What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"...

keysersoze

Star
Registered
This article is a little old but still relevant.

An interview with Malcolm X’s daughter
Ilyasah Shabazz recalls other dimensions of her late father
050222_shabazz_hmed_9a.hmedium.jpg

Ilyasah Shabazz stands by a mural featuring her father,
Malcolm X, last week inside New York City's Audubon Ballroom,
the scene of his assassination on Feb. 21, 1965.


In an interview, Ilyasah Shabazz remembered her father, Malcolm X, and speculated on his reaction to hip-hop music and the hip-hop lifestyle, and Americans' views of Islam in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. — Michael E. Ross

Q: It's perhaps a little unfair to ask what you remember of your father, but what do you remember of him as a family man? So much is made of him as a fire-breathing public figure. What personal dimensions of the man can you share?

Shabazz: Of course I was in love with my father as a child. He was daddy and our house came alive in a special way whenever he walked through the door. He’d romp and play with us; my sisters and I would literally squeal with excitement when daddy came home.

Also, my father and I had a special ritual, as my mother often told many times:

In the evenings I’d wait for him at the front door. He'd come in, pick me up, throw me over his shoulder, get a plate of oatmeal cookies that my mother made from scratch, and we’d go into the den to watch the news and share the delicious cookies.

Q: What would he have made of the hip-hop lifestyle?

Shabazz: Well, I think my father would avoid the pitfall of monolithic generalities and simplistic assessments of complex movements or genres. Remember, my father was a complex man and some people wanted to reduce him to, as you suggested earlier, a “fire-breathing public figure” who, as such, had no real credibility.

I don’t know that there is a, quote, "hip-hop lifestyle." I think the music responds to complex social issues and injustices; I think it also raises complex social questions. To the extent that young people are conscious and aware of human rights issues and the problems of miseducation, I think my father would be pleased.

To the extent that history and thinking and self-pride are conveyed, he would applaud the artistic efforts. I'm certain he would encourage everyone to live lives of service to God and commitment to family and community, and to learn historical facts.

Q: The 40th anniversary observance of his passing comes in an America newly, and in some ways angrily, sensitive to Islam, related to the events of 9/11 and a variety of conflicts around the world. How do you think your father would have responded to the American reaction to Islam today?


Shabazz: Again, I think we must be careful of monolithic generalities. I don’t know that there is a quote, "American reaction" to Islam today. There is no “one American” or “one American reaction” to anything. To the extent that there is any reaction that would condemn Islam and Muslims on the basis of the tragedy of 9/11 and the travesties of wars and conflicts in the world ... well, I think my father would respond to such fallacious thinking and faulty premises the way he always did — expose them for what they are and challenge all of us to think more clearly and let our actions always be based in truth.

I think he would point out the absurdity of condemning an entire religion and applauding the trampling of the human rights of its followers ... in response to the zeal of a limited number of practitioners.

It just doesn’t make sense — no more sense than to condemn all Christians and arbitrarily round up Baptists and detain them indefinitely because a few fundamentalists bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors who provide these kinds of services to women, or to lock up all priests and condemn Catholicism because a number of clerics broke the laws of the faith and of man.

And how would he respond to the way in which the tenets of his faith are being violently corrupted by extremists?


I’m certain my father would welcome any debate about the tenets and practice of Islam. Throughout his life, he would have continued to study the faith of his choice — seeking to expand his understanding of Islam in its various dimensions. He would be a strong voice of advocacy for Muslim self-determination and freedom from oppression. By the same token, he would distinguish between legitimate liberation struggles and acts of terrorism, because Islam itself makes that distinction.

© 2008 MSNBC Interactive
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..



Q: What would he have made of the hip-hop lifestyle?

Shabazz: Well, I think my father would avoid the pitfall of monolithic generalities and simplistic assessments of complex movements or genres. Remember, my father was a complex man and some people wanted to reduce him to, as you suggested earlier, a “fire-breathing public figure” who, as such, had no real credibility.

