What do you think?
Rate this book
Prophet Of Rage: A Life Of Louis Farrakhan And His Nation
He preaches a dynamic message of African-American empowerment and self-reliance, offering discipline and hope to those most in need. At the same time, he outrages mainstream America with his fiery rhetoric and unrestrained criticism of whites, Jews, and Catholics, whom he blames for the ongoing oppression of blacks. He is the Reverend Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, and his voice shakes the nation.Prophet of Rage penetrates the rhetoric that surrounds this enigmatic figure to reveal his personal story, tracing his life from his birth as Eugene Walcott in the Bronx through his childhood in Boston’s Roxbury neighborhood, his training as a classical violinist, and his career as a calypso singer. It then follows his remarkable political career, recounting his indoctrination into the Nation of Islam, during which time he took the name “Louis X”; explaining his involvement with the assassination of Malcolm X; and chronicling his rise to power as a powerful orator, political leader, and self-proclaimed prophet.
304 pages, Paperback
Published May 29, 1997
1 person is currently reading
65 people want to read
About the author
Arthur J. Magida
19 books56 followers Arthur J. Magida's new book, Code Name Madeleine: A Sufi Spy in Nazi-Occupied Paris, will be published by W.W. Norton in June 2020.
Advance readers call Code Name Madeleine "a thrilling spy story & a moving portrait of Noor Inayat Khan's courage" and "one of the finest & most affecting true stories of espionage I have read."
A former professor at Georgetown University and at the University of Baltimore and a consultant to several PBS documentaries, Magida has been a columnist for the on-line religion magazine, Beliefnet.com; a contributing correspondent to PBS's "Religion & Ethics Newsweekly;" editorial director of Jewish Lights Publishing; senior editor of the Baltimore Jewish Times; environmental reporter for National Journal; writer/editor for Ralph Nader; director of publications for an energy conservation project; & a reporter for Pennsylvania newspapers.
His op-eds have appeared in major newspapers around the country, he has free-lanced for such publications as Conde Nast Traveler, Travel & Leisure, Tikkun & Geo. amd he has appeared on Dateline, the CBS Early Show, Court TV's "Catherine Crier Live," "The MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour," ABC's "World News Tonight," C-Span's "Booknotes," NPR's "Morning Edition" and an A&E documentary.
Advance readers call Code Name Madeleine "a thrilling spy story & a moving portrait of Noor Inayat Khan's courage" and "one of the finest & most affecting true stories of espionage I have read."
A former professor at Georgetown University and at the University of Baltimore and a consultant to several PBS documentaries, Magida has been a columnist for the on-line religion magazine, Beliefnet.com; a contributing correspondent to PBS's "Religion & Ethics Newsweekly;" editorial director of Jewish Lights Publishing; senior editor of the Baltimore Jewish Times; environmental reporter for National Journal; writer/editor for Ralph Nader; director of publications for an energy conservation project; & a reporter for Pennsylvania newspapers.
