xband
Gold Member
- Jan 5, 2016
- 6,200
- 1,467
- 140
I wasn't trying to prove a point, i was just pointing out that malcolm x and MLK had very different opinions on non violence. Malcolm x was a socialist revolutionary who advocated a violent overthrow of the system, while MLK was a christian preacher who advocated non violence and was basically ignored by the government and the media, until riots began breaking out and the establishment used MLK to negotiate for reform, rather then revolution. Its doubtful that nonviolence by itself wouldve done anything since slavery had been around 400 years (and was pretty nonviolent) if it wasn't for violent protests they wouldve never listened to MLK. The same way the british would never listened to ghandi if there wasn't already a civil war brewingIt is likely that Farrakhan had Malcolm X assassinated.
No, that was Elijah Muhammad.
I was going to joke about that though. This is coming from the leader of a cult that killed Malcolm Little, who was undoubtedly the best voice for the interests of the black community in the 20th century.
In a lot of ways Malcolm X was like Martin Luther King and neither advocated violence to achieve their goals. Sadly enough both were assassinated during the prime of their life.
You just proved my point. I am exactly like Malcolm X, hit me on the cheek and I hit back rather than turning the other cheek.
Great Britain did one good thing before it got out of India. Took the west part of India and created Pakistan and took the east part of India and created Bangladesh where the Muslims were forced to move to. The Muslim problem still exists today.