I don’t know that there is a, quote, "hip-hop lifestyle." I think the music responds to complex social issues and injustices; I think it also raises complex social questions. To the extent that young people are conscious and aware of human rights issues and the problems of miseducation, I think my father would be pleased.

To the extent that history and thinking and self-pride are conveyed, he would applaud the artistic efforts. I'm certain he would encourage everyone to live lives of service to God and commitment to family and community, and to learn historical facts.


She should have continued.

I doubt there is any evidence that will support the notion that Malcolm would have supported, condoned or otherwise promoted some of the major features/aspects of Hip Hop, especially those misogynistic "women being bitches and hoes" themes that permeate a lot of the Hip Hop genre.

If there is evidence of such, somebody should post it.

If there is not such evidence, how can that same industry claim to support Malcolm's self-help principles, on the one hand, yet totally disrespect the "self-respect" principles which forms the basis of Malcolm's ideology, on the other ???​



QueEx
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

<font size="3">
Wonder if she has an opinion on: What would Malcom think about Ayman al Zawahiri ??
</font size>
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

<font size="3">
Wonder if she has an opinion on: What would Malcom think about Ayman al Zawahiri ??
</font size>

Like she said ...

He would be a strong voice of advocacy for Muslim self-determination and freedom from oppression. By the same token, he would distinguish between legitimate liberation struggles and acts of terrorism, because Islam itself makes that distinction.

Put Zawahiri in the latter category.

I saw that new video of his and he's talking about praising Malik Shabazz yet Malik Shabazz would want nothing to do with him :smh::angry:
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

`

Of course, we may never know what would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, & "War on Terror", What would Malcolm X have thought about Zawahiri's statements about Obamahttp://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=329715&highlight=malcolm, or what Malcolm might have thought about a lot of other things -- but one person who was on the verge of giving us some insight into the mind of Malcolm just passed away, moments, litterally, before he was about to share.



On Eve of Redefining Malcolm X,
Biographer Dies​


subMALCOLMX-articleInline.jpg

The author and historian
Manning Marable



The New York Times
By LARRY ROHTER
Published: April 1, 2011


For two decades, the Columbia University professor Manning Marable focused on the task he considered his life’s work: redefining the legacy of Malcolm X. Last fall he completed “Malcolm X: A Life of Reinvention,” a 594-page biography described by the few scholars who have seen it as full of new and startling information and insights.

The book is scheduled to be published on Monday, and Mr. Marable had been looking forward to leading a vigorous public discussion of his ideas. But on Friday Mr. Marable, 60, died in a hospital in New York as a result of medical problems he thought he had overcome. Officials at Viking, which is publishing the book, said he was able to look at it before he died. But as his health wavered, they were scrambling to delay interviews, including an appearance on the “Today” show in which his findings would have finally been aired.


MALCOLMX-1-popup.jpg

Malcolm X, the black nationalist, with his wife,
Betty Shabazz, and their daughters Attallah,
left, and Qubilah around 1962. Richard Saunders
/Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture



The book challenges both popular and scholarly portrayals of Malcolm X, the black nationalist leader, describing a man often subject to doubts about theology, politics and other matters, quite different from the figure of unswerving moral certitude that became an enduring symbol of African-American pride.

It is particularly critical of the celebrated “Autobiography of Malcolm X,” now a staple of college reading lists, which was written with Alex Haley and which Mr. Marable described as “fictive.” Drawing on diaries, private correspondence and surveillance records to a much greater extent than previous biographies, his book also suggests that the New York City Police Department and the F.B.I. had advance knowledge of Malcolm X’s assassination but allowed it to happen and then deliberately bungled the investigation.

“This book gives us a richer, more profound, more complicated and more fully fleshed out Malcolm than we have ever had before,” Michael Eric Dyson, the author of “Making Malcolm: The Myth and Meaning of Malcolm X” and a professor of sociology at Georgetown University, said on Thursday. “He’s done as thorough and exhaustive a job as has ever been done in piecing together the life and evolution of Malcolm X, rescuing him from both the hagiography of uncritical advocates and the demonization of undeterred critics.”