His op-eds have appeared in major newspapers around the country, he has free-lanced for such publications as Conde Nast Traveler, Travel & Leisure, Tikkun & Geo. amd he has appeared on Dateline, the CBS Early Show, Court TV's "Catherine Crier Live," "The MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour," ABC's "World News Tonight," C-Span's "Booknotes," NPR's "Morning Edition" and an A&E documentary.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
June 15, 2024
A THOROUGH, CRITICAL, YET NOT UNSYMPATHETIC VIEW OF THE NOI LEADER
Author and journalist Arthur J. Magida wrote in the Prologue to this 1996 book, “At his Million Man March on October 16, 1995, Louis Farrakhan did not wear the yarmulke I had given him during dinner at his nineteen-room mansion in Chicago the previous summer. During that meal, Farrakhan had mentioned the march… As he spoke of his hopes for what the march would accomplish, I withdrew from my pocket a gleaming white yarmulke: ‘Minister Farrakhan, I would like YOU to wear this at the march.’ Visibly moved, Farrakhan held the yarmulke briefly between his palms: ‘I know what this mean, Mr. Magida---I thank you.’ Farrakhan did no promise to wear the yarmulke at the march---or any other time. But for a brief moment… the gesture of reconciliation---his and mine---short-circuited the verbal mayhem that has been waging between Jews and Farrakhan since 1984.” (Pg. xv-xvi)
He continues, “Farrakhan has rarely, in public or private, retreated from the turf he has staked out for himself as the one black leader unafraid to scold white America about its sins and atrocities against blacks… Despite the fury of his theology and his preaching, there is a certain chasm between the public Farrakhan and the private… I first approached Farrakhan in June 1993, shortly after he had played a Mendelssohn concerto on his violin … ostensibly as an overture of reconciliation toward Jews… I was then senior editor of a Jewish newspaper... I faxed Farrakhan a request for an interview… As a Jew, I had been appalled, sickened, frightened by some of Farrakhan’s rhetoric, which had labeled Judaism ‘a gutter religion’ in 1984. But as a liberal… I was equally appalled… by the downward trajectory of black-Jewish relations… I believed that if Farrakhan’s motives were pure and his words of conciliation were genuine, there might be hope yet for black-Jewish relations.” (Pg. xvii-xix) He adds, “But Farrakhan’s damage… does not stem from how he treated [Jews]… in the comfort of his home… [but] from what he says at press conferences and … where his audiences number in the tens of thousands.” (Pg. xx)
He recounts the history of the Nation of Islam, beginning with its founder, W. Fard Muhammad: “Curiously for a man whose theology venerated blackness, Fard had a white mother and a black father… But when Detroit police asked him in the early 1930s about his identity, his answer had nothing to do with … earthly parentage… ‘I am the Supreme Ruler of the Universe,’ … his finest, most loyal student, Elijah Muhammad, would variously call him the ‘Son of Man’ or ‘a God in person.’ … Fard found a ready, eager audience in Detroit. By 1933, the two back-to-back meetings he was holding weekly in a four-hundred-person capacity hall were jam-packed… After being detained in Chicago, Fard traveled across the country and surfaced again fleetingly in Chicago before virtually disappearing. The last contact Elijah Muhammad had with him was a postcard mailed from somewhere in Mexico.” (Pg. 45-47)
He continues, “Fard had not simply espoused ‘Islam’ to those who had never heard of it: he fabricated much of it out of whole cloth… Fard’s ‘Original Man,’ a black man of Eden, had known only peace and righteousness until Yacub, ‘the Mighty Scientists of that time,’ created the devil… Yacub created a manlike creature---whites---that was really the ‘devil’ in disguise… One side effect of the Yacub tale that was apparently lost on Fard’s followers was that, by burdening blacks with inventing their worst enemy, he also saddled them with the responsibility for their own woeful condition.” (Pg. 53-54)
Turning to Farrakhan (originally ‘Eugene L. Walcott’), he notes, “Gene Walcott had returned to Boston. As an entertainer he had never fully realized his ambition to attain fame and fortune… Being in the Nation served Walcott well. It gave him a platform that he relished (for he still had his performer’s ego) and it gave him a mission---raising up the black masses---that was not out of live with … Garveyite traditions. In time, it also gave him the sort of headlines for which any entertained would kill… Louis first went to Boston as a captain in the Fruit of Islam, since Elijah Muhammad decided to delay making him a minister until he had proved how well he could perform under the authority of others. In a few months… Louis was finally promoted to minister… Louis may have been a Muslim, but he had not forgotten his Christian roots… Louis did not think he had abandoned the faith of his youth by joining the NOI. Rather, he was spearheading … a reform movement that would purge Christianity of its hypocrisy and spiritual sterility.” (Pg. 58-60)
He points out, “Farrakhan’s … diatribes against Malcolm [X] may have distorted the Koran’s teaching that Muslims never punish apostates. Allah, not man, judges them in this life and the afterlife… The possibility that, in some way, he may have contributed to the atmosphere leading to Malcolm’s death does not seem to have crossed Farrakhan’s mind until much later.” (Pg. 87-89)
