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

They were NOT political in that way according to this one writer, who discounts:

The fact that Malcolm X called for a political war in pursuit of liberty.

In a subversive newspaper published by the leader of the group, Elijah Muhammad.

And their most visible member took a political stance against the oppressors war.

It's is so painfully obvious that this writer is wrong, and that you are wrong.

Except that an "invincible warrior" is a ridiculous notion and Ali's involvement with Malcolm X, an organisation so painful obviously involved with resistance against an oppressive state that this waist of bandwidth is becoming unique in my experinece, and his own political anti-establishment views are amongst the most consumed post-King. As far as analogies go, that is about as useless as they get.

I really think you need to get away from that phrase. Perhaps you need to get away from the NOI too. Malcolm X, Elijah Mohammad and Muhammad Ali all actively pursued the betterment of a black race oppressed by the US Govt. It's obvious and actually pretty inarguable. You are determined to "peel away" Malcolm X from the NOI. It can't work. 90% of his preachings were made directly on his behalf. Some civil rights historians consider him the most important, or second most important, figure of his day. There is no getting away from that. He spoke for the NOI for almost all of his political career.


"We declare our right on this earth...to be a human being, to be respected as a human being, to be given the rights of a human being in this society, on this earth, in this day, which we intend to bring into existence by any means necessary."
Maclolm X, whilst a member of the nation of Islam.

Malcolm X was a civil rights leader, whilst he was in the Nation Of Islam.

So, "The devout NOI followers were not Civil Rights activists, under any MEANINGFUL definition" inspite of political preachings as variable as a call to arms to a respect for the self, made in part by a near universally-acknowledged "devout follower" of the NOI who was also seen as one of the most important Civil Rights Activists in history, to one of the most captive audiences in the era's politics...but they're not involved because you say so?

Muhammad Ali was seen by some as replacing Malcolm X politically in 1967 when he took his famous anti-war stance. Either a) he took one of the most famous and important Civil Rights stands on his on, or b) NOI made him do it. Either a) Ali was a terribly important political figure or b) NOI was firmly involved in this struggle to allow self-determination.

You are obviously not going to admit your mistake, but your mistake is obvious.

 

Malcolm X was a member of the NOI for years, and most of his POLITICAL preachings were made whilst he was a member.

Malcolm's ideas and NOI orthodoxy were exactly the same for years upon years and different for something like 11 months. Most of the moves Malcolm X made in support of civil rights were made when he was in the NOI. You can't escape the fact.

I think that if you genuinely believe that nobody saw Ali in POLITICAL terms when he anounced his membership of NOI, your misunderstanding of the situation may be complete, but I think it's true that he didn't become the "towering political figure" Huaser described until 1967, when he was still a member of NOI.

Now you are literally making **** up. They weren't thought of as political? They were represented up until March of 1964, in the main, by Malcolm X, but they weren't thought of as political?

This has become embarrassing.

 

I think, as a d-day final solution type answer, this is fine. Vietnam made him one. Inarguably, I would have thought. However, I think Ali's belonging to an organisation which would later be placed upon Hoover's Radical Blacklist (five years after Malcolm X's departure) whilst HW champion of the world is as political an action as any boxer has committed.

Ali's position of political relevance and work towards betterance of a repressed people is so obvious and undeniable I would have thought it inarguable at this point - then again, you have people on this forum that will argue for Mosley's glass jaw so I guess I shouldn't really be surprised.

 

Malcolm was NOT a maverick. This is something you have made up. Malcolm X was in NOI in the early 1950's. He was in it for over ten years. For much of that period he was the spokesman for the NOI. He was kicked out because he made remarks about Kennedy which were not sanctioned. Most of the rest of what he said was NOI policy, in which he had an enormous say. Why do you think he was a "maverick"? He helped design policy!! Crazy.

Who cares? Here is Macolm X on mainstream television in the US in 1963 discussing the racial politics of the era:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENHP89mLWOY[/ame]


Of course, after splitting from NOI (and well aware, also in his own words, that he would be killed by the NOI) he had a lot to say that was negative. What does it matter?

Malcolm X was involved at the very cutting edge of the Civil Rights struggle in the US during his membership of the NOI.

How much help do you need?

 

Naturally, but this is true of any great thinker.

He was a member for more than ten years (possibly 15), and to my knowledge, the schism occured in the final year. In the interim, he spoke as the mouthpiece of the the NOI. Distinguishing between the two is valid, distinguishing between the two to make X politically valid and the NOI invalid is spastic. If you watched the linked video:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENHP89mLWOY[/ame]

Q: What is your organisations position of what happened in Mississippi?

A: The honourable Elijah Mohammad wants justice for every one of the 20 million so called negroes.


As late as 1963 - something like ten months before his gag order - Malcolm X quantified detailed public announcements with the position of EM and the wider organisation. Even the white press detailed his position in these terms. He goes to every length to stress that he is speaking on behalf of the nation of islam. Still you struggle to get the point! You paint him as an independent thinker. Of course he was an independent thinker. But his independent though was channelled back into the organisation! One he apparently joined in 1948!

says who?! The NOI was placed on the radical groups list in 1970! Even if you are right (And you are wrong), apparently enough of them went back to make the group "revolutionary" enough to be placed on the same danger list as the Black Panters.

Yeah, all my information comes from Thomas Hauser :nut

This is what amazes me. You have been googling like crazy since the go - you MUST have run across mutliple references to Malcolm X and the NOI and the dramatic preachings they made between about 1958ish and 1970, yet still you are trying to say that played no part in the political process. It's mad.

Even if you are absolutely right (and you are wrong), so what?? It still wouldn't mean that the NOI played no part in the politics of the early sixties. It doesn't matter!

Christ, who CARES about the differences in ideology? This is more interference! You claim that they made no political impact in the early sixties. Even if Malcolm X HATED Elijah Mohammed and plotted his death and set his photograph alite every night, it doesn't matter! What matters is the broad political impact the group had in the early sixties. Why is this so hard for you?



Here is a short video highlighting Ali's POLITICAL impact:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eLrJMb6wpk[/ame]

"You are my enemy. My enemy is the white person, not the vietcong. You are my opposer when I want freedom, justice, equality."
-Muhammad Ali

"The backlash was conagious, and other black athletes did follow suit."
Narration.

"When he said, "no viet-cong ever called me ******", every black American new what he was talking about."
-Kareem Abdul Jabbar


"Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs and denied simple human rights."
-Muhammad Ali (the video further documents Martin Luther King's meeting with Ali on this occasion).




The fact that you genuinely think that this man is not political and not a part of a wider freedom rights movement is pitiful enough - the fact that you try to remove Malcolm X from the NOI's process to reinforce a hollow point, seems flat out dishonest.


Malcolm X talking about his three year association with Muhammad Ali:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSskWIASFqU&feature=related[/ame]


There is something rather disturbing about your inability/determination not to grasp these basic facts. Blindness and bias is much more palatable when it relates purely to boxing matters.