Over the course of a 35- year academic career, Mr. Marable wrote and edited numerous books about African-American politics and history, and remained one of the nation’s leading Marxist historians. But the biography is likely to be regarded as his magnum opus. He obtained about 6,000 pages of F.B.I. files on Malcolm X through the Freedom of Information Act, as well as records from the Central Intelligence Agency, State Department and New York district attorney’s office. He also interviewed members of Malcolm X’s inner circle and security team, as well as others who were present when Malcolm X was shot to death.

Poor health had slowed his progress, but Mr. Marable remained optimistic. “For a quarter-century I have had sarcoidosis, an illness that gradually destroyed my pulmonary functions,” he wrote in the volume’s acknowledgments. “In the last year in researching this book, I could not travel and I carried oxygen tanks in order to breathe. In July 2010, I received a double lung transplant, and following two months’ hospitalization, managed a full recovery.” (An interview with The New York Times was planned, but did not take place.)

The book’s account of the assassination of Malcolm X, then 39, on Feb. 21, 1965, is likely to be its most incendiary claim. Mr. Marable contends that although Malcolm X embraced mainstream Islam at least two years before his death, law-enforcement authorities continued to see him as a dangerous rabble-rouser.

“They had the mentality of wanting an assassination,” Gerry Fulcher, a former New York City police detective who participated in the surveillance of Malcolm X, told Mr. Marable for the book.

That is why “law-enforcement agencies acted with reticence when it came to intervening with Malcolm’s fate,” the book asserts. “Rather than investigate the threats on his life, they stood back.”

In a statement, Paul Browne, the chief spokesman for the Police Department, said, ”As much as conspiracy theorists may press to reach a sweeping, unsupported and untrue conclusion, the fact is the N.Y.P.D. was not complicit in Malcolm X’s assassination, and it’s gratuitously false to suggest as much.”

Based on his new material, Mr. Marable concluded that only one of the three men convicted of killing Malcolm X was involved in the assassination, and that the other two were at home that day. The real assassination squad, he writes, had four other members, with connections to the rival Nation of Islam’s Newark mosque — two of whom are still alive and have never been charged.

Since Malcolm X’s death, the posthumous “Autobiography,” along with “Malcolm X,” Spike Lee’s 1992 film drawn from it, has made a pop-culture hero out of the man who was born Malcolm Little. But the Marable book contradicts and complicates key elements of his life story.

Malcolm X himself contributed to many of the fictions, Mr. Marable argues, by exaggerating, glossing over or omitting important incidents in his life. These episodes include a criminal career far more modest than he claimed, an early homosexual relationship with a white businessman, his mother’s confinement in a mental hospital for nearly 25 years and secret meetings with leaders of groups as divergent as the Ku Klux Klan and the Palestine Liberation Organization.

“Malcolm X: A Life of Reinvention” shows, for instance, that at a time when Malcolm X claimed in the autobiography to have “devoted himself to increasingly violent crime” in New York, he was actually in Lansing, Mich., his hometown. Mr. Marable attributes the embroidery of “amateurish attempts at gangsterism” to Malcolm X’s wish to demonstrate that the Nation of Islam’s gospel of pride and self-respect had the power to redeem even the most depraved criminal.

“In many ways, the published book is more Haley’s than its author’s,” Mr. Marable writes, noting that Haley, who died in 1992, was a liberal Republican and staunch integrationist who held “racial separation and religious extremism in contempt” but was “fascinated by the tortured tale of Malcolm’s personal life.”

The book maintains that several chapters of the autobiography explaining Malcolm X’s evolving but still radical political vision were deleted before publication, perhaps out of Haley’s desire to produce a work that “frames his subject firmly within mainstream civil rights respectability at the end of his life.”


MALCOLM-X-2-popup.jpg

Malcolm X with Elijah Muhammad in 1961. The Marable biography adds new information about
causes behind their split

The Marable book also sheds new light on Malcolm X’s departure from the Nation of Islam and the subsequent feud with the organization and its founder, Elijah Muhammad, preceding his assassination. That split is usually attributed to theological and political differences and the jealousy of Muhammad’s children and inner circle.

But Mr. Marable also points to an episode of almost Oedipal sexual duplicity, in which Elijah Muhammad impregnated a woman Malcolm X had loved since he was a young man. “Malcolm must have felt a deep sense of betrayal,” Mr. Marable writes.

Malcolm X’s subsequent trip to Mecca in 1964 — a likely turning point in his religious evolution — was recounted in both the autobiography and the biopic. The Marable book, however, provides extensive new material about a second, 24-week trip to Africa and the Middle East later that year, drawing on Malcolm X’s own travel diary and providing details on a campaign he waged to have the United States condemned for racism in a vote at the United Nations.

As part of that effort to open a foreign front for the civil rights struggle, which was closely monitored by American governmental agencies, Malcolm X met with numerous African heads of state as well as Chinese and Cuban diplomats. The Johnson administration was so upset, Mr. Marable writes, that Nicholas Katzenbach, the acting attorney general, considered prosecuting him for violating a law that bans United States citizens from negotiating with foreign states.

“These are new facts being unveiled, showing just how serious and sustained was Malcolm’s interest in the global dimension” of the domestic civil rights struggle, Mr. Dyson said. “They really do suggest he was a subversive figure, trying to undermine the best interests of the U.S. government” in the name of a larger pan-African cause. “That is a fresh insight, one of many.”

Mr. Marable’s editor, Wendy Wolf, said Friday evening that “his every fiber was devoted to the completion of this book.” She added: “It’s heartbreaking he won’t be here on publication day with us.”


MALCOLMX-3-popup.jpg

Police photographs of Malcolm Little, 18, in 1944. The new book says he had less of a criminal
history than he claimed.









http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/02/b...ion-of-redefining-work.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..


An Excerpt from "MALCOLM X: A Life of Reinvention" by Manning Marable


‘Malcolm X’



By MANNING MARABLE
Published: April 1, 2011
in The New York Times


From Chapter 7, “As Sure as God Made Green Apples"


Malcolm may have publicly commanded his followers to obey the law, but this did little to lessen suspicion of the Muslims by law enforcement in major cities. Nowhere did tensions run hotter than in Los Angeles, where Malcolm had established Temple No. 27 in 1957. For most whites who migrated to the city, Los Angeles was the quintessential city of dreams. For black migrants, the city of endless possibilities offered some of the same Jim Crow restrictions they had sought to escape by moving west. As early as 1915, black Los Angeles residents were protesting against racially restrictive housing covenants; such racial covenants as well as blatant discrimination by real estate firms continued to be a problem well into the 1960s. The real growth of the black community in Southern California only began to take place during the two decades after 1945. During this twenty-year period, when the black population of New York City increased by nearly 250 percent, the black population of Los Angeles jumped 800 percent. Blacks were also increasingly important in local trade unions, and in the economy generally. For example, between 1940 and 1960, the percentage of black males in LA working as factory operatives increased from 15 percent to 24 percent; the proportion of African-American men employed in crafts during the same period rose from 7 percent to 14 percent. By 1960, 468,000 blacks resided in Los Angeles County, approximately 20 percent of the county’s population.

These were some of the reasons that Malcolm had invested so much energy and effort to build the NOI’s presence in Southern California, and especially the development of Mosque No. 27. Having recruited the mosque’s leaders, he flew out to settle a local factional dispute in October 1961. Such activities were noticed and monitored by the California Senate Fact-Finding Committee on Un-American Activities, which feared that the NOI had “Communist affiliations.” The state committee concluded that there was an “interesting parallel between the Negro Muslim movement and the Communist Party, and that is the advocacy of the overthrow of a hated regime by force, violence or any other means.” On September 2, 1961, several Muslims selling Muhammad Speaks in a South Central Los Angeles grocery store parking lot were harassed by two white store detectives. The detectives later claimed that when they had attempted to stop the Muslims from selling the paper, they were “stomped and beaten.” The version of this incident described in Muhammad Speaks was strikingly different, with the paper claiming that “the two ‘detectives’ produced guns, and attempted to make a ‘citizen’s arrest.’ Grocery packers rushed out to help the detectives . . . and black residents of the area who had gathered also became involved. For 45 minutes bedlam reigned.” About forty Los Angeles Police Department officers were dispatched to the scene to restore order. Five Muslims were arrested. At their subsequent trial, the store’s owner and manager confirmed that the NOI had been given permission to peddle their newspapers in the parking lot. An all-white jury acquitted the Muslims on all charges.

Following the parking lot mêlée, the LAPD was primed for retaliation against the local NOI. The city’s police commissioner, William H. Parker, had even read Lincoln’s The Black Muslims in America, and viewed the sect as subversive and dangerous, capable of producing widespread unrest. He instructed his officers to closely monitor the mosque’s activities, which is why, just after midnight on April 27, 1962, when two officers observed what looked to them like men taking clothes out of the back of a car outside the mosque, they approached with suspicion. What happened next is a matter of dispute, yet whether the police were jumped, as they claimed, or the Muslim men were shoved and beaten without provocation, as seems likely, the commotion brought a stream of angry Muslims out of the mosque. The police threatened to respond with deadly force, but when one officer attempted to intimidate the growing crowd of bystanders, he was disarmed by the crowd. Somehow one officer’s revolver went off, shooting and wounding his partner in the elbow. Backup squad cars soon arrived ferrying more than seventy officers, and a full-scale battle ensued. Within minutes dozens of cops raided the mosque itself, randomly beating NOI members. It took fifteen minutes for the fighting to die down. In the end, seven Muslims were shot, including NOI member William X Rogers, who was shot in the back and paralyzed for life. NOI officer Ronald Stokes, a Korean War veteran, had attempted to surrender to the police by raising his hands over his head. Police responded by shooting him from the rear; a bullet pierced his heart, killing him. A coroner’s inquest determined that Stokes’s death was “justifiable.” A number of Muslims were indicted.

News of the raid shattered Malcolm; he wept for the reliable and trustworthy Stokes, whom he had known well from his many trips to the West Coast. The desecration of the mosque and the violence brought upon its members pushed Malcolm to a dark place. He was finally ready for the Nation to throw a punch. Malcolm told Mosque No. 7’s Fruit of Islam that the time had come for retribution, an eye for an eye, and he began to recruit members for an assassination team to target LAPD officers. Charles 37X, who attended one of these meetings, recalled him in a rage, shouting to the assembled Fruit, “What are you here for? What the hell are you here for?” As Louis Farrakhan related, “Brother Malcolm had a gangsterlike past. And coming into the Nation, and especially in New York, he had a tremendous sway over men that came out of the street with gangster leanings.” It was especially from these hardened men that Malcolm demanded action, and they rose to his cry. Mosque No. 7 intended to “send somebody to Los Angeles to kill [the police] as sure as God made green apples,” said James 67X. “Brothers volunteered for it.”

As he made plans to bring his killers to Los Angeles, Malcolm sought the approval of Elijah Muhammad, in what he assumed would be a formality. The time had come for action, and surely Muhammad would see the necessity in summoning the Nation’s strength for the battle. But the Messenger denied him. “Brother, you don’t go to war over a provocation,” he told Malcolm. “They could kill a few of my followers, but I’m not going to go out and do something silly.” He ordered the entire FOI to stand down. Malcolm was stunned; he acquiesced, but with bitter disappointment. Farrakhan believes Malcolm concluded that Muhammad was trying “to protect the wealth that he had acquired, rather than go out with the struggle of our people.”

A few days later Malcolm flew to Los Angeles, and on May 4 he held a press conference about the shootings at the Statler Hilton. The next day he presided over Stokes’s funeral. More than two thousand people attended the service, and an estimated one thousand joined in the automobile procession to the cemetery. Yet the matter was far from resolved. If Malcolm could not kill the officers involved, he was determined that both the police and the political establishment in Los Angeles should be forced to acknowledge their responsibility. The only way to accomplish this, he believed, was for the NOI to work with civil rights organizations, local black politicians, and religious groups. On May 20, Malcolm participated in a major rally against police brutality that attracted the support of many white liberals, as well as communists. “You’re brutalized because you’re black,” he declared at the demonstration. “And when they lay a club on the side of your head, they do not ask your religion. You’re black — that’s enough.”

He threw himself into organizing a black united front against the police in Southern California, but once more Elijah Muhammad stepped in, ordering his stubborn lieutenant to halt all efforts. “Brother, stay where I put you,” ran his edict, “because they [civil rights organizations] have no place to go. Hold your position.” Muhammad was convinced that integration could not be achieved; the civil rights groups would ultimately gravitate toward the Nation of Islam. When desegregation failed, he explained to Malcolm (and later to Farrakhan), “they will have no place to go but what you and I represent.” Consequently, he vetoed any cooperation with civil rights groups even on a matter as contentious as Stokes’s murder. Louis X saw this as an important turning point in the deteriorating relationship between Malcolm and Muhammad. By 1962, Malcolm was “speaking less and less about the teachings [of Muhammad],” recalled Farrakhan. “And he was fascinated by the civil rights movement, the action of the civil rights participants, and the lack of action of the followers of the Honorable Elijah.”

At heart, the disagreement between Malcolm X and Elijah Muhammad went deeper than the practical question of how to respond to the Los Angeles police assault. Almost from the moment Muhammad had been informed about the raid and Stokes’s death, he viewed the tragedy as stemming from a lack of courage by Mosque No. 27’s members. “Every one of the Muslims should have died,” he was reported to have said, “before they allowed an aggressor to come into their mosque.” Muhammad believed Stokes had died from weakness, because he had attempted to surrender to the police. Malcolm could hardly stomach such an idea, but having submitted to the Messenger’s authority, he repeated the arguments as his own inside Mosque No. 7. James 67X listened as Malcolm told the congregation, “We are not Christian(s). We are not to turn the other cheek, but the laborers [NOI members] have gotten so comfortable that in dealing with the devil they will submit to him. . . . If a blow is struck against you, fight back.” The brothers in the Los Angeles mosque who resisted had lived. Ronald Stokes submitted and was killed.

Some of Malcolm’s closest associates were persuaded that Elijah Muhammad had made the correct decision, at least on the issue of retaliation. Benjamin 2X Goodman, for one, would later declare, “Mr. Muhammad said, ‘All in good time’ . . . and he was right. The police were ready. It would have been a trap.” But Malcolm himself was humiliated by the NOI’s failure to defend its own members. Everything that he had experienced over the previous years — from mobilizing thousands in the streets around Hinton’s beating in 1957 to working with Philip Randolph to build a local black united front in 1961–62 — told him that the Nation could protect its members only through joint action with civil rights organizations and other religious groups. One could not simply leave everything to Allah.

The Stokes murder brought to a close the first phase of Malcolm’s career within the NOI. He had become convinced that Elijah Muhammad’s passive position could not be justified. Malcolm had spent almost a decade in the Nation, and for all his speeches, he could point to no progress on the creation of a separate black state. Meanwhile, in the state that existed, the black men and women who looked to him for leadership were suffering and dying. Political agitation and public protests, along the lines of CORE and SNCC, were essential to challenging institutional racism. Malcolm hoped that, at least within the confines of Mosque No. 7, he would be allowed to pursue a more aggressive strategy, in concert with independent black leaders like Powell and Randolph. In doing so, he speculated, perhaps the entire Nation of Islam could be reborn.


From "MALCOLM X: A Life of Reinvention" by Manning Marable. Excerpted with the permission of Viking Books, the publisher.







http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/02/b...y-manning-marable.html?pagewanted=1&ref=books
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..


Manning Marable: A Brother,
a Mentor, a Great Mind​

Michael Eric Dyson recalls the pioneering scholar as a 20th-century
Frederick Douglass who nurtured and inspired talented young academics.



manningmarable.jpg




The Root
By: Michael Eric Dyson
April 2, 2011


I discovered Manning Marable as a 21-year-old freshman at Knoxville College, a historically black college I'd left my native Detroit to attend after working in factories and fathering a son during the time most college-bound kids are in school.

I was in the library stacks, browsing the sociology section, when I came upon a book that grabbed my attention: From the Grassroots: Social and Political Essays Towards Afro-American Liberation. It was clear that Marable's left politics reflected how he had baptized classic European social theory in the black experience. "Wow," I said to myself. "If Karl Marx was a brother, this is how he'd write and think."

The author photo on this intriguing book showed a young man with a handsome face that was crowned by a shock of black hair whose woolly Afro styling conjured a 20th-century Frederick Douglass. As I was to learn later, the comparison to Douglass didn't end at the 'fro, since Marable, like his 19th-century predecessor, was an eloquent spokesman for the democratic dreams of despised black people.

As I devoured Marable's brilliant work -- including his quick 1980 follow-up, Blackwater: Historical Studies in Race, Class Consciousness, and Revolution, and his pioneering 1983 work, How Capitalism Underdeveloped Black America -- I knew I was in the presence of a world-class intellectual who lent his learning to the liberation of the vulnerable masses. I was impressed that a man so smart and accomplished could so unashamedly identify with struggling black folk -- and I was really impressed that he was so young, only eight years older than I.

Years later, when he invited me to Columbia to teach as a visiting professor in the late '90s, and I recalled again to Marable my introduction to his work, he flashed that magnetic smile of his and said that he was glad his books could help a brilliant young intellectual find his way. That, of course, was vintage Marable: deflecting attention from his Herculean efforts to parse the meaning of black political destiny by embracing the promise of a younger colleague.

And that wasn't just something he did with me; Marable nurtured and guided a veritable tribe of graduate students and junior professors as they sought sure footing in the academy. He was generous with his time and insight; he had a real talent for spotting rising stars, and a genius for tutelage and inspiration, with either a bon mot if time was short or a hearty, dynamic, luxurious, sprawling conversation when you were blessed to find his inner circle.

What was remarkable about Marable is that he possessed none of the jealousies and backbiting that render the professional academic guild a highfalutin' version of hip-hop culture's lethal fratricidal tensions. Please don't be confused: Marable loved academic gossip and tidbits of underground cultural stories as much as the rest of us, but he was never mean-spirited or vicious in his often humorous relay of the folly or hubris of a colleague or acquaintance.

Marable was kind and sweet, a teddy bear of a patriarch who watched over his young charges with wise forbearance. And he proved, in the tender and enduring companionship that he forged with his life mate, the brilliant anthropologist Leith Mullings, that you can love and learn with a black woman and drink in her beauty and brains in one sweet swig.

Marable's huge hunger to tell the truth about black suffering could never be satisfied. In a relentless stream of articles, essays, newspaper columns and books, he detailed the burdens of race and class and how these forces -- along with gender, age and sexual orientation -- ganged up on black folk and mugged us at every turn, robbing us of our dignity and our right to exist without being ambushed by inequality and injustice.

Long before the term "public intellectual" became the rage, again, Marable showed us just what engaged academics worth their salt and degrees should be up to: offering sharp analysis of the social behaviors and political practices that shape or distort our democratic heritage, while encouraging the powerless to take on the mighty with pen and protest. Marable could never get enough of such work, and he taught us all how to combine sophisticated critical scrutiny and compassionate regard for the lowly, never putting either goal in jeopardy by neglecting the work that must be done to be both smart and good.

