Talk:Malcolm X: Difference between revisions

Remembered as "militant"

From reading his autobiography, he doesn't seem to be militant at all. Where does this come from? Is this NPOV?

I'll double that this doesn't seem NPOV to me at all. "He is most remembered for his anti-white speeches"??? Would a man "most remembered for his anti-white speeches" be standard reading for high school and college students everywhere? It seems to me that he is most remembered for his remarkable oratory, for the self-transformation recounted in his autobiography, and for being one of the great black leaders of the 20th century. I think he certainly could be accurately labelled a "militant" but I wouldn't call this NPOV. I'll come back to this and try to neutralize it a bit myself, but I'm not sure I'm the best person for the job -- we definitely could use someone to fix this page up. -- User:Thomas Mills Hinkle

I think the article is pretty accurate as it stands. When most people think of him, they remember him as the black leader that advocated violence and black supremacy (in contrast to Martin Luther King Jr). Even if he realized the error of his views, that is the lasting impression of Malcolm X to most people. I don't know about your claim about 'standard reading', I think that's an exagerration.

He didn't advocate violence, he advocated self-defense. That's a pretty big difference. 24.39.131.88 17:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

He did advocate violent "self-defense" and violent action in support of his position. That is, by definition, a militant. J. D. Redding

You're mistaken, Mr. Redding. First, Malcolm didn't advocate "violent 'self-defense'"; he advocated the use of violence in self-defense in response to violence. Your use of quotation marks is both condescending and inappropriate. Malcolm's point was that, unlike Dr. King and his approach of non-violence, he believed that violent people who attack you you should be met with violence; violence is the only language they understand.

Second, Malcolm advocated the use of "any means necessary" to achieve full human rights for African-Americans. He did not advocate "violent action in support of his position." One of his "means" was the establishment of an independent state for African-Americans, so they wouldn't have to put up with white people. Another of his "means" was approaching the African states for assistance in the United Nations to press the issue of human rights abuses in the United States. He never advocated violence for the sake of violence, or violence as a means of first resort. In fact, having read, listened to, and watched close to 100 of his speeches, I don't remember ever hearing Malcolm advocate the use of violence as a means of achieving full human rights.

Finally, "militant" does not mean what you think it means. American Heritage defines a militant as "a fighting, warring, or aggressive person." The Compact Oxford defines it as a person "favouring confrontational methods in support of a cause." Malcolm can be considered a militant by the second definition; he certainly favored confrontation. By that definition, Martin Luther King was also a militant. But neither definition mentions the advocacy of violence. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 20:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

NOT NPOV and is irrelevant to article as to opinions of how Malcolm X will be remembered. Certainly the movie will have a lasting effect on his legacy. Malcolm X is regularly assigned to high school students, incidentally. Many people remember him most specifically for his "complete" conversion to Islam that occurred after Hajj, when he discovered transcendence over racial divides.

---

"Speaking as a black man from America, which is a racist society. No matter how much you hear it talk about democracy it's as racist as South Africa or as racist as Portugal or as racist as any other racialist society on this earth. The only difference between it and South Africa: South Africa preaches separation and practices separation. America preaches integration and practices segregation. This is the only difference. They don't practice what they preach. Or as South Africa preaches and practices the same thing. I have more respect for a man who let me know where he stands, even if he's wrong, then one who comes up like an angel and is nothing but a devil."

-Our Holy Brother, Frater X:.

"I am a white American, but above all I am a Christian American. When people say that the US is a racist nation, they are perpetuating racism. There certainly is a racist society in the United States, but the American society as a whole is not racist. Colleges and sports teams and businesses are employing and educating African Americans at a greater rate than at any time in history and that trend will continue; however, when radicals like Malcolm X say things like he was 'glad' when president Kennedy died and that a 'bloody' revolution would take place to re-establish African Americans to their rightful place at the top of society, a kind of reverse racism is perpetrated: radicals that say things like that are installing a similar feeling towards whites as whites had towards blacks. I believe that blacks and whites are equal and that neither is superior or inferior, I believe that a white person can work under a black person without any feelings of strife or injustice and likewise the same with a black person under a white person. Constant calls of racism from either side pervades the vast advances of peace that we have made throughout the United States' recent history. As I conclude I pray that we may all take on an attitude of peace and love towards each other commanded by Christ, regardless of color or religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.52.142.3 (talk) 01:04, March 15, 2007 (UTC)