He notes, “In November 1963, Aubrey Barnette, the secretary of the temple’s Fruit of Islam who had recently left the Nation, had only harsh words for the organization… The only official for whom he showed any sympathy was Minister Louis… Barnette implied that Louis was being hoodwinked, conned, and scammed and was no better off than the ordinary NOI members: all were victims of their own high hopes for Elijah Muhammad’s homemade brew of religion and black nationalism. Weary of being victimized by whites, they were now being victimized by their own kind.” (Pg. 94-95)
After Elijah Muhammad’s death, “Elijah had not died naturally, Farrakhan revealed, but fell to a conspiracy patched together by the U.S. government, which had plotted to destroy any powerful black leader; by unnamed members of Muhammad’s family, whose motives Farrakhan did not explain… and by Arabs, who had been peeved that Elijah was not an orthodox Muslim… Farrakhan’s source for this conspiracy of devils? A black man who had heard abut it from a white prostitute who had heard about it from a white doctor who had hired her for an orgy… And Farrakhan’s proof that Elijah had been resurrected? ‘Exhume the body and prove me a liar.’ There were no takers.” (Pg. 131-132)
He observes, “to the more polished, more articulate… more ‘presentable’ Farrakhan came what rarely, if ever, had come to Muhammad: invitations to speak in mainstream black forums. In such settings, Farrakhan tempered his rhetoric, but not his essential message. He omitted talk of ‘devils’ and Yacub, but rarely wandered from the Nation’s doctrine of tribal cohesion, self-improvement, and fierce suspicion of white America.” (Pg. 133)
In 1984, “the NOI leader demonized an entire people, while simultaneously denying he was anti-Semitic… Indeed, Farrakhan did speak ‘harsh truths’ about blacks: … ‘My people are not dying from skinheads. They’re not dying from the Ku Klux Klan. They’re dying from their ignorance and self-hatred that has us destroying one another. We can’t blame Jews. We can’t blame Koreans or Vietnamese… We have to blame ourselves, because we’ve been offered the chance to go to the best schools to get an education, but we have not come out and used that education to provide the goods and education that our communities need.” (Pg. 139-140)
He points out, “most Jewish leaders were convinced that Farrakhan was insincere about improving relations with them, especially since he would periodically profess to seek amicable relations with them, then either he or a lieutenant would utter something dreadful about Jews. Just two days before the Million Man March… the NOI’s national youth minister told a cheering crowd in Washington, ‘All you Jews can go straight to hell…’ … [Yet] at the Million Man March, Farrakhan asked again to meet with Jews---and said not one word about the hate from inside his own organization.” (Pg. 159)
Of the NOI’s publication, ‘The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews,’ he comments, “Contrary to the impression conveyed by ‘The Secret Relationship’ that Jews’ involvement in slavery was a deep, dark secret… their participation has been openly chronicled by historians, both Jewish and non-Jewish… Outside the Nation of Islam and the enclaves of Afrocentrism, ‘The Secret Relationship’---whose author was possibly an academic and probably not a member of the Nation of Islam---was denounced as a spiteful jumble of misquotes and miscited statistics… But ‘The Secret Relationship’ … appealed to the depths of the black psyche that detected secret, genocidal conspiracies against them everywhere.” (Pg. 183-184)
Of the Million Man March, he observes, “for most on the Mall, the march endorsed neither Farrakhan nor the Nation of Islam but the selfhood and integrity of the black male… Finally, around 3:20, the crowd began to lose patience and manners. Many had been on the Mall since dawn… A cheer arose when Farrakhan finally took the podium, yet when he started to speak, many were visibly let down. Within fifteen minutes, Farrakhan began to lose the crowd… Louis Farrakhan, ordinarily a master of oratory, meandered through a loose patchwork of themes that never quite cohered. Even more surprising was that from the very person who had called for a ‘Day of Atoning’ came no atonement. Instead, his two-and-a-half-hour ‘lecture’… was a catalog of evils and infamies visited throughout history on blacks.” (Pg. 193-194) He adds, “At the end of his speech, with … maybe one-third of his original audience remaining on the Mall, Farrakhan led the assembled men in a seven-minute pledge to help rebuild their community and abstain from violence, drugs, and sexual or verbal abuse.” (Pg. 196)
He concludes, “Not uncommon on the streets of black America… were variations on the question: What has Farrakhan really done for us… He was the only person who could so intuit the needs and the frustrations of America’s blacks that he could summon hundreds of thousands to the nation’s capital to, of all things, atone. The men hadn’t come for Farrakhan, they had came for an opportunity to be publicly redeemed, to assert a manhood American had long denied them.” (Pg. 197) He adds, “real people suffering … in the black ghettoes of America… needed more than theatrics … to relieve them from their despair and their sorrows. Farrakhan may have been a release valve for their wrath, but whether he was a purveyor of a constructive ANSWER to their plight seemed increasingly dubious in the aftermath of the March…” (Pg. 202)
This critical, yet not unsympathetic book will be of great interest to those studying Minister Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.
