Punching Nazis

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's far from CFC, and far from people who personally know you. I know in person (not including the billions of other earthlings that I don't personally know) TONS of people who hate Malcom X, and people who in particular think nothing he did helped civil rights.

Also, I actually did address it. Your point is "People listened to Martin Luther King because they're afraid of Malcom X". Then I said "Are people going to listen to moderate Muslims because of Osama Bin Laden, or is it the other way around - that Osama Bin laden (and Muslims like him) only make people hate all the Muslims even more?

I also exposed Malcom X as the fraud he was.
 
It's far from CFC, and far from people who personally know you. I know in person (not including the billions of other earthlings that I don't personally know) TONS of people who hate Malcom X, and people who in particular think nothing he did helped civil rights.

Also, I actually did address it. Your point is "People listened to Martin Luther King because they're afraid of Malcom X". Then I said "Are people going to listen to moderate Muslims because of Osama Bin Laden, or is it the other way around - that Osama Bin laden (and Muslims like him) only make people hate all the Muslims even more?

I also exposed Malcom X as the fraud he was.

I'm glad you've convinced yourself.
 
I also exposed Malcom X as the fraud he was.
You said he claimed he was articulate but since he didn't write his own book that would be impossible. But we have much better source than having to go off such proximal judgments, we have video of him speaking. He is quite articulate, incredibly so, indeed that was much of his power as a speaker. You can easily see for yourself.

It doesn't bolster your argument that Malcolm X didn't help Dr. King be seen as the better deal in one of two inevitable scenarios of black liberation by making weird claims about his articulation based on lesser evidence than seeing for yourself, and then citing that again.
 
If he couldn't write his autobiography, are there also good odds that he couldn't write his speeches - which are nothing to be proud of regardless when they're filled with that type of racism?

And whatever.
 
If he couldn't write his autobiography, are there also good odds that he couldn't write his speeches - which are nothing to be proud of regardless when they're filled with that type of racism?

And whatever.

To the best of my knowledge MLK didn't write an autobiography either.
 
Grant did his own memoirs! Great man. Capable general. Subaverage president.
 
But certainly a president you'd want to have a beer with. Or ten.
 
To the best of my knowledge MLK didn't write an autobiography either.
He never attempted to, and he didn't lie that he did, which makes him less of a fraud. It is also possible that he intended to write an autobiography but never got around to it, since he was interrupted from the task earlier than he knew.
 
He never attempted to, and he didn't lie that he did, which makes him less of a fraud. It is also possible that he intended to write an autobiography but never got around to it, since he was interrupted from the task earlier than he knew.

As opposed Malcolm X who had all of his life's ambitions behind him when he has suddenly gunned down.
 
As opposed Malcolm X who had all of his life's ambitions behind him when he has suddenly gunned down.
He had someone else write his autobiography BEFORE getting gunned down.
 
Those are two completely different forms of writing.
Sure. Someone who cannot even write an autobiography is someone I definitely wouldn't call intelligent. Period.
 
edit: directed at Tim:

I actually could. Why won't I?

First, I am mostly interested in commercial writing. To make money off my writing. The autobiography of a 25 year old is not typically going to sell for obvious reasons, especially a 25 year old who isn't even famous. It also brings up another point - that I should wait until I'm older.

Malcom X was heavily under the spot light - plenty of people would read his autobiography just because he wrote it, no matter how terrible it might be. He was also, at the time of his death, old enough to be my dad. We can't honestly say he had no idea he was going to die either. He received death threats from all sides on a regular basis.
 
How do you know he couldn't? All you know is that he didn't. That isn't the same thing.

I suppose it does provide a measure for whether or not one thinks they've lived an interesting enough life that other people should read an entire book about themselves.

I find this a questionable measure of worth.
 
How do you know he couldn't? All you know is that he didn't. That isn't the same thing.
Why did he get someone else to write his autobiography? If there was simply no autobiography at all that's one thing. Let's put it this way: If someone never goes to a university, I won't hold it against them. If someone goes to a University and only graduates because they cheated, I would hold it against them.
 
edit: directed at Tim:

I actually could.

I wasn't doubting that you could, I was suggesting that going to do so would be more productive than trailing down this rabbit hole that does nothing to disprove the premise...that being 'MLK in no way demonstrated that peaceful protest, in the absence of a violent alternative, works.' No matter how forcefully you blather about Malcom X his existence as a contemporary of MLK is not going to have not happened.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom