What do you think?
Rate this book
Martin and Malcolm and America: A Dream or a Nightmare?
Reexamines the ideology of the two most prominent leaders of the civil rights movement of the 1960s
358 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1991
107 people are currently reading
5471 people want to read
About the author
James H. Cone
41 books342 followersJames Hal Cone was an advocate of Black liberation theology, a theology grounded in the experience of African Americans, and related to other Christian liberation theologies. In 1969, his book Black Theology and Black Power provided a new way to articulate the distinctiveness of theology in the black Church. James Cone’s work was influential and political from the time of his first publication, and remains so to this day. His work has been both utilized and critiqued inside and outside of the African American theological community.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews
January 5, 2019
Professor Cone has done much research in comparing the lives, careers, and teachings of the two leading figures of the Civil Rights Movement and Black Power Movement: Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, whose lives were both cut short by assassins. Cone argues that each was important in his own right, and the product of their upbringing, with Martin growing up as a middle class black preacher's son in the South while Malcolm grew up dirt poor in the ghettos of the North (Lansing, Harlem) and served time in prison. Martin was a non-violent integrationist with a dream whereas Malcolm was a brash separatist living a nightmare, calling for self-defense. Martin had a broad appeal to whites and Christians whereas Malcolm's appeal was more limited to the radical and poor, but his contribution to the civil rights movement has been under-recognized, especially as it complemented Martin's work. Malcolm spent too many years under the shackles of Elijah Mohammad, which precluded his participation in politics, and it was not until his censure and separation when he broadened his activity, mind with greater international exposure that he became most enlightened and willing to work together. I liked the characterization of Malcolm as a "field nigger" and Martin as a "house nigger" insightful. However, I disagree with Cone's attempt to characterize the two as friends, especially with Martin's steadfast refusals to meet with Malcolm.
February 5, 2019
Rev. Dr. James Cone's Martin & Malcolm & America is a masterful work, chock full of piercing insights into both of these transcendent figures of American history and into the times and contexts that shaped them. As such, I recommend it highly to anyone who wants to understand both of these men and their legacies deeply.
And therein is one of the author's central and most compelling theses: that in order to understand the one fully, you must compare and contrast him to the other. This sort of 'two sides of the same coin' dialectic is intriguing and helpful in surfacing meaningful insights into these two towering figures of 20th century social history.
Further, Dr. Cone's comparison of their respective core constituencies - MLK's being southern Negroes and X's being northern, urban Blacks - and philosophies - integration vs. Black nationalism - yields many meaningful insights as well. For example, I found the author's treatment of Dr. King's post-Watts riot experience profoundly insightful. In it, he identifies that limit to MLK's then imminence as the American Black leader and both what the latter then learns from this and how he evolves because of it.
Finally, I was moved, inspired and awed by the author's insightful treatment of the subjects' respective evolutions, which, he rightly and adroitly points out, were in directions toward each other: Martin became a true radical in the last phase of his (public) life and Malcolm became more mainstream in both his interest and approach. For example, his examination of their sexism is masterful and surprising as it rightly explores and exposes that the mature Malcolm was more open in his approach to the inclusion of women in the struggle than was the mature Martin (which is not how we tend to think of the latter today due to the hagiography in which he has been cloaked since his death almost a half-century ago).
I could go on, but it would be like sharing too many 'spoiler alerts': this book is full of wisdom and insight, so I urge prospective readers to discover this for themselves.
And yet it's not perfect by any stretch. Among other (glaring) weaknesses is that the author often makes significant assertions without backing them up and tends to get a little preachy (and a lot less scholarly) when concluding a chapter or section thereof. It's jarring to go from insightful biography to soaring prescriptive social advocacy (even though the latter is based on the work and legacies of the subjects). Simply put, when the 'shoulds' and 'oughts' show up, they are most often far less compelling than the analysis and insight that preceeded them. A final quibble: it took me a while to warm up to the book. It's hard to say why exactly - from the moment that I opened it I respected it but it took a while to like/fully enjoy it - but the impression lingers even now that I've finished it. This being said, it's still a powerful read and a powerful and major contribution.
On the whole, this is a towering, important work and thus I recommend it highly. So much so that I wish that Dr. Cone would update the book: though its insights are still plentiful and profound almost a quarter-century later, I suspect that they would be even more so were he to reflect on what he's and we've learned since. I, for one, will be at the front of the line to get a copy to devour.
And, to me, this is a great way to end this review: to share that, after warming up to it, I devoured this book and wish that there were more of it to consume. Seems to me that this is a great indication of a work's significance if it leaves you (ful)filled and yet wanting more....
And therein is one of the author's central and most compelling theses: that in order to understand the one fully, you must compare and contrast him to the other. This sort of 'two sides of the same coin' dialectic is intriguing and helpful in surfacing meaningful insights into these two towering figures of 20th century social history.
Further, Dr. Cone's comparison of their respective core constituencies - MLK's being southern Negroes and X's being northern, urban Blacks - and philosophies - integration vs. Black nationalism - yields many meaningful insights as well. For example, I found the author's treatment of Dr. King's post-Watts riot experience profoundly insightful. In it, he identifies that limit to MLK's then imminence as the American Black leader and both what the latter then learns from this and how he evolves because of it.
Finally, I was moved, inspired and awed by the author's insightful treatment of the subjects' respective evolutions, which, he rightly and adroitly points out, were in directions toward each other: Martin became a true radical in the last phase of his (public) life and Malcolm became more mainstream in both his interest and approach. For example, his examination of their sexism is masterful and surprising as it rightly explores and exposes that the mature Malcolm was more open in his approach to the inclusion of women in the struggle than was the mature Martin (which is not how we tend to think of the latter today due to the hagiography in which he has been cloaked since his death almost a half-century ago).
I could go on, but it would be like sharing too many 'spoiler alerts': this book is full of wisdom and insight, so I urge prospective readers to discover this for themselves.
And yet it's not perfect by any stretch. Among other (glaring) weaknesses is that the author often makes significant assertions without backing them up and tends to get a little preachy (and a lot less scholarly) when concluding a chapter or section thereof. It's jarring to go from insightful biography to soaring prescriptive social advocacy (even though the latter is based on the work and legacies of the subjects). Simply put, when the 'shoulds' and 'oughts' show up, they are most often far less compelling than the analysis and insight that preceeded them. A final quibble: it took me a while to warm up to the book. It's hard to say why exactly - from the moment that I opened it I respected it but it took a while to like/fully enjoy it - but the impression lingers even now that I've finished it. This being said, it's still a powerful read and a powerful and major contribution.
On the whole, this is a towering, important work and thus I recommend it highly. So much so that I wish that Dr. Cone would update the book: though its insights are still plentiful and profound almost a quarter-century later, I suspect that they would be even more so were he to reflect on what he's and we've learned since. I, for one, will be at the front of the line to get a copy to devour.
And, to me, this is a great way to end this review: to share that, after warming up to it, I devoured this book and wish that there were more of it to consume. Seems to me that this is a great indication of a work's significance if it leaves you (ful)filled and yet wanting more....
September 25, 2008
I enjoyed the contrast between the lives of these two great leaders, but it was difficult read for me sustain. It was my daily rush hour reading on the metro, and inadvertantly someone would always ask me about the book, leading people who normally do not communicate to have a pretty in depth conversation fairly early in the morning. In that way, I learned far more than what was outlined in the book.