Author and journalist Arthur J. Magida wrote in the Prologue to this 1996 book, “At his Million Man March on October 16, 1995, Louis Farrakhan did not wear the yarmulke I had given him during dinner at his nineteen-room mansion in Chicago the previous summer. During that meal, Farrakhan had mentioned the march… As he spoke of his hopes for what the march would accomplish, I withdrew from my pocket a gleaming white yarmulke: ‘Minister Farrakhan, I would like YOU to wear this at the march.’ Visibly moved, Farrakhan held the yarmulke briefly between his palms: ‘I know what this mean, Mr. Magida---I thank you.’ Farrakhan did no promise to wear the yarmulke at the march---or any other time. But for a brief moment… the gesture of reconciliation---his and mine---short-circuited the verbal mayhem that has been waging between Jews and Farrakhan since 1984.” (Pg. xv-xvi)
He continues, “Farrakhan has rarely, in public or private, retreated from the turf he has staked out for himself as the one black leader unafraid to scold white America about its sins and atrocities against blacks… Despite the fury of his theology and his preaching, there is a certain chasm between the public Farrakhan and the private… I first approached Farrakhan in June 1993, shortly after he had played a Mendelssohn concerto on his violin … ostensibly as an overture of reconciliation toward Jews… I was then senior editor of a Jewish newspaper... I faxed Farrakhan a request for an interview… As a Jew, I had been appalled, sickened, frightened by some of Farrakhan’s rhetoric, which had labeled Judaism ‘a gutter religion’ in 1984. But as a liberal… I was equally appalled… by the downward trajectory of black-Jewish relations… I believed that if Farrakhan’s motives were pure and his words of conciliation were genuine, there might be hope yet for black-Jewish relations.” (Pg. xvii-xix) He adds, “But Farrakhan’s damage… does not stem from how he treated [Jews]… in the comfort of his home… [but] from what he says at press conferences and … where his audiences number in the tens of thousands.” (Pg. xx)
He recounts the history of the Nation of Islam, beginning with its founder, W. Fard Muhammad: “Curiously for a man whose theology venerated blackness, Fard had a white mother and a black father… But when Detroit police asked him in the early 1930s about his identity, his answer had nothing to do with … earthly parentage… ‘I am the Supreme Ruler of the Universe,’ … his finest, most loyal student, Elijah Muhammad, would variously call him the ‘Son of Man’ or ‘a God in person.’ … Fard found a ready, eager audience in Detroit. By 1933, the two back-to-back meetings he was holding weekly in a four-hundred-person capacity hall were jam-packed… After being detained in Chicago, Fard traveled across the country and surfaced again fleetingly in Chicago before virtually disappearing. The last contact Elijah Muhammad had with him was a postcard mailed from somewhere in Mexico.” (Pg. 45-47)
He continues, “Fard had not simply espoused ‘Islam’ to those who had never heard of it: he fabricated much of it out of whole cloth… Fard’s ‘Original Man,’ a black man of Eden, had known only peace and righteousness until Yacub, ‘the Mighty Scientists of that time,’ created the devil… Yacub created a manlike creature---whites---that was really the ‘devil’ in disguise… One side effect of the Yacub tale that was apparently lost on Fard’s followers was that, by burdening blacks with inventing their worst enemy, he also saddled them with the responsibility for their own woeful condition.” (Pg. 53-54)
Turning to Farrakhan (originally ‘Eugene L. Walcott’), he notes, “Gene Walcott had returned to Boston. As an entertainer he had never fully realized his ambition to attain fame and fortune… Being in the Nation served Walcott well. It gave him a platform that he relished (for he still had his performer’s ego) and it gave him a mission---raising up the black masses---that was not out of live with … Garveyite traditions. In time, it also gave him the sort of headlines for which any entertained would kill… Louis first went to Boston as a captain in the Fruit of Islam, since Elijah Muhammad decided to delay making him a minister until he had proved how well he could perform under the authority of others. In a few months… Louis was finally promoted to minister… Louis may have been a Muslim, but he had not forgotten his Christian roots… Louis did not think he had abandoned the faith of his youth by joining the NOI. Rather, he was spearheading … a reform movement that would purge Christianity of its hypocrisy and spiritual sterility.” (Pg. 58-60)
He points out, “Farrakhan’s … diatribes against Malcolm [X] may have distorted the Koran’s teaching that Muslims never punish apostates. Allah, not man, judges them in this life and the afterlife… The possibility that, in some way, he may have contributed to the atmosphere leading to Malcolm’s death does not seem to have crossed Farrakhan’s mind until much later.” (Pg. 87-89)
He notes, “In November 1963, Aubrey Barnette, the secretary of the temple’s Fruit of Islam who had recently left the Nation, had only harsh words for the organization… The only official for whom he showed any sympathy was Minister Louis… Barnette implied that Louis was being hoodwinked, conned, and scammed and was no better off than the ordinary NOI members: all were victims of their own high hopes for Elijah Muhammad’s homemade brew of religion and black nationalism. Weary of being victimized by whites, they were now being victimized by their own kind.” (Pg. 94-95)
After Elijah Muhammad’s death, “Elijah had not died naturally, Farrakhan revealed, but fell to a conspiracy patched together by the U.S. government, which had plotted to destroy any powerful black leader; by unnamed members of Muhammad’s family, whose motives Farrakhan did not explain… and by Arabs, who had been peeved that Elijah was not an orthodox Muslim… Farrakhan’s source for this conspiracy of devils? A black man who had heard abut it from a white prostitute who had heard about it from a white doctor who had hired her for an orgy… And Farrakhan’s proof that Elijah had been resurrected? ‘Exhume the body and prove me a liar.’ There were no takers.” (Pg. 131-132)
He observes, “to the more polished, more articulate… more ‘presentable’ Farrakhan came what rarely, if ever, had come to Muhammad: invitations to speak in mainstream black forums. In such settings, Farrakhan tempered his rhetoric, but not his essential message. He omitted talk of ‘devils’ and Yacub, but rarely wandered from the Nation’s doctrine of tribal cohesion, self-improvement, and fierce suspicion of white America.” (Pg. 133)
In 1984, “the NOI leader demonized an entire people, while simultaneously denying he was anti-Semitic… Indeed, Farrakhan did speak ‘harsh truths’ about blacks: … ‘My people are not dying from skinheads. They’re not dying from the Ku Klux Klan. They’re dying from their ignorance and self-hatred that has us destroying one another. We can’t blame Jews. We can’t blame Koreans or Vietnamese… We have to blame ourselves, because we’ve been offered the chance to go to the best schools to get an education, but we have not come out and used that education to provide the goods and education that our communities need.” (Pg. 139-140)
He points out, “most Jewish leaders were convinced that Farrakhan was insincere about improving relations with them, especially since he would periodically profess to seek amicable relations with them, then either he or a lieutenant would utter something dreadful about Jews. Just two days before the Million Man March… the NOI’s national youth minister told a cheering crowd in Washington, ‘All you Jews can go straight to hell…’ … [Yet] at the Million Man March, Farrakhan asked again to meet with Jews---and said not one word about the hate from inside his own organization.” (Pg. 159)
