From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Sun May 05 2002 - 08:29:12 MDT
5140$420c1a50@pbncomputer> <000f01c1f42b$5bdf0c80$2400a8c0@catherine>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Edmund Grech wrote:
>
> Mike Lorrey wrote: <<<WHile I understand that there are many in europe who
> > don't recognise that the individual human has a right to defend themselves
> > with appropriate force, we in the US do, and we'd appreciate it if
> > know-it-all europeans stopped shoulding all over us.>>>
>
> Martin Luther King vs. Malcolm X
>
> Same Cause, yet one is revered, the other villified. Who was successful and
> why?
> The Black rights movement could lay claim to far greater cause for resorting
> to violence and still . . .
This is a popular if inaccurate view of the civil rights movement in the
US in the 60's. King was an abject failure at getting actual legislative
and judicial change beyond mere tokenism. It was not until groups like
Malcom X's and the Black Panthers scared the bejeezus out of whitey that
Civil Rights were given the fast track.
The black community reveres King as a saint, but not an actual 'hero'.
Malcom X and Hewey Newton are the heroes of those in the black community
who are adamant about their civil rights. King is primarily revered in
America as a society specifically because it is whites who still decide
what laws get passed and what textbooks get written, and they'd rather
that blacks remember King and not Malcom or Newton.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:49 MST