Friday, August 31, 2012
Welcome & First Exercise
Welcome to this place in the "blogosphere" set up for this course, Sociology 306: The Sociological Lessons of the Life and Times of Malcolm X. We will be using this space over the course of this semester for what I call "individual and group activities and exercises," and for occasional posting of lecture notes, reminders, and other comments. I will usually give you notice in class if I have or will be posting anything on this blog, but let me suggest that you get in the habit of checking this blog at least once a week anyway. Often, if I feel that I did not do a terribly good job presenting something in class or responding to a question, I may use this blog space to make amends and try to clarify or elaborate on some remarks I made in class. This blog will also be used near the end of the term to post some questions (and answers) that you will be asked to make up for the final exam. I hope you will feel free to use this space to post any questions or comments you may not feel comfortable verbalizing in class. Finally, this space will be used for any extra credit opportunities which may arise during the semester.
FIRST EXERCISE
Toward the end of our first class meeting on Tuesday (9/4) I am going to play a brief YouTube clip of Malcom X addressing the question, "Who Are You?" What I want you to do for this first exercise is post a comment about this clip, addressing the question of whether you believe what Malcolm X says is "ancient history" (i.e., no longer really relevant, or just of historical interest), or whether it continues to have some relevance for our time? You are welcome to make any other observations about it that you'd like to make. I am just looking for a paragraph or two at most. Please try to submit your comment by Tuesday, 9/11 (or one week after our first class meeting). This exercise is worth 5 activity points.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Family Questions & Answers for the Final Exam & Notes About the Final Exam
Notes about the final exam: I have almost completed making up the final exam and there a couple tips I can share with you. First, the bulk of the questions are on the Autobiography, the Assassination and several on the Imam Zaid/Cornel West speeches. There are some questions on Between Cross and Crescent, dealing with issues I raised in class about various chapters, but not a lot. And I have only come up with a couple questions about Dyson's book which I tried to cover last Tuesday. So, keep that in mind as you study. I believe the best strategy is to study all of your notes as if any aspect of them could be on the test, and don't forget to review key textual passages I quoted in class or called your attention to. And there is also some material I posted on the blog, especially notes about the assassination. Below are the family questions I chose to include.
___________________________________
FAMILY QUESTIONS ON THE FINAL EXAM
BLUE FAMILY (Sami, Lauren, Arsenio, Annie) earn 10pts + 1 bonus point.
1. What was Malcolm referring to when he was reflecting on the sentences he and Shorty got for burglary and he said: "...their worst crime was their involvement with Negroes." ? (1)
ANSWER: He was referring to the light sentences the white girls who were a part of their burglary ring received, compared to the 10-year sentences he and Shorty received.
2. Why was Malcolm X so critical of the typical depiction of Jesus? (2)
ANSWER: The typical depiction of Jesus as blonde-haired and blue-eyed he felt was historically inaccurate and reflected the white man's interest in brainwashing Blacks to worship a white Jesus.
3. In the video, Imam Zaid stresses that ___________________ is the key to transcending what America had made you. (fill-in-the-blank) (1)
ANSWER: knowledge
4. Who did Malcolm meet in jail and why was he so impressed with him? (2)
ANSWER: An inmate named Bimbi, who commanded total respect when he spoke. Malcolm was intrigued by how he used language without any profanity and could command such respect.
5. What did Malcolm say to Martin Luther King when they met and shook hands for the first and only time? (1)
ANSWER: He joked, "Now you're going to get investigated."
RED FAMILY (Emily, Frances, Michaela, Sarah) earn 10pts. + 1 bonus point.
1. How was Malcolm treated by his parents in comparison to his other siblings, and why does he suspect this was the case? (3)
ANSWER: Malcolm's father was very strict with his siblings, but more lenient on Malcolm. In contrast, his mother gave him most of his whippings. He felt his father was subconsciously afflicted with the white man's brainwashing of Negroes that he was inclined to favor the lighter-skinned Malcolm, whereas Malcolm's mother resented the display of white blood that was apparent in Malcolm's skin color. His mother gave him hell for the same reason his father subconsciously favored him.
2. What was Malcolm's teacher, Mr. Ostrowski's, reaction to Malcolm telling him he wanted to be a lawyer? And how did this affect Malcolm? (2)
ANSWER: His teacher said that being a lawyer is no realistic goal for a nigger; rather, he should consider becoming something more realistic and practical such as a carpenter. This incident was sort of the last straw with whites -- Malcolm turned his back on them.
3. How did Malcolm interpret the drug culture of Harlem? (1)
ANSWER: The drugs that plagued Harlem were just another means by which the white man, who ran the drug trade, oppressed and degraded the black community economically and morally.
4. What was the name given to Malcolm by the Nigerian Muslims during his travels in Africa, and what does it mean? (2)
ANSWER: "Omowhale" -- the son that has come home.
5. What would Imam Zaid say if you told him that we need another Malcolm X or MLK? (1)
ANSWER: We don't need another Malcolm or Martin, so stop searching for one. We need enough people who can be inspired by their example. Basically, he is saying that people need to stop waiting around for some sort of messiah and take action themselves.
_____________________________
That's it, and you'll note that I did some editing of both questions and answers. Remember that ALL of the above questions will be on the test, but placed in their proper chronological order. So, the test will begin with questions from the first class and conclude with some questions from the last class. Also, for some of the longer answers, you do NOT need to give me back the exact same answer to get full credit for it, as long as you make the basic point or points in your own words.
___________________________________
FAMILY QUESTIONS ON THE FINAL EXAM
BLUE FAMILY (Sami, Lauren, Arsenio, Annie) earn 10pts + 1 bonus point.
1. What was Malcolm referring to when he was reflecting on the sentences he and Shorty got for burglary and he said: "...their worst crime was their involvement with Negroes." ? (1)
ANSWER: He was referring to the light sentences the white girls who were a part of their burglary ring received, compared to the 10-year sentences he and Shorty received.
2. Why was Malcolm X so critical of the typical depiction of Jesus? (2)
ANSWER: The typical depiction of Jesus as blonde-haired and blue-eyed he felt was historically inaccurate and reflected the white man's interest in brainwashing Blacks to worship a white Jesus.
3. In the video, Imam Zaid stresses that ___________________ is the key to transcending what America had made you. (fill-in-the-blank) (1)
ANSWER: knowledge
4. Who did Malcolm meet in jail and why was he so impressed with him? (2)
ANSWER: An inmate named Bimbi, who commanded total respect when he spoke. Malcolm was intrigued by how he used language without any profanity and could command such respect.
5. What did Malcolm say to Martin Luther King when they met and shook hands for the first and only time? (1)
ANSWER: He joked, "Now you're going to get investigated."
RED FAMILY (Emily, Frances, Michaela, Sarah) earn 10pts. + 1 bonus point.
1. How was Malcolm treated by his parents in comparison to his other siblings, and why does he suspect this was the case? (3)
ANSWER: Malcolm's father was very strict with his siblings, but more lenient on Malcolm. In contrast, his mother gave him most of his whippings. He felt his father was subconsciously afflicted with the white man's brainwashing of Negroes that he was inclined to favor the lighter-skinned Malcolm, whereas Malcolm's mother resented the display of white blood that was apparent in Malcolm's skin color. His mother gave him hell for the same reason his father subconsciously favored him.
2. What was Malcolm's teacher, Mr. Ostrowski's, reaction to Malcolm telling him he wanted to be a lawyer? And how did this affect Malcolm? (2)
ANSWER: His teacher said that being a lawyer is no realistic goal for a nigger; rather, he should consider becoming something more realistic and practical such as a carpenter. This incident was sort of the last straw with whites -- Malcolm turned his back on them.
3. How did Malcolm interpret the drug culture of Harlem? (1)
ANSWER: The drugs that plagued Harlem were just another means by which the white man, who ran the drug trade, oppressed and degraded the black community economically and morally.
4. What was the name given to Malcolm by the Nigerian Muslims during his travels in Africa, and what does it mean? (2)
ANSWER: "Omowhale" -- the son that has come home.
5. What would Imam Zaid say if you told him that we need another Malcolm X or MLK? (1)
ANSWER: We don't need another Malcolm or Martin, so stop searching for one. We need enough people who can be inspired by their example. Basically, he is saying that people need to stop waiting around for some sort of messiah and take action themselves.
_____________________________
That's it, and you'll note that I did some editing of both questions and answers. Remember that ALL of the above questions will be on the test, but placed in their proper chronological order. So, the test will begin with questions from the first class and conclude with some questions from the last class. Also, for some of the longer answers, you do NOT need to give me back the exact same answer to get full credit for it, as long as you make the basic point or points in your own words.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Notes & Reminders
NOTES: Thanks for the submissions on the family exercise on the speeches of Imam Zaid and Cornel West. They were both interesting and insightful and everyone received the 10 points for this activity. I may highlight a few points that were brought out when we get together next time.