Of the NOI’s publication, ‘The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews,’ he comments, “Contrary to the impression conveyed by ‘The Secret Relationship’ that Jews’ involvement in slavery was a deep, dark secret… their participation has been openly chronicled by historians, both Jewish and non-Jewish… Outside the Nation of Islam and the enclaves of Afrocentrism, ‘The Secret Relationship’---whose author was possibly an academic and probably not a member of the Nation of Islam---was denounced as a spiteful jumble of misquotes and miscited statistics… But ‘The Secret Relationship’ … appealed to the depths of the black psyche that detected secret, genocidal conspiracies against them everywhere.” (Pg. 183-184)
Of the Million Man March, he observes, “for most on the Mall, the march endorsed neither Farrakhan nor the Nation of Islam but the selfhood and integrity of the black male… Finally, around 3:20, the crowd began to lose patience and manners. Many had been on the Mall since dawn… A cheer arose when Farrakhan finally took the podium, yet when he started to speak, many were visibly let down. Within fifteen minutes, Farrakhan began to lose the crowd… Louis Farrakhan, ordinarily a master of oratory, meandered through a loose patchwork of themes that never quite cohered. Even more surprising was that from the very person who had called for a ‘Day of Atoning’ came no atonement. Instead, his two-and-a-half-hour ‘lecture’… was a catalog of evils and infamies visited throughout history on blacks.” (Pg. 193-194) He adds, “At the end of his speech, with … maybe one-third of his original audience remaining on the Mall, Farrakhan led the assembled men in a seven-minute pledge to help rebuild their community and abstain from violence, drugs, and sexual or verbal abuse.” (Pg. 196)
He concludes, “Not uncommon on the streets of black America… were variations on the question: What has Farrakhan really done for us… He was the only person who could so intuit the needs and the frustrations of America’s blacks that he could summon hundreds of thousands to the nation’s capital to, of all things, atone. The men hadn’t come for Farrakhan, they had came for an opportunity to be publicly redeemed, to assert a manhood American had long denied them.” (Pg. 197) He adds, “real people suffering … in the black ghettoes of America… needed more than theatrics … to relieve them from their despair and their sorrows. Farrakhan may have been a release valve for their wrath, but whether he was a purveyor of a constructive ANSWER to their plight seemed increasingly dubious in the aftermath of the March…” (Pg. 202)
This critical, yet not unsympathetic book will be of great interest to those studying Minister Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.
January 5, 2023
It's good, but it cuts off in 1996. I think the author did a good job of showing the Nation of Islam's connection to violence. It would have helped to have more dates or a timeline. I found myself looking up dates to try to piece together what happened when and who was involved.
By the end, the author seemed conflicted between trying to vindicate Jews and blame the state of Blacks in the US on Whites, but also, throughout the book, presented the NOI as problematic because it is violently anti-white. (But, from what I can tell, almost all violence was directed by Black NOI members against other Blacks).
By the end, the author seemed conflicted between trying to vindicate Jews and blame the state of Blacks in the US on Whites, but also, throughout the book, presented the NOI as problematic because it is violently anti-white. (But, from what I can tell, almost all violence was directed by Black NOI members against other Blacks).
May 7, 2008
I was blown away at this twisted but brilliant mind that American racism and hate produced, but I still will never forgive him for killing Malcom X. Deeply disturbing but a great read!
February 24, 2025
I enjoyed this book immensely. When I first picked it up, I wasn’t sure whether it would serve as a homage to its subject or a denouncement—but after a chapter or two, it became clear that it was a bit of both. The author masterfully balances respect for his subject with a deliberate, well-sourced critical review, offering a nuanced perspective rather than a one-sided narrative.
One of the book’s greatest strengths is its ability to inform without dictating. I walked away with a newfound awareness of Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, gaining insights that I hadn’t previously considered. For example, after the death of Elijah Muhammad, he initially tried serving under Wallace Muhammad, only to eventually venture out on his own, reverting back to the original theology of the Nation as taught by Elijah Muhammad. Odd thing though, it seemed he left not because he strongly disagreed with Wallace Muhammad's teaching of orthodox Islam, but that he couldn't further tolerate him personally, so he left to return to the original firebrand format of teaching espoused by the Nation of Islam. The author not only explores the movement’s historical and cultural impact but also delves into the business of religion—highlighting how, for many organizations, faith operates as both a spiritual and financial enterprise.
This book is an engaging, thought-provoking read, perfect for those who seek a balanced exploration of religious leadership, influence, and power. Whether you come in as a supporter, critic, or someone simply curious about the subject, you’ll find this to be a well-researched and compelling analysis.
One of the book’s greatest strengths is its ability to inform without dictating. I walked away with a newfound awareness of Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, gaining insights that I hadn’t previously considered. For example, after the death of Elijah Muhammad, he initially tried serving under Wallace Muhammad, only to eventually venture out on his own, reverting back to the original theology of the Nation as taught by Elijah Muhammad. Odd thing though, it seemed he left not because he strongly disagreed with Wallace Muhammad's teaching of orthodox Islam, but that he couldn't further tolerate him personally, so he left to return to the original firebrand format of teaching espoused by the Nation of Islam. The author not only explores the movement’s historical and cultural impact but also delves into the business of religion—highlighting how, for many organizations, faith operates as both a spiritual and financial enterprise.
This book is an engaging, thought-provoking read, perfect for those who seek a balanced exploration of religious leadership, influence, and power. Whether you come in as a supporter, critic, or someone simply curious about the subject, you’ll find this to be a well-researched and compelling analysis.
July 23, 2017
Eugene Walcott, aka Louise Farrakhan, what a guy. The book still left me puzzled as to why this guy hates Jews so much. I find his anti-Semitism lacking any semblance of logic, and misplaced. His hatred of whites was more understandable, but why all the anti-Semitism?
Eugene Walcott strikes me as below average intelligence when it comes to history,"1555 was the year we arrived in Jamestown as slaves (Jamestown wasn't founded until 1607, and the first Dutch ships brought Africans to Jamestown as indentured servants in 1619. These servants worked 4-7 years, then were free. See p. 194). My favorite history gaffe was his statement that Jews owned 75% of all the slaves in the South- see p. 180-182. Wow. Blacks owned more African slaves in North America than Jews. There were only 50,000 Jews in the South during the time slavery existed, in a population of 23 million. His hatred of these people is just so alarming. I found it fascinating that blacks in North America owned more slaves than Jews. I did not know this!)
Walcott certainly is a man who knows how to manipulate people for his personal financial gain, speaking of the disenfranchisement of an entire people, while living in a 19 bedroom mansion. There will always be those who market hate to the masses, while enriching themselves. Eugene Walcott is one of these individuals. Thank you, Arthur Magida, for bringing this to light.
Eugene Walcott strikes me as below average intelligence when it comes to history,"1555 was the year we arrived in Jamestown as slaves (Jamestown wasn't founded until 1607, and the first Dutch ships brought Africans to Jamestown as indentured servants in 1619. These servants worked 4-7 years, then were free. See p. 194). My favorite history gaffe was his statement that Jews owned 75% of all the slaves in the South- see p. 180-182. Wow. Blacks owned more African slaves in North America than Jews. There were only 50,000 Jews in the South during the time slavery existed, in a population of 23 million. His hatred of these people is just so alarming. I found it fascinating that blacks in North America owned more slaves than Jews. I did not know this!)
Walcott certainly is a man who knows how to manipulate people for his personal financial gain, speaking of the disenfranchisement of an entire people, while living in a 19 bedroom mansion. There will always be those who market hate to the masses, while enriching themselves. Eugene Walcott is one of these individuals. Thank you, Arthur Magida, for bringing this to light.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews