Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X held significantly different opinions about how to advance African-Americans in American society. Malcolm X believed in the use of force to accomplish goals, whereas King supported nonviolent means. The differences between the two leaders can be explained by their differing political views, upbringings, and beliefs.
First of all, King believed the best strategy for achieving change was nonviolence. He had faith that empathy and nonviolent protests could shift people's minds and bring about the needed changes to bring about equality for African Americans. Malcolm X, on the other hand, promoted forceful resistance and self-defense. He thought that African Americans had a right to protect themselves from an unjust, violent system. Malcolm X, for instance, said in his speech "The Ballot or the Bullet" that "if it's necessary to form a Black Nationalist army, we'll form a Black Nationalist army." This basic philosophical difference is important because it indicates the degree of risk that each individual was willing to endure to accomplish his goal. King was willing to take a personal risk, but he rejected putting other people in danger. On the other hand, Malcolm X was prepared to put both his own life and the lives of others in danger to accomplish his goals.
…show more content…
King was a Christian minister who highlighted the value of showing the power of prayer. He had faith that God was on his side and that the fight for civil rights was a moral one. On the other hand, Malcolm X was a Muslim who supported the efficacy of taking action. He thought that religion could serve as an instrument for enacting social change. The difference in religious beliefs has significance because it reflects the various activist positions each individual chose. Malcolm X considered the fight for civil rights as a political problem, whereas King saw it as a moral