I began reading your last set of journal entries last night, and it caused me to do some re-reading of Chapter 6 in Between Cross and Crescent. That made me realize that some of my criticisms of Baldwin who wrote that chapter may have been a bit unfair. It is not as if Baldwin directly says that King inspired the sit-ins and freedom rides, and made the decision to use children in Birmingham (in fact, he does mention Rev. Bevel, who I noted was directly responsible for that), but he does seem to IMPLY that. Also, Baldwin does make a reference to King's work with young people to try to discourage them from rioting during the mid-60s.
REMINDERS: First, remember that the essay on Obama's take on black nationalism is due this FRIDAY, APR. 30TH.
Second, your papers on Malcolm X (either topic I or II) is due NEXT FRIDAY, MAY 7TH.
Third, next Tuesday will be our last regular class, since you will be taking the final exam on the last class day, TUESDAY, MAY 11TH. In that regard, you need to read Michael Eric Dyson's book, "Making Malcolm," because I plan to cover as much of it as I can in our last class.
Finally, DON'T FORGET TO START TO REVIEW YOUR NOTES AS WELL AS BLOG MATERIAL AND MAKE UP SHORT-ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR THE FINAL EXAM. NEXT TUESDAY I WILL GIVE THE TWO FAMILIES SOME TIME TO CONFER ABOUT THIS, BUT I WILL NEED THOSE QUESTIONS BY NEXT WEDNESDAY, MAY 5TH, TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTING THE FINAL EXAM.
I began reading your last set of journal entries last night, and it caused me to do some re-reading of Chapter 6 in Between Cross and Crescent. That made me realize that some of my criticisms of Baldwin who wrote that chapter may have been a bit unfair. It is not as if Baldwin directly says that King inspired the sit-ins and freedom rides, and made the decision to use children in Birmingham (in fact, he does mention Rev. Bevel, who I noted was directly responsible for that), but he does seem to IMPLY that. Also, Baldwin does make a reference to King's work with young people to try to discourage them from rioting during the mid-60s.
REMINDERS: First, remember that the essay on Obama's take on black nationalism is due this FRIDAY, APR. 30TH.
Second, your papers on Malcolm X (either topic I or II) is due NEXT FRIDAY, MAY 7TH.
Third, next Tuesday will be our last regular class, since you will be taking the final exam on the last class day, TUESDAY, MAY 11TH. In that regard, you need to read Michael Eric Dyson's book, "Making Malcolm," because I plan to cover as much of it as I can in our last class.
Finally, DON'T FORGET TO START TO REVIEW YOUR NOTES AS WELL AS BLOG MATERIAL AND MAKE UP SHORT-ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR THE FINAL EXAM. NEXT TUESDAY I WILL GIVE THE TWO FAMILIES SOME TIME TO CONFER ABOUT THIS, BUT I WILL NEED THOSE QUESTIONS BY NEXT WEDNESDAY, MAY 5TH, TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTING THE FINAL EXAM.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Note About Current Family Activity & Making Up Questions for the Final Exam
NOTE ABOUT FAMILY ACTIVITY: I assume you have all familiarized yourselves with the description of this family activity (previous blog post). Remember, there are two things, basically, that I want each of the families to address AS A GROUP. First, describe something your speaker (Blue Family - Zaid Shakir & Red Family - Cornel West)had to say which connects in some respect with that Baldwin passage. In general, I believe the Blue Family might have an easier time with this than the Red Family because of some of the things Imam Zaid brought out in his talk. But, in any case, this is a matter of interpretation and there is not any particular right or wrong answer. And, then, again AS A GROUP, identify what you felt was the most significant point your speaker made, especially as it relates to the legacy of Malcolm X. Once you have come to an agreement on these two points, someone from each family should post your findings as a comment on that blog post describing this activity. If possible, I'd like you to do this by next Tuesday.
______________________________
MAKING UP QUESTIONS FOR THE FINAL EXAM: We need to begin the process of having the two families confer on questions for the final exam. I'll need to have those questions (and answers) several days before our last class on May 11th when you will take this exam. I will ask each family to submit SIX SHORT-ANSWER QUESTIONS (NO true-false or multiple choice questions, but fill-in-the-blank is ok), of which I will try to accept a minumum of FOUR QUESTIONS. For each additional question I decide to use, that family will earn a bonus point, so you may earn up to two bonus points for this exercise. The questions can come from anything we have covered in class over the semester, including some material I posted on the blog, such as notes on Malcolm X's assassination. I believe both families have members who have done this for me in other classes, so they can serve as guides for those who are doing this for the first time.
I will give the families some time in class next Tuesday (the 27th) at least to get organized or perhaps divide up responsibilities. But you can all, individually, begin to give some thought to this. Then, in the following class (May 4th) I will give the families 20-30 minutes to confer and decide on which six questions each family will submit. I will, then, want a hard copy or email copy of each family's questions (and answers) NO LATER THAN 2PM WEDNESDAY, MAY 5TH. I will consider them and make my selections and then post them on the blog by FRIDAY AFTERNOON, MAY 7TH, so you can have them to study for the final exam on TUESDAY THE 11TH.
This exercise is worth 10 points, and you each have to participate to earn those points, not to mention possible bonus points.
______________________________
MAKING UP QUESTIONS FOR THE FINAL EXAM: We need to begin the process of having the two families confer on questions for the final exam. I'll need to have those questions (and answers) several days before our last class on May 11th when you will take this exam. I will ask each family to submit SIX SHORT-ANSWER QUESTIONS (NO true-false or multiple choice questions, but fill-in-the-blank is ok), of which I will try to accept a minumum of FOUR QUESTIONS. For each additional question I decide to use, that family will earn a bonus point, so you may earn up to two bonus points for this exercise. The questions can come from anything we have covered in class over the semester, including some material I posted on the blog, such as notes on Malcolm X's assassination. I believe both families have members who have done this for me in other classes, so they can serve as guides for those who are doing this for the first time.
I will give the families some time in class next Tuesday (the 27th) at least to get organized or perhaps divide up responsibilities. But you can all, individually, begin to give some thought to this. Then, in the following class (May 4th) I will give the families 20-30 minutes to confer and decide on which six questions each family will submit. I will, then, want a hard copy or email copy of each family's questions (and answers) NO LATER THAN 2PM WEDNESDAY, MAY 5TH. I will consider them and make my selections and then post them on the blog by FRIDAY AFTERNOON, MAY 7TH, so you can have them to study for the final exam on TUESDAY THE 11TH.
This exercise is worth 10 points, and you each have to participate to earn those points, not to mention possible bonus points.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
FAMILY ACTIVITY: Upon Viewing "Malcolm & Martin: Implications of Their Legacies for the Future"
At the end of Chapter 3: Of Their Spiritual Strivings: Malcolm and Martin on Religion and Freedom, in "Between Cross and Crescent," Lewis Baldwin makes the following observation:
"Thus, the message emerging out of Malcolm's and Martin's legacies is that interreligious dialogue and cooperation in the black community and indeed the whole world is authentic to the degree that it is concerned with the socioeconomic and political liberation of individuals and communities."
"Malcolm and Martin brought us closer to the view that because no religion exhausts truth, different traditions can complement and enrich each other rather than being mutually exclusive rivals. Their different faiths complemented each other because they ultimately shared a common goal, namely, to embrace the essential 'oneness' of humanity, among which the many religions, while upholding their own truth claims, will also affirm their individual obligations to contribute to the shaping of a shared universal ethic. There is no greater legacy for the twenty-first century." (p. 127)
In light of the above passage, I want each family to discuss how one of the speakers (Cornel West or Imam Zaid) reflect the points that Baldwin makes. Before seeing this video next week (4/13), we will flip a coin to see which family will focus on which speaker. Then, following the viewing of this video, I want the families to begin conferring on this topic. I also want each family to determine what they felt was the most significant point each speaker made, especially with reference to Malcolm X in particular. Since we only meet once a week, it is quite possible you will need more time to confer with your family members and you will have to do so outside of class. Finally, I want a representative of each family to post your findings (a couple paragraphs) as a comment on this blog post, and to do so NO LATER THAN A WEEK AFTER WE SEE THE VIDEO, NAMELY, TUESDAY, APRIL 20TH.
This family exercise is worth 10 activity points.
"Thus, the message emerging out of Malcolm's and Martin's legacies is that interreligious dialogue and cooperation in the black community and indeed the whole world is authentic to the degree that it is concerned with the socioeconomic and political liberation of individuals and communities."
"Malcolm and Martin brought us closer to the view that because no religion exhausts truth, different traditions can complement and enrich each other rather than being mutually exclusive rivals. Their different faiths complemented each other because they ultimately shared a common goal, namely, to embrace the essential 'oneness' of humanity, among which the many religions, while upholding their own truth claims, will also affirm their individual obligations to contribute to the shaping of a shared universal ethic. There is no greater legacy for the twenty-first century." (p. 127)
In light of the above passage, I want each family to discuss how one of the speakers (Cornel West or Imam Zaid) reflect the points that Baldwin makes. Before seeing this video next week (4/13), we will flip a coin to see which family will focus on which speaker. Then, following the viewing of this video, I want the families to begin conferring on this topic. I also want each family to determine what they felt was the most significant point each speaker made, especially with reference to Malcolm X in particular. Since we only meet once a week, it is quite possible you will need more time to confer with your family members and you will have to do so outside of class. Finally, I want a representative of each family to post your findings (a couple paragraphs) as a comment on this blog post, and to do so NO LATER THAN A WEEK AFTER WE SEE THE VIDEO, NAMELY, TUESDAY, APRIL 20TH.
This family exercise is worth 10 activity points.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Follow-Up to "Brother Minister" & After Spring Break
I returned the DVD, "Brother Minister: The Assassination of Malcolm X," to the library, so some of you who had to leave early can check it out at your leisure and see what you missed. Sorry that it ran a bit longer than I anticipated. They added some things to the DVD version that were not on the VHS version I used to show. For example, they included more extended and redundant clips of Minister Farrakhan, clearly suggesting that the NOI dealt with Malcolm, the traitor, as they saw fit. Let me weigh in on just a couple things.
** First, James Fox, director of the New York office of the FBI. I agree with his denial of any direct involvement of the FBI in Malcolm X's assassination. But there can be no doubt that "behind the scenes" the FBI was not only surveilling Malcolm X but they were actively doing things to exacerbate the split between Malcolm and Elijah Muhammad. And I do not buy for one minute Fox's claim that the media or Congress would have exposed such operations and punished FBI officials for misconduct. To my knowledge, NOT ONE FBI AGENT OR OFFICIAL (NOT EVEN WILLIAM SULLIVAN WHO WROTE THE NOTE TO KING THREATENING TO EXPOSE HIM) WAS EVER FIRED, REPRIMANDED OR PUNISHED IN ANY WAY FOR WHAT THEY DID IN THE 60s. THE PRESS LARGELY FAILED AT THE TIME AND EVEN SUBSEQUENTLY TO COVER THESE MISDEEDS.
** The "Black Messiah Letter" (that you have a copy of) CANNOT be used as evidence of FBI involvement in Malcolm X's assassination. But there can be no question the FBI was intent on trying to "neutralize" leaders such as Malcolm X and King, among others.
** Brother Kondo, author of "Unraveling the Assassination" (which I have not read), was right on target in his description of what the FBI's "COINTELPRO" operation entailed. It was mainly about discrediting, neutralizing, sowing dissension, exploiting weaknesses to cripple what Hoover thought was a subversive movement, which we call today the Civil Rights Movement.
** Benjamin Karim and Charles Kenyatta, two trusted aides to Malcolm X after he left the NOI, clearly said they did not see Johnson or Butler at the Audobon. Likewise, undercover NYPD cop, Gene Roberts. All of them should have been called to testify at the trial, but they weren't. The prosecution was just intent on winning convictions and perhaps covering up the NYPD's undercover surveillance operation. And the defense was incompetent.
** I generally agree with Brother Kondo, and William Kuntsler, that five NOI individuals out of the Newark mosque, which included Hayer, did it. Kuntsler, who was a radical lawyer at the time said he turned down the offer to represent Hayer at the time. But he regretted that because he now sees how the trial might have exposed the NYPD and FBI surveillance operations. I have not read Hayer's handwritten account of what actually happened which he wrote in prison. But it sounds credible from what those on the video said about it.
** New York Daily News reporter, Jack Newfield, who suspects government involvement, said some things that are suspect. He claimed John Ali was an FBI informant, which is possible, but one of his sources for this, Karl Evanzz, is NOT credible. And his implication that Malcolm's trip to Selma was supported by Coretta King and Andy Young is not accurate. Malcolm was invited by SNCC, and Coretta and Andy Young were worried about what he would say. It is certainly possible that Malcolm might have eventually joined forces with King, but I believe Newfield's claims are exaggerated and inaccurate.
_________________________
AFTER THE BREAK: Try to remember that we will be relocating the class to OLIN 219 for our next meeting and for the rest of the semester. If you get a chance, do begin reading Between Cross and Crescent, thru Chapter 2. I will probably begin talking about it during that first class after the break. Your next set of journal entries is not due until TUESDAY, APRIL 13TH. Finally, the class right after the break (Apr. 6th) is the deadline to clear with me any alternative paper topics you may have in mind. Have a good and safe spring break. See you in a couple weeks.
** First, James Fox, director of the New York office of the FBI. I agree with his denial of any direct involvement of the FBI in Malcolm X's assassination. But there can be no doubt that "behind the scenes" the FBI was not only surveilling Malcolm X but they were actively doing things to exacerbate the split between Malcolm and Elijah Muhammad. And I do not buy for one minute Fox's claim that the media or Congress would have exposed such operations and punished FBI officials for misconduct. To my knowledge, NOT ONE FBI AGENT OR OFFICIAL (NOT EVEN WILLIAM SULLIVAN WHO WROTE THE NOTE TO KING THREATENING TO EXPOSE HIM) WAS EVER FIRED, REPRIMANDED OR PUNISHED IN ANY WAY FOR WHAT THEY DID IN THE 60s. THE PRESS LARGELY FAILED AT THE TIME AND EVEN SUBSEQUENTLY TO COVER THESE MISDEEDS.
** The "Black Messiah Letter" (that you have a copy of) CANNOT be used as evidence of FBI involvement in Malcolm X's assassination. But there can be no question the FBI was intent on trying to "neutralize" leaders such as Malcolm X and King, among others.
** Brother Kondo, author of "Unraveling the Assassination" (which I have not read), was right on target in his description of what the FBI's "COINTELPRO" operation entailed. It was mainly about discrediting, neutralizing, sowing dissension, exploiting weaknesses to cripple what Hoover thought was a subversive movement, which we call today the Civil Rights Movement.
** Benjamin Karim and Charles Kenyatta, two trusted aides to Malcolm X after he left the NOI, clearly said they did not see Johnson or Butler at the Audobon. Likewise, undercover NYPD cop, Gene Roberts. All of them should have been called to testify at the trial, but they weren't. The prosecution was just intent on winning convictions and perhaps covering up the NYPD's undercover surveillance operation. And the defense was incompetent.
** I generally agree with Brother Kondo, and William Kuntsler, that five NOI individuals out of the Newark mosque, which included Hayer, did it. Kuntsler, who was a radical lawyer at the time said he turned down the offer to represent Hayer at the time. But he regretted that because he now sees how the trial might have exposed the NYPD and FBI surveillance operations. I have not read Hayer's handwritten account of what actually happened which he wrote in prison. But it sounds credible from what those on the video said about it.
** New York Daily News reporter, Jack Newfield, who suspects government involvement, said some things that are suspect. He claimed John Ali was an FBI informant, which is possible, but one of his sources for this, Karl Evanzz, is NOT credible. And his implication that Malcolm's trip to Selma was supported by Coretta King and Andy Young is not accurate. Malcolm was invited by SNCC, and Coretta and Andy Young were worried about what he would say. It is certainly possible that Malcolm might have eventually joined forces with King, but I believe Newfield's claims are exaggerated and inaccurate.
_________________________
AFTER THE BREAK: Try to remember that we will be relocating the class to OLIN 219 for our next meeting and for the rest of the semester. If you get a chance, do begin reading Between Cross and Crescent, thru Chapter 2. I will probably begin talking about it during that first class after the break. Your next set of journal entries is not due until TUESDAY, APRIL 13TH. Finally, the class right after the break (Apr. 6th) is the deadline to clear with me any alternative paper topics you may have in mind. Have a good and safe spring break. See you in a couple weeks.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Follow-Up to Assassination Remarks
Before I attempt to patch up some of my scattered remarks on Malcolm X's assassination, I'd like to make a couple final comments about the Autobiography. First, with regard to Alex Haley's Epilogue, I believe that reading the Epilogue is important to understand how the Autobiography was actually written and how Haley interacted with Malcolm during the time of their collaboration. Unfortunately, Haley's account of the assassination is not very good or precise. One other thing I did want to bring out was Haley's very good description of the predicament Malcolm X was in in January, '65, roughly a month before his death. Haley says, "He talked about the pressures on him everywhere he turned, and about the frustrations, among them that no one wanted to accept anything related to him except 'my old hate and violence image.' He said 'the so-called moderate' civil rights organizations avoided him as 'too militant' and the 'so-called militants' avoided him as 'too moderate.' 'They won't let me turn the corner!' he once exclaimed, 'I'm caught in a trap.'" (p. 431) And Ossie Davis's brief remarks at the end underscore why he admired him, thoughts that are more eloquently expressed in his Eulogy, which I handed out in class yesterday.
MALCOLM X'S ASSASSINATION: First, let me apologize for my rather scattered remarks yesterday. I realized just before class that I did not have a good synopsis of the assassination and the questions it raises, so I just "winged it," so to speak. Nonetheless, even though it was scattered, the points I made are valid, I believe. So, in this follow-up I am going to reiterate some points, but hopefully present them in a bit more coherent, organized fashion. Also, let me preface this by saying that my references to both the Kennedy and King assassinations probably sounded to you as a bit extreme, like a wild-eyed, so-called "conspiracy buff." Let me assure you that I am not a "buff." I spent many years studying both assassinations (more than 30 years in the case of Kennedy), and most of my studies have focused on the official investigations of those events, not reading the countless books of wild-eyed conspiracy buffs (among whom I would include Oliver Stone). Although the lingering questions about Malcolm X's assassination are not nearly as significant as Kennedy & King, those unanswered questions, unfortunately, have spawned irresponsible conspiracy theories which I believe need to be discredited. And more importantly, we need to demand that our criminal justice system and local and federal investigatory bodies (NYPD, FBI, et. al.) operate more honestly and truthfully with an eye to getting at the truth, not merely being satisfied with politically-acceptable solutions.
* As I mentioned in class, two books stand out in my mind for their objective treatment of the assassination, focusing especially on the trial of the accused assassins. Those are: Malcolm X: The Assassination by Michael Friedly & The Death and Life of Malcolm X by Peter Goldman.
* Friedly does an especially good job documenting the fact that the NOI clearly had the ability and desire to kill Malcolm X, that is, the MEANS & MOTIVE. Malcolm was clearly the greatest threat to that orgainization not only because of his knowledge of Elijah Mohammad's sexual infidelity but also because of corruption among the higher ups in the organization, not to mention dealings with the KKK and the American Nazi Party (the latter is not even mentioned in the Autobiography). Silencing Malcolm X was really essential to the survival of the NOI in many respects.
* The "Fruit of Islam" (FOI) was involved in more than just security and protection. Increasingly, they had taken up the task of disciplining members who strayed from the fold. Friedly notes, "The evolution of the Fruit of Islam was also significant because of the increasing tendency for the FOI to use force against former members of the Nation rather than against the enemies of the movement. Although the original justification of having a paramilitary wing to the Nation of Islam was to serve as the vanguard against Euro-American society, there were no major cases of reported violence between the FOI and whites, although there are countless instances in which the FOI instigated violence against those blacks who supposedly betrayed the movement." (p. 185)
* The trial was a travesty in many respects, and both the defense and prosecution are to blame. First, the police and prosecution decided to charge only 3 individuals, despite the fact that most of the evidence pointed to 5 conspirators. And the prosecution knew from grand jury testimony and from undercover police officer, Gene Roberts, that two of the charged individuals, Butler and Johnson, were not even in the Audobon Ballroom, much less assassins. Apparently, the FBI was also aware of this. But the prosecution went forward anyway, never calling Roberts to testify, for fear of bringing out in the open their surveillance of Malcolm X. The FBI and CIA had ongoing surveillance of Malcolm X, but they too did not want their operations compromised. Friedly also makes clear that whatever Malcolm X was threatening to do, such as charge the U.S. with human rights violations in the UN, was not serious enough for the FBI or CIA to even contemplate killing him. Neither the prosecution or the defense seem interested in trying to get to the bottom of the conspiracy, that is, whether someone higher up in the NOI had ordered Malcolm X's assassination. The defense was no "dream team," such as represented O.J. Simpson. Despite the prosecution's hiding some evdence, they should still have been able to prove Butler and Johnson had nothing to do with it. In short, it seemed that everyone wanted to just get passed this episode with some sort of resolution that would satisfy the public but leave many questions unanswered.
* Goldman makes a good point about Hayer, the one individual who clearly was directly involved: that if Hayer had been hired by the CIA or FBI he would have been happy to pin the blame on the NOI, but he did everything to try to shield them during the trial.
* Goldman also makes a good point that many people, followers of Malcolm X, apparently felt the need to invent a better death for Malcolm -- that is, that he must have been killed by "the man," by elements of the white power structure: the CIA, FBI, et. al.. Being killed by other Blacks only cast the cause of African Americans in a bad light.
* There are some other interesting "loose ends," in this story, some of which will be brought up in the video program we will see next Tuesday.
___________________
PLEASE INCORPORATE THE ABOVE COMMENTS IN YOUR CLASS NOTES. Remember that your next set of journal entries are due next week, and we will hear from: Emily, Sarah, Michaela, and Lauren. Following their presentations, we will see: "Brother Minister: The Assassination of Malcolm X," which runs about an hour and a half. Regarding our next book, Between Cross and Crescent, you can read the Introduction and selections #1 & 2, which takes you up to p. 82, HOWEVER, THERE IS NO HURRY ON THIS SINCE WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THIS UNTIL AFTER SPRING BREAK.
MALCOLM X'S ASSASSINATION: First, let me apologize for my rather scattered remarks yesterday. I realized just before class that I did not have a good synopsis of the assassination and the questions it raises, so I just "winged it," so to speak. Nonetheless, even though it was scattered, the points I made are valid, I believe. So, in this follow-up I am going to reiterate some points, but hopefully present them in a bit more coherent, organized fashion. Also, let me preface this by saying that my references to both the Kennedy and King assassinations probably sounded to you as a bit extreme, like a wild-eyed, so-called "conspiracy buff." Let me assure you that I am not a "buff." I spent many years studying both assassinations (more than 30 years in the case of Kennedy), and most of my studies have focused on the official investigations of those events, not reading the countless books of wild-eyed conspiracy buffs (among whom I would include Oliver Stone). Although the lingering questions about Malcolm X's assassination are not nearly as significant as Kennedy & King, those unanswered questions, unfortunately, have spawned irresponsible conspiracy theories which I believe need to be discredited. And more importantly, we need to demand that our criminal justice system and local and federal investigatory bodies (NYPD, FBI, et. al.) operate more honestly and truthfully with an eye to getting at the truth, not merely being satisfied with politically-acceptable solutions.
* As I mentioned in class, two books stand out in my mind for their objective treatment of the assassination, focusing especially on the trial of the accused assassins. Those are: Malcolm X: The Assassination by Michael Friedly & The Death and Life of Malcolm X by Peter Goldman.
* Friedly does an especially good job documenting the fact that the NOI clearly had the ability and desire to kill Malcolm X, that is, the MEANS & MOTIVE. Malcolm was clearly the greatest threat to that orgainization not only because of his knowledge of Elijah Mohammad's sexual infidelity but also because of corruption among the higher ups in the organization, not to mention dealings with the KKK and the American Nazi Party (the latter is not even mentioned in the Autobiography). Silencing Malcolm X was really essential to the survival of the NOI in many respects.
* The "Fruit of Islam" (FOI) was involved in more than just security and protection. Increasingly, they had taken up the task of disciplining members who strayed from the fold. Friedly notes, "The evolution of the Fruit of Islam was also significant because of the increasing tendency for the FOI to use force against former members of the Nation rather than against the enemies of the movement. Although the original justification of having a paramilitary wing to the Nation of Islam was to serve as the vanguard against Euro-American society, there were no major cases of reported violence between the FOI and whites, although there are countless instances in which the FOI instigated violence against those blacks who supposedly betrayed the movement." (p. 185)
* The trial was a travesty in many respects, and both the defense and prosecution are to blame. First, the police and prosecution decided to charge only 3 individuals, despite the fact that most of the evidence pointed to 5 conspirators. And the prosecution knew from grand jury testimony and from undercover police officer, Gene Roberts, that two of the charged individuals, Butler and Johnson, were not even in the Audobon Ballroom, much less assassins. Apparently, the FBI was also aware of this. But the prosecution went forward anyway, never calling Roberts to testify, for fear of bringing out in the open their surveillance of Malcolm X. The FBI and CIA had ongoing surveillance of Malcolm X, but they too did not want their operations compromised. Friedly also makes clear that whatever Malcolm X was threatening to do, such as charge the U.S. with human rights violations in the UN, was not serious enough for the FBI or CIA to even contemplate killing him. Neither the prosecution or the defense seem interested in trying to get to the bottom of the conspiracy, that is, whether someone higher up in the NOI had ordered Malcolm X's assassination. The defense was no "dream team," such as represented O.J. Simpson. Despite the prosecution's hiding some evdence, they should still have been able to prove Butler and Johnson had nothing to do with it. In short, it seemed that everyone wanted to just get passed this episode with some sort of resolution that would satisfy the public but leave many questions unanswered.
* Goldman makes a good point about Hayer, the one individual who clearly was directly involved: that if Hayer had been hired by the CIA or FBI he would have been happy to pin the blame on the NOI, but he did everything to try to shield them during the trial.
* Goldman also makes a good point that many people, followers of Malcolm X, apparently felt the need to invent a better death for Malcolm -- that is, that he must have been killed by "the man," by elements of the white power structure: the CIA, FBI, et. al.. Being killed by other Blacks only cast the cause of African Americans in a bad light.
* There are some other interesting "loose ends," in this story, some of which will be brought up in the video program we will see next Tuesday.
___________________
PLEASE INCORPORATE THE ABOVE COMMENTS IN YOUR CLASS NOTES. Remember that your next set of journal entries are due next week, and we will hear from: Emily, Sarah, Michaela, and Lauren. Following their presentations, we will see: "Brother Minister: The Assassination of Malcolm X," which runs about an hour and a half. Regarding our next book, Between Cross and Crescent, you can read the Introduction and selections #1 & 2, which takes you up to p. 82, HOWEVER, THERE IS NO HURRY ON THIS SINCE WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THIS UNTIL AFTER SPRING BREAK.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)