Two Roads to Freedom

Beginning Paragraph In April of 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. sat "alone in a narrow jail cell," thinking "long thoughts," praying "long prayers," and writing the long "Letter from a Birmingham Jail." He was responding to criticisms from his fellow clergymen who thought his protests in Birmingham and elsewhere were "unwise and untimely."  He defended his nonviolent approach against these accusations, saying, Quotations "I came to Birmingham with the hope that the white religious leadership of this community would see the justice of our cause and, with deep moral concern, would serve as the channel through which our just grievances could reach the power structure. I had hoped that each of you would understand. But again I have been disappointed." Explanations Seven months later in Detroit, Malcolm X presented his "Message to the Grassroots," saying that MLK's efforts had failed and a more radical approach was necessary: "When Martin Luther King failed to desegregate Albany, Georgia, the civil-rights struggle in America reached its low point. King became bankrupt almost, as a leader. . . . As soon as King failed in Birmingham, Negroes took to the streets. . . ." Malcolm X decried King's March on Washington, saying, "it even ceased to be a march. It became a picnic, a circus. Nothing but a circus, with clowns and all. . . . with clowns leading it, white clowns and black clowns." Comparisons King's "Letter" and Malcolm X's "Message" both are brilliantly reasoned, powerful and passionate, and relevant not only in their times but also today. Both agree on the evils of injustice and oppression, but they offer completely different remedies. Thesis Statement Now more than ever, we need to understand the visions of these two great African-American thinkers, and we must wrestle anew with the best path forward for healing our divided nation.

Middle Paragraphs In his "Letter," Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote as a Christian, "the son, the grandson and the great grandson of preachers," advocating for "nonviolent direct action" to force those in the halls of power to address ongoing injustice and oppression. Topic-by-Topic Pattern He abjured his critics among the white clergy to let the protester nonviolently "march; let him make prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; let him go on freedom rides—and try to understand why he must do so. If his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history." Like Gandhi before him, MLK sought to peacefully direct the national attention to these injustices in order to solve them:

Excerpt I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

Instead of recognizing the nonviolent sacrifices made by the protesters, the clergymen had praised the police in Birmingham for keeping "order." MLK pointed out that, though the police had shown restraint while in view of cameras and reporters, they committed many heinous abuses in prison. In fact, their nonviolent restraint in public was only to preserve the system of injustice and oppression that the protesters sought to overturn. MLK called on his critics instead to support and join the nonviolent protests that were bringing about change.

Topic Sentence In his "Message to the Grassroots," Malcolm X provided a different vision. He wrote as a Muslim, calling all people of color to band together in revolution, violent if necessary: "Every time you look at yourself, be you black, brown, red, or yellow—a so-called Negro—you represent a person who poses such a serious problem for America because you're not wanted. Once you face this as a fact, then you can start plotting a course that will make you appear intelligent, instead of unintelligent." He pointed to the American, French, and Russian Revolutions, saying that all were struggles to gain land, the land-less fighting the landlord in order to create a nation for themselves. He said MLK's nonviolent approach failed because he failed to recognize that people of color needed their own nation rather than remaining as slaves within the larger, white nation. He also indicated that the nonviolent approach ignored the historical fact of revolutions: They were bloody.

[As] long as the white man sent you to Korea, you bled. He sent you to Germany, you bled. He sent you to the South Pacific to fight the Japanese, you bled. You bleed for white people. But when it comes time to seeing your own churches being bombed and little black girls be murdered, you haven't got no blood. You bleed when the white man says bleed; you bite when the white man says bite; and you bark when the white man says bark. I hate to say this about us, but it's true. How are you going to be nonviolent in Mississippi, as violent as you were in Korea? How can you justify being nonviolent in Mississippi and Alabama, when your churches are being bombed, and your little girls are being murdered, and at the same time you're going to be violent with Hitler, and Tojo, and somebody else that you don't even know?

Malcolm X argued that if violence was justified in wars overseas, it was justified in wars in the United States, as well. MLK had predicted that if nonviolent protests failed, people of color had only violent means left to accomplish their ends, and Malcolm X argued that the time for violence had come. He noted that people violently took to the streets after the failures in Georgia and Alabama, but said that their movement was co-opted by the white establishment. The black coffee of the civil rights movement was watered down with cream, ceasing to be black, ceasing to be hot. "It used to wake you up, now it'll put you to sleep. This is what they did with the march on Washington. They joined it. They didn't integrate it; they infiltrated it. They joined it, became a part of it, took it over. And as they took it over, it lost its militancy. They ceased to be angry. They ceased to be hot. They ceased to be uncompromising." In the face of white nationalism, Malcolm X argued that the only cure was a violent revolution that embraced black nationalism.

Similarities-and-Differences Pattern Despite their strong opposition to each other, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X agreed on many issues. Both identified the same root cause of the problem in the country: racism systematically taught to both the oppressor and the oppressed until both sides accepted the injustice as justice, until both sides had a stake in perpetuating the status quo. Both men pointed strongly to the oppression of the white majority as the chief cause, but both also decried the codependency of people of color. King called out the "force of complacency, made up in part of Negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, are so drained of self respect and a sense of 'somebodiness' that they have adjusted to segregation," and the "few middle-class Negroes who, because of a degree of academic and economic security and because in some ways they profit by segregation, have become insensitive to the problems of the masses." Malcolm X took the split in the black community even further, identifying MLK and others as "house Negros" who benefited from their enslaved status and worked hard to preserve the order. He identified the masses as "field Negros" who were routinely beaten, hated slavery, and needed to rise up in bloody revolution against their masters.

Contrasts Both men agreed that the longstanding oppression and injustice in the country had to end, but they disagreed markedly as to how it could and should end. Martin Luther King Jr. took his solution from Jesus, calling him an "extremist for love," who told his followers to love their enemies and pray for those who persecuted them. He opposed Malcolm X and "the hatred and despair of the black nationalist. For there is the more excellent way of love and nonviolent protest. I am grateful to God that, through the influence of the Negro church, the way of nonviolence became an integral part of our struggle. If this philosophy had not emerged, by now many streets of the South would, I am convinced, be flowing with blood." Malcolm X meanwhile believed that blood was exactly what was needed to bring about change. "A revolution is bloody. Revolution is hostile. Revolution knows no compromise. Revolution overturns and destroys everything that gets in its way. And you, sitting around here like a knot on the wall, saying, 'I'm going to love these folks no matter how much they hate me.' No, you need a revolution." Instead of turning the other cheek when struck, Malcolm X called the masses to strike back. Instead of suffering in misery, he told his followers to take an eye for an eye, a life for a life.

Argumentation and Evaluation Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X presented two powerfully reasoned, impassioned, and courageous visions for addressing the institutionalized racism of their time and the continued racism in our time. And each man died for his views—Malcolm X in 1965, shot by rivals in his black nationalist movement, and Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, shot by James Earl Ray. In the intervening 60 years, MLK's strategy of nonviolent protest has prevailed, ending Jim Crow, voter suppression, segregation, and a host of other abuses. This nonviolent model continues to prevail in marches for Black Lives Matter, in protests during the National Anthem, and in social-media campaigns that continue the fight against racism up to the highest levels of government. Though these methods still have not fully solved the problem, they do bring about change over time. As King said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." Nonviolent protests continue to expose ugly injuries to air and light so that they can be cleaned and dressed and healed.

Malcolm X's more radical call for violent revolution had a different end in mind: gaining land to establish a black nation. Historical Analogy His approach was analogous to the Partition of India in 1947. Bloody conflicts drove Muslims out of India to seek their own nation in Pakistan and drove Hindus out of Pakistan to live with their own kind in India. As these groups self-segregated, approximately a million people died. This "two-state" solution did indeed give each group its separate nation, but it did not end the hatred between them. India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons pointed at each other and continue to fight over the region of Kashmir. Now imagine a "Partition of America." Imagine breaking off a portion of the country into which all black people must flee and from which all white people must flee. Imagine a nuclear-armed country of white nationalists living beside a nuclear-armed country of black nationalists. This solution would not end racism but perpetuate it. The best outcome would be a tense peace based on mutually assured destruction; the worst outcome would be the nuclear annihilation of both nations. Yes, Malcolm X's solution would have worked, but its outcome would not have been ideal.

Ending Paragraph In 1963, Martin Luther King Jr.'s "Letter" and Malcolm X's "Message" both took an unflinching look at racism and oppression in the United States. They agreed about the problem but disagreed about the solution. In the 60 years that have followed, MLK's solution has brought about great change. Nonviolent protests still seek to address ongoing racism including police brutality, unequal incarceration rates, and the ugly resurgence of white nationalism. Despite many gains, the country still has a long way to go. That's the trouble with MLK's approach. It requires patience, persistence, and constant vigilance and does not bring about an overnight solution. Malcolm X's more radical call for violent revolution would be quicker and more decisive, but the results could well make racism only deeper. So far, his solution has not been required. However, we should all heed MLK's warning: shutting down nonviolent protest would make violent revolution inevitable.

Works-Cited Entries Works Cited

King, Jr., Martin Luther. "Letter from a Birmingham Jail, 16 April 1963." African Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania, www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html.

X, Malcolm. "Message to the Grassroots, 10 November 1963." Teaching American History, Ashbook Center of Ashland University, teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/message-to-grassroots/.