Did You Fear That Ali Would Have Been Assasinated During The 1960s?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Hydraulix, Feb 2, 2011.


  1. rapscalion

    rapscalion Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,849
    761
    Oct 7, 2010
    I wasn't alive then so no.
     
  2. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,748
    21,580
    Nov 24, 2005
    They were a religious cult, and a capitalist enterprise.
    As an entity of that type of course they wanted more freedom. Their "fight" took on the form of building mosques and businesses. They wanted "independence" even, but that surely doesn't make them part of Civil Rights movement or freedom fighters.


    So, they said some things that went against the grain. This doesn't make them part of the Civil Rights movement, moderate, radical, extreme or otherwise.
    They were a religious cult with a racial bent, nothing to do with any wider movement.

    Well, they spoke to George Lincoln Rockwell, Fuhrer of the American Nazi Party. I guess he was part of the civil rights movement too.


    Ali always deferred to "The Honorable Prophet and Messenger Elijah Muhammad" in the 1960s.
    As I've said all along, his statements make clear his devotion to the doctrine of the NOI and Elijah Muhammad, who were not friends of the civil rights movement, or allied with any black group that was. They were largely opposed to that sort of thing.
    That's what I think anyway.

    Ali's anti-war stance is something different again. There's no doubt that he became part of that
     
  3. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,207
    48,477
    Mar 21, 2007
    So? This in no way precludes Ali being a part of the civil rights movement.

    That's right. Even if you are completely correct, this weakens your position, doesn't it? Why are you so caught up with their motives? I'll quite happily defer to your naming them capitalists, fighting for the right to make money as a black organisation not afforded that right on an even playing field, and trying to change that, it rather seems to dead end your argument?


    Right. And preaching widely and consistently about the superiority of the black man to his white counter-part - unthinkable. Why would you leave this obvious and most discussed aspect of their nature out of your surmise above? It's the most obvious thing about them and key to understanding their role in those events.

    Anyway, put in these terms, it's very easy to see why an ego like Ali would be attracted.

    Why? The movement was about achieving greater rights for a race of people in the US. The NOI went way beyond that, but there very existence (or, from your point of view, it's potential profitability) is explained only by its direct opposition to an oppressive regime. Of course it makes them "a part" of the civil rights movement.

    I think your confusion springs from an "holding hands, all together" view of civil rights resistance. As I've already said, it doesn't work that way. Or perhaps you think that because they have motives additional to the advancement of African-Americans that motive is null and void. Whatever it is, it's a very narrow view of the issue.

    Anybody who worked towards the betterment of the race was a part of the civil rights movement when "civil rights movement" is taken out of the neat box it was placed in by the appraisers of the King movement and seen in it's wider context.




    No, they publicly said radical things going against the grain of an oppressive regime in support of the betterment of the subjugated race - about as close to a textbook definition of resistance as you are going to get.


    It definitively and completely makes them exactly that.

    Their isolation from "any wider movement" is utterly irrelevant. Again, civil rights resistance isn't about holding hands and pursuing all goals in the same breath. Malcolm X and Martin Luther King are, throughout the literature exploring the era regarded as two wings of the revolt against racism. Malcolm X is seen as representing the more aggressive pursuit of the exact same basic goal as King - the furtherment of the African American.

    I'm bemused that you insist on being unable to see it.



    :lol: come on.


    But before that, he was making genuine strides on his own. In an era where black fighters tended to defer to white sportscasters as "sir" and shuffle verbal platitudes, he was threatening to knock them out. To me, Ali showed signs of being to big for his repressed boots long before Malcolm X wooed him, and I have no doubt that he would have found outlets for his personal and political opinions had that not occured - as it was, I understand totally why he got involved with the organisation he did. It seems, in many ways, a perfect fit for his personality.


    :lol: again, you're determined that to be a part of the Civil Right Movement a person or organisation has to be in "The Civil Rights Movement". It's not something you join.

    A completely isolated non-associated individual working in support of the betterment of his race in a nowhere town is a "member".

    A deeply significant political position, the first black man to "beat Uncle Sam". He had to wait for the tide to turn, but this is arguably as crucial to the self esteem and general advancement of a race as Rosa Lee Park's heroics.
     
  4. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,192
    13,203
    Jan 4, 2008
    You make good points McGrains. My take:

    1. The NOI's main aim was not to amend the current system in order to put them on equal footing with whites, but to create a separate system where they didn't have to refer to whites at all. They were aiming for Civil Rights in a separate system. Yeah, this could in principle be seen as a Civil Rights movement.

    2. Ali wasn't a Civil Rights activist as much as he was a living example of emancipation. Just like Johnson. They were living the dream rather than preaching it. Neither had a calculated political program, but instead made terrific impact by just bending the laws of possibility.
     
  5. Il Duce

    Il Duce Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,972
    45
    Nov 18, 2010
    Easy there fella's,,,,,,,,,you're making a young Cassius Clay as too deep,
    and way too important.

    As for the 'first' Black Man to beat Uncle Sam,,,,,beat him in what.
     
  6. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,192
    13,203
    Jan 4, 2008
    Who's saying Clay was deep? Whom here has put him forth as a thinker?

    I don't see him as such, I see him as someone who reacted instictively, but in the process, yeah, he was important.
     
  7. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,207
    48,477
    Mar 21, 2007
    I understand what you mean, especially about Johnson.

    But let me ask you this about Ali - who preached to a wider audience on the subject of race relations than Muhammad Ali after 1968?
     
  8. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,192
    13,203
    Jan 4, 2008
    Probably no one. But he only burped up the same things Eljiah Muhammed preached. When Eljiah died and the NOI moderated themselves, Ali expressed relief even though he had happily repeated the old message up until then. This makes him in best case an effective pawn. By his own admission he didn't express his own convictions.

    One should also note that the NOI's official line on race relations during these years made little real impact. There was no actual movement towards a separate state for blacks. Native Americans have had some success with a similar line, but blacks have not. So Ali wasn't even an effective pawn really. His real impact came from the example he set by the things he did his way.
     
  9. Il Duce

    Il Duce Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,972
    45
    Nov 18, 2010
    I like the original question,,,,,,,about possible assasination.

    I don't think anyone feared that, maybe someone throwing an egg or tomato
    at him,,,,,,,,,but no bullets.
     
  10. Dempsey1238

    Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,732
    3,577
    Jul 10, 2005
    Native Americas didnt have success of being separate.
    They were put on crappy land just to stay out of the way after loosing the wars in the 1800's.

    You think Crazy Horse was just murder? He was still a danger to the US goverment, even when put on land with no food.
     
  11. Swarmer

    Swarmer Patrick Full Member

    19,654
    52
    Jan 19, 2010
    maybe by Il Duce :hey
     
  12. Longhhorn71

    Longhhorn71 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,714
    3,456
    Jan 6, 2007
    What members of the Malcom X group would have assassinated him?
     
  13. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    It's a wonder he made it out alive.


    I think the only thing that kept him alive was the fact that he was a boxer. Theres something sentimental about boxers for all old time Americans. And It always seems like when the public is against a certain boxer, they would rather see them lose than killed.


    And also, as Duce said, his security was top notch.

    Guess those crazy NOI's were good for something eh?


    Hey Duce, thinking back to our old thread, Im curious, what would have been better for the overall well being of the human race? A man like Ali face down dead in a ditch before he even became champion, yet having 0 ties to the NOI. Or the Ali today? Something interesting to think about...
     
  14. Il Duce

    Il Duce Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,972
    45
    Nov 18, 2010
    Mr. Reznick,,,,,,,,,Glad to see you are back..

    Of course 'anyone' who can add something positive to the human race is a
    benefit for all mankind.

    Either you offer something positive or not, but just because someone is in
    the position to offer a little more than the average Joe, does that make them
    a better person than the little guy.
    Something to think about........

    No one should measure the good things they do in life.
    You do it because, it is in your heart,,,,,,,,, not for public admiration.
     
  15. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    Thank you glad to be back :)

    "Either you offer something positive or not, but just because someone is in
    the position to offer a little more than the average Joe, does that make them
    a better person than the little guy.
    Something to think about........"


    On a philosophical and moral standpoint? No.

    But unless there are deeper layers to specific special cases, yes. The man who goes out, and works to put food on other peoples table, is better than the man who only says he will put food on another mans table if given the chance.


    Ali wasnt born into riches and wealth. Hes not a millions kid who gave money away to charity. He WORKED HARD to get to the position he is in. Not only did he put physical labor into the majority of his schedule since he was 12, he was also to be tested for his physical abilities in combat with other 200+ lb men. And not only did he have success, he became the best. The best of the best. He became so good, that the majority of boxing fans would argue he is one the greatest to ever do what he did.


    This wasnt manifested in him. He worked and worked.


    If there is a higher being, he/she/it can tell us what is right and wrong, or if even these ideas are real. But in our world as we know it, yes. He is by far better than the average Joe on the block.