Contemporary ideologies often regard the need of change in order for development to actually take place. However established norms and traditions often negate the occurrence of these elements, particularly because it poses as a threat to its existence. This has been the case in the African-American plight for civil liberties decades ago. Though there is still room for improvement, the rights of minority groups have considerably handed to them after these agents of change have done their part. In a certain level, their calls for change in the social order was not only limited to the national issues that they are encountering at their period. Malcolm X and King eventually took on positions advocating change in the international arena. Regrettably their deaths have brought their fight in a permanent hiatus. In any case, their ideologies and achievements for the civil rights movement will stay entrenched in American consciousness decades later. This paper will look on the ideologies of the two agents of social change as they take on issues of international level.
II. Beyond Civil Rights: Malcolm X and King
The civil right movement of the African-American people in half a century ago has made icons on individuals like the charismatic Martin Luther King Jr. and the enigmatic Malcolm X. On their way to changing the pre-existing culture in US, they have tackled means of addressing oppression through their works and orations in the public. On such terms, both have addressed the role of the American leadership in addressing the social issues on both national and international landscapes.
In the case of Malcolm X, he has provided the ideology of “ballot or the bullet.” On this condition, the struggle highlighted a nationalist stand by improving the political system. To this end, his claims indicate the empowerment of the voting public in determining who will rise in office. Though it is often initially seen as an indication of fighting oppressive forces in the political system, the perspective of Malcolm X manifest its practicability in these modern times. People who hold the seat of power in the American setting have considerable influence not only on national issues but also how the leader of the free world will address its foreign policies. The ballot, as Malcom X have noted, possess as much power as that of the bullet. Superficially, it appears that Malcolm X condones violence in order to instill change; nevertheless a closer look will provide that the use of violent means is only an option, one of the alternatives and not the sole course of action.
In the case of Martin Luther King Jr. his speech regarding one of the most pressing issues in the nation at that period, the Vietnam War has influenced modern thinking on the opposition in armed conflicts. In the same manner, the speech claims not only the issues of the young American men shoved head-first into the battlefield, but also the responsibility of the United States as a powerful nation to the rest of the world. King claimed that “the world now demands a maturity of America” not only in the essence of economic superiority but also in knowing the implications of political decisions internationally. The core of the speech greatly regards the moral side of the actions of the US government at that time. In the eyes of King, change is not only needed but also indispensable. Moreover, a sense of urgency could be taken to mean in the context of the speech of King who is particularly worried of the imminent spiraling down of the morals of American society with a huge assistance from the leaders of the country.
III.Conclusion
The stand of both Malcolm X and King has contributed greatly on modern American philosophy. It highlights both the need for the American leadership to exercise a more judicious way of developing policies those particularly affecting the national and foreign landscape. Both have seen the capability of the American nation to be mighty over and above the other countries in the world. With such power, considerable degree of conscientiousness is required. Malcolm X and King gave emphasis on the power of the people to influence those in the seat of power. Malcolm X claimed the use of the electoral process and justified violence as a means to influence the government while King claimed the use of civil disobedience. In either way, the people is given means where their voices could be heard.
0 comments:
Post a Comment