This "Talk" page is intended for the purpose of discussing improvements to the Malcolm X article on Wikipedia. It isn't intended to be a forum for your thoughts about Malcolm X as an individual. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 06:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Malcom X was worshiped for being a civil rights leader, however he was NO BETTER than the Klansmen who killed him. I will elaborate, because just as the Klan preached anti-Black (Sorry, Anti-African-American) propaganda, Malcom X preached Anti-White (Sorry, Oh wait there is no politically correct term for White people in America, maybe Anti-Caucasion) propagnda. People think Malcom X was a great man, he was not. He had a following of uneducated, uninformed people JUST LIKE HITLER AND LIKE THE KU KLUX KLAN (after it becam a hate group). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggibr (talk • contribs) 06:15, June 21, 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you missed the paragraph right above your comment that says "This 'Talk' page is intended for the purpose of discussing improvements to the Malcolm X article on Wikipedia. It isn't intended to be a forum for your thoughts about Malcolm X as an individual." Just in case you did, I thought I'd be helpful and post it again. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 01:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Mr Shabazz: I believe you fail to realize that in order to make the argument that the article is partisan or not, one must first prove whether or not it is true. The above comment was paraphrasing Malcom X's personality, therefore proving the article non-partisan. However, the use of cited quotes would be more beneficial in proving Malcom X's militant ideas. For example:

"...respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetary." http://www.cmgww.com/historic/malcolm/about/quotes_articles.htm That quote hardly needs to be explained. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.85.87 (talk) 01:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I just finished reading Malcolm's autobiography. Him being remembered as a militant is exactly how he prophesied people would think of him after his death. He spoke the truth about American culture. Never has there been equality and never will there be equality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.238.188.213 (talk) 05:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

And apparently there isn't any hope for it either... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.85.87 (talk) 05:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Meaning of X?

Does the X signify something in particular? I assumed it didn't, until I saw the names "Norman 3X Butler, and Thomas 15X Johnson" in this article. I'm curious what the X's (and the numbers) mean.

Back in the beginnings of the creation of the Black Muslims, they tended to use "X" instead of a last name because they claimed that their true African names had been stolen via slavery, and so they had no name to use. When there were several people in the same mosque with a name, they'd be John 2X, etc. As for the 3X Butler, etc., I can't answer that one. Nowadays, Black Muslims tend to take Arabic names and don't use the "X" so much any more. RickK 08:23, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

Also, X stands for X-drinker, X-smoker, X-Christian, etc. This is stated in the main article.

---

any doubts, "X" stands for unknown (as in mathematical excercises), since they couldnt really figure out what was their true last name, they prefered that it remained unknown.

It also represents the unknown. In mathematics the letter x is used as a variable to represent the unknown. Since most African Americans were/are unable to trace back to our orginal name, the X was used in its' place. Brother Malcom stated this once before.

To reiterate, the "X" means unknown and was used to indicate that the true surnames of one's ancestor was unknown and could never be known. The number before the "X", for example a person with the name "Donald 10X", would mean that there were 10 members of the same mosque with that first name. In such a case this individual would have been either the 10th person with that name to join the organization or the 10th person to drop his anglo-slave master name. NOTE: The meaning of the number could also represent the numberical value of the number generations of one's family known to have been held in bondage(e.g. "3X" means 3 generations of known slaves and no further information available). In practice typically the anglo-slavemaster surname was no longer used once the person "adopted" the new name so it would probably be incorrect to call someone "Norman 3X Bulter". It would be like calling Muhammad Ali by his birth name, Cassius Clay, so more than likely the source meant it as a backhanded insult (typical of the media in the 1960s).

--If you peruse the official Malcolm X website--administered by his estate--you will find many references to so-and-so 10X so-and-so, including that same name formation for the two men who murdered him.

It is also possible that source of mistakening it for a nickname or an alias. Therefore the source used the adopted name as a moniker and the person's legal name (Charles 'Lucky' Luciano). Again it was probably cited incorrectly by the source with the intent of being disrespectful.

== Malcolm X stated in an interview that his surname was his slave name, handed down from generation to generation. The transition to X represented a kind of liberation and rejection (more of an rejection I would imagine) of that slave name.

The Malcolm X documentry "Make it Plain" includes this interview and can be found on google video ==

As others have written, the "X" was intended to represent the true names that were stolen from our African ancestors when they were enslaved, and it's a replacement for the slave names that were forced upon them by the slave-owners.

