Talk:Malcolm X

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Malcolm X article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
Good article Malcolm X has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

Am I the only person to notice the picture of the monkey? Thats racist

This page and others are currently undergoing repeated attacks from IP addresses belonging to TV Cable S.A. An ongoing Abuse Report on this can be found at WP:AbRep - Please report all vandal attacks from IP addresses starting 200.x.x.x and especially either 200.118.x.x or 200.74.x.x on my talk page User talk:Heligoland. If you leave a vandalism warning, please also consider adding {{ISP|TV Cable S.A.}} to try and deter further vandalism and/or checking other contributions from that IP address for other vandalism. Heligoland 20:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] "El-hajj"

Regarding "Shabazz" comment: To say that Muslims do not add "el-hajj" to their names because it is "no longer a symbol of prestige as it used to be" is not true. Most pilgrims do not add the name because the intention for the holy pilgrimage is marred with a sense of gaining worldy recognition; and for Americans it is simply too cumbersome to be practical.

Hajj and Hajji are often used to address those who have made the Hajj; it can also be used as a term of respect without knowledge of one's status as a "haji." Taking hajj, incidentally, is required of all capable Muslims during their lifetime; it IS INDEED respected by all Muslims to be a Hajj or Hajji so I am unclear as to why someone would write that it's no longer a symbol of prestige. Among Muslims, it most certainly is prestigous to have done your hajj obligation (and many do so several times), but is not generally used as a marker of one's socioeconomic status.

[edit] "Shabazz"

There seems to be some confusion here -- Malcolm adopted the name "Malik Shabazz" long before he ventured to Africa or the Middle East. It seems he started using the name "Malachi Shabazz" for his correspondence, starting as early as his prison time (I may be wrong on the timing), but then Elijah Muhammad later gave him the name "Malik."

He added the el-Hajj and the "el-" prefix to the Shabazz after his hajj (those additions are largely superficial though, nowadays most Muslims who perform the hajj don't bother putting the "hajji" or "el-hajji" or "el-hajj" prefix before there names because it's no longer a symbol of prestige as it used to be). But he did have the name Malik Shabazz long before that.

Perhaps his use of "el-Hajj" had some personal significance. His pilgrimage to Mecca is generally seen as the point in his life that marked his transformation into an all-embracing mainstream Muslim.

[edit] Wife's name

Autobiography, page 231, the maiden name of his wife is given as Betty X. Malcolm (and Betty) changed their family name to Shabazz after Malcolm's hajj and tour of Africa, perhaps to signify that he had "recovered" his African heritage.

Her maiden name was Sanders...Malcolm used the name Shabazz in correspondence in 1953...Betty joined NOI NY Temple 7 in 1957... See Malcolm's FBI FOIA HTH --Nazikiwe 08:54, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 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.


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. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.52.142.3 (talk) 01:04, March 15, 2007
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)

Despite his change of view, he was most remembered for his anti-White speeches, which were emulated by other black nationalist organizations such as the Black Panthers.

I wouldn't really consider the Black Panther Party to be anti-White (certainly not in the way Malcom X was during his NOI years), they had much more in common with X's post-NOI views. Saul Taylor 10:13, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

There are sections for X's prison term and the Hajj, but nothing appears to occur between them. If this isn't the most important time in his life, it's one of the two most important. Note to self: create section named "Spokesman for the Nation of Islam" or something along those lines.

[edit] Wife?

I see no mention here whatsoever of his wife? --Golbez 03:24, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)

There is no link to the wikipedia article on "Betty Shabazz" yet.

[edit] 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)

[edit] Black Legion

Link in article to Black Legion is wrong as far i can judge. -Svdmolen 20:46, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Created a disambiguation page for Black Legion and added a stub page for the Black Legion (murder cult). Read the FBI FOIA on the Black Legion and add to it if you can. --Nazikiwe 21:52, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

[edit] Pronunciation of X

John X, Stephen X, Gregory X, Leo X, Innocent X, Clement X, and Pius X were popes, and when reading their names aloud, the X is pronounced "the tenth." Someone might say "Leo Eks excommunicated Martin Luther" as a mnemonic device, but usually, prononuncing the X in a pope's name as "Eks" is irreverent or derisory. With Malcolm X, the case is reversed: pronouncing his name as "Malcolm the tenth" is mockery. Since this article may be read for those who are learning of Malcolm X from reference material rather than oral tradition, and who might even be living during the reign of a future Boniface X, the article should make the correct pronunciation of Malcolm X's name explicit. -- Eustace Tilley

[edit] Malcolm X's Positions

Right now, the article covers the events of Malcolm X's life, but only touches on what he advocated. I think we should have a section describing the positions he took during his life, with excerpts from his writings and speeches.

Good idea. Go for it. -Willmcw 21:51, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)
Should we consider the tab to be called Politic/Philosophy? And have broken down into summarize points that will be then further expanded? I do believe that everything must be cited.Marcelino 18:27, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Boston link

The Boston link could do with updating to point to the appropriate Boston article, but I'm not sure which it is. --John 23:06, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 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 1969-70 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)

[edit] Civil rights activist

Now was he really a civil rights activist? I see very little if any similarities with X and say Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu etc. —mikko (speak) 14:48, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Malcom X is very definitely in the Civil Rights movement. His politics were very different from King's, but he was recognized as a militant voice in the same movement, particularly after he left the NOI. His parents were supporters of Marcus Garvey, whose work strongly influenced him (as well as influencing the Nation of Islam). His emphasis on self-defence harkens back to the anti-lynching movement of the early 20th century and to organizations like the African Blood Brotherhood. He's considered to be an originator of the Black Power movement. DJ Silverfish 15:43, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
All very true, but I still would think twice before calling him civil rights activist and I'm glad the article itself doesn't say it. —mikko (speak) 20:05, 23 May 2005 (UTC)


He was most certainly a civil rights activist. It might seem a bit muddled at first, esp. during the NOI period, but he clearly advocated full rights for "Afro-Americans." After his pilgrimage, he took on a different, softer stance, advocating that people of all colors and walks of life work together to promote equality and brotherhood. — JorgeMacD

This is absolute nonsense and clearly an indication of someone's views of Malcolm X. activist: adj : advocating or engaged in activism [syn: activistic] n : a militant reformer [syn: militant]

Malcolm X advocated civil rights for AfroAmericans. A civil rights activist is not by definition required to advocate civil rights for more than one group, although many do. Nor are they required to participate in peaceful activism (note that some animal rights activists and anti-globalist activists participate in less than peaceful demonstrations). Your point, therefore, is duly ignored.

[edit] 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))

[edit] Spike Lee joint

Hmmm, no mention of the Spike Lee film... Should i put the poster of the movie somewhere in the article or create a sepeate article? Project2501a 23:50, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There is currently a sentence under "Biographies" that reads:
  • The film Malcolm X (movie) was released in 1992, directed by Spike Lee. Based on the autobiography, it starred Denzel Washington as Malcolm with Angela Bassett as Betty and Al Freeman Jr. as Elijah Muhammad.
And there is a significant article on the movie. Is there much more to say about it here? -Willmcw 01:29, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

It would appear i need better spectacles, appologies ^_^ Project2501a 01:45, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No prob. I've done the same thing. Cheers, -Willmcw 04:38, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of the movie, do any of you understand what was going on with the numbers game young Malcolm played with West Indian Archie? I understand that it was a lottery of some kind, but I do not understand the specifics, by whom it was run or why Archie was going possibly to kill Malcolm because he (Archie) had forgotten the number 281.

[edit] Was Malcolm X a pimp or racketeer?

After some time, he moved to New York City, New York, where, in Harlem, he became involved in drug dealing, gambling, pimping, racketeering, and robbery (referred to collectively by Malcolm as "hustling"); he also feigned insanity in order to evade the World War II draft.

I often hear Malcolm in his hustling days referred to as a "pimp", but never found any reference to him doing any pimping in his autobiography; indeed, he suggests he wouldn't be any good at it. One of his best friends was a pimp, but I wouldn't really call that being "involved" with pimping. Also, what made him a "racketeer"? Was it the numbers game? - furrykef (Talk at me) 15:21, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

There's another connotation to "hustling" which is, you might say, the opposite of pimping. Is his autobiography our only source for his youth? -Willmcw 18:30, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • During his hustling days Malcolm would canvass for johns and arrange sessions for prostitutes, dominatria, and other sex workers. This fact is detailed in the Autobiography. Although people could disagree on the terminology, I would call this work pimping.--Pinko1977 21:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

It ain't easy, but it's necessary.

[edit] insanity

I think we have a good compromise in the insanity reference. The anon, however, insists on removing the fact that Malcolm X claimed to have feigned insanity to dodge the draft. Does someone have a copy of "Autobiography" handy? It's in chapter 7 somewhere. At any rate, the anon has some interesting comments on my talk page. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 05:46, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

As long as we state it as Malcolm did in the letter -- "if they think I'm crazy, it's not too hard to convince them" -- I'm happy with it. I've got the page on my watchlist, and if the anon gets his panties in a bunch about it, I'm perfectly willing to continue reverting his silliness.—chris.lawson (talk) 06:38, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] editing

I have honest and good-intentioned hopes of editing this article. Is there a way to circumvent the edit-block? There are many typographical errors in this article that I would like to clean up. For instance, there is a link which reads "NOI's", which, obviously because of the possessive 's' included in the link title, does not connect to the NOI disambiguation page. I'd like to be able to correct the link, among others. Thanks. Refugee621 23:46, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Just hang on to it. Keep Malcolm X on your watchlist, and you'll see when it gets unprotected -- there was a wave of vandalistic (and also non-vandalistic but uncooperative) editing in the last few days which led to the protection; it will probably be unprotected in the next day or two. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:58, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
With no offense intended to Refugee621, might I humbly suggest this protection remain in place for another week or two (an admin can fix the Nation of Islam link, btw) because the vandal has been actively disrupting Wikipedia within the past 24 hours. I suspect that this disruption will continue until he gets bored, and a week more protection will probably solve that problem.--chris.lawson 00:04, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
That's way too long to leave an article protected, except in the case of the most determined vandalism or a revert war that simply won't stop. In a case like this, it makes more sense to unprotect it sooner than later -- it can always be protected again if the slimebags show up and those of us fighting them want some sleep. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:26, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
Fair enough. Have a look at my contributions from about the last 48 hours if you'd like some sense of what this guy's been up to lately.--chris.lawson 00:36, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
Same guy I've been dealing with, isn't it? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:41, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
No, I really don't believe that it's the same guy. The problem here is simply one of misunderstanding. On one side, you have somebody who wants to use Wikipedia as a place to post the truth about Malcom X, on the other, officious dweebs who want to try to prevent this. Maybe you all should take a big step back, and try to look at this situation from another perspective. Anyway, what I am proposing here is that you all do some additional research before jumping to any crazy conclusions. I really have to ask you at this point -- has anybody here even considered turning up the audio on their computer and taking a look at:

http://oobagij.tripod.com/

Well I can tell you without a doubt that nobody has.

I mean maybe, just maybe, there is an angle here that everyone is just missing.

Ooh, look, the anon strikes again. How's that one-year block treating you, 70?--chris.lawson 04:00, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Physical characteristics

I've temporarily removed the following from the first paragraph of "Biography":

According to FBI reports, Malcolm X was 6 feet, 3.5 inches (192 cm) tall.

It didn't fit with the rest of the paragraph at all. There's ample citation for it, but it needs to find a home elsewhere in the article. Anyone have suggestions for how we can work this in, or whether it even matters that we keep it? His red hair is a characteristic that's important to the article, since one of his nicknames was "Detroit Red", but I don't see how his height matters in the least.--chris.lawson 03:59, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I'd love to know just why there's been a spate of edits over the last few months adding height information to articles -- and it seems mostly to articles about taller people! Signed, Shorty. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 04:35, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
    • It seems relevant to me to add information unusual physical characteristics to biographies. However, such information need only be presented in a subclause of another sentence, i.e. "A tall man (6' 3 1/2"), Malcom was known as an engaging speaker". -Willmcw 05:33, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Right, and IMO, 75 inches isn't even that tall (says the 5-9 guy). He'd be a short guard in the NBA. :) If he were unusually tall, then it'd be notable, but it's not like Malcolm X was notable for his height. (In the context of height, I'd say it's only notable when it lies outside one standard deviation from the mean, or when height is relevant to a person's profession, like a basketball player, or Verne Troyer.)--chris.lawson 21:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Irish Roots?

I'm sure many Americans must be sick of hearing this question asked of virtually every other famous American, but ... is it true that Malcolm was of Irish descent somewhere along the line (like Ali)? Thank you. Fergananim 17:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I've never seen any claims to that effect, but considering red hair is pretty unusual in folks of African descent, I'd say there's a decent chance of it. We'd need proof if we put it in the article, though.--chris.lawson 19:23, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree on the subject of proof. However, red hair is not in itself an indicator of Irish ancestry, as it is found in Scottish, English and German people too. As far as I know, red hair is found more in Scotland more than any other nation, and the Scots are descendants of the Picts, Angles, Britions, Norse and Irish Fergananim 19:29, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Agreed. As I said, there's a chance that he's Irish, but we need some more solid proof than simply red hair and a bad temper ;)--chris.lawson 20:03, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Gee, red hair and a bad temper! Plus, he loved his Mum, hated whitey liked we hated the Brits, was a rebel, was tall, dark and handsome, and died tragicly young - what more proof do we need? Just kidding! Fergananim 21:59, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
But he wasn't an alcoholic (just kidding!)

one of his grandfathers was white, maybe he was irish? Colorfulharp233 03:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

His mother's father was Scottish, according to Perry. Uucp 10:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

LOL! are you guys idiots? His hair is redish because he relaxed his hair so much as a youth. Relaxing your hair can turn your hair many shades lighter over time. And its known that he did it many times as a youth.

Um... hair grows. Thus, dyeing his hair in his youth would not have an effect on his later-grown hair.


^^^He did in fact relax his hair a lot as a youth, but his hair was reddish as his grandfather was white (and had red hair). If anything, the relaxer "brought out" the reddish color more.

-- Mik 17:10, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Profound Racism

I know I am about to be bombarded with flames/death threats/whatever for saying this, but why is there no mention on this page of Malcolm X's publicly stated, profound racist views? Considering the language he used when referring to the "wicked race of devils" (ref: [1], [2], [3]), among other things. While it may be true that these positions had changed by the end of his life, I do not see why this aspect of his rhetoric, to which he returned repeatedly, and held as a core belief, is omitted from the article. He stated publicly that it was his belief that the Black Nation descended from God, but not the white population, and thus they were inherently evil, and incapable of acting as a force of good (as history shows, which is his claim). I believe that Wikipedia is fundamentally about being "factually correct" not "politically correct." NPOV dictates that whatever personal feelings one may have (even for a figure held in high regard by many) that it is important to bring objective truth. I am not saying that Wikipedia should attempt in any way to paint Malcolm X in a bad light, however if, as it seems, the notion of people without color being fundamentally and unredeemingly evil is pervasive throughout his public speaking, etc, then this should be included in the article, as it is highly relevant to his attacks against racism in the white community. Maybe there is a reason for this that I have overlooked, if so this is why it is on the discussion page, and feel free to enlighten me. - 19:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Provide some good NPOV language, then, if you feel proper information is missing. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:45, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
  • So glad I'm not the only one who noticed this. Malcolm X said "the common enemy is the white man" and repeatedly referred to whites as "devils," which is probably the most extreme expression of hatred one can verbally muster. On June 3, 1962, after hearing about a plane crash, he ghoulishly celebrated the deaths of innocents when he said, "The death of over 120 white people is a very beautiful thing," There are other quotes out there, but I get nauseated while reading this guy's racist garbage. - Wed Mar 29 15:16:53 EST 2006
He discarded these views in the last couple of years before his death. You may want to add a reference to these earlier beliefs, but it would not be fair to characterize him as a racist in the end; he repudiated those views. Uucp 20:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, from what I understand, he became more moderate in his last days, but he never abandoned his separatist doctrine. It seems the only tolerance he demonstrated towards whites were for whites who embraced Islam. And I've never seen an apology for the "death of over 120 white people" remark.
Now, if you can prove me wrong, I'll accept it. I'm just saying I've never seen it.
Even if you're correct, I must then ask if the majority of the guy's ministerial career was spent espousing blatantly racist doctrine, why is it completely ignored on the main page? -Wed Mar 29 16:32:02 EST 2006
From New York Times reporter M. S. Handler, in June 1965, "Malcolm's attitude towards the white man underwent a marked change in 1964 -- a change that contributed to his break with Elijah Muhammad and his racist doctrines. Malcolm's meteoric eruption on the national scene brought him into wider contact with white men who were not the "devils" he had thought they were.... [There follows some text about his split with Elijah Muhammad, and some text about his visits to Saudi Arabia and Africa]... Assassins' bullets ended Malcolm's career before he was able to develop this new approach, which in essence recognized the Negroes as an integral part of the American community -- a far cry from Elijah Muhammad's doctrine of separation. Malcoln had reached the midpoint in redefining his attitude to this country and the white-black relationship. He no longer inveighed against the United States but against a segment of the United States represented by overt white supremacists in the South and covert white supremacists in the North."
From a letter written by Malcom X to his wife, in 1964, "...perhaps if white Americans could accept the Oneness of God, then perhaps, too, they could accept in reality the Oneness of Man -- and cease to measure, and hinder, and harm others in terms of their 'differences' in color... I do believe, from the experiences that I have had with them, that the whites of the younger generation, in the colleges and universities, will see the handwriting on the wall and many of them will turn to the spiritual path of truth..."
And shortly thereafter, speaking at the Skyline Ballroom at the Hotel Theresa, "My trip to Mecca has opened my eyes. I no longer subscribe to racism."
On January 19, 1965 on the Pierre Berton television show in Canada, Malcolm X said "I believe in recognizing every human being as a human being--neither white, black, brown, or red; and when you are dealing with humanity as a family there's no question of integration or intermarriage. It's just one human being marrying another human being or one human being living around and with another human being."
The actor Ossie Davis, giving the eulogy at Malcolm X's funeral in 1965 said "No one who knew him before and after his trip to Mecca could doubt that he had completely abandoned racism, separatism, and hatred."
And, regarding the 1962 plane crash at Orly airport, though Malcolm X never publicly recanted it, he did tell Alex Haley that he wished he had never said it (Autobiography of Malcolm X, epilogue, p.453 in my edition)
I think the point is made. Now, if you can stand a bit of criticism, I will point out that all of the above can be found in The Autobiography of Malcolm X as told to Alex Haley, and your saying that you've "never seen [evidence that he abandoned his racist views]," tells me that you have never read this book. Lobbying for changes to an encyclopedia page about Malcom X without reading The Autobiography of Malcolm X is like lobbying for changes to a page about Jesus without ever reading the New Testament. It's lazy and you should feel ashamed. However, I agree with the broad point that the article should be clear that Malcolm X espoused a racist doctrine until 1964, when he changed hs mind. You can take a crack at it if you like, but you should probably read up on the man a little first. Uucp 03:42, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Provide some good NPOV language, then, if you feel proper information is missing. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:05, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minor edits

I just tried to make some minor edits, but someone reverted them. Apologies if I did them wrong; I'm a wiki novice.

The edits I tried to make are: 1) Correct the spelling of Ossie Davis's name (it's spelled Ozzie in the article); 2) add a link to the entry on Ossie Davis; and 3) add a link to Mike Wallace's entry later in the same sentence.

[edit] Temple?

I'm trying to disambig the temple page, but don't know enough about the Nation of Islam. I assume it would be correct to have the reference to temple point to mosque, but am not positive. D-Rock 12:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

NOI calls their places of worship and meetings temples and not mosques...this works out well because Muslims do not consider adherent to NOI to be Muslim because of their incompatible beliefs (i.e., Muslims do not believe there can be another prophet after Prophet Muhammad, Muslims believe in the unity of all Muslims--so no "black Muslim" status can exist, etc.).

I agree with the change of temples to mosque due to that fact that after Elijah Muhammad went to Mecca and came back to America. He changed the name of temples to mosque. If you need a reference. I'll look it up in Malcolm X autobiography. Rello222

[edit] 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).

[edit] Red hair

Malcolm X had red hair when he was young - that seems to be well documented. But did the red hair change color or did he dye it? It seems I read in a biography that he dyed it. So my questions are:

  • If he dyed his hair does anyone have any details about this - did he do it himself or go to a barber? Did he dye it to fit in better with his peers?
  • Was he the only black young man with red hair in his circle when he was growing up?
  • Is there any reference to how he felt about having red hair?

I think this would be interesting for the Malcolm X article but maybe only to me. So I am asking these questions for an article about red-haired people where it is relevent. Thanks. --cda 01:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

His hair was always reddish. Although he did "conk" his hair, there's nothing about him actually using dye to colour his hair. In his autobiography, he attributes his red hair and light skin to the fact that his grandmother was raped by a white man. In his autobiography, he also talks about how he hated the white blood in his veins. Hope that helps. Antihostile 20:27, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Yes, that is exactly what I was trying to remember from reading his autobiography years ago. Thank-you.--cda 13:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
You can see the reddish tinge in the two color photographs (among lots of black and white pix) at http://www.cmgww.com/historic/malcolm/about/photos.htm
I was born with hair the color of cotton. My brother was born with red hair. His red hair "all fell out" according to my mother. As children both of us were blond. As my father predicted, my hair color eventually grew to match my eyebrows, which were fairly dark brown. And my current hair color is actually two-toned, with the hair on the sides being black. I think this kind of color change can happen when one has a mixed genetic heritage. Some of my maternal grandfather's siblings had red hair, and my mother's hair had a reddish tinge to it. My father's side of the family all had black hair. As a child, whenever I got in deep trouble and everybody was angry with me I would wonder whether my brother and I had been adopted. (What could be worse than having both s step-mother and a step-father. ;-) Truth will out, however, and my brother and I both darkened up over the decades to where we looked like a compromise between parental hair colors. Why the expression of hair color genes changes over time is a mystery,
If people had gone out of their way to make trouble for Malcolm X because of his hair color it would have been a sensible response to dye it, but I've seen no indication in the things that I read to indicate he did anything like that. There is one picture of him in his teens that looks like he had dyed his hair blond or bleached it much lighter than it originally was, but that's only one photograph and he could have shaved off the dyed hair the next day. P0M 06:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] current??

Someone put the "current" tag on the article. What current event is it referring to? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 01:53, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't see anything in the article that's a current event. Iwalters 02:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes I don't either. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

This was probably tagged current because it is referenced on the Main Page because today is the anniversary of Malcolm X's assasination. Edwin Stearns | Talk 21:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay then it's fine. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 21:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current View of Muslims

Upon listening to the interview with herman blake in 11 oct 1963, found on the article, I have noticed that the current view of Muslims throughout the west is not much differnt when compared to that which is accounted by Malcom X towards the end of the clip. What's your view? Jackpot Den 20:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean the one of everyone being equal? Which view do you mean? --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
My view is that you agree with the grossly stereotypical views of an ignorant segment of the population, and smeared "the west" in the process. You've also openly agreed with a racist/seperatist who made those comments before he eschewed his racist views. My view is that you need to take a closer look at what you're assuming and who you're climbing into bed with. 70.115.211.122 07:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Tired-of-stupid-people-making-stupid-poliitcal-comments-and-thinking-because-they-are-anti-us-that-they-are-magically-not-ignorant

".. But whites, speak of Muslims synonomously with violence, whenever Muslims are mentioned by them, violence is brought up, but it is not connected with any other group. This is the sort of problem, again the tactic, or what I would call "Psychological warfare" to, in some way make the image of Muslims in the country to have a violent image rather than a religous image" - Malcom X,interview with herman blake in 11 oct 1963

The view I mean is the view of the west on Muslims and the Islamic community. I believe that the quote by Malcom X, from over 40 years ago is still applicable to the western view on Muslims now. Jackpot Den 22:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes that still is very applicable now. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 03:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Broadly applicable, but not narrowly -- the general public concept of who a muslim is has changed. --72.25.0.67 22:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Categories"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't appear that this article is part of any categories like "Black Americans" or "Civil Rights Leaders" or what have you. It doesn't seem to be contained in any categories at all. Is it an orphan?

Yes that's right. Why is this important article an orphan? I added eight categories. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Who Done It?

I think the article might benefit from a short discussion of the competing theories as who who "really" done it. I've rarely seen an article about Malcolm X that accepted the convictions of Hayer, Norman 3X Butler, and Thomas 15X Johnson as the final word. There ought to be some discussion of whether or not the NOI had ordered the killings and, if so, if these were their assassins. Were law enforcement agencies involved (Malcolm X himself thought they might be setting him up)? Uucp 12:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Bruce Perry's book, Malcolm, has fairly complete interviews behind his reports on who was involved in the killing. As with Kennedy, it is easy to make a fairly long list of individuals and groups that would have had strong motives for killing. For one thing, killing effective leaders is one of the hallmark techniques of groups that want to destabilize a society. And the people who have the wherewithal to hire competent goons to do their dirty work for them generally have a plan for insuring that the hit men will take the fall. Ideally the people are hired through an intermediary or "cut out" who will, uh, cut out as soon as the job is done. Just look at how money was mobilized after the Watergate plumbing squad got caught. They were amateurs. What could a group with a long-practiced facility for this kind of thing do?
The bottom line is that if powerful people are behind an assassination they generally do not fail to provide themselves with plausible deniability and various carrot and stick methods of assuring loyalty on the part of the goons.
A separate article on the causes and effects of the assassination might be very worthwhile. One of the things that might be done is to show which groups thought it was in their interest to have Malcolm X dead. Allegedly there was some involvement of U.S. government figures in attempts to get organized crime figures to assassinate Castro. Such a plan has obvious shortcomings, and it means that the people in white hats have to get their hands dirty by approaching the organized crime figures. However, if an organized criminal or counter-culture group was planning to go gunning for somebody anyway and some law enforcement or intelligence group learned of the attempt that group might do anything from putting a stop to the attempt, to turning a blind eye to the attempt, or might even go so far as to unobtrusively remove certain stumbling blocks.
IMHO, the assassination of Malcolm X was a terrible blow against this nation. It would be a service to all of us if one could demonstrate the confluence of selfish, hateful, and short-sighted interests that facilitated his killing. P0M 06:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tensions

In the first few lines, it says "he brushed the rummors aside" and "He talked to the secretary." Was that Malcolm or Ellih that did these things? I would fix it myself, but I don't know who it was.Minnesota1 05:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Malcolm ignored the rumors for a few years and then he spoke with the secretaries (plural). I'll clarify. Uucp 10:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

The comment about Malcolm saying "Chickens coming home to roost never made me sad in fact it only made me glad" is false. I have a documentary with Malcolm denying he ever made any comment saying that. Plus, The Nation of Islam never allowed camara's OR audio tapes in at this point due Elljah Muhammad rejection of the media. So it's not any factual proof of Malcolm making that comment.

[edit] 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?

[edit] Trip to Great Britain

There is no mention in the link in the Great Britain section to the said Labor Slogan. Can someone please try to get an additional source for the quote other than the PDF buried in the said universities website.

[edit] Constant request for citations?

Does anybody else consider the rampant usage of "citation needed" in between every other word in this article a little passive aggressive? Or is it just me? - mixvio 15:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

It reads terribly, but I think it's valid. The vast majority of the article as it stands today is taken from the Autobiography of Malcolm X as told to Alex Haley, and readers deserve to know that they are reading material from an interested source. There is a huge list of references at the bottom, but I doubt that any of them were referred to in the writing of the article as it now stands. Uucp 15:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LBGT rights opposition

He's listed as someone opposed to gay rights; can anyone source this? Ohyeahmormons 18:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Over-reliance on the Autobiography

I am concerned that this entry relies almost entirely for its content on the Autobiography of Malcolm X, as told to Alex Haley. This book is, in my opinion, very well written and insightful. However, it is also biased, discussing only those aspects of Malcolm's past that he wanted to discuss, presenting only those explanations for his behavior that he wanted on record, and mythologizing his own past and that of his family in some respects.

I would like to see this entry become much better footnoted, so that people can see where each claim comes from. I plan to start inserting material from sources other than the Autobiography as well. I hope that others will join me in this.

Uucp 11:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article size

this article is quite long. I am thinking of starting a new pages for some sub-headings. seeWikipedia:Article size

[edit] Germany-Christianity quote

A quick Google search did yield this; beyond that, I'd defer to an expert on the subject, relating to the quote, "If Christianity had asserted itself in Germany, six million Jews would have lived." --Emufarmers(T/C) 11:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why was he assassinated?

Why did the nation of islam what him killed so badly?

[edit] Quotations

i'm not sure about the wikipedia policy on this, but what's the point of having all those quotes if there's already a wikiquote page? Yiyun 04:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree, that list has grown out of hand. I think most of these should be sent over to Wikiquote; it is very much not standard to have 40 quotes on a WP page. Does anyone have any objections?-- Deville (Talk) 04:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Please reduce it to one or two of his classic black power/anti-white quotations, plus one or two of his more moderate comments post conversion to Sunni Islam. The rest can go to wikiquote. Uucp 21:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking the same thing, I looked at the article and thought that they should be moved to a new article, then saw this and wondered why they had the section at all then. -- Anyr (( Not logged in))

If anyone can help me pin down the source of this quote, I would be very appreciative:

It's a crime, it's a crime what people, not just black people but white people too, it's a crime what they don't know about their history. And we have not only to learn history, but I invite you to that other excitement, the excitement of unlearning history, unlearning the history that you learned.

--1000Faces 22:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sexuality

There's an article in The Guardian website giving a case that Malcolm X may have been gay or bisexual. Check it out. [4]. 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. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.66.161.156 (talk) 01:46, February 28, 2007
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)

[edit] Punishment

Is there any information what sentences killers of Malcolm X received? It should be included in the article.

[edit] FBI

It seems to me like someone who is strongly against the FBI wrote the section Nation of Islam. Please I'm new to wikipedia, so tell me if I did this right. Snoopl3s 00:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

  • You did it right. Now, please tell us exactly what parts of that section seem biased. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 01:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Intro needs urgent fixing

The last two sentences in the intro need rewording/or a strong citation:

"The situation surrounding his assasination continues to be murky, while he reportedly was assasinated by Nation of Islam officials, he also had many enemies in the United States government. It is widely believed that the government also had a role in the assasination."

I am no expert on the man but I have checked several reliable sources (E.g. "Malcolm X" Encyclopedia Britannica. 1990 Ed.) and they don't say anything about a government role. I am not saying that the viewpoint is untenable, but I don't think 'widely believed' is correct.

If someone more knowledgeable on the subject doesn't do it in the next day or so then I will (I am hesitant to leap in as I imagine that this article can be controversial).

Also, it's spelt Assassination (unless us Aussies are out of step with the rest of the world on that one – happens occasionally.)

Joaq99 16:13, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Your complaint is valid. Saying that something is "widely believed" does not give anybody much confidence in the purported information. That being said, it is probably a valid comment about public opinion, or one segment of public opinion, in the U.S. to say that many people have wxpressed suspicion. P0M 07:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Defacement

Its been fixed, but I noticed someone defaced the page making it sound like he was the founder of the KKK. Here is a quote. "Malcolm X, born Malcolm Little, also known as Black Evil and El Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Omaha, Nebraska, May 19, 1925 – February 21, 1965 in New York City) was a Muslim Minister and National Spokesman for the Nation of Islam. He was also founder of the UAZ and the KKK." Please report further incidents so we can keep track of it. Keithg 20:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality dispute?

Midway down the article there is a "neutrality questioned" flag, saying somebody has nominated it as needing attention in this regard. There is a link to this talk page, where whoever placed the notice should have given some justification for throwing doubt on the legitimacy of the article. But I see no mention of "neutrality" in any of the stuff above.

I think the article could be improved, but a quick reading reveals no hint of intentional bias to me. I do think, however, that the article is less than objective in the sense that it does not give due recognition to this individual's highest qualities and greatest contributions to American life.

So, whoever put up the notice, let's have some specifics. P0M 08:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why it's there, but it might be the following, which has been discussed on the talk page -- the article sources only from the Autobiography, which like all autobiographies, is a biased and selective rendition of the man's life. Books have been written by others who investigated Malcolm X by reviewing old tapes, speaking with people who knew him, reviewing public records, etc., but none of this is reflected in the article. Uucp 12:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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!

[edit] 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)


[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/l/Talk%7EMalcolm_X_9217.html"