To what extent was Black politics divided during the 1960s?

This was written for my North American module during my first year at University. I personally find Malcolm X and Martin Luther King two of the most complex figures of the twentieth century and examining the two was a challenging task. Please let me know what you think.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Black politics during the 1960s was dominated by two diametric figures, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X.The division, meaning difference or disagreement, between the two is superficially clear; King’s manifesto was one of non-violence, arguing that Black politics did not need to ‘resort to futile and harmful violence’, while Malcolm exclaimed that ‘If you can’t fight for it, then forget it’.However, in his autobiography Malcolm wrote that for King and himself ‘the goal has always been the same’ before paraphrasing King’s famous speech, ‘I have dared to dream myself’.While divided in method Black politics was united in its dream that the Black citizens of America would be emancipated. This will be evidenced through an examination of the speeches, interviews and writings of these two key individuals.

The two organisations King and Malcolm were predominantly associated with were the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and the Nation of Islam respectively. James Cone states that the identity of King was firmly tied to the Black Church, with King giving most of his early speeches concerning civil rights at a Baptist Church in Montgomery. Malcolm was similarly religiously convicted describing how while in prison he ‘found… the religion of Islam and it completely transformed my life’. Both closely identified the civil rights movement with their respective faiths, using it to fuel their political convictions. Vincent Harding states that there was a persistent relationship between the civil rights movement and religion, with ‘the Black church… moving out of the pulpits and onto the street’ during the 1930s under the leadership of Adam Clayton Powell Jr. and Reverend Divine, while the Honourable Elijah Muhammad preached that Islam was the tool through which Black people would be emancipated. King and Malcolm were successors of this tradition; King followed the teachings of Father Divine relating to non-violence and Malcolm acted as a minister at Elijah Muhammad’s Philadelphia temple.10 While the faiths of the two men differed both were led by religious belief in their political work, suffusing the civil rights movement with a religious conviction. For example, religious language is found in King’s I have a Dream speech, King declaring that ‘Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God’s children.’ Black politics was united under this belief in a divine being, whether named God or Allah, that was watching over the Black citizens of America.

However, the effect that King’s Christian and Malcolm’s Islamic faith had on their politics was radically different. The Nation of Islam was founded upon the principle that the Black citizens of America were a lost tribe stolen from Mecca and transported to America, and that Christianity was a religion imposed upon them by the White man. For Malcolm Allah was a Black God; the idea of a Black God was central to the Nation of Islam’s theology, a theology in which White people were viewed as devils who would be destroyed by God’s judgement. If Black people were to assert their unique identity they must purge white influence, Christianity, and accept Islam as their faith. Therefore, it appears as if there was a religious divide within Black politics between Muslims and Christians, due to Malcolm’s dislike of Christianity as a ‘criminal philosophy’. However, in his speech The Ballot or the Bullet (1964) Malcolm described his religion as merely a ‘personal belief’ making no difference to his identification as a Black man. He argued that whether ‘Baptist, or a Methodist, or a Muslim’ all shared the same ‘common problem’, any division should be ‘left in the closet’. Furthermore, Michael Dyson argues that Black Christianity and Black Muslims were a lot closer to each other than their orthodox versions. For Malcolm divisions of religion were immaterial compared to the divisions between Black and White People and consequently religion did not divide Black politics during the 1960s.

Despite the immateriality of religious divide within the movement, there was a divide over the level of integration that Black people should aspire to within American society. As well as religious separation Malcolm advocated cultural separation. This was exemplified by Malcolm’s objection  to the ‘conk’, a hairstyle which straightened the natural ‘kinks’ of Black men’s hair in an attempt to match the ‘limp’ hair of the white man. Malcolm, who underwent this process, described it as his first ‘really big step towards self-degradation’, his attempt to copy the culture and style of White people eroding his sense of Black identity. For Malcolm racial integration was impractical, ‘a foxy Northern liberal’s smoke screen’. The only option for Black citizens, according to Malcolm, was independence from White people and the formation of their own unique culture and religion. Only when Black people became independent and strong would they be accepted. This concept was encapsulated in the ideal of ‘Black Nationalism’ which aimed to instil Black Americans with ‘racial dignity’; Maurice Isserman and Michael Kazin describe Black Nationalism as a doctrine of ‘self-love’. The eventual aim of Black Nationalism, according to Malcolm was the return of Black people to ‘our African homeland’, exemplifying Malcolm’s separationist views.

In contrast the politics of King were integrationist, diametrically opposed and divided from those of Black Nationalism; King described Black Nationalism as a ‘strange dream’.  J. Angelo Corlett argues that King’s non-violent methods were a means of integration, attempting to peacefully assimilate Black people into American society as accepted citizens.  King’s I have a Dream speech and the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom (1963) which preceded it are primary examples of this. Firstly, the peaceable nature of the March on Washington exemplified King’s commitment to non-violent methods; during the march, which comprised of over a quarter of a million participants, not a single participant was arrested. King’s commitment to non-violence can also be seen in his Letter from Birmingham City Jail in which he stated that ‘we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure’. Indeed, he saw violent methods as counterproductive, arguing that they forfeited support and damaged the civil rights movement. This juxtaposes the views of Malcolm who believed that ‘you have to walk in with a hand grenade and tell the man, listen’. However, despite the division over method there was a shared commitment to lawful methods; Malcolm believed that the Government had said Black people had rights and therefore any action, whether violent or not, was legal if it was carried out in order to attain these rights. Therefore, while methods may have differed the entirety of Black politics was united by the belief that they were acting within their rights when carrying out actions regarding the attainment of Black equality. All of Black politics believed that both Black and White people shared the same ‘unalienable rights’ and that they had a right to enjoy them.

Secondly, King’s reference to the ‘”unalienable Rights” of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”’ and his attempt to attain these rights for Black people, within his Washington speech, represented his desire for integration. King’s quotation of the Declaration of Independence endeavoured to integrate American and Black history, juxtaposing with Malcolm who told the story of Black history through the medium of Africa and Islam. Indeed, King asserted that his ‘dream’ was ‘deeply rooted in the American dream’, his listing of numerous states further rooting his speech in America, as a geographical and dreamlike conception. Furthermore, August Meier notes the influence that Democratic presidents had over King, evidencing his assimilation into mainstream American politics. Rather than rejecting American history and the ‘American Dream’ as white concepts, he accepted them as multiracial, attempting to take his place in both. Therefore, it is evident that there was a division within Black politics concerning whether to assimilate into American society or not. This division was primarily based upon differing conceptions of White people. For King White people were an integral part of the civil rights movement, instructing his followers that ‘Negro militancy… must not lead us to a distrust of all White people’. Inversely Malcolm’s view of White people was heavily coloured by the Whites who had killed his father, the Whites who had taken his mother to an asylum and ‘the White people who kept calling my mother “crazy” to her face’ before they took her away to an asylum. The greatest division within the Black politics movement during the 1960s was between those who were willing to forgive these abuses, and integrate, such as King, and those who were not.

However, while this may have been the greatest division within the movement there was a greater ideal that unified them, the concept of ‘the dream’. Throughout the speeches, writings and interviews of Malcolm and King there are frequent references to ‘the dream’ and ‘the nightmare’, ‘the nightmare’ being the present and the ‘the dream’ the future. Cone argues that a belief in freedom and hope was central to the life and politics of King. This belief came from his Christian faith which led him to assert that ‘the Lord will make a way somehow’. In his Washington Speech (1963) he ‘[refused] to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt’ impassioning Black politics to optimistically trust that justice would be rightfully dispensed in time. However, despite his optimism King also acknowledged that the 1960s was a period of darkness for Black people describing segregation as a ‘dark and desolate valley’, his ‘dream’ in stark contrast to his present reality. Malcolm’s life story was synopsised by this ‘dark and desolate valley’, titling the first chapter of his autobiography ‘Nightmare’, beginning this with a description of a Ku Klux Klan attack upon his family home. Contrastingly, Malcolm’s ‘nightmare’ was a reality based on experience, while King’s was one based on ideals rather than hardship; King enjoyed a relatively privileged lifestyle, enjoying a middle class upbringing and a University education. Furthermore, Malcolm’s dream was an African rather than an American one. He rejected the American dream as a White dream stating that ‘I don’t see any American dream; I see an American nightmare’. His dream was to be found in Africa; in a letter from Accra he asserted that even the Black people who chose to remain living in America should return to Africa in a philosophical and cultural manner. However, despite the differences between the dreams and nightmares of the two men both were striving to escape the demons of the present and bring Black people into a brighter future, whether that be in America or Africa. The conglomeration of individual dreams, each as distinct as those of King and Malcolm, gave power and direction to this collective dream which Black politics held during the 1960s. The diversity of beliefs united rather than divided the movement.

This photograph (right) of Malcolm and King meeting for the first and only time, symbolises this ‘dream’. The ‘dream’ that allowed King and Malcolm to put aside divisions over religion, background and method, and aim for the same objective. Furthermore, even when these divisions became apparent they were not a negative reality. Rather, the divisions of King, Malcolm were needed to achieve the aims of Black politics. The peaceable nature of King was necessary to win over Capitol Hill and attract middle class support, while Malcolm was required to appeal to militant and working class groups who had experienced the reality of ‘the nightmare’, as well as to violently pressure the US government into concessions. Therefore, the divisions and differences between the two men helped unite the 22 million African Americans into a singular movement. In conclusion, despite the divisions within Black politics, embodied by the cipher figures of King and Malcolm, Black politics was a united force that encompassed almost the entirety of the Black American population. The stirring words of Malcolm and King empowered this force, uniting it in its religious desire to banish the night and bring about the dawn of freedom, to make reality their ‘inalienable rights’.  This was a faith both Malcolm and King were to die for.

Bibliography 

James Cone, ‘Martin and Malcolm and America: A Dream or a Nightmare?’, in John A. Kirk (ed.), Martin Luther King Jr and the Civil Rights Movement (New York, 2007)

James Cone, ‘Martin Luther King, Jr: Black Theology – Black Church’, in John A. Kirk (ed.), Martin Luther King Jr and the Civil Rights Movement (New York, 2007)

Angelo Corlett, ‘Political Integration, Political Separation, and the African-American Experience: Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X on Social Change’, Humboldt Journal of Social Relations 21 (1995)

Michael Dyson, ‘Reflecting Black: African American Cultural Criticism’, in John A. Kirk (ed.), Martin Luther King Jr and the Civil Rights Movement (New York, 2007)

Vincent Harding, ‘Prologue: We the People’, in Clayborne Carson, David Garrow, Gerald Gill, Vincent Harding and Darlene Hine (eds), The Eyes on the Prize Civil Rights Reader (New York, 1991)

Maurice Isserman and Michael Kazin, America Divided, Fourth Edition (New York, 2012)

Martin Luther King, I Have a Dream (1963),

Martin Luther King, ‘Letter from Birmingham City Jail’, in Clayborne Carson, David Garrow, Gerald Gill, Vincent Harding and Darlene Hine (eds), The Eyes on the Prize Civil Rights Reader (New York, 1991)

Martin Luther King, ‘The Movement Gathers Momentum’, in Clayborne Carson, David Garrow, Gerald Gill, Vincent Harding and Darlene Hine (eds), The Eyes on the Prize Civil Rights Reader (New York, 1991)

Martin Luther King, ‘The social organization of Non-Violence’, in Clayborne Carson, David Garrow, Gerald Gill, Vincent Harding and Darlene Hine (eds), The Eyes on the Prize Civil Rights Reader (New York, 1991)

David Lewis, Martin Luther King (New York, 1970)

August Meier, ‘On the Role of Martin Luther King’, in John A. Kirk (ed.), Martin Luther King Jr and the Civil Rights Movement (New York, 2007)

Bruce Perry, Malcolm, The Life of the Man who Changed Black America (New York, 1991)

Malcom X, By Any Means Necessary, (New York, 1992)

Malcom X, The Autobiography of Malcom X, (London, 2001)

Malcolm X, The Ballot or the Bullet (1964)