As far as "Norman 3X Butler" goes, RickK is right: Norman 3X would have been the 3rd Norman to join a particular Mosque, hence the 3 to distinguish him from Norman X and Norman 2X. Norman Butler was probably his given name at birth, so the use of "Norman 3X Butler" is a mish-mash of his two names. That usage probably started in police reports, newspaper articles, or court proceedings. Malik Shabazz 07:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

In math, X could be solved by an equation. The ancestry of a african-american being "can never be unraveled", so therefore has no algebraic solution. Or does it? Recently, Oprah Winfrey's roots were partially traced back to her african tribe, though they didn't find her original last name. Is this the first step to finding the meaning of X? What exactly does the future hold?--Black and Proud 05:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

We in the West go by patrilineal descent. It would be relatively easy to locate the places that have people that are statistically most similar. But if all of your great-grandparents came from different groups what would your true "home town" be? Unless there was some quirk in your or your brother's Y-chromosome that could be traced to one group, then you wouldn't be able to say where the great-grandfather in the line of lineal descent came from. But assume that you could somehow trace all your great-grandfathers and three of them came from Malawi but one of them came from an Ainu community in northern Japan. Would it be appropriate to adopt a surname from that community? What if your ancestry traced back to a group that does not use surnames? Maybe it would be better to do what many people like my childless friend who had what she called "play children" all over Philadelphia and turn it around a bit by adopting yourself into a family that you feel you really belong to? P0M 16:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Umrah or Hajj?

Was Malcolm's Mecca experience a Hajj or an Umrah? (In other words, did it take place during Dhu Al-Hijjah, or some other time of year?) An anon altered the Umrah reference to Hajj, but I'm not sure which is correct. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 02:34, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well... he returned home w/ the title "El Hajj" so I'm pretty sure it was the Hajj and not the Umrah.

I am asking teh same question did he do the hajj or the umrah this information needs to be checked because hajj is hajj and umrah is umrah and we need accuracy. the title could be symbolic and the title is not a religious one so it has no factual relevance.--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 07:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Doesnt one have to be a muslim to perform hajj in the first place? i dont understand how he made hajj BEFORE he became a muslim. d riffat

From his autobiography (p. 338, in the chapter "Mecca"): "I only knew what I had left in America, and how it had contrasted with what I had found in the Muslim world. About twenty of us Muslims who had finished the Hajj were sitting in a huge tent on Mount Arafat. As a Muslim from America, I was the center of attention. They asked me what about the Hajj had impressed me the most. One of the several who spoke English asked; they translated my answers for the others. My answer to that question was not the one they expected, but it drove home my point." He was a muslim before the hajj, but the experience changed a lot of his ways of thinking about islam (and other things). He describes being interviewed before begin allowed to enter mecca: "I...learned that the Hajj Committee Court had been notified about my case, and that in the morning I should be there. And I was. The Judge was Shiekh Muhammad Harkon. ... He not only recognized me as a true Muslim, but he gave me two books...He recorded my name in the Holy Register of true Muslims." (autobiography, p. 335) Doctormatt 19:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Publication Date for "Autobiography of Malcolm X"

The article says that the "Autobiography of Malcolm X" was published in 1972, but this cannot be true. This was on our reading list when I was a Junior in High School in and, at that point, it was available in paperback. The NY Times reported today (14-May) that it was published in 1965, which seems likely to be correct.

There will most probably be different published versions of the book as it gets re published throughout the years, 1972 may well be a re print year?

It was published in 1965. That's the copyright date, and it's cited that way in every bibliography I've ever seen. Malik Shabazz 20:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Doesnt one have to be a muslim to perform hajj in the first place? i dont understand how he made hajj BEFORE he became a muslim.

Assassination

"Angry on-lookers in the crowd caught and beat the assassins as they attempted to flee the Ballroom" - they caught them and beat them, and they were never charged for the murder? Not even their identity is mentioned in the article. (clem 11:46, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC))

Regarding the proposed merger of the various articles: I propose creating a new article, maybe "Assassination of Malcolm X" or "Assassins of Malcolm X", to include an account of Malcolm's assassination, details about the three men tried and convicted for his murder, and whatever else may be deemed relevant. This article is already very long, and I don't see how it would benefit from the addition of details about the men's lives and fates. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 04:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I certainly agree. Malcolm X lived in fear from the time he was outsed from the Black Muslims until the time of his death. A new article describing the deatils of the assassination as well as information about the killers and their possible motives will give anyone interested in Malcolm X's life and his influence on American culture, and the world in general a better idea of what happened and why it is important. Nickiesncream 19:41, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Did I miss anything in the news about Louis Farrakhan being cleared of any/all suspicion for Malcolm X's murder? If I did, that would explain his total absence from the Assassination section. So, of course, would a heavy bias by Wiki "editors."— Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.137.215 (talk • contribs) 08:29, July 15, 2007 (UTC)