May 16, 2020
I put this on my ‘Want to Read’ shelf a few weeks ago but I didn’t expect to get around to reading it. I was gifted it so made sure to devour the words of James H.Cone. My intentions were to take my time reading this but I ended up reading it in a day - a testament to the writing style.
Having read The Autobiography of Malcolm X a few months ago I was quite familiar with the roots of his political views and what inspired his thinking. My knowledge of Martin Luther King, Jr. prior to reading this was only a viewing of his famous “I have a dream” speech. I was quite surprised when I found he held almost polarising views to Malcolm – Nonviolent Integrationism as oppose to Malcolm’s Black Nationalism. Regardless of this, their end goal was the same; the fight against injustice in America.
"Martin and Malcolm and America: A Dream or a Nightmare?" is a great, objective microanalysis of the contrasting childhoods, education and theologies of the two. How these factors shaped their ideologies, moulded them into the great leaders they became, and what eventually lead to their deaths – quoting directly from the book, “Malcolm X was killed by the blacks he loved and was seeking to liberate from self-hate. Martin King was killed by the whites he loved and was seeking to set free from racism.” The constant back and forth between Martin’s Dream and Malcolm’s Nightmare, detailing their motivations was like watching a basketball match (my heart yearns for sport in these *checks notes* unprecedented times). A final observation was that it is quite worrying noticing parallels between America in their lifetime then and modern-day America.
It’s an extremely detailed book (full of quotables for you pseudo-woke tumblr chicks) that I recommend you all check out.
Having read The Autobiography of Malcolm X a few months ago I was quite familiar with the roots of his political views and what inspired his thinking. My knowledge of Martin Luther King, Jr. prior to reading this was only a viewing of his famous “I have a dream” speech. I was quite surprised when I found he held almost polarising views to Malcolm – Nonviolent Integrationism as oppose to Malcolm’s Black Nationalism. Regardless of this, their end goal was the same; the fight against injustice in America.
"Martin and Malcolm and America: A Dream or a Nightmare?" is a great, objective microanalysis of the contrasting childhoods, education and theologies of the two. How these factors shaped their ideologies, moulded them into the great leaders they became, and what eventually lead to their deaths – quoting directly from the book, “Malcolm X was killed by the blacks he loved and was seeking to liberate from self-hate. Martin King was killed by the whites he loved and was seeking to set free from racism.” The constant back and forth between Martin’s Dream and Malcolm’s Nightmare, detailing their motivations was like watching a basketball match (my heart yearns for sport in these *checks notes* unprecedented times). A final observation was that it is quite worrying noticing parallels between America in their lifetime then and modern-day America.
It’s an extremely detailed book (full of quotables for you pseudo-woke tumblr chicks) that I recommend you all check out.
July 17, 2017
Cone argued that while Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X are often framed as polar opposite leaders of two competing ideologies within Black Freedom struggles, that of nonviolent integration and Black Nationalism; they are much more similar in their philosophies and moved increasingly closer to one other’s positions towards the end of their lives. While King came from a middle class background and preached respectability and nonviolence, spoke in the language of Black Christianity, and whose primary base was “Southern Negros”, and primarily reached out to white audiences to sway them to build a better America for everyone, free of legal segregation, Malcolm X came from poverty and was a former street hustler who converted to the Nation of Islam, a small but rapidly growing sect that was quite separate from traditional Islam and embraced black nationalism and separatism, whose primary base were poor urban blacks (he hated the term Negro) and whose primary audience was those same poor blacks, who cared not for creating bonds with middle class blacks or whites.
Malcolm X, in the 11 months from his separation from the Nation of Islam before his murder, underwent a rapid transformation in which he sought to move to work within civil rights framework and build alliances without abandoning his notions of self-defense and self-determination. Martin Luther King, after the Watts Riots shortly after the passage of the Civil Rights bill, began to move beyond demanding civil rights and towards democratic socialism as he saw that it did not matter if Black Americans could eat at the same restaurant if they did not have money for food. He also began calling for more radical measures and began bringing up calls for reconstruction of American society, bringing up class as much as race and speaking out against the Vietnam War before his assassination.
Cone argued that the two complimented and corrected each other, sometimes indirectly and sometimes consciously, especially as they began to move towards each other’s positions near the ends of their lives. Malcolm X even explicitly said that if whites didn’t listen to King, people like him were there with other solutions. Both were also human beings and were flawed, often being bad on gender and sexism and sidelining women activists, calling for black men to have dignity to provide for women. While Malcolm X often directly criticized King’s nonviolence, King usually tried to ignore the black nationalists. Both were deeply religious during the height of their careers, and sought to directly tie political goals with religion. King was critical of black clergy who concentrated on heaven and salvation without discussing the here and now, while Malcolm X’s explicit political arguments made Alijah Muhammad uncomfortable ultimately.
Key Themes and Concepts:
-Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. ultimately compliment and correct each other’s positions and helped each other, mostly from afar and not directly, when their positions began to shift towards larger critiques of world wide capitalism.
-Both were hostile to Socialists because socialism was materialism and atheistic, but both began to soften and sympathize towards socialism as their views shifted and because of contacts they had with black radicals.
-For King’s Dream of a better America, to Malco;m X America was a nightmare that Blacks could only hope to fight for liberation from, by any means necessary. King sought to include blacks in Americanness, while Malcolm X sought to separate.
-Of Dubois’s concept of Black Americans representing both Americanness and Africanness, King was the Americanness and Malcolm was Africanness. King represented hope for inclusion and respect and the end of Jim Crow, while Malcolm represented the black poor across the entire United States who suffered by de facto segregation and poverty. King eventually moved to seeing that the end of Jim Crow would not solve Black American’s problems, especially after the Watts Rebellion in a city without Jim Crow laws.
Malcolm X, in the 11 months from his separation from the Nation of Islam before his murder, underwent a rapid transformation in which he sought to move to work within civil rights framework and build alliances without abandoning his notions of self-defense and self-determination. Martin Luther King, after the Watts Riots shortly after the passage of the Civil Rights bill, began to move beyond demanding civil rights and towards democratic socialism as he saw that it did not matter if Black Americans could eat at the same restaurant if they did not have money for food. He also began calling for more radical measures and began bringing up calls for reconstruction of American society, bringing up class as much as race and speaking out against the Vietnam War before his assassination.
Cone argued that the two complimented and corrected each other, sometimes indirectly and sometimes consciously, especially as they began to move towards each other’s positions near the ends of their lives. Malcolm X even explicitly said that if whites didn’t listen to King, people like him were there with other solutions. Both were also human beings and were flawed, often being bad on gender and sexism and sidelining women activists, calling for black men to have dignity to provide for women. While Malcolm X often directly criticized King’s nonviolence, King usually tried to ignore the black nationalists. Both were deeply religious during the height of their careers, and sought to directly tie political goals with religion. King was critical of black clergy who concentrated on heaven and salvation without discussing the here and now, while Malcolm X’s explicit political arguments made Alijah Muhammad uncomfortable ultimately.
Key Themes and Concepts:
-Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. ultimately compliment and correct each other’s positions and helped each other, mostly from afar and not directly, when their positions began to shift towards larger critiques of world wide capitalism.
-Both were hostile to Socialists because socialism was materialism and atheistic, but both began to soften and sympathize towards socialism as their views shifted and because of contacts they had with black radicals.
-For King’s Dream of a better America, to Malco;m X America was a nightmare that Blacks could only hope to fight for liberation from, by any means necessary. King sought to include blacks in Americanness, while Malcolm X sought to separate.
-Of Dubois’s concept of Black Americans representing both Americanness and Africanness, King was the Americanness and Malcolm was Africanness. King represented hope for inclusion and respect and the end of Jim Crow, while Malcolm represented the black poor across the entire United States who suffered by de facto segregation and poverty. King eventually moved to seeing that the end of Jim Crow would not solve Black American’s problems, especially after the Watts Rebellion in a city without Jim Crow laws.
June 8, 2020
“𝙒𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙡𝙤𝙤𝙠𝙚𝙙 𝙪𝙥𝙤𝙣 𝙖𝙨 𝙖𝙣 𝘼𝙢𝙚𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙙𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙢 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙬𝙝𝙞𝙩𝙚 𝙥𝙚𝙤𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙝𝙖𝙨 𝙡𝙤𝙣𝙜 𝙗𝙚𝙚𝙣 𝙖𝙣 𝘼𝙢𝙚𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙣𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩𝙢𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙗𝙡𝙖𝙘𝙠 𝙥𝙚𝙤𝙥𝙡𝙚.”
— 𝗠𝗮𝗹𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗺 𝗫, 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟮
Dr. Cone’s detailed and thorough account of the lives of the most significant black leaders of the civil rights movement made for an enlightening and fascinating read. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X remain two of the most renowned political activists in the world today, both incredibly unique personalities struggling against the same evil - racism, and the same goal - freedom for African Americans. Their unwavering conviction and passion for the reformation of America was manifest throughout their lives, and it would be an injustice to discuss one without mentioning the influence and impact of the other. ✍🏼
Typically depicted as deeply contrasting figures, they were not too dissimilar - particularly with the advent of MX renouncing the Nation of Islam and finding common ground with MLK. Their varying political stances, ideologies and beliefs were sculpted by their differences in childhood, class, religion and family dynamics. In terms of freedom, MLK is painted as a Christian Integrationist, MX a Muslim Nationalist; the former sought to liberate blacks through educating and appealing to whites, and the latter (initially) by renouncing American culture altogether, advocating a reversion back to their original African roots.
One thing I truly admired in both figures was the presence of God in their struggle for justice. Consciousness of the divine was central to their campaigns, and I find it hard to believe that either would have made such a significant impact on the world if not for their deep-rooted religious beliefs. ☪️✝️
Overall this was a great objective read. Cone’s analysis is balanced, equal and dense with information. I don’t think I could’ve picked a more appropriate time to read this book. As MLK stated: “𝙄𝙣𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙚 𝙖𝙣𝙮𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙖 𝙩𝙝𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙤 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙚 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚.”
5/5 ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
— 𝗠𝗮𝗹𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗺 𝗫, 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟮
Dr. Cone’s detailed and thorough account of the lives of the most significant black leaders of the civil rights movement made for an enlightening and fascinating read. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X remain two of the most renowned political activists in the world today, both incredibly unique personalities struggling against the same evil - racism, and the same goal - freedom for African Americans. Their unwavering conviction and passion for the reformation of America was manifest throughout their lives, and it would be an injustice to discuss one without mentioning the influence and impact of the other. ✍🏼
Typically depicted as deeply contrasting figures, they were not too dissimilar - particularly with the advent of MX renouncing the Nation of Islam and finding common ground with MLK. Their varying political stances, ideologies and beliefs were sculpted by their differences in childhood, class, religion and family dynamics. In terms of freedom, MLK is painted as a Christian Integrationist, MX a Muslim Nationalist; the former sought to liberate blacks through educating and appealing to whites, and the latter (initially) by renouncing American culture altogether, advocating a reversion back to their original African roots.
One thing I truly admired in both figures was the presence of God in their struggle for justice. Consciousness of the divine was central to their campaigns, and I find it hard to believe that either would have made such a significant impact on the world if not for their deep-rooted religious beliefs. ☪️✝️
Overall this was a great objective read. Cone’s analysis is balanced, equal and dense with information. I don’t think I could’ve picked a more appropriate time to read this book. As MLK stated: “𝙄𝙣𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙚 𝙖𝙣𝙮𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙖 𝙩𝙝𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙤 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙚 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚.”
5/5 ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
December 6, 2020
A striking comparison of Martin Luther King's dream versus Malcolm X's nightmare. Martin, born to relatively wealthy black parents in the south, and raised in the Christian church, saw opportunity and a common belief in the values of Jesus. Malcolm X, born in the poor ghettos of a supposedly integrated midwestern city, was left on his own to find work through schemes in an individualistic and cutthroat society that didn't care about him, only found religion, the Nation of Islam, while in prison. His outlook was based on his lived experience of segregated ghettos, few opportunities, police brutality, and an every man for himself mentality, even within the black community. But the brilliance of this book, lies in the analysis that as they each aged, their ideas and actions moved toward each other. Martin Luther King, after seeing successful legislation end Jim Crow segregation, started to see that the problems of the north and west: poverty, incarceration, and isolation, affected the black and brown communities in ways that were far more reaching and more difficult to solve. Malcolm X, saw the successes of sit-ins, boycotts, and non-violent protest, and began to have some hope. He tried reaching out to Martin, but was assassinated before anything developed. Martin, in turn, had expanded his vision to fight poverty, and was killed while trying to organize a march for workers, known as the "Poor People's Campaign". The book was sweeping in scope, encompassing all aspects of the men's lives, while also following the Civil Rights movement from the turn of the 20th century into the 1980's. It is well worth reading for all levels of knowledge, from someone just curious about the Civil Rights movement to someone with a wide-ranging knowledge.
November 4, 2012
The genius of Cone's writing lies in the dialectics, the tension that finds truth in the midst of an identification with oppression as the only route to freedom. The tension plays itself out in both the abstract and the empirical in liberation struggles. In the 1950s-1960s, these two men represented the tensions of righteous indignation as both justice and love. It was further represented in the emphases both placed on their religions of Islam and Christianity, and through the open racism of the South and the more "politically correct racism" of the North. That tension still exists today as we look back and compare the racism of the 1960s to now. Even as Cone wrote this book in 1990, he stated that the condition of poor blacks was worse than in the time of Martin and Malcolm. It is even more true today, with the largest prison population (comprised primarily of minorities) in both United States history and of any nation in the world and obscene rates of poverty and income disparity in black communities. Cone - like Malcolm and Martin - states the hard truth without anything to make it more palatable. His is a voice that needs to be heard, and his writings on Liberation Theology as well as who Martin and Malcolm were and what they represented needs to be considered over and above any mainstream interpretations that are outright lies and distortions in most cases. Both of these men would be castigated in today's American political climate, and it is a dishonor to their status as martyrs to co-opt them for purposes other than complete revolutionary upheaval and destruction of racism in modern-day America.
May 30, 2024
WOW!
There’s so much I want to say about this book.
First, I am so glad to have been recommended the book after finishing The Autobiography of Malcolm X. It certainly worked perfectly in that order. And it kept me on my toes as after I finished X’s biography, I felt like “what now?” Now that I’m done with this book, I feel complete but I’m sad that I finished the book lol.
Just like when I read X’s biography, I felt some kind of way about his earlier thought process. This book not only explores that, but in comparison to King’s thought process, it completes it.
I learned so much about the both of them. My opinion on X fluctuated at times, but overall, I enjoy both King and X respectively. Learning that X wanted to help King in his later years after trashing him, was quite the turn around, but it gave me a more positive view on him. Not to say that my views on X are totally negative, but this book paints a wonderful comparison to both King and X.
I need to say that I really love that this book explored how people see Malcolm and Martin after their deaths. We all know Martin is more revered by the American people of all races, but when it comes to Malcolm, he’s either forgotten or just seen as a black supremacist. Which is another reason why I enjoyed this book, it gave me a Birds Eye view on both and how they regarded each other, because that’s something I’ve never really thought of
I could say more, but I’ve already said enough!
10/10 recommend.
There’s so much I want to say about this book.
First, I am so glad to have been recommended the book after finishing The Autobiography of Malcolm X. It certainly worked perfectly in that order. And it kept me on my toes as after I finished X’s biography, I felt like “what now?” Now that I’m done with this book, I feel complete but I’m sad that I finished the book lol.
Just like when I read X’s biography, I felt some kind of way about his earlier thought process. This book not only explores that, but in comparison to King’s thought process, it completes it.
I learned so much about the both of them. My opinion on X fluctuated at times, but overall, I enjoy both King and X respectively. Learning that X wanted to help King in his later years after trashing him, was quite the turn around, but it gave me a more positive view on him. Not to say that my views on X are totally negative, but this book paints a wonderful comparison to both King and X.
I need to say that I really love that this book explored how people see Malcolm and Martin after their deaths. We all know Martin is more revered by the American people of all races, but when it comes to Malcolm, he’s either forgotten or just seen as a black supremacist. Which is another reason why I enjoyed this book, it gave me a Birds Eye view on both and how they regarded each other, because that’s something I’ve never really thought of
I could say more, but I’ve already said enough!
10/10 recommend.
July 7, 2025
مارتن لوثر و مالكوم أكس وأمريكا الحلم أو الكابوس
الكتاب يتحدث عن أهم شخصين انتزعوا حقوق السود ال(afro-american) الأمريكان من الأصول الأفريقية خلال 400 سنة من العبودية والأعتداء والقتل وإغتصاب نسائهم حتى بعد إنتهاء عصر العبودية بعد الحرب الأهلية.
الكاتب يقارن بين حياة الرجلين لكي يصل إلى الأتفاق والإختلاف بين رؤية الرجلين ,مارتن الذي ارادا مستقبل يعيش فيه البيض والسود معا في خطبته الشهير أنا أملك حلم (I have a dream) , ومالكوم أكس الذي رأى المستقبل في أمريكا امتداد لكابوس الماضي.
مارتن عاش في عائلة ومجتمع محب له ,أبوه كان رجل دين مسيحي, بينما ماكلوم عاش حياة صعبة ,حيث تم حرق منزلهم من قبل جماعة بيضاء متطرفة وهو صغير. ولم تفعل الشرطة والدفاع المدني أي شئ . بعد ذلك انتقلت العائلة إلى مدينة أخرة وتم قتل والده في حادث دعس بالسيارة, بعد ذلك أصيبت الأم بالجنون , وتم افتراق العائلة الكبيرة .
انتقل مالكوم مع عائلة بيضاء تعامله كأنه حيوان أليف وليس انسان. في مدرسته الخاصة بالبيض درس بجد وأصبح من الأوائل , وفي السنة السابعة تم إنتخابه عريفاً لفصله, في السنة التالية عندما تحدث الطلاب عن أحلامهم , قال ماكوم أنه يريد أن يصبح محامي, سخر منه المعلم وأخبره أن يكون نجاراً لأنه أسود.
أمن مارتن بالحب
-العدالة للسود سوف تحصل بالحب للكل
-اله مارتن المسيح يحب الإنسانية
-البيض طيبين وسوف يساعدون السود في الحصول على حريتهم
أما مالكوم فقد أمن بالعدالة
-حب السود اولا وهذا ما جعل العدالة أولا
-اله مالكوم يحب السود فقط وسوف يعاقب البيض بسبب العبودية والقتل لمئات السنين
-البيض شياطين ولا يمكن العيش معهم
-وصول لحقوق السود يكون بتعاونهم مع بعض فقط
ازدادت شعبيت مالكوم اكس في امريكا و اوربا وبالأخص في أمة الإسلام. خاف القريبين من الإليجا محمد ان يرث مالكوم أمة الإسلام, الذي كان خائفا من مالكوم أن يأخذ مكانه في زعامة أمة الإسلام.
تم طرد مالكوم من الأمة الذي سبب له صدمت شديدة . بعدها حاول الإنخراط مع حركات حقوق السود ومنهم مارتن. لكنهم رفضوه بسبب كونه يدعو للعنف وهم يدعون للعيش بسلام و محبة مع البيض .بعدها قرر الذهاب للحج في مكة وزيارة دول أفريقيا. في الحج شاهد أناس بيض زرق العيون ,لكن كانوا على عكس الناس البيض في أمريكا , عاملوه كأخ ولم ينظروا له نظرت إستحقار واعتباره من طبقة أقل من البشر .بعد عودته بمدة قصيرة تم اغتياله رحمه الله .
المفارقة العجيبة
مارتن لوثر قتله شخص أبيض ممن دعا لمحبتهم ونسيان ما حدث لهم خلال مئات السنوات.
ومالكوم مات من قبل السود.
الكتاب يتحدث عن أهم شخصين انتزعوا حقوق السود ال(afro-american) الأمريكان من الأصول الأفريقية خلال 400 سنة من العبودية والأعتداء والقتل وإغتصاب نسائهم حتى بعد إنتهاء عصر العبودية بعد الحرب الأهلية.
الكاتب يقارن بين حياة الرجلين لكي يصل إلى الأتفاق والإختلاف بين رؤية الرجلين ,مارتن الذي ارادا مستقبل يعيش فيه البيض والسود معا في خطبته الشهير أنا أملك حلم (I have a dream) , ومالكوم أكس الذي رأى المستقبل في أمريكا امتداد لكابوس الماضي.
مارتن عاش في عائلة ومجتمع محب له ,أبوه كان رجل دين مسيحي, بينما ماكلوم عاش حياة صعبة ,حيث تم حرق منزلهم من قبل جماعة بيضاء متطرفة وهو صغير. ولم تفعل الشرطة والدفاع المدني أي شئ . بعد ذلك انتقلت العائلة إلى مدينة أخرة وتم قتل والده في حادث دعس بالسيارة, بعد ذلك أصيبت الأم بالجنون , وتم افتراق العائلة الكبيرة .
انتقل مالكوم مع عائلة بيضاء تعامله كأنه حيوان أليف وليس انسان. في مدرسته الخاصة بالبيض درس بجد وأصبح من الأوائل , وفي السنة السابعة تم إنتخابه عريفاً لفصله, في السنة التالية عندما تحدث الطلاب عن أحلامهم , قال ماكوم أنه يريد أن يصبح محامي, سخر منه المعلم وأخبره أن يكون نجاراً لأنه أسود.
أمن مارتن بالحب
-العدالة للسود سوف تحصل بالحب للكل
-اله مارتن المسيح يحب الإنسانية
-البيض طيبين وسوف يساعدون السود في الحصول على حريتهم
أما مالكوم فقد أمن بالعدالة
-حب السود اولا وهذا ما جعل العدالة أولا
-اله مالكوم يحب السود فقط وسوف يعاقب البيض بسبب العبودية والقتل لمئات السنين
-البيض شياطين ولا يمكن العيش معهم
-وصول لحقوق السود يكون بتعاونهم مع بعض فقط
ازدادت شعبيت مالكوم اكس في امريكا و اوربا وبالأخص في أمة الإسلام. خاف القريبين من الإليجا محمد ان يرث مالكوم أمة الإسلام, الذي كان خائفا من مالكوم أن يأخذ مكانه في زعامة أمة الإسلام.
تم طرد مالكوم من الأمة الذي سبب له صدمت شديدة . بعدها حاول الإنخراط مع حركات حقوق السود ومنهم مارتن. لكنهم رفضوه بسبب كونه يدعو للعنف وهم يدعون للعيش بسلام و محبة مع البيض .بعدها قرر الذهاب للحج في مكة وزيارة دول أفريقيا. في الحج شاهد أناس بيض زرق العيون ,لكن كانوا على عكس الناس البيض في أمريكا , عاملوه كأخ ولم ينظروا له نظرت إستحقار واعتباره من طبقة أقل من البشر .بعد عودته بمدة قصيرة تم اغتياله رحمه الله .
المفارقة العجيبة
مارتن لوثر قتله شخص أبيض ممن دعا لمحبتهم ونسيان ما حدث لهم خلال مئات السنوات.
ومالكوم مات من قبل السود.
April 27, 2008
this book was excellent in its concrete and objective analysis of both martin luther king and malcolm x. it went beyond the stereotypes of both, martin simply as a preacher of peace and nonviolence, and beyond malcolms image of a preacher of violent revolution. this book takes a look at their different experiences with white america and how that shaped their world perspectives, as well as another key aspect of martin and malcolm that is overlooked: the evolution of their ideologies. as malcolm became more moderate, martin was becoming more radical, facts which are often overlooked in popular depictions. i would recommend this book to anybody who has any interest in either of these figures, as they are still very relevant to life in america, and around the world today
February 24, 2023
I’ve read the majority of Cone’s work, and have fallen in love with his approach to Systematic Theology. Without hyperbole, I believe that this is his most critical and best work. Taking seriously the calling of liberation theologians to engage history as a living, theological reality, Cone presses into the history and thought of these two giants. Rather than relishing in nuance, Cone unearths the discomfort that white folks generally have about Malcolm, and untangled the Santa-fication of King. The concluding portion of this text was a synthesis of the thought of Malcolm and Martin, and offers a liberative praxis of solidarity that is fresh and unapologetically rooted in black religious tradition. This is a very early contender for my favorite read of the year.
March 17, 2021
This book is a comparison of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. The author begins with a brief biography of each man and how their early years effected their philosophy on race in America. King, raised in the South in a fairly affluent family with a strong religious background, developed a strong integrationist outlook. Malcolm, on the other hand was raised in the North, experienced ghetto life, led a life of criminal activity which resulted in his imprisonment. His conversion to the Black Muslin faith and devotion to Elijah Muhammad led to his belief in separatist society. He was often accused of being racist against whites, but this was not true. He felt that Blacks had to be separate from white society to develop their own self identity. His religion believed that the white race would be destroyed by God for their sin of racism. His forthright language and anger at whites led to his being labeled as a violent threat to whites. His image was largely created by white media.
The author describes how the two complimented each other and benefited from each other’s perspective. Late in their careers, their philosophies moved closer to each other. In the end they both realized that the plight of Blacks was due to more than racism. They both realized the part economics played and that many white liberals didn’t really believe in integration. Their respective outlook led to an international philosophy of the plight of all the poor and people of color were united in the same struggle.
This book is an excellent description of the two men and their place in the civil rights movement.
The author describes how the two complimented each other and benefited from each other’s perspective. Late in their careers, their philosophies moved closer to each other. In the end they both realized that the plight of Blacks was due to more than racism. They both realized the part economics played and that many white liberals didn’t really believe in integration. Their respective outlook led to an international philosophy of the plight of all the poor and people of color were united in the same struggle.
This book is an excellent description of the two men and their place in the civil rights movement.
November 4, 2025
what I previously knew about Malcolm X and MLK barely scratched the surface of these figures and their work.
the American education system doesn't want you to know that these men are far more alike than they are different.
they don't want you to know that Malcolm X actually WASN'T a violent person - he was simply trying to empower Black people to engage in self-defense if they needed to do so. ("We should be peaceful, law-abiding [...]. But the time has come for the American Negro to fight back in self-defense whenever and wherever he is being unjustly attacked.")
they don't want you to know that MLK was very outspoken against the Vietnam War. ("There is something strangely inconsistent about a nation and a press that would praise you when you say, 'Be nonviolent toward Jim Clark,' but will curse and damn you when you say, "Be nonviolent to are little brown Vietnamese children!")
and they DEFINITELY don't want you to know that by the times of their deaths, these two figures had both moved toward each other in terms of ideology - MLK becoming more radical and Malcolm X becoming more tolerant of non-Black ethnicities.
Cone is a great writer, but his stuff is pretty dense. nonetheless, he did a fantastic job juxtaposing these two figures and showcasing how their respective upbringings - MLK's in the South and Malcolm X's in the urban North - impacted what justice looked like to them.
overall, I think Cone says it here best: "Solidarity with the poor is the only genuine way to liberate them and ourselves. We must share their lot, not because we feel sorry for them and want to help them but because they are a part of us and we are a part of them. There can be no 'us' and 'them.' [...] When we help another we help ourselves. This is the way the world is made. No lives demonstrate this ethical principle more than those of Martin and Malcolm. And today more than at any other time in history we need this principle of mutuality applied in human relations."
that was published in 1991. and yet, how fitting for today?
the American education system doesn't want you to know that these men are far more alike than they are different.
they don't want you to know that Malcolm X actually WASN'T a violent person - he was simply trying to empower Black people to engage in self-defense if they needed to do so. ("We should be peaceful, law-abiding [...]. But the time has come for the American Negro to fight back in self-defense whenever and wherever he is being unjustly attacked.")
they don't want you to know that MLK was very outspoken against the Vietnam War. ("There is something strangely inconsistent about a nation and a press that would praise you when you say, 'Be nonviolent toward Jim Clark,' but will curse and damn you when you say, "Be nonviolent to are little brown Vietnamese children!")
and they DEFINITELY don't want you to know that by the times of their deaths, these two figures had both moved toward each other in terms of ideology - MLK becoming more radical and Malcolm X becoming more tolerant of non-Black ethnicities.
Cone is a great writer, but his stuff is pretty dense. nonetheless, he did a fantastic job juxtaposing these two figures and showcasing how their respective upbringings - MLK's in the South and Malcolm X's in the urban North - impacted what justice looked like to them.
overall, I think Cone says it here best: "Solidarity with the poor is the only genuine way to liberate them and ourselves. We must share their lot, not because we feel sorry for them and want to help them but because they are a part of us and we are a part of them. There can be no 'us' and 'them.' [...] When we help another we help ourselves. This is the way the world is made. No lives demonstrate this ethical principle more than those of Martin and Malcolm. And today more than at any other time in history we need this principle of mutuality applied in human relations."
that was published in 1991. and yet, how fitting for today?
May 9, 2024
I appreciate the depth of this book, the analysis of the differences and many similarities between these two honorable men. Though this does not serve as an in-depth biography on either man in the conventional sense, it does chronicle how each man approached the race problem that pervaded the United States in the mid-20th century. Unfortunately, amongst many whites and Blacks, there are camps devoted primarily to the adoration of either and critique of the other. In reality, Dr. King needed Malcolm X and Malcolm X needed Dr. King.
This book does not shy away from the victories and limitations of both, nor does it strive to romanticize or crown them with sainthood; this book treats them both in the most honorable way possible, as men. They were both ordinary men who stood up for the freedom of their people. From either context they were not wrong in their assessments of the world in which they lived, but they also had limitations— sexism, lack of awareness to classism, and he ignorance of the ingredients that made their respective approaches to freedom a necessity to the regions in which they practiced their ministries.
I love how Dr. Cone showed how Malcolm was making strides towards Dr. King’s philosophies and how Dr. King was making strides towards Malcolm’s. If one man is celebrated for their sacrifice for the freedom of humanity, so should the other. I have nothing but respect for both of these flawed and courageous men and the positive imprint on the Black psyche they both left behind
This book does not shy away from the victories and limitations of both, nor does it strive to romanticize or crown them with sainthood; this book treats them both in the most honorable way possible, as men. They were both ordinary men who stood up for the freedom of their people. From either context they were not wrong in their assessments of the world in which they lived, but they also had limitations— sexism, lack of awareness to classism, and he ignorance of the ingredients that made their respective approaches to freedom a necessity to the regions in which they practiced their ministries.
I love how Dr. Cone showed how Malcolm was making strides towards Dr. King’s philosophies and how Dr. King was making strides towards Malcolm’s. If one man is celebrated for their sacrifice for the freedom of humanity, so should the other. I have nothing but respect for both of these flawed and courageous men and the positive imprint on the Black psyche they both left behind
December 17, 2025
I found this book to be a really good comparative history, not only of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, but really about their role in American history and in Black theology. I learned a lot about both men, but this book did a lot to clear up my own misconceptions about both men, especially towards the end of their lives. It's interesting to see two people who have largely been deified broken down into their own humanities, but also to see how similar they both were, even if they came from different backgrounds and vantage points. James Cone was a great thinker, and this is an excellent example of his work.
January 17, 2023
This book contains far more knowledge about both Dr. King and Malcolm X than anything I ever read in school, by an extremely wide margin. I'm deeply grateful to have access to this insight into their contexts, characters, and contributions, because (as Cone himself said), "If Americans of all races intend to create a just and peaceful future, then they must listen to both Martin and Malcolm."
August 18, 2018
I read this in the mid 90s at some point and really want to re-read it again.
Read
November 24, 2020This book is a key resource on understanding the legacies of both Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr. and to understand the current understanding of race and oppression in the United States.
November 12, 2020
Siccc
But also doesn’t talk about the impact of Islam and NOI imo. Cool cohesive picture of the climate tho.
But also doesn’t talk about the impact of Islam and NOI imo. Cool cohesive picture of the climate tho.
April 16, 2020
This book talks about the 2 men that were mainly responsible for bringing the world “African American” to the English dictionary! Malcom X=African , Martin Luther King jr= American. It provides a rich history of the of the civil rights struggle in USA ~1950-1965
The writer is an African American university Professor who specializes in Christian theology, African American history, and is deeply in love with both Characters. He was successfully able to tell the background story of both characters, critique the role they played in history, and describe their influence on America.
Even thought I am Muslim, I feel in love too with both Characters, Especialey Martin Luther King who was successful in using Christianity (Black church theology) as a practical method for fighting discrimination, injustice, and serving his community & country.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 12, 2009
In this book liberation theologian James Cone compares the lives, careers, and teachings of the two leading figures of the Civil rights Movement and Black Power Movement, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X. Cone's thesis is that in spite of their public feuds MLK and X needed each other, and complemented each other. He further goes onto to say that the ongoing issues of justice and freedom for people of color in the US are framed by the philosophies of these two leders. At the same time Cone is careful to warn the reader against making either or both of them out to be messiahs, as he reveals their shortcomings and areas of blindness. This is a great book for anyone trying to grasp the essential messages of the 50's and 60's.
March 12, 2016
An excellent book that compares the strategies of two great civil rights leaders. A remarkable account of how both men while using different tactics had not only a major impact on the African-American community, but on the entire world. It is certainly a portrayal of idealism, courage and strength of two men who gave of themselves so that others could have a better, freer and more prosperous life.
April 5, 2015
Cone's book is not really a biography; it's more of a comparative analysis of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X's major speeches, interviews, and writings. In that respect, it's great for a rhetoric class. I assigned three chapters of it this semester in conjunction with some speeches by both, and my students seemed to find it lucid and helpful.
May 7, 2024
This is the best book on the topic you’ll find. I highly recommend
April 19, 2024
after an insane 97+ tabs/highlights in this book, I think I'm obligated (and happily so) to say that this is a masterful work of historical research, power-building analysis, and critical literature.
in the realm of nonfiction biographical works, Cone displays an incredible ability to merge historical narratives, world events, character development, and psychological analyses for both Martin and Malcolm in ways that are not only digestible, but also reflective. the focus on a combination of his topics' upbringings, philosophies, speeches, and progressions serve as powerful devices through which Cone displays contrasts, similarities, and criticisms. I would venture to say as well that this book is not just a great academic study, it's also very readable and accessible, owing to the writing style and overall structure of the book.
some reflections:
1. I think it's a true tragedy and disservice that Martin Luther King Jr. has been so flattened by the passage of time and political interests that weaponize snippets of him while ignoring the underlying philosophies and approaches he believed in. King not only stood for racial justice as he had to define it in the predominantly white South, but also became an avid anti-war and anti-poverty advocate in his later years in spite of pushback from his allies. similarly, I think it's a true tragedy and disservice to Malcolm X that he's at best forgotten, and at worst maligned, in the social consciousness because he, in his Northern upbringing, speaks to the modern era of de facto racism we see across this country. to understand that Malcolm also carried forward the roots of Black Power and Black Liberation (especially in the form of the Black Panthers) cannot be understated.
the most well-done, and impactful, component of this book remains the way Cone develops his narratives to the end result of demonstrating how Malcolm and Martin's philosophies/approaches overlapped later on in their lives. breaking the dichotomy that is often set before us about the two with undeniable evidence clarifies the transitions both were making at the times of their assassinations and the legacies/visions they have left for us to continue.
2. in reflecting on the challenges / barriers that both Martin and Malcolm faced in the 1960s, I find myself both appalled and in awe of how little and how much progress we've made. in many regards, it's clear that the racist and classist structures that informed M&M have contorted into new, arguably more destructive variations. wealth inequality, racial wealth gaps, maternal mortality, segregation, and much more continue to pervade without restraint and we, as a citizenry, allow ourselves to be lulled into a sense of personal, individual security by the comforts of modern life and our misplaced faith that Martin and Obama ended racism. there are plenty of passages throughout the book, especially in their speeches, that could have been given yesterday verbatim with the same meanings. in this way, the entire book serves as a reminder of how much more work remains to be done and how many of us are needed to make progress happen.
3. it's a tragedy of the modern era for me to truly believe that no equivalent to Malcolm and Martin will emerge in the face of so many various social, economic, and global disasters. seeing through Cone's narration the commanded of audiences and national attention both men held through philosophy, tactic, and strategy, I can find no parallels in our fragmented, inattentive current environment. that's not to say great work isn't being done, but the dissolution or defanging of most organized justice movements combined with the politicization of media and fragmentation of news sources make for a near-impossible path towards power-building as Martin and Malcolm accomplished it.
4. maybe in some ways that dispersion is for the best. but oftentimes, I think it is to the detriment of not only our futures, but also the vision both men had for America. it seems to me that we've collectively forgotten how to work together. instead of the local organizing, shoe-to-pavement strategies that Martin used and intellectual spars Malcolm engaged in, we live in an ecosystem where a majority of people care primarily for themselves, refuse to do the hard work, and cannot bear the considerations of intellectual dialogue or disagreement. instead, we force ourselves into our corners and lack the willpower or interest in coalition power-building and civic engagement. as a product (and catalyst), we end up mired in corporate greed, capitalist productivity, isolation, and the degradation of everything from education to social services to faith in our own ability to affect change. there is no one Martin or Malcolm today who can guide us out of our tragic myriads. it follows that the book is perhaps a reminder that, as Cone emphasizes, there is no one coming to save us except for ourselves.
I would encourage reading this with an open mind and a lens on the world as we see it today. history has passed but there remains much to be learned from and inspired by works like Cone's who show us the paths that have been forged for us to carry onwards.
in the realm of nonfiction biographical works, Cone displays an incredible ability to merge historical narratives, world events, character development, and psychological analyses for both Martin and Malcolm in ways that are not only digestible, but also reflective. the focus on a combination of his topics' upbringings, philosophies, speeches, and progressions serve as powerful devices through which Cone displays contrasts, similarities, and criticisms. I would venture to say as well that this book is not just a great academic study, it's also very readable and accessible, owing to the writing style and overall structure of the book.
some reflections:
1. I think it's a true tragedy and disservice that Martin Luther King Jr. has been so flattened by the passage of time and political interests that weaponize snippets of him while ignoring the underlying philosophies and approaches he believed in. King not only stood for racial justice as he had to define it in the predominantly white South, but also became an avid anti-war and anti-poverty advocate in his later years in spite of pushback from his allies. similarly, I think it's a true tragedy and disservice to Malcolm X that he's at best forgotten, and at worst maligned, in the social consciousness because he, in his Northern upbringing, speaks to the modern era of de facto racism we see across this country. to understand that Malcolm also carried forward the roots of Black Power and Black Liberation (especially in the form of the Black Panthers) cannot be understated.
the most well-done, and impactful, component of this book remains the way Cone develops his narratives to the end result of demonstrating how Malcolm and Martin's philosophies/approaches overlapped later on in their lives. breaking the dichotomy that is often set before us about the two with undeniable evidence clarifies the transitions both were making at the times of their assassinations and the legacies/visions they have left for us to continue.
2. in reflecting on the challenges / barriers that both Martin and Malcolm faced in the 1960s, I find myself both appalled and in awe of how little and how much progress we've made. in many regards, it's clear that the racist and classist structures that informed M&M have contorted into new, arguably more destructive variations. wealth inequality, racial wealth gaps, maternal mortality, segregation, and much more continue to pervade without restraint and we, as a citizenry, allow ourselves to be lulled into a sense of personal, individual security by the comforts of modern life and our misplaced faith that Martin and Obama ended racism. there are plenty of passages throughout the book, especially in their speeches, that could have been given yesterday verbatim with the same meanings. in this way, the entire book serves as a reminder of how much more work remains to be done and how many of us are needed to make progress happen.
3. it's a tragedy of the modern era for me to truly believe that no equivalent to Malcolm and Martin will emerge in the face of so many various social, economic, and global disasters. seeing through Cone's narration the commanded of audiences and national attention both men held through philosophy, tactic, and strategy, I can find no parallels in our fragmented, inattentive current environment. that's not to say great work isn't being done, but the dissolution or defanging of most organized justice movements combined with the politicization of media and fragmentation of news sources make for a near-impossible path towards power-building as Martin and Malcolm accomplished it.
4. maybe in some ways that dispersion is for the best. but oftentimes, I think it is to the detriment of not only our futures, but also the vision both men had for America. it seems to me that we've collectively forgotten how to work together. instead of the local organizing, shoe-to-pavement strategies that Martin used and intellectual spars Malcolm engaged in, we live in an ecosystem where a majority of people care primarily for themselves, refuse to do the hard work, and cannot bear the considerations of intellectual dialogue or disagreement. instead, we force ourselves into our corners and lack the willpower or interest in coalition power-building and civic engagement. as a product (and catalyst), we end up mired in corporate greed, capitalist productivity, isolation, and the degradation of everything from education to social services to faith in our own ability to affect change. there is no one Martin or Malcolm today who can guide us out of our tragic myriads. it follows that the book is perhaps a reminder that, as Cone emphasizes, there is no one coming to save us except for ourselves.
I would encourage reading this with an open mind and a lens on the world as we see it today. history has passed but there remains much to be learned from and inspired by works like Cone's who show us the paths that have been forged for us to carry onwards.
October 30, 2021
Discussion questions for Martin and Malcolm and America
These diverse theologies of liberation share in common three emphases evident not only in the work of Cone but also in its appropriation by Wright and Warnock: (1) God’s solidarity with the victims of oppression and desire for their liberation; (2) the responsibility of the church to join God in God’s mission of solidarity and liberation; and (3) the task of theology as critical reflection on the faith and practice of Christian community, inquiring whether or not its faith and practice has facilitated this mission of solidarity and liberation.
Martin found his calling in the kitchen and Malcolm found his in prison. Can you point to a moment where you knew your calling?
Martin went from viewing love, hope, justice through the love lens but eventually had to shift to the hope lens. How do you resonate with this worldview?
As a white person, where do you find yourself on the spectrum of integration vs separation? If you can imagine yourself as a person of color, do you think your position would shift?
Cone gives a lot of evidence of Martin finding his voice through the words of Christ as recorded in the Bible. He primarily shows that Malcolm found his voice through Elijah Mohammed, with very few passing references to the Quran. Do you think Cone’s description of Malcolm’s religiosity is accurate, or is he punting because he knows a lot about the Bible and little about the Quran?
Where do you think we are now? Are we moving toward a Martin society (beloved community) or a Malcolm community (isolated to retake power that was blindly stolen and rightfully belonging to POC)? What evidence do you have?
In many ways both Martin and Malcolm were martyrs for the cause. Do you have a moral cause so deep that you would be willing to be a martyr for it? What would it take?
Malcolm says that Martin allows the white power brokers to use his non violence to control black people. How do power brokers today use elements of Christianity to control kingdom work in the world? Is this dangerous?
Cone says that Martin’s approach appealed to southern Christians while Malcolm’s approach spoke to blacks who were indifferent to or alienated from Christianity. Agree? Any contemporary corollaries?
As white people, what do we see regarding Cone’s statement that blacks are, overall, worse off now than in M&M’s time? Are examples to the contrary only window dressing?
These diverse theologies of liberation share in common three emphases evident not only in the work of Cone but also in its appropriation by Wright and Warnock: (1) God’s solidarity with the victims of oppression and desire for their liberation; (2) the responsibility of the church to join God in God’s mission of solidarity and liberation; and (3) the task of theology as critical reflection on the faith and practice of Christian community, inquiring whether or not its faith and practice has facilitated this mission of solidarity and liberation.
Martin found his calling in the kitchen and Malcolm found his in prison. Can you point to a moment where you knew your calling?
Martin went from viewing love, hope, justice through the love lens but eventually had to shift to the hope lens. How do you resonate with this worldview?
As a white person, where do you find yourself on the spectrum of integration vs separation? If you can imagine yourself as a person of color, do you think your position would shift?
Cone gives a lot of evidence of Martin finding his voice through the words of Christ as recorded in the Bible. He primarily shows that Malcolm found his voice through Elijah Mohammed, with very few passing references to the Quran. Do you think Cone’s description of Malcolm’s religiosity is accurate, or is he punting because he knows a lot about the Bible and little about the Quran?
Where do you think we are now? Are we moving toward a Martin society (beloved community) or a Malcolm community (isolated to retake power that was blindly stolen and rightfully belonging to POC)? What evidence do you have?
In many ways both Martin and Malcolm were martyrs for the cause. Do you have a moral cause so deep that you would be willing to be a martyr for it? What would it take?
Malcolm says that Martin allows the white power brokers to use his non violence to control black people. How do power brokers today use elements of Christianity to control kingdom work in the world? Is this dangerous?
Cone says that Martin’s approach appealed to southern Christians while Malcolm’s approach spoke to blacks who were indifferent to or alienated from Christianity. Agree? Any contemporary corollaries?
As white people, what do we see regarding Cone’s statement that blacks are, overall, worse off now than in M&M’s time? Are examples to the contrary only window dressing?
January 25, 2021
This was an exceptional book comparing the lives and careers of MLK and Malcolm X. It explores a lot of different issues that they grappled with, but the main gist was that they played off each other. On one side, King used Malcolm X as a warning of what would happen if whites continued to ignore issues of blacks. Similarly, Malcolm X used King as an example of pandering to whites rather than blacks standing up for themselves. On the other side, they tempered each other because each saw some truth in the other's criticism. Overall, they moved towards one another in the early 1960s, although they never saw eye to eye. Malcolm X realized that demonizing all whites was both wrong and counterproductive while MLK saw that political rights were easier to get than economic rights. MLK saw the Watts riots and realized the depths of economic issues facing blacks in America. He took up a more economic message and immediately lost white support.
The two men were always separated by their feelings for America. MLK loved it and wanted it to live up to its ideals and promise. Malcolm X hated it and saw it as a consistent force of oppression, so much so that he longed to take African-Americans "back" to Africa. MLK wanted to integrate blacks into white society because he believed in the American dream, even if it was far from being fulfilled. Malcolm X wanted separation because he believed the American dream to be hypocritical and based on the oppression of blacks. Cone compares their ideologies and actions, tracing how they evolved over their lifetimes. It is a fascinating juxtaposition that drew me in completely.
At the end of the book, Cone offers his own thoughts on the two. He slipped these in here and there throughout his narrative, but the last couple of chapters revolve around his thoughts on them. I found this to be the weakest part of the book, perhaps because it was written nearly thirty years ago and the situation in the United States has changed (not for the better). But it was interesting hearing his evaluations of the two men.
This was a very good book and is well worth a read for anyone interested in the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Even though it is thirty years old, it is still relevant for todays society and the problems we face.
The two men were always separated by their feelings for America. MLK loved it and wanted it to live up to its ideals and promise. Malcolm X hated it and saw it as a consistent force of oppression, so much so that he longed to take African-Americans "back" to Africa. MLK wanted to integrate blacks into white society because he believed in the American dream, even if it was far from being fulfilled. Malcolm X wanted separation because he believed the American dream to be hypocritical and based on the oppression of blacks. Cone compares their ideologies and actions, tracing how they evolved over their lifetimes. It is a fascinating juxtaposition that drew me in completely.
At the end of the book, Cone offers his own thoughts on the two. He slipped these in here and there throughout his narrative, but the last couple of chapters revolve around his thoughts on them. I found this to be the weakest part of the book, perhaps because it was written nearly thirty years ago and the situation in the United States has changed (not for the better). But it was interesting hearing his evaluations of the two men.
This was a very good book and is well worth a read for anyone interested in the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Even though it is thirty years old, it is still relevant for todays society and the problems we face.
February 27, 2021
It is pretty much a sermon, but the problem is that 50% of the time it is preaching a faith that a non-Christian wouldn't necessarily think is useful. I recognize the importance of MLK's faith in God but I can hardly find any evidence of it actually improving the well being of the black American. But maybe that's because I'm a atheist socialist.
I found it really hard to maintain my enthusiasm reading the book, despite my interests in history and activism; not the topic that bored me, but the writing style prohibited me from concentrating. The author used too much paragraphs speaking about things that are too obvious to any of us, but didn't address the issue that the readers are expecting until the last few chapters. The first 250 pages or so has so many quotes that I almost want to skip all of them. It was really the last few chapters the author started to weaving all the facts and back ground together, forming a constructive and critical over view of the entire movement, under the global scale. If you are already familiar with the history of the civil right movement, or simply read the biography of MLK and Malcolm, then you can really jump to the last four or five chapters. Overall I am a little bit disappointed not because the content is not good enough nut it really should be a book less than 200 pages.
I found it really hard to maintain my enthusiasm reading the book, despite my interests in history and activism; not the topic that bored me, but the writing style prohibited me from concentrating. The author used too much paragraphs speaking about things that are too obvious to any of us, but didn't address the issue that the readers are expecting until the last few chapters. The first 250 pages or so has so many quotes that I almost want to skip all of them. It was really the last few chapters the author started to weaving all the facts and back ground together, forming a constructive and critical over view of the entire movement, under the global scale. If you are already familiar with the history of the civil right movement, or simply read the biography of MLK and Malcolm, then you can really jump to the last four or five chapters. Overall I am a little bit disappointed not because the content is not good enough nut it really should be a book less than 200 pages.
March 20, 2025
This book felt much longer than it looks; maybe it’s the font. But the second half was more gripping, as Cone convincingly shows how Martin Luther King and Malcolm X gradually moved towards one another’s views despite the media’s portrayals of the two as polar opposites. The book is generously suffused with extensive quotes from both men, and I came away feeling much more attuned to the thought of both. Malcolm’s quick wit is hilariously acerbic as he tirelessly names the white and black failures in America.
Cone insists on the Christian-theological roots of King’s nonviolence, but I would have liked to hear more reflection on how Christology shaped that stance for MLK. Cone helpfully distinguishes between those in the Civil Rights movement who adopted nonviolence as a practical strategy, and those like King who used the practical strategy from theological bases. The argument between King and Malcolm about nonviolence versus self-defense weaves through the whole narrative and we can only wish the two had been able to work more closely as they had planned to do before their murders.
Cone isn’t writing hagiography and the two are humanized while still being deeply admired. I especially appreciated one of the last chapters where he critiques both on their sexism and missed opportunities to add class to their race-focused messages.
Cone insists on the Christian-theological roots of King’s nonviolence, but I would have liked to hear more reflection on how Christology shaped that stance for MLK. Cone helpfully distinguishes between those in the Civil Rights movement who adopted nonviolence as a practical strategy, and those like King who used the practical strategy from theological bases. The argument between King and Malcolm about nonviolence versus self-defense weaves through the whole narrative and we can only wish the two had been able to work more closely as they had planned to do before their murders.
Cone isn’t writing hagiography and the two are humanized while still being deeply admired. I especially appreciated one of the last chapters where he critiques both on their sexism and missed opportunities to add class to their race-focused messages.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews