Not true and again I have a hard time believing that we read the same book.
Cosby is different from malcolm x because he espouses that blacks strive to succeed in the society that we live in while malcolm x wanted blacks to separate themselves and was very negative toward white folks.
Negative towards white folks? Hmm... I find this a bizarre statement given that he grew up in an era in which he could not drink at the same water fountain as white people. You would not have had a negative opinion towards white folks if you were in his shoes??
There were three phases in Malcom's fight after his conversion to Islam. The book was VERY clear about that.
Phase one: Follower of the Nation of Islam.
Phase two: A transition period
Phase three: what some call the period of true Islam. I agree that the Nation of Islam was not true Islam. The theoretical part was non sense. Not sure what else the label "true Islam" is meant to imply.
In phase one he was a Separatist. During his trip to Mecca he saw Black people enfranchised in society. He saw Black people flying commercial airplanes and many other things Blacks were not allowed to do at that time in America. He also saw this in a context of Muslims of all colors including people with white skin. After he finally publicly broke with the Nation of Islam and announced that he would form his own group he renounced his separatism by first saying that if John Brown were alive John Brown could join his new organization. I assume the offer extended to John Browns sons who died along with John Brown. Later he said that white groups could work constructively in a limited fashion with his new organization.
Malcom X is perhaps the most misquoted person in American history IMO.
Malcom was no longer a separatist after his trip to Mecca. His Autobiography made this VERY clear.
ct....I agree with his decision to not grant clemency to williams,
No argument about that.
I am also not that familiar with george jackson,
I also am not that familiar with George Jackson however from what I gather over the internet in the last few days, Among other things George Jackson pleaded guilty to stealing $70 and was given a one year to life sentence. He spent a decade in Jail before he was gunned down by gaurds in the San Quentin yard.
other than the fact that he was a black panther who embraced violence as a legitimate tool to get what he wanted. I assume that the reasoning was that if williams was of a mind to honor folks that stood for lawlessness and hatred, then that mindset did not show any true repentance for his deeds -- if that be the case, I would agree with him.
In the time period of George Jacksons life the KKK was still very active. Do you not think that Black people had the right to use violence to defend themselves against violence? Do you mean to imply in the above statement that any and all Black Panthers were lawless and violent and stood for hatred?
You embrace violence to get what you want in Iraq? No? You supported the invasion of Iraq and bombing of civilan populations to get what you want in Iraq?
Or did I read all that wrong?
I have never heard of ANY Black Panther ( many of whom I wont defend as I will Malcom X ) ever justify the bombing of civilian populations ANYWHERE EVER. I have never heard any Black Panther call for violence against people in far away lands half way around the world. However when Malcom X made public statements that Black people should form gun clubs and learn to defend themselves the newspapers would have headlines stating that "Malcom X advocates armed overthrow of the U.S. Government" and other such similar non sense.
I am hardly a fan of malcom X -- I read his book a long time ago and found little in it that was worthwhile.
What was it you object to? He constantly called for the Black community to become self reliant and self educated. He was quite candid about his ignorance and life of crime prior to converting to Islam. More than anything it struck me that his book was a constant and articulate criticism of both those in the Black and White community that worked to keep Black people in ignorance and poverty. I am not sure why you found so little in his book.
His successor (and quite possibly his killer) louis farrakhan is a dangerous nut case and hate monger, in my opinion.
I agree Farrakhan is a hate monger. I believe that Farrakhan had Malcom killed. However I also strongly suspect that the FBI knew all about it before and after and did nothing to stop it. At that time the FBI and Farrakhan had a common goal in wanting Malcom dead.
There are folks, like MLK who one could legitimately call "black militants" who are worthy of honor, but I do not think that george jackson would be one of them.
Unlike Malcom MLK was killed by white folks. MLK was killed by white folks in spite of his non violence.
What disturbs me about Arnolds choice in naming Tookies dedication to George Jackson as some kind of "proof" that Tookie see violence as a legitimate means to address social reform, is that it seems to me he may hand picked someone designed to add to the racial divide in California. Something that might benifit Arnolds re-election bid. Politicians world wide these days seem to be seeking stirring up racial tension as a way to distract the public from economic and other problems. Not that politicians do not do that all the time. They do.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