Only three people were charged with the assassination: Norman 3X Butler, Talmadge Hayer, and Thomas 15X Johnson. Others in Elijah Muhammad's inner circle are believed to have orchestrated the assassination, including John Ali (national secretary of the NOI and a suspected FBI informant), Farrakhan, and perhaps Muhammad himself. Wikipedia articles have to be based on reliable sources, not speculation or conspiracy theories, which is why Ali, Farrakhan, and Muhammad aren't mentioned in the Assassination section. I suppose we could add a subsection about conspiracy theories, or alternate theories of the assassination, and refer to reliable sources that document the existence of those theories. Hmmm.... — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 19:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Conspiracy?

No mention is made of a possible assassination conspiracy along the lines of MLK, RFK and JFK. Personally (since I think there was one) I think this shuld be added.

• Well, find us some encyclopedic sources backing up the conspiracy theory and write up a new paragraph. Shouldn't be too hard -- I've heard such rumors for a long time. But what I may have heard and what you may think isn't what matters, of course; WP:NOR. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 04:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

If you ask me, it makes "sense" [in a way], that the CIA or so assassinated him. I mean, if hundreds of thousands [or even more] of Blacks would have converted to Islam because Malcolm X did, the US government would NOT have liked that. The USA had problems with Islam already back then. So he had to die.

Maybe he is a martyr for Islam, but I am 100% sure, that not nearly as many Blacks converted to Islam after his death, as Blacks would have if Malcolm X lived, so he could "make" them convert to Islam... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.255.31.12 (talk) 01:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

Got out of Prison?

Article doesn't mention he went to prison, when, or for what. Is there an assumption that if you get "involved in drugs, ..., and robbery" in New York you automatically go to prison?

Please sign your postings with ~~~~. P0M 03:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

In one of his first jobs, Malcolm "was making more money putting [shoeshine] customers in touch with prostitutes than he was in polishing their shoes." (Malcolm, by Bruce Perry, p. 53.

He was apprehended pimping to a serviceman (actually an undercover policeman), but let off with a warning. (Malcolm, p. 69)

He convinced the Army that he was mentally unfit for service, and thereby evaded the draft. Malcolm', by Bruce Perry, p. 74)

He apparently engaged in homosexual acts for money. Malcolm', by Bruce Perry, p. 77f. See also p. 82f.)

In 1944 he stole a coat from a relative and was sentenced to a three-month suspended sentence and a year's probation. Malcolm', by Bruce Perry, p. 84)

In 1946 Malcolm was sentenced, concurrently, to several counts of armed robbery and sentenced to 8-10 years in prison at hard labor. Malcolm', by Bruce Perry, p. 101. He entered prison in February of 1946.

By some time in 1949 he had been recruited by the Nation of Islam.

He was released on parole in 1952. Malcolm', by Bruce Perry, p. 140)

Red hair and conking

Malcolm', by Bruce Perry, p. 50f, details how Malcolm first got his hair "conked," and how painful it was. He continues:

But Malcolm's first look in the mirror quenched the pain, for his hair was as smooth and straight "as any white man's". It was also bright red. Now he could be prouind of the nickname "Red."

Malcolm's younger brother had red hair. (Malcolm', by Bruce Perry, p. 80)

• I would not include all this talk about who his parents liked best and who gave him "hell". Also, the color of his hair as a child and that it looked reddish in the summer are not noteworthy enough for a Wiki entry. I would delete all this:

As Malcolm was the lightest child in the family, he felt that his father favored him; however, his mother gave him more hell for the same reason.[4] One of his nicknames, "Red," derived from the reddish tinge of his hair. He was described as having, at birth, "ash-blonde hair ... tinged with cinnamon," and at four, "reddish-blonde hair." His hair darkened as he aged, but resembled the hair of his paternal grandmother whose hair "turned reddish in the summer sun."[5] Gandydancer 01:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It appears that the mixture of lye, potatoes, and eggs reduced the brown component of his natural hair color and let the red component shine through. P0M 03:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Sexuality

