AHC: M.L. King- Malcom X Alliance

IOTL, Martin Luther King & Malcom X met
only once- & briefly @ that- in 1964. Malcom was of course assinated in February
1965, King, April 1968- such a waste! The
challenge here: change what happened in
IOTL so that King & Malcom were able to
form @ least SOME kind of alliance & thus
avoid being killed- or @ the least, live longer than they did IOTL.
 
I don't think a King-Malcolm alliance is going to make the people who wanted their heads on a platter any more amenable to their respective agendas. You can still expect redneck businessmen to be putting bounties on King, and Elijah Muhammed to be muttering "Will no one rid me of this turbulent preacher?" to anyone in the general vicinity.

So, longer lives, not likely. But if they DID both manage to get a few more years under their belts, an alliance is not entirely impossible, especially if Malcolm continues to distance himself from his earlier racialism. I don't know enough about the relationship between the two men to know how likely an alliance would have been earlier than that.
 
I can't swear to the historical accuracy of this, but I believe I once read somewhere that Malcolm X and MLK did have something of an unspoken alliance. From my understanding, Malcolm would often be purposely aggressive (and some might say "outlandish") when dealing with his counterpart, in an attempt to sway more whites into MLK's camp. Reasoning that between an angry, loud, aggressive black man, and a more moderate preacher, whites would be convinced to embrace Martin Luther King Jr.

If the two had worked together in a more organized capacity, it's conceivable that the Civil Rights movement may have seen more success down the road. Perhaps an earlier hajj by Malcolm could've convinced him to work formally with MLK. But in all honesty, I don't see any alliance that they could (realistically) form preventing their assassinations. In fact, if the two were more closely intertwined publicly, I imagine the potential for their deaths would be greater, not lesser.
 
I don't think a King-Malcolm alliance is going to make the people who wanted their heads on a platter any more amenable to their respective agendas. You can still expect redneck businessmen to be putting bounties on King, and Elijah Muhammed to be muttering "Will no one rid me of this turbulent preacher?" to anyone in the general vicinity.

So, longer lives, not likely. But if they DID both manage to get a few more years under their belts, an alliance is not entirely impossible, especially if Malcolm continues to distance himself from his earlier racialism. I don't know enough about the relationship between the two men to know how likely an alliance would have been earlier than that.


Re the relationship between the two: in 1967
IOTL King, in a conversation with the noted
journalist David Halberstam, lamented that
Malcom was now dead. "He had such a sweet soul", King commented. (I read that
in Stephen B Oates' biography of King, LET
THE TRUMPETS SOUND)
 
I can't swear to the historical accuracy of this, but I believe I once read somewhere that Malcolm X and MLK did have something of an unspoken alliance. From my understanding, Malcolm would often be purposely aggressive (and some might say "outlandish") when dealing with his counterpart, in an attempt to sway more whites into MLK's camp. Reasoning that between an angry, loud, aggressive black man, and a more moderate preacher, whites would be convinced to embrace Martin Luther King Jr. . .
Martin was not prickly. Unlike Michael Dukakis who was prickly in his 1988 presidential campaign.

http://americanexperience.si.edu/wp...ation-Malcolm-X-and-Martin-Luther-King-Jr.pdf

' . . . In a television interview, psychology professor Dr. Kenneth B. Clark discussed with King his philosophy of non-violence . . . '

' . . . Clark then addressed the differences between King and Malcolm X, calling attention to the fact that Malcolm X had criticized King’s method of non-violent opposition by saying King’s philosophy "plays into the hands of the white oppressors, that they are happy to hear [King] talk about love for the oppressor because this disarms the Negro and fits into the stereotype of the Negro as a meek, turning-the-other-cheek sort of creature." King replied, "I don’t think of [love] as a weak force, but I think of [it] as something strong and that organizes itself into powerful direct action. . . " . . . '
Notice how Martin responds to the criticism in generalities. And/or he kind of uses it as a teaching moment to preach his own ideas.

PS I'm sure Martin didn't always bring his A game, but in his dealing with Malcolm, he seemed to do pretty well.
 
Top