Martin or Malcolm

Whom do you prefer?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=cC33gH6RE5k
youtube.com/watch?v=M5FR1LGsT7E
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Hard to say, as they're both dead.

we like the Captain here

this. Who cares about Ameriburgers

>MLK
5'7
>M X
6'4

the answer is obvious

They were both shit

Malcolm X.
King was a hypocrite. He contradicted everything he said by being pro-Israel

That

Malcolm X, because he left behind an "autobiography" (ghostwritten, but he was heavily involved with the writer) and it's a damn good story. I feel like I know the guy, even though he died decades before I was born.

MLK was great and all, I'm sure, but I have no personal connection with him. Plus he constantly cheated on his wife. To my knowledge, although their marriage was sometimes strained, Malcolm X never did.

I prefer MLK but he lost in the end

Blacko whackos not for me thanks

>Plus he constantly cheated on his wife.
Paraphrasing from LBJ but if the FBI arrested every southern preacher with a mistress they'd have to build more jails. His infidelity has nothing to do with his civil rights cause.

>Raping children is only "infidelity".

>MnM.jpg
>Who do you prefer?

Eminem.

youtube.com/watch?v=cC33gH6RE5k

Malcolm X is more interesting and wasn't a commie.

Never said it did.

But I think loyalty to your loved ones is pretty fucking important, so it sure makes me dislike him as a person.

The question was "Who do you prefer?" not "Who ultimately did more for the Civil Rights Movement?"

this.

MX because he actually made self improvements.

>preach peace
>get shot

>preach war
>then learn the error of your ways and preach peace
>get shot

negros when will they learn

Booker T Washington was better than both. He would have actually fixed the long term issues between white and black americans, rather than getting a short term political success at the expense of actual mutual understanding.

>follow Booker T
>advance black culture
>all of it either gets appropriated or ignored
>"why can't negros into culture?"

and that's why he usually gets ignored

>Loyalty to your loved ones is pretty fucking importan

Polyamory isn't for everyone. In my opinion however, Dr. King's cheating doesn't necessarily manifest evil desires. Love is love, sex is sex, and any man with a robust libido likes a strange 18 year old pussy as much as he loves his wife. As long as said wife is treated well and not neglected at home, I can't condemn a man looking for something on the side.

Blacks not having a distinct culture and identity would be leagues better than them having what they do now.

What they have now is rights as actual citizens unlike back when they followed BT where Black codes, Jim Crow, and race laws were a common thing.

was sort of a negative reinforcement you brought

>While the civil rights movement fought against racial segregation, Malcolm X advocated the complete separation of African Americans from whites. He proposed that African Americans should return to Africa and that, in the interim, a separate country for black people in America should be created.

Malcom X stood for something of substance. MLK was a man of platitudes and plagiarism. But thanks to MLK I know what streets to avoid.

Malcolm X but both eventually realized equality was an economic issue rather than a race issue.

Interesting both were assassinated shortly after transition from race relations to class relations.

Neither, because I'm not black. It's like asking blacks who they prefer, George Lincoln Rockwell or George Wallace?

Why would you have to be black to have an opinion on two historical figures?

>read autobiography of Malcolm X
>was a gangster in Harlem in the late 50s
>Being a gangster is fucking awful I don't miss it at all

>Read wise guys (the autobiography Goodfellas was adapted from)
>Was a gangster in Brooklyn in the 60s
>Being a gangster is fucking awesome, I miss it every day

Which one is it?

Neither. I used to be a Malcom supporter and then I found out what the NOI actually is, how it interacts with islam and why actual muslims killed him.

Makes a shit tonne more sense now then it did when I first learnt about him. Anyone who joins NOI is automatically disregarded as mentally challenged and easily misguided.

Good speakers tho.

But he left NOI????

>Neither. I used to be a Malcom supporter and then I found out what the NOI actually is, how it interacts with islam and why actual muslims killed him.

u wot m8
malcolm was killed by NOI (or at least members of it) after converting to sunni islam

t. niceguy beta who gets 0 clam

Yeah, net operating income's a bitch.

>Everyone must think like I do

>/pol/

MX was a douchebag idiot, and MLK was a decent guy. Not understanding all the backwards opinions of this thread.

Because you don't know shit about either beyond your grade school education on the civil rights movement.

Hands down Malcolm

Unlike King he saw America for what it is and had no illusions with regards to the status of blacks in that society. His militancy helped scare the whites in power enough to allow the Civil Rights Act to pass, without leaders like him it's doubtful the law would have come to passage. Also he wasn't a communist like most the Civil Rights leaders.

Wrong. Debate me and you will lose.

Malcolm X, because he died sooner.

It'll end up the other way.

He certainly wasn't pro-capitalism.

Martin

>tfw we never got the alliance between MLK and chilled-out post-Pilgrimage Sunni Malcom X

It's just not fair.

I'd still say MX, though. Make It Plain was a GOAT-tier documentary, and gave me a totally new view and respect for the man.

I choose MLK

Most people oppress blacks because "they are all violent thugs" so naturally MLK though "why not don't be violent thugs?" thus depriving the bigots of their excuses for taking rights away.

MX is ok but I don't think he made that much of an influence towards anything. He and the Black Panthers felt more like a revenge fantasy than something that actually progressed anything.

Respectability politics is an ineffective way of creating change. The whites in power saw the growing militancy amongst the blacks through Malcolm X and it scared the fuck out of them. King was a way for the establishment to save face and his ineffective pacifist approach is the narrative taught to children by the elites.

>MX is ok but I don't think he made that much of an influence towards anything.

That's what they would have you believe. The reality is that the Civil Rights movement would have never succeeded without him. Just like how the British teach the world that it was Gandhi's non-violent approach that forced them to see the error of their ways and give India independence when it was the the very real threat of a full-blown rebellion, groundwork laid by Subhash Chandra Bose his Azad Hind, that forced them to give up the "Jewel in the Crown"

MLK, but only after his resurrection.

youtube.com/watch?v=M5FR1LGsT7E

Do you really not understand the difference in quality of life between a black Harlem gangster and a member of the italian mafia?

>he left NOI
>therefore it's okay he joins NOI
'no'.

regardless of how you felt about it, it doesn't change the fact that it wasn't "actual muslims" who killed him.

it's just simply wrong history.

Speaking as a white right winger, Malcolm X obviously. He was for racial separation and so am I.

That really wasn't the part that irked me, granted I was wrong.

Anyone who joins the NOI is a literal fucking retarded cultist. It doesn't matter if you later wisen up and leave, you had the mental faculties to join in the first place.

The only, ONLY reason why NOI is still a thing today is because of Malcolm.

Malcolm X.

True patriot. MLK was a sell out coon.

T. Known Boss