There's an article in The Guardian website giving a case that Malcolm X may have been gay or bisexual. Check it out. [1]. Should this theory be included in the article? Stancel Spencer 02:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The Guardian piece is based entirely on the writings of Bruce Perry, whose book I have read. He devotes a few pages to the possibility. The best that can be said is that perhaps, when he was a young hustler in Boston and New York, Malcolm got involved with a couple of guys for money. The evidence is terribly weak. I do not incline to mention it at all. Uucp 04:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I remember reading a book years ago by an old acquaintance/friend of Malcolm X's--can't recall his name; may have been Berry--in which the author asserts that Malcolm X was involved with transvestites. I can't recall whether it was for money or not, but I do remember that this guy said that Malcolm had told him excitedly "They [perform oral sex]!" Even if this is true, I don't think this necessarily means all that much. Just wanted to throw that out there

Malcolm X is definately not 'gay'. Such a rumor about a strong black leader that spoke of freedom had a wife, didn't he? And children?didn't he have children?And for that article,i will have nothing to do with it. as far as i'm concerned, the author resulted to racism, and tried to attack the black community, based on his ridiculous story. I will leave it at that. --Black and Proud 04:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

You can get married and have kids while being gay. It was common to have closeted homosexuals marry people of the opposite sex before the 1990s, and even have sex, though they probably didn't enjoy it. And you can be strong while being gay, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.66.161.156 (talk) 01:46, February 28, 2007 (UTC)

1) The last comment is right on all counts. Being married and having children, especially in the past, is/was no indication of one's sexual orientation. And being gay doesn't mean that one can't be a "strong Black leader." Read about Bayard Rustin or Barbara Jordan.

2) I don't think anybody has suggested that Malcolm X was gay. Perry's biography — which was based on hundreds of interviews with people who knew Malcolm during different periods of his life — alleges that Malcolm engaged in sex with other men when he was a young man. According to the Kinsey Report, that was true of 37% of the men in the study.

3) Perry's book has been criticized for its sensationalism. For example, more than one page is spent discussing the color of Malcolm's eyes (!). No biographer beside Perry has written about these alleged sexual encounters. On the other hand, because of his extensive interviews, Perry may have had the best primary sources of any of Malcolm's biographers.

4) Most importantly, Malcolm's sexual activity as a young man has no bearing on why he is notable or why he continues, more than 40 years after his death, to be an important figure in America. He is not known for his sexuality or his views on sexuality, and I think that adding these allegations has no value other than titillation. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 19:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Surely bisexual, on the evidence. Doesn't need wider coverage than it already has in the article but appropriate project coverage is warranted.SupaPlaya —Preceding comment was added at 11:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

This page is constantly undergoing vandalism. Unless anyone has a better idea I would like to add semi-protection (i.e. editing of this article by unregistered or newly registered users is disabled) - Robogymnast 23:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

---

I saw that as well. I'm in agreement for the protection.JayPetey 04:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

---

What do you expect, he is controversial.

Honestly, I see no more vandalism on this page than I do on the pages of other black American historical figures. Protection may be warranted on the lot of them. Uucp 15:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

protect the page, any critical liberator of Africans will need our protection, we fail to protect him then the least we can do is protect him now!--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 06:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

---

I am not an expert but from experience with running my home pc network i think (i am not sure) that someone may be going through (the isp listed above) network in order to have many ips to bug us. If i am wrong delete this but i am just posting what i think Jesse60905 06:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

proposed malcolmite section

there is a term Malcolmite for those who follow X, such as Maulana Karenga. Also this can be a cat for those who are malcolmites. need research--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 06:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

missing section popular culture

this section is so needed it actually would have to be a seperate page, music from PE to Spike Lee, the X hats, the slogans the poster. Did you see his quote in V for Vendetta. this needs to be a stub here and a sep article.--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 07:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

---

No I didn't. Other than the sound bite in the credits of course. But I didn't see any other quote? The book is far better than the film anyway, but I wonder if even that had any references to Malcolm. --AYBGerrardo 12:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Elijah Muhammad links

Why are there six links at the very bottom of this article to a single site that is reverential toward "Messenger" Elijah Muhammad? They may (or may not) be appropriate for the article on Elijah Muhammad, but they are not appropriate here. Malik Shabazz 00:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Good point. Remove them. Uucp 01:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I tried but I can't. Evidently they're part of Template:Nation of Islam, which probably is appropriate for an article on Malcolm X. I'll take it up on that page. Malik Shabazz 05:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I could be wrong but...

Wasn't Malcom X a rapper? Sunshine 17:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Rap wasn't around back in the mid-60's. Chairman Sharif 17:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure? I remember a couple years ago, a friend of mine took too many pills and started yelling a bunch of stuff. I'm pretty sure "Malcom X is a rapper" was one of the things he said. If rap wasn't around in the mid-60's, are you denying that the Beatles were one of the first great rap duets? Sunshine 17:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Please don't feed the troll. Malik Shabazz 17:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not appreciate that. Doesn't you calling a fellow wikiuser a troll constitute a violation of the policy of no personal attacks?

I am not a troll, I simply want to know the facts and eliminate any confusion that I, as well as other users, may have. Sunshine 17:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Even though you are extremely wrong, you have the right not to be called a troll. PS. tell your friend to get off those pills.--Black and Proud 04:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Re Sunshine: You're an idiot. But not a troll.

Alpha sort in categories

In the various Wikipedia categories, Malcolm X is listed under "X". In most non-Wikipedia references (bibliographies, encyclopedias, dictionaries, etc.), he is found under "M". Malik Shabazz 17:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

MALCOM X

IM doing a report on Malcom X —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.66.200.64 (talk) 22:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

Good for you...--Jayson Virissimo 21:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I am also!

Conspiracy Theories

I changed the reference from about the possibility of US Government involvement in Malcolm X's murder from 'Conspiracy Theories'to 'Theories'. The reason for this is beacuse by definition the fact that three people murdered malcolm X is in itself a conspiracy. The use of the term 'Conspiracy Theories'only serves to frame such theories in an unflattering light and lump them with some more ridiculous notions of conspiracy. john geraghty 23 February 11.47am GMT

That's a good edit, but I think the sentence is a good example of the use of weasel words, especially its placement in the lede. "There are several theories positing the involvement of elements of the United States Government." Okay, so what are they? The article doesn't mention any of them, except an oblique reference to a police report that "disappeared." Who has advanced the theories? Are they credible, or are they part of the tin-foil hat crowd? The article would benefit a great deal if (a) it had a section — or at least a paragraph — that described the conspiracy theories and who has advanced them, or (b) the sentence was removed. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 18:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Wrong Citation

It says for the "no realistic goal for a nigger" quote that it is from page 36 in the Autobiography, it is actually from page 38.

I'm not going to change it until somebody else verfies

Peter Young

There are many different editions of the Autobiography. The quote may be on page 38 in your edition, page 40 in my edition, and page 36 of the edition of the editor who added the footnote in the first place. Ideally, the footnote should mention which edition the editor is citing, but often people don't do that, especially if they don't realize that different editions exist or that the pagination is different.

You can change the footnote if you'd like, or you can leave it. It's your choice. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 18:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep it as is, I didn't realize there was more than one edition, the only ones I've seen are all the same.

Thanks for the quick update.

Opera

I think that Anthony Davis's "X: The Life and Times of Malcolm X" should be mentioned in the popular culture section. 72.200.75.111 23:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Martin Luther King Jr

Was it true that Malcolm X hated King？i read somewhere-i couldn't remember which article-that when King read his 'i have a dream speech', Malcolm answered "When he was having dreams, we Negroes were having nightmares." Could someone please clarify? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.48.215.96 (talk) 02:56, March 17, 2007

(1) It's true that Malcolm X mocked the March on Washington and Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech. I don't remember the exact words off-hand, but you've got the gist of it.

(2) I don't think that they hated one another on a personal level. At the time (August 1963) they disagreed on the best means to improve the situation of African-Americans.

(3) After he left the Nation of Islam, Malcolm X reconciled with Martin Luther King. They happened to meet once, in Washington DC in 1964, and a famous picture of the event was taken. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 20:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The United States government was set up on the basis of insights that the founding fathers had into "politics" as "things that we have to deal with," and one of the regularities they observed was that policies (decisions) are often not the result of "the decider" deciding something. (That's the way that a monarchy works.) Instead, people pull on a policy issue from two or more directions, and wherever their individual powers move the center then that's where the policy lands. Imagine a game like tug of war except that there is a ring to which many different ropes are attached. Everybody tries to pull the ring so it will center over what each of them regards as the best choice. Some people pull on the west rope for a while and then discover that the ring has gone too far west so they may run around and help pull on the east ring. If other people want to pull the ring to the north or to the south they may have no problem unless both east and west keep pulling the ring back toward the center.

Malcolm X had the organized capability to use force, but he had his supporters under very tight discipline so that they "pointed the bow but did not fire the arrow." Martin Luther King had the spiritual vision to call for a revitalization of the values that many people in white society only gave lip service to, but he did not imagine that he could merely make resounding speeches. His followers were the ones who got assaulted by the establishment forces. There was lots of tension between the viewpoint that said, "by any means possible" and the viewpoint that said, "by the power of our higher natures," but Malcolm X did not let his principle fall to the default value of gunfire and Martin Luther King did not let his principle rise to the default value of "depending passively for all things on the Lord." What would have happened at some crucial moment if the threat of Malcolm X using open force was actualized by a full-scale attack on Martin Luther King and his group and/or by the loss of Malcolm's discipling hand? What would have happened at some crucial moment if the restraint of MLK on his group to use non-violent confrontation had been lost by a racist attack on Malcolm X and/or by the loss of MLK himself? Considerations of symmetry are poor grounds for founding a conspiracy theory. Nevertheless, I wonder what would have happened if either MLK or MX had been spared. As things worked out, the death of both leaders resulted in damage to both the yang side and the yin side of the balance between their efforts. However, Malcolm's side suffered more disruption. The center moved a little.

I don't know how Martin Luther King felt about the values that Malcolm X espoused, and vice-versa. However, since both men were at the top of the "game" of power and politics it is difficult to imagine that either missed the complementary nature by which the other's actions benefited his own efforts. And, for what it's worth, I see Malcolm X as an angry person, but not a hateful person. His anger was directed at malefactors, not at "the competition." P0M 21:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

We should see about getting a copy of that image into this article.--Sefringle 04:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Malcom - don't forget the silent l

(Moved from top of talk page)

Could one of you admin guys edit the source to at least spell his name right in all places in the text. It's Malcolm not Malcom. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Notmalcom (talk • contribs) 10:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

You seem to have found some - go for it yourself. That's why it's called "the encyclopedia anyone can edit." KrakatoaKatie 11:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

A misaligned view of history?

From the autobiography, Malcom X had a view of history that more or less blames "the white man" for all the worlds social ills. The slave trade in Africa, the hardships of this or that people, blah blah.

For instance, in one part of the Autobiography it is stated that the white man invaded northern africa and abused the Muslims there. This is true, but that part of Africa had seen a time BEFORE Islam, and Islam had rode across North Africa, conquering and converting, even getting so far as France before being pushed back by Charlemagne.

He blames the "white man" for suffering in China in another part. Yet, while he may not of even been able to know this at the time, I agree, Mao Zedong once ordered peasants to stop growing food and make steel so as to keep up with America's industrial power. 30 million people starved to death. Thats more than the Russian genocide (against the farmers who resisted collectivization) and the German Holocaust combined. Malcom X also forgets that Egyptians once held Hebrew slaves in similar bondage to America's version of African slavery, he forgets that Africans had been dealing in enslaving each other since Roman times, and that Persia once too conquered vast swaths of land and enslaved and/or oppressed people of Eurasia.

Shouldn't it be mentioned here that he was not especially accurate in his interperations of history? Or maybe in the article on the Autobiography? Any who reads the Autobiography may to believe that all white people are somehow evil, or that the culture is evil, or just generally lose sight of history.

I know some people actually do believe X's version of history: I point out that if they gave me a translator and took away all European-descendant history books and articles, I could go to the former great empires of the world and come away with the same history. Egypt kept fabulous historical accounts until Islam showed up (which still kept the books, ableit with heavy religious zeal), and going to Asia would not bring away a vastly different account at all! Hell, as someone who knows people who work in the field of Chinese history, most of what we know is either translations or archaeology!

Signed by Scryer_360, to lazy and tired to sign in. He wonders: why does the Starbucks coffee run out so fast? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.152.173.22 (talk) 05:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

The Autobiography was just that, an autobiography and an explanation of Malcolm's views. Anybody who relies on it as an account of world history, or genetics, or science does so at her or his own risk. Why should Wikipedia include a disclaimer to that effect? Are there similar disclaimers elsewhere? — Malik Shabazz | Talk 18:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

And if you read his biography, you will see that he, himself, disavowed the notion that "whiteness" was responsible, rather than just evil. He comes to this conclusion after the Hajj.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.137.215 (talk • contribs) 08:17, July 15, 2007 (UTC)

Malcolm X's Achievements

The section titled Malcolm X's Achievements seems to me to be calling out for the contents to be merged into the other sections. It is poorly written and doesn't really seem to be a description of his 'achievements'. I will try to take what is written there and place it elsewhere in the article. Fanra 11:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

This is a good web site for information on history.

Archived Older Subjects

I've archived older subjects. See the Archive box to the right of the table of contents. If any subject is archived that you feel should be continued to be discussed here, please start a new discussion on it here. Thank you. Fanra 11:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for cleaning up the mess :-) — Malik Shabazz | Talk 16:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Typos

The article is protected, so I cannot arrange it. There are a cople of misspellings of his name, Malcom instead of Malcolm. --83.32.68.37 08:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've fixed it. Note that one instance of this is in the title of an article, so we can't fix that. Cheers, Doctormatt 15:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Photograph / 'By Any Means Necessary'

The caption by the photograph of Malcolm X with an M1 simply says that he's looking out a window and that this image is often on t-shirts with the quotation "by any means necessary." While both of these are true statements, it is important to note that the photograph was taken when Malcolm was guarding his family following a series of death threats. The juxtaposition of this picture with "by any means necessary" has fueled the myth that Malcolm X advocated violent revolution -- this is simply not the case. The quotation was from a speech in which Malcolm X told listeners we must "liberate our minds by any means necessary." This statement had nothing to do with the image of him holding an M1. The two events have only been joined in the pop culture. Since the page is protected, will an admin please edit this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.39.131.88 (talk • contribs) 17:47, May 20, 2007 (UTC)

• What specific edits do you recommend? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

comment

Malcolm's last name was Little not Large and he had nothing to do with the Ku Klux Klan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.13.25.90 (talk • contribs)

he was...

it seems inherentely biased to only list Malcom X in relation to the Black Muslims in the intro's definition of his person. He was notable even after he broke with the group, and it was a out-spoken advocate for african american rights nearly on-par with Dr. King that he is generally famous as. VanTucky ^(talk) 05:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

"Black Muslim"

I think it may be incorrect to refer to Malcolm X as a "Black Muslim." I'm currently reading his autobiography, and he disavows that phrase numerous times; he frequently mentions it's a label invented by the press. He calls himself a Muslim and a member of the Nation of Islam, but never a "Black Muslim." Casuallyobserving 17:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The name "Black Muslims" is way most non-members refer to members of the Nation of Islam. Per Black Muslims: "The Nation of Islam never appreciated being labeled "Black Muslims" and years afterward publicly denounced the title but as Malcolm X (the head preacher of the New York mosque) stated, 'the name stuck.'" (Similarly, most members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are referred to as Mormons, and their church is referred to as the "Mormon Church", even though those are terms the Church avoided for a very long time. See Mormon#Popular usage.) — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 22:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Removed conservative party campaign 'quote'

I removed the conservative party campaign leaflet quote in the UK travels section. The source is just a generic A-level (UK college qualification) text source. If anyone can find a better source, or feels the removal was unnecessary, please feel free to put this section back.

Merger proposal concerning Malcolm X assassination

Six articles related to the assassination of Malcolm X — Norman 3X Butler, Leon David,Talmadge Hayer, Thomas 15X Johnson, Hayer affidavits, and Wilbur McKinley — are stubs. I propose the following merger:

• Merging the four articles into a single article
• Adding some context from Malcolm X#Assassination
• Renaming the article Assassination of Malcolm X or Assassins of Malcolm X or something similar
• Possibly including, and expanding, some of the material in Malcolm X#Conspiracy theories

Please leave your thoughts or comments at Talk:Hayer affidavits#Merger proposal. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 03:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Rage Against the Machine

The song "Wake Up" by Rage Against the Machine contains the line "you know they murdured X and tried to blame it on islam". Would this be relevant for the popular culture section? 71.174.94.2 06:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

More popular culture refs

"We got love for those with love for us" -- Method Man, I forget which album and song (probably Retro Godfather or Judgement Day) Method Man is in the Wu Tang Clan which is often linked to Malcolm. Said quote reflects, and I assume is directly borrowed from, Malcolm’s

"I believe in the brotherhood of man, all men, but I don't believe in brotherhood with anybody who doesn't want brotherhood with me. I believe in treating people right, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to treat somebody right who doesn't know how to return the treatment."

I don't have any sources to back up my argument AYBGerrardo 17:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Impact on civil rights movement

I know it's debatable but surely it should say somewhere the different arguments for how he helped/hindered the movement. I know it would be hard, almost impossible, to have NPOV but there really isn't much mention of that of MLK, du Bois, etc Surely we've got to change that --AYBGerrardo 11:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:LGBT African-Americans

The above should be added in per what's revealed in the discussion on 'sexuality' above and considerable evidence outing this person for his seasonal bisexuality (esp in earlier life). Any good reason not to?SadButSoTrue 03:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

His dad

His dad Earl Little was killed by the KKK y Scocal studies teacher told me! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.241.247.30 (talk) 17:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

God bless him

he knew exacly the problem he would be happy about the blacks and whites are together he now whatching over us.

Did you see the Malcom X movie? i'll give you 3 seconds

1...2...I'm gona say 3.