Martin Luther King Jr. was a better leader for civil rights for blacks than was Malcolm X.

Malcolm X was a leader for civil rights for blacks in a different manner, as derived from his experiences and knowledge. His leadership, however, was a short period of his life and carried not the weight of Martin Luther King Jr.

Malcolm X began his leadership in a more volatile manner than did the master of “civil disobedience” Martin Luther King Jr. In his militancy, Malcolm X alienated the white communities, even those whites who admired and followed Mr. King.

The principle point being that Malcolm X vied for an equality that was in essence a superiority of black persons. This had much to do with his indoctrination into the Nation of Islam, in the United States. A renegade, cult-like, sect of the Islamic faith that helped to steer Malcolm X toward a leadership path more anti-white than pro-black.

Unbeknownst to himself, Malcolm had become involved with a pretense of Islam, not the true Islam itself. A corrupted organization of gangster types, an irreverent religion dressed in sheep clothing, as it were. A fanatical schism of Islam that ruled by the gun with the admonition that “if you are not with us, you are against us”, shooting and not even bothering to ask questions later.

Malcolm X would enter the world of true civil rights leadership too late, and for too short of a period, to be nearly as effective as Mr. King. His association with the falsified aspect of Islam would be a blocking of his leadership and he would find his death at their hands.

Late in a career that would be short-lived, Malcolm X made a pilgrimage to Mecca, where he had a revelation. Seeing that all persons were dressed alike, no person dressed for status above or below the other. Persons of all colors, races, ages, etc. Malcolm realized that he was no better than others were for his racial background, nor were others better than he was for their racial backgrounds. Malcolm saw equality at its finest.

With this epiphany, that reaching for superiority was not the same as reaching for equality, Malcolm returned to the United States of America and renounced his affiliation with the offshoot Islamic sect that had misguided him. His leadership changed from an anti-white point of view to a pro-black point of view. The American Islamic church to which he had belonged did not like Malcolm’s change at all, especially with knowing that in Malcolm was a great power that was of benefit to them.

Because he had left and denounced the vulgarized church of Islam in which he had been a member, he was no longer “with us”. The penalty for leaving this brotherhood of Islam was death. Sadly, the facade of Islam executed Malcolm X just as his pro-black leadership began to replace his anti-white leadership.

Malcolm X would surely have become a great leader for the civil rights movement of blacks in America. Even in his short-lived leadership, it is undeniable that he accomplished some great things in forwarding civil rights for the black community. He, as did Martin Luther King Jr., would surely have come to see that whites, as blacks, just wanted to live and let live. That denial of civil liberties was more a thing of governments and groups than the general population.

However, as it stands, Martin Luther King Jr. far exceeded Malcolm X as a leader for civil rights for blacks.

The black population may have been Mr. King’s foremost cause but Mr. King envisioned and called for civil rights for all. In this, he procured the backing of many persons of all colors, creeds, etc. The many organizations and yet to organize groups who dreamed of their own recognition in obtaining civil rights.

Where Malcolm X’s charisma would be directed solely at the black community and his hand guided by an unorthodox and violent faction of the Nation of Islam; Martin Luther King Jr. directed his charisma at all people and was guided by principles of a Christian undertaking.

Mr. King’s non-violent approach of civil disobedience also did not scare the white population, as Malcolm X scared the white population (in the years before his enlightenment).

Martin Luther King Jr. led with an almost unthinkable demand to be peacefully disobedient. A leader of such strength was Mr. King that a much-abused people put away the natural penchant for physically defending himself or herself.

It is claimed by many that Malcolm X was also not violent; this is not quite true in his beginnings. He who survives a violent upbringing will normally lean toward violence as an answer, and Malcolm X was no exception. He called for a fighting of the white man, under all circumstances. Where he, himself, did not pick an iron pipe from the debris and use it, he incited others to do so. This before he came to understand that he had been misled by the splintered pretense of a Nation of Islam which defied Islam itself.

To recognize the immensity of Martin Luther King Jr. in his leadership role, one need only listen to the story of one black man.

The young black man, schoolbooks in hand, was walking down the street, minding his own business, when two white police officers stopped him.

Knocking the books from him, they began to hit him. As Marin Luther King Jr. had taught, he did not lift a hand to defend himself.

When the officers stopped beating and kicking him, as he lay on the ground. He rose and picked his books off the pavement saying, “If you gentlemen are finished now, I would like to be on my way.”

He said the two officers stood there looking at him. Stunned, they said nothing.

He walked silently away and would later say that it was the time that he realized that there was great power in turning the other cheek.

I should think that, in that moment, two police officers also learned something.

Violence is a natural reaction to violence. For a man to lead a people into doing what comes natural is one thing. For a man to lead a people that they withhold a natural response is a verification of a greater leadership.

I have a deep respect for Malcolm X. I believe the story of his life should be a positive influence on any person. That, even in the midst of what one sees as righteous, things can come that open the eyes further to a different understanding.

Malcolm X was not afraid to change and, especially for someone in the forefront of the public eye, to change takes monumental courage.

Malcolm X was a better leader for civil rights for blacks than many. If he had not been executed in his prime, and at the start of his great change of vision, I believe that he would have been one of the greatest persons in the history of the world.

Nevertheless, Malcolm was denied a reaching his potential. This hardly makes him a bad’ or worse’ leader but it mitigates the question of better’ leader that this category of articles raises.

Therefore, as Martin Luther King Jr. affected more of the black population and brought civil rights for blacks to the attention of more people’s non-black, bringing also, by way of his methods, a concurring that blacks deserved these civil rights. I would have to consider him a “better” leader for civil rights for blacks than was Malcolm X.