Malcolm X on black people and war

[Conghaileach]

Via Workers World News Service
Reprinted from the Feb. 20, 2003
issue of Workers World newspaper
-------------------------

MALCOLM X ON BLACK PEOPLE AND WAR

[On Nov. 10, 1963, the revolutionary Black nationalist Malcolm X (Al Hajj
Malik El-Shabazz) gave a powerful speech directed to a predominantly
African American audience in Detroit. Entitled "Message to the Grass
Roots," it focused on different forms of revolution. This was almost two
years before the United States widened its military presence in Vietnam
and Southeast Asia and also before Malcolm's historic 1964 trip to Mecca
and Africa. Later, on his return to the United States, Malcolm began to
develop a worldwide class view toward racism and imperialism, but he was
assassinated in 1965. Here are some excerpts from Malcolm X's 1963 talk
that ring as true today as they did almost 40 years ago.[

--Monica Moorehead

Look at the American Revolution in 1776. That revolution was for what?
For land. Why did they want land? Independence. How was it carried out?
Bloodshed. ... The French Revolution--what was it based on? The
landless against the landlord. What was it for? Land. How did they get
it? Bloodshed. Was no love lost, was no compromise, was no negotiation.
...

The Russian Revolution--what was it based on? Land, the landless against
the landlord. How did they bring it about? Bloodshed. You haven't got a
revolution that doesn't involve bloodshed. ... 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 ... but when
it comes to seeing your own churches being bombed and little Black girls
murdered, you haven't got any blood. ...

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 are going to get violent with
Hitler, and Tojo, and somebody else you don't even know?

If violence is wrong in America, violence is wrong abroad. If it is
wrong to be violent defending black women and black children and black
babies and black men, then it is wrong for America to draft us and make
us violent abroad in defense of her. And if it is right for America to
draft us, and teach us how to be violent in defense of her, then it is
right for you and me to do whatever is necessary to defend our own
people right here in this country. n

- END -

(Copyright Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to copy and
distribute verbatim copies of this document, but changing it is not
allowed. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY,
NY 10011; via e-mail: [email protected] Subscribe wwnews-
[email protected] Unsubscribe [email protected] Support the
voice of resistance http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)

[Kez]

IMO we should publicise such works as Malcom X and the such, as they are not leftist, or progressive, but reactionary forces like those set up in Iran today who were brought to kick out the imperialists.

As long as the blacks in America are racec concious they wont progress, only the class concious will progress, unite with the whites, yellow, red and all to smash capitalism.

Malcom X was a racist

[Umoja]

Thats a narrow minded view. Malcolm X believed that human unity could only result after their was black unity, because you can't try to go and solve problems outside your home if your house is already messed up the same way.

[Hampton]

This is quite ridiculous. Malcolm was not a racist. And indeed as everyone knows who has read his autobiography that as he traveled the world he was more attuned to a global conscience and awareness to the fact that every white man was, and is not, the enemy. And the concept of race instead of global conscience is also false. As Malcolm said:

"It is incorrect to classify the revolt of the Negro as simply a racial conflict of black against white, or as a purely American problem. Rather, we are today seeing a global rebellion of the oppressed against the oppressor, the exploited against the exploiter."

"Whites who are sincere should organize among themselves and figure out some strategy to break down prejudice that exists in white communities."

[Comrade Marcel]

Quote: from TavareeshKamo on 10:54 pm on Feb. 19, 2003

Malcom X was a racist


Malcolm X was not racist, he did however hold hostile views towards white Americans and did not view them as a force that would help emancipate African-Americans.

However, before he was killed his views where expanding and becoming more class concious.

Malcolm's Legacy (http://rebelyouth.ca/literature/malcolmx/mxl.html)

[Totalitarian]

Quote: from Umoja on 12:06 am on Feb. 20, 2003
Thats a narrow minded view. Malcolm X believed that human unity could only result after their was black unity, because you can't try to go and solve problems outside your home if your house is already messed up the same way.


That's fine, but can't the same argument apply to white racial unity?

[Umoja]

Yes, their should be white racial unity, just not at the expense of everyone else.

[Arkham]

No, there can't be. The reason is that the white people as a race weren't, and have never been oppressed like that. The black community required unity to win any sort of advancement for their people. In the same way the working class has always required unity to get anywhere. White pride/unity is a thinly veiled cheap shot at the struggle of minorities, only because it is uneccessary.

[Kez]

eh?

you black unity?
blacks arent a seperate entity?

it is in the bourgeois favour to play races off with each other,
we can only be class consious, we are all the same, of one class, working class, and that class must overcome the ruling oppressing class.

Kamo

[Umoja]

Not everything with class follows the borders the way you think of them. Races as a byproduct are classes. To say, "No your race doesn't mean anything" when it really does, is what scares so many blacks away from the traditional leftist movements (It's doing that for me right now infact).

[Kez]

im not white, doesnt mean id support everything my racee does, or stand in unity with them 100%.
My race is armenian, does that mean i must smash every azerbaijani face i see?
There is war now on ceace-fire, what do i do?:
1) go to war and kill azeri soldiers and civilians
or
2) get marxist revolution on both sides of the border for the masses to rise up from the profiteers and capitalists

which do i choose?

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Your ignorance has already been pointed out by people, but your claim that "Malcolm X was a racist" is the one comment which infuriates me more than any other.

I wish people like you would learn about things before you debate them. Like someone said in the thread, Malcolm travelled to Makkah for Hajj and was transformed. Malcolm X enetered Makkah, Hajj Malik Al-Shabazz returned. Brother Shabazz wanted unity. He saw, in the Holy City, people of all colours and races together as one under God.

Hajj Malik Al-Shabazz wanted blacks to unite, but also wanted peace and coexistence between people of all colours. This is basic knowledge on the man and for you to argue a point about him without this basic knowledge displays your pure ignorance. Brother Shabazz once said "Do not jump to criticise those who do not know what you do. There was a time where you did not know what you now know today". This I agree with, but ignorance is different.

It sickens me when people say Malcolm and his aim of black unity was racist.

[Exploited Class]

Quote: from TavareeshKamo on 10:12 pm on Feb. 20, 2003
eh?

you black unity?
blacks arent a seperate entity?

it is in the bourgeois favour to play races off with each other,
we can only be class consious, we are all the same, of one class, working class, and that class must overcome the ruling oppressing class.

Kamo

Okay you know what, when you are the bottom, and treated as a second class citizen, can't vote, are seperated from the rest of society through schools, drinking fountains, bus seats, libraries and even bathrooms, even hospitals - as a race or whatever you do not sit around and wait for the worker's revolution to come and save you. Just because you can function, unite and get shit done as a race, do you think they should just not and wait for the worker's revolution to come and save them. Because it still hasn't helped.

Perhaps if you studied their succesful ability to actually unite and become more empowered, beyond what we have accomplished so far, you might learn how to mimic their accomplishments. Granted Race will always be eaiser than a workers unity.

As far as Malcom X being racisist and not a socialists, you do realize that he along with Huey P Newton is in the Leftist New Reader? Printed in the 70's? With some very well known socialist/communists. Some even thrown out of Poland for being communists.

People in bad conditions, the worst conditions are not going to wait for all us.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

100% agree. It appears as if Tavareesh Kamo doesn't understand what blacks have been through in America

[Umoja]

*Does the weird cringing thing he does with his neck, before he dives off a swimming block* Okay that was useless information, but that's what I did when I read your post, exploitedclass, it was quite good.

[Hampton]

Goes out to exploitedclass (http://www.yourethemannowdog.com/)

[El Brujo]

Quote: from TavareeshKamo on 6:54 am on Feb. 20, 2003
IMO we should publicise such works as Malcom X and the such, as they are not leftist, or progressive, but reactionary forces like those set up in Iran today who were brought to kick out the imperialists.

As long as the blacks in America are racec concious they wont progress, only the class concious will progress, unite with the whites, yellow, red and all to smash capitalism.

Malcom X was a racist


Either your a hard-line revisionist or you have no clue what the fuck your talking about.

Race IS a matter BECAUSE of class. The reason blacks are repressed economically goes way back to the time of slavery. Blacks were freed but they were not given socio-economic equality (and still aren't because of the reactionary bourgeoisie trying to maintain the current system that benefits them).

Do you then support the South African Communist Party who believe in blacks uniting with a "white working class" that still makes 20 times as much as the average black in South Africa?

[Palmares]

Malchom X was a revolutionary. Unity comes in stages. Peace be upon him.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

I think that some of you mean that since blacks are seen as "a worser race", they should unite all their power to claim their rights as a human beeing.

"The White Race" doesn't need to claim rights, because it's mostly "the white race" wich "steals" rights.

But I believe that the whole uniting in race thing only worsen up the whole situation, seeying yourself as a member of a race rather than human won't bring any good.

But nothing wrong with uniting as a group exploited ones. Such as workers unite against their bosses.

As long as you don't see it as a war blacks vs. whites.

[Umoja]

So, on the same token, what do people think of people like Stokely Carmicheal (Kwame Ture) who believed that Uniting the Black community would be the primary goal, nad whites shouldn't at all be involved?

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Ofcourse it shouldn't be primary.

It should be claiming your rights.

Too bad that so much people see it as a war blacks vs. whites.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Quote: from CCCP on 11:59 am on Feb. 21, 2003
I think that some of you mean that since blacks are seen as "a worser race", they should unite all their power to claim their rights as a human beeing.

"The White Race" doesn't need to claim rights, because it's mostly "the white race" wich "steals" rights.

But I believe that the whole uniting in race thing only worsen up the whole situation, seeying yourself as a member of a race rather than human won't bring any good.

But nothing wrong with uniting as a group exploited ones. Such as workers unite against their bosses.

As long as you don't see it as a war blacks vs. whites.



So, to you, a war of WORKERS .VS. BOSSES is ok but a war of BLACKS .VS. WHITES isnt?

Both are cases of EXPLOITED .VS. EXPLOITERS so why is one ok and the other not? I don't believe a "war", as such, is called for in either of those cases, but you cannot say you agree with and respect a war by workers against bosses if you do not feel the same for blacks against whites.

Like I said, both are cases of EXPLOITED .VS. EXPLOITERS

[Conghaileach]

from Socialsmo o Muerte:
So, to you, a war of WORKERS .VS. BOSSES is ok but a war of BLACKS .VS. WHITES isnt?

Both are cases of EXPLOITED .VS. EXPLOITERS so why is one ok and the other not?

I'm white. I've never exploited a black person. So you see why I have some trouble accepting your argument here.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

You are right.....you may have never exploited a black person. Just like not ALL bosses expolit their workers.

Like I said, Im not in favour of a "war" in either case. I was just pointing out the bias in CCCP's argument

[Umoja]

It seems to me, that many of the people here find the idea of black vs. white (or any number of other combinations) being important, because they don't come from the opressed posistion, and never really can.

[Totalitarian]

Quote: from Arkham on 6:49 pm on Feb. 20, 2003
No, there can't be. The reason is that the white people as a race weren't, and have never been oppressed like that. The black community required unity to win any sort of advancement for their people. In the same way the working class has always required unity to get anywhere. White pride/unity is a thinly veiled cheap shot at the struggle of minorities, only because it is uneccessary.

White people's identity is based on common ancestry and history, just like blacks and other peoples

Racial unity needn't be something which causes conflict with other races; its an instinctive reaction to be race-consciouss

People care about more things than eliminating the owners of capital

capitalists are not one unified bloc anyway

[Kez]

what the hell?

As long as "communists" or "socialist" see the struggle as white vs black then there will be no revolution.
There is only one struggle, the class struggle.
By having the class struggle by default the race struggle goes away, it CANNOT be around

Who was that motherfucker who said i didnt know about racism? As a non-white i been subjected to racial hatred since i was 12, so dont lecture you on what i do/dont know while your sitting behind your little computer thinking your some sort of gift to the "struggle".

Racial unity plays in the hands of bourgeois, because then the employer plays off 2 races against each other (as in the case in Cali where mexicans are played off against armenians, blacks, and iranians).

Until people realise that a race struggle is idiotic to the core there will be no class struggle

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

It was me that said it.

And dont you try and lecture me. I don't want to bring in personal arguments but I have been victimised all my life. I live in an area where just about everyone is white and racism is rife. Ive been turned away from playing football for my country at my age probably because of my race. I was by far the best in my position and everyone knew, but the coaches, who called me "Darkie" decided to drop me from the set up so that the white kids can all play. Ive been refused places by elitist universities which are predominatly white. How do I know? In their offers to me they issued a separate question asking my race. The question wasn't even in printed writing like the rest of the letter, it was hand written. It had clearly been put in after suspicion was caused probably because my surname sounded unusual.

Your first mistake was to make this discussion personal. Your second was making this amazing assumption that if an great almighty class struggle is defeated and the romanticism of a classless society comes about, then race wont matter. I dont like swearing in debate, but OPEN YOUR FUCKIN EYES.


Yes, it was me who said you didn't know what racism was and I stick to my guns. You might have been subjected to the odd bit of racism, btu that doesn't mean you know what racism is. Prejudice based on race is just as bad if not worse than prejudice based on class. You need to open your eyes to things which really happen. Lose your "Marxism" for a second and use your common sense.

[Kez]

ur right, lets not make this personal.
i do no what racism is.

there is no romantism about if, if a class struggle is one it is IMPOSSIBLE for racial differences to occur, how can they?
The reason why they cannot is in that when they were in class stuggle they had forcibly been in racial mixture, and therefore the stupidity of racial differences dissapears.

i know this sounds wishy washy but its 23:13 here so im tired.

Malcom X was a nationalist, how could he have supported one race over another?
There was racism during Tsarist Russia, so why during lenins rule was there no racism? Only with the stalinist deformation of the state did racism occur once more, leading to armenian pogroms committed by azeri's in Baku, Sumgait etc

[Hampton]

Taken from A Declaration of Independence:

"The political philosophy of black nationalism means: we must control the politics and the politicians of our community. They must no longer take orders from outside forces. We will organize, and sweep out of office all Negro politicians who are puppets for the outside forces."

[Totalitarian]

TavareeshKamo:

there is no romantism about if, if a class struggle is one it is IMPOSSIBLE for racial differences to occur, how can they?

Racial differences are genetically based, so in a sense they are unalterable.

Its based on ancestry, like an extended family. In my opinion people will always have a feeling of kinship towards those more closely related to them, it is only natural

People of different racial backgrounds getting together in a common cause is great; however, lets not underestimate the force that race has in the human mind

Sometimes i think people try to forcibly repress racial feelings, make racial consciouness seem "evil" yet it can never really be eliminated, we can just hope it finds a peaceful outlet in our actions

Ignoring race is very dangerous, i think.

[Kez]

what u base this on?

you go to any cosmopolitan city now, and people get on regardless of racee, no-one but the racists gives a shit about race

[Umoja]

Then why is it that most ethnic groups live in close proximity to each other? Just becuase it's cosmopolitian doesn't mean people don't find the easiest common grounds on racial boundries, it's still a dividing point.

[Kez]

y?
because if you hadnt notices we dont live in a socialist country, but a capuitalist one.....
thats why racial bounries are present.

Once there is a socialist revolution ethnic differences are put behind

[Conghaileach]

This idea that ethnic groups live close to one another is because of ghettoisation.

[Umoja]

Although, many would point out Cuba as a perfect example, their are still racial differnces, that are only overcome simply by the fact that all Latinos view themselves as Latinos culturally. Their are still derogatory words for dark skinned Cubans, so although it may seem racism will just fall apart under Socialism, it isn't the savior of humanity, we have more problems to resolve other then getting rid of capitalism.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Whoever said the bit about it being genetic differences is spot on.

Before it becomes a social construction, racism derives from genetical differences. From there, people give it social meaning.

I don't agree with what you say that in a Socialist society, the idea of race would vanish. That's a stupid thing to say. Race will always be an issue. But the problem is that it is always an issue of conflict.

[Totalitarian]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 12:07 am on Feb. 25, 2003
Whoever said the bit about it being genetic differences is spot on.

Before it becomes a social construction, racism derives from genetical differences. From there, people give it social meaning.

I agree.


I don't agree with what you say that in a Socialist society, the idea of race would vanish. That's a stupid thing to say. Race will always be an issue. But the problem is that it is always an issue of conflict.

A revolution must occur within the minds of humanity...or it is worthless

[4514]

race isnt skin colour, ive just spent a year in london and my skin went from brown to white, now im back downunder and in the sun, my skin has returned to a brown colour, but the whole time wether i was dark or light skined, i was still the same person, the same race, a proud half english and half maori. skin colour is just another reason for ignorant minds to hate each other.

[El Brujo]

Just like there is a huge difference between nationalism and ultra-nationalism, there is a huge difference between unity of an opressed race and racism. The bourgeoisie are willing to keep all elements of the current system (including racism) just to keep the bourgeoisie alive.

If you study dialectics, you will know what Im talking about. The Black Panthers are a Maoist organization that believe fighting for national/racial equality goes hand-in-hand with class-struggle. It makes perfect sense as opressed races being race-conscious is the same as opressed classes being class-conscious.

Revisionists like the South African Communist Party try to eliminate this inalienable fact just to be politically correct. There is no "white working class" in South Africa because the poorest of the whites (which only make up 12% of the population there) still make 20 times as much as the average black. Class-equality will only come with racial equality in cases such as these, of which the US is a dilluted version.

[Totalitarian]

El Brujo:


It makes perfect sense as opressed races being race-conscious is the same as opressed classes being class-conscious.

So you have no problem with oppresssed whites in zimbabwe being race consciouss?


(Edited by Totalitarian at 10:29 am on Feb. 25, 2003)

[Umoja]

That's one thats harder for me to call. On the one hand, I can't help but view them as invadeders, but on the other hand they shouldn't be killed because of their parents very bad mistakes. If they were race conscious..... ehhh.... I guess they have a right to be, but it might be dangerous towards them.

[Kez]

u cant be both, they are contradictory

The whites in Zimbbwe must unite witht he blacks to overthrow the regime and create a democratic workers state, not fuckup of marxism bullshit

[El Brujo]

Quote: from Totalitarian on 6:28 pm on Feb. 25, 2003
El Brujo:


It makes perfect sense as opressed races being race-conscious is the same as opressed classes being class-conscious.

So you have no problem with oppresssed whites in zimbabwe being race consciouss?


(Edited by Totalitarian at 10:29 am on Feb. 25, 2003)


Whites in Zimbabwe aren't "opressed". With the 2% white population there is, they held an apartheid regime for almost 2 decades and still continue to live in luxury while many blacks are dying of hunger. I don't support Mugabe but not for trying to eliminate all elements of colonialism, rather because he is maintaining the bourgeoisie and not properly distributing wealth. Rather than try to kick whites out (which obviously is crossing the line and IS racist), he should nationalize businesses owned by both whites and blacks and give them to the people.

[Totalitarian]

El Brujo:


Whites in Zimbabwe aren't "opressed". With the 2% white population there is, they held an apartheid regime for almost 2 decades and still continue to live in luxury while many blacks are dying of hunger. I don't support Mugabe but not for trying to eliminate all elements of colonialism, rather because he is maintaining the bourgeoisie and not properly distributing wealth. Rather than try to kick whites out (which obviously is crossing the line and IS racist), he should nationalize businesses owned by both whites and blacks and give them to the people.

Don't you think its a form of oppression if a certain racial group is officially demonised by the state, and that same group of people continually attacked in a genocidal fashion?

Its not just whites facing Mugabe's genocide: non-Shona blacks are being victimised, as well as semitic jews. (a friend of mine was in zim for mugabe's election speech where he proclaimed that whites and jews must be uprooted like weeds)

The deputy leader of zimbabwe has also proclaimed that whites are "non-human".

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Totalitarian is right.

However much Mugabe rejects colonialism, his oppression of the white folk is sickening. They cannot be punished for what their long-gone relatives did.

It is like Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye will only end up making the whole world blind". What Mugabe is doing won't benefit anyone in the long term. I dont think he is a danger though, he will be gone soon. The people are seeing what his faults are, and they exist in their plenty.

[El Brujo]

Quote: from Totalitarian on 6:06 am on Feb. 26, 2003


Don't you think its a form of oppression if a certain racial group is officially demonised by the state, and that same group of people continually attacked in a genocidal fashion?

Its not just whites facing Mugabe's genocide: non-Shona blacks are being victimised, as well as semitic jews. (a friend of mine was in zim for mugabe's election speech where he proclaimed that whites and jews must be uprooted like weeds)

The deputy leader of zimbabwe has also proclaimed that whites are "non-human".


I see what your saying and I agree but you must have in mind that whites are, nevertheless, an "elite minority" in Zimbabwe still.

Like I said, Zimbabwe has always had horrible leadership, first the apartheids and now black rule that instead of concentrating on demolishing the status quo and racial socio-economic inequality (not to mention SEVERELY punishing ONLY those responsible for apartheid crimes such as Ian Smith), is making vengefull counter-racism upon a group while keeping them as the elite, something which not only isn't benefitting the people but is increasing racial tensions.

[Totalitarian]

ElBrujo:


I see what your saying and I agree but you must have in mind that whites are, nevertheless, an "elite minority" in Zimbabwe still.

Its a tricky situation...i think there is definitely a large element of ethnic Shona nationalism in Mugabe's tactics, not just socialism.

Hitler referred to german Jews as an "elite minority" and went about confiscating their positions, taking away their rights and property. We all know how that ended up.

There appears to be a fine line between socialism and national socialism in my opinion, especially when ethnic conflict becomes involved.



(Edited by Totalitarian at 7:34 pm on Feb. 27, 2003)