. An don't forget the US was knee deep at war in Viet Nam.

I don't believe MLK's plan would've succeeded without those who put it on the line to fight for their beliefs. It wasn't just MLK or Malcolm, although history wouldn't give them the credit due add in Stokely Carmichael, H. Rapp Brown, the Black Panther Party and many others history managed to omit. They all were part of the movement. A movement without people willing to die for their cause is nothing more than a parade. All these men knew that, the riots affected Washington more than we will ever know.

 

[Deacs]

nothing worth quoting

This is what I get for posting on my blackberry...*sigh*

Thank you for not caring about grammar by pointing it out

Ok, before I start in on military tactics which could be used or your possible lack of knowledge of the type of warfare that could be used, and what the government in those wars would be unable to do on their own soil... I will fully leave it alone.

For some reason, you forgot either the tactics used in revolutions, successful coups, and recent terrorists. Maybe you forgot what war truly is and its meaning, or exactly the extent of the brutality of revolutions, or the stunning American defeats in both Korea and Vietnam [anytime you have military superiority and not win is a loss, not a tie]. Or the fact that not only would they have war on both fronts, we had soldiers on both fronts as well.

Military service has taught me a few things, which were only expansions from my life before the service. So I will park this here for the time being, because truthfully, and historically, it hasn't been proved wrong. And your lukewarm comments stained with fear are among them.

There will be no further conversation with you, for I will lack patience with your kind.


I hope you truly listen to this small portion and download the full version in my signature, it is filled with truths of our people from 1965 - present.

What if there was a faction in the government whose main purpose was to play on the fears of others, incite the hatred against you, destroy your leaders [correction, destroyed your leaders], and thwart every single attempt at unity without the control of this faction, hell, they will need to successfully murder or destroy every single leader which was a threat to their way of life, those who really had a change of inciting the negroes against the White way of life, I mean, that would mean the destruction or defamation of all of its leaders which didn't play ball, and even then they may need to die... Oh yeah, COINTELPRO really did exist.

The quickest read you will ever do, the devils are in the details
COINTELPRO: THE FBI'S CONVERT ACTION PROGRAMS AGAINST AMERICAN CITIZENS
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7MI2JYSE

There were several key points which Malcolm brought up, which still rings true in the climate our condition today. It is a lesson learned by this nation when it kicked the British out, it was learned by the French, and other societies which rebelled.

Your masters will never give you your freedom without resistance. They will never respect you or have respect of you, for their is no fear in a beaten dog. Fear is a healthy component of respect. Hell, even Machiavelli said that the transgression must be big enough to ever warrant revenge... they did, they destroyed every possible general in public and one of their own public officials in the kitchen.

There is no suitable condition or solution which works for both and still is not, there has been no cure to racism, instead, the documents signed only weakened you as men because it gave us an innate handicap which is the crutch our entire society currently has.
The culture which we held before their taint on the civil rights movement and the destruction of it afterwards with their direct influenced proved it. Don't believe me? Check the stats of the Nubian family as a whole; we have successfully reversed our progress.

It is true all of our assassinated and destroyed leaders were needed, and successfully removed once their purpose was fulfilled?

Malcolm anger was stunted due to internal conditions in the NOI. stymied by his trip to Mecca and faith in religion, and later fear for his family on his return, but with that, he will always bear arms against his oppressor and murdered at the very hall before he named the names of the criminals.

Lets look at our enemy then, they gave us a compromise. They gave us the basic rights of Americans which was garnered by other races already. Rights guaranteed in our nation's founding documents. Historically speaking, the only ones who had racist doctrines placed on the books were the Japanese, whom they feared. With us they simply humored.

It was never in Martin to fight for his rights, his religious beliefs held no anger in its words, only beautiful speeches with shame to their masters... no teeth.

As also mentioned on here, Malcolm was a liberator, he believed in liberty, he believed in equal rights and your rights to protect yourself, not to have others protect you. He believed in self reliance, not receiving a hand up. He believed in showing the hypocrisy of both White and Black leaders while doing it to their face and combatting with facts, not with situations which still hasn't worked in our society.

Instead, we lost all of our generals of our factions, we looked for peace out of fear, we got toilet paper signed which gave us no real rights, then they killed their last Martyr, and since then, kept all the others paid very well with distorting our image.

Is it a coincidence Malcolm died first? or the Uncle toms after his death said 'it was the life which he lived which guaranteed his death?'

What have we truly gained? Is it more than what we lost? Or possibly unable to gain back?

We keep saying that it is right, but we haven't done it the other way to prove it wrong, and the only class of servants which hasn't been tried.

 

[auggiedoggy]

I was thinking of starting a thread just like this a few days ago but I was going to add Marcus Garvey eventhough I doubt anyone would have sided with him now.

 

[Nevsky]

I was thinking of starting a thread just like this a few days ago but I was going to add Marcus Garvey eventhough I doubt anyone would have sided with him now.

there is a small handfull that would.

 

[Garifuna]

It was never in Martin to fight for his rights, his religious beliefs held no anger in its words, only beautiful speeches with shame to their masters... no teeth.

Did Martin die before you were born, or were you just asleep back then?

 

[Deacs]

Did Martin die before you were born, or were you just asleep back then?

I was awake, and he turned the other cheek twice. He should've chopped off the limb which hit him twice.

The only one which benefits from a religion as this is a wolf which gave you the religion in the first place.

 

[Deacs]

I was thinking of starting a thread just like this a few days ago but I was going to add Marcus Garvey eventhough I doubt anyone would have sided with him now.

Add him, for he was correct as well.

 

[ClevelandDawg216]

malcolm. singing and marching, while still getting your head bust open, don't sit too well with me.

 

[divine]

because its not true.. thats why somone will knock what youve said...

Brother Malcolm(pbh) wanted change by force,then once he came from his pilgrimage he was for a peaceful change.

Dr.King was always for peace.

someone will knock what i've said

 

[Brother Blaque]

Beyond any shadow of a doubt I'd follow Malcolm X

Even Ozzie Davis said that Malcolm was our Black Manhood.
He didn't say King was, he said Malcolm was our Black manhood.

But why?

It wasn't because Malcolm taught some bullshit about loving your enemies or turning the other cheek.

Who else in the history of the world is taught to love their (white) enemy besides the brain damaged brainwashed negro in the USA?

You had a holy rolling, Brainwashed Negro preacher, a fucking preacher teaching other brainwashed Negros to love the very crackas who kept a foot up his ass.

That's some sick shit.

And I wonder how Michael...ummm Martin L. King would have been received in the Black community if the Negros back then had known that he was using Gandhi's philosophy of non-violence....but that pedophile mother fucker hated Black people too.

Look it up.

I respect what King did but If I was old enough back then I'd been 100% behind Malcolm
​

 

[Mo-Better]

malcolm. singing and marching, while still getting your head bust open, don't sit too well with me.

Exactly why I said earlier the paths of both leaders were needed. The movement was the only time I can remember the a united effort by blacks working for a common cause. Two diametrically different approaches but the same cause none the less.

I don't believe King's approach would've worked without the emergence of the Black Power Movement. Black people would still be marching and singing today had there not been the threat of revolution.

 

[Deacs]

But we never revolted. We talked about revolution, we created the idea within their minds, and folded once the leadership was murdered.

-we never did anything past a stern protest or in defense of ourselves.

-we accepted the litigation of 64 and 65 and haven't moved further in that respect.

Since then, although open sentiment is now covered in smile against us, they control our image ans what we think of ourselves.
-we successfully shunned the metallic chains for one unseen and currently of our own choosing

We keep saying that the peace that MLK garnered could only have happened without Martin, but we truthfully never backed Martin passed anything. We folded too soon

 

[GAMETHEORY]

ADDITIONAL READINGS:
# Malcolm X and James Farmer, “Separation or Integration: A Debate,” in Dialogue Magazine 3 (May 1962), pp. 14-18.
# LeRoi Jones, “What Does Nonviolence Mean?” Home: Social Essays, pp. 133-154.
# Manning Marable, “Malcolm, Martin and the Mandates of Justice,” Speaking Truth to Power: Essays on Race, Resistance and Radicalism, pp. 134-138.
# Robin Kelley, “House Negroes on the Loose: Malcolm X and the Black Bourgeoisie,” Callaloo 21 (2) 1998:419-435.
# James Baldwin, “Malcolm and Martin,” Esquire 77 (4) 1972: 94-97, 195-196, 198, 201-202.
# James Cone, Martin & Malcolm & America, Chapter 9, “Two Roads to Freedom,” pp. 244-271; Part of Chapter 10, “Nothing But Men,” pp. 272-273, 280-287; Chapter 11, “Making Their Mark: Legacies,” pp. 288-314; and “Conclusion,” pp. 315-318.
# The Playboy Interview: Malcolm X Speaks with Alex Haley (May 1963),” in Gallen, ed., Malcolm X: As They Knew Him, pp. 109-130.
# “Minister Malcolm: A Conversation with Kenneth B. Clark (June 1963),” in Gallen, ed., Malcolm X: As They Knew Him, pp. 131-134.
# Malcolm X, “God’s Judgment of White America,” in The End of White World Supremacy, pp. 121-148.
# “Muslims Press Race Separation,” New York Times, February 26, 1963, p. 3. download
# “X Marks the Spot,” Newsweek, May 6, 1963, p. 28. download
# Handler, “Malcolm X Starting Drive in Washington,” New York Times, May 10, 1963, pp. 1, 14. download
# Handler, “Malcolm X Terms Dr. King’s Tactics Futile,” New York Times, May 11, 1963, p. 9. download
# “Themes and Variations: Coffee with Malcolm X,” Wall Street Journal, May 16, 1963, p. 12. download
# Handler, “Malcolm X Scores Kennedy on Racial Policy,” New York Times, May 17, 1963, p. 14. download
# “Why Black Muslims Are Focusing on the Nation’s Capital Now,” US News & World Report, May 27, 1963, p. 24. download
# Malcolm X Disputes Nonviolence Policy,” New York Times, June 5, 1963, p. 29. download
# Malcolm X, “Muslim Teachings,” New York Times, August 25, 1963, p. SM2. download
# “3 Negro Speakers on TV Hold Kennedy Leadership Inadequate,” New York Times, June 25, 1963, p. 13. download
# Clayborne Carson, “The Unfinished Dialogue of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X,” Souls, Vol. 7, no. 1 (Winter 2005), pp. 12-19. download
# George Breitman, ed., Malcolm X Speaks, pp. 3-17.

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ccbh/mxp/mlk.html

should be good reads