And now, even in death, Marable teaches us still. His magnum opus, his summum bonum -- what all of his books on the urgent relevance of black politics, the pitfalls and seductions of capitalism, the ironic opportunities and vices of history, the romance and ruin of culture, and the triumphs and travails of race have built up to -- is his book on Malcolm X, due out on Monday, April 4. It is now, sadly, a posthumously published masterwork that rescues the legendary leader from the catacombs of history, separating him from the hagiography of adoring acolytes and prying him free from the hateful grip of dismissive critics.

In death, Marable gives us a life's work. He speaks to us, too, in another way: the disease from which he perished, sarcoidosis, affects black folk in America far more than it does whites or other groups. Right down to his dying breath, Marable bore witness to the possibilities and pains, the privileges and limitations, of the black identity that he so brilliantly and bravely embraced.

I will sorely miss Marable as my very dear friend whom I love -- my mentor, my colleague and big brother -- and all of us will miss one of the greatest minds and one of the most forceful spirits this land and world have ever known.


Michael Eric Dyson is University Professor of Sociology at Georgetown University and the author of 17 books, including his latest, Can You Hear Me Now? The Inspiration, Wisdom and Insight of Michael Eric Dyson.





http://www.theroot.com/views/remembering-manning-marable
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..


Malcolm X's Birthday
May 19, 1925



malcolmx1.jpg



The third Sunday in May marks the celebration of Malcolm X Day. Born
Malcolm Little on May 19, 1925, Malcolm X became one of the most
outspoken and popular leaders of the black nationalist movement in
the 1960s.

Malcolm X was imprisoned in 1946 for burglary and embraced the Nation
of Islam while in prison. Upon his release in 1952, he went to the Muslim
headquarters in Chicago and met Elijah Muhammad. He then became a
prominent speaker and was assigned to Mosque Number Seven in New
York City. However, his comments following the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy resulted in his suspension and Malcolm X decided to
establish his own organization, the Organization of Afro-American Unity.

Malcolm X was a fervent supporter of black separatism and spoke eloquently
and bitterly against white people. A trip to Mecca in 1964 caused him to
modify these views and he announced that he now embraced world unity.
On February 21, 1965, he was assassinated at the Audobon Ballroom in
Harlem by members of a rival organization.

Playboy magazine published Alex Haley's interview with Malcolm X in May
1963. This interview led to Haley co-authoring The Autobiography of Malcolm
X which was published in 1965.

Malcolm X Day is celebrated in most major American cities, including
Washington, D. C. where festivities draw about 75,000 people to Anacostia
Park.



http://www3.kumc.edu/diversity/ethnic_relig/malcolm.html
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

colin on this one, but why is he so obsessed with Malcolm if all he does is tear him down and call an AUTObiography fiction. Seriously I have not heard other public figures, except maybe movie stars, have their personal writings called lies. Crabs in a barrel i tell ya
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

colin on this one, but why is he so obsessed with Malcolm if all he does is tear him down and call an AUTObiography fiction. Seriously I have not heard other public figures, except maybe movie stars, have their personal writings called lies. Crabs in a barrel i tell ya

:yes::smh:
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

She should have continued.

I doubt there is any evidence that will support the notion that Malcolm would have supported, condoned or otherwise promoted some of the major features/aspects of Hip Hop, especially those misogynistic "women being bitches and hoes" themes that permeate a lot of the Hip Hop genre.

If there is evidence of such, somebody should post it.

If there is not such evidence, how can that same industry claim to support Malcolm's self-help principles, on the one hand, yet totally disrespect the "self-respect" principles which forms the basis of Malcolm's ideology, on the other ???​



QueEx


Of course he would have disapproved of that aspect of hip-hop and rap music but, like himself, the genre is complex so I think he would have had plenty of artists he would have voiced support for, such as Common, Lupe Fiasco, and the Roots - all topselling, mainstream acts.
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

..in honor of Malcolm's birthday
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

If nationalist is the opposite of integrationist, in hindsight, black nationalist Malcolm X was more right than not.
 
Re: What would have Malcolm X thought about today's Hip-Hop, Islam, "War on Terror"..

bump_signs.jpg
 
Back
Top