Dr. King, Malcolm X, and the Truth Behind the Narrative
First off, rest in peace and rise in power to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s son Dexter King, who made the transition and reunited with his parents and older sister a few days ago on January 22 of this year.
But let's talk more about Dr. Martin Luther King and how the real-time media and hindsight history books love to compare him to Malcolm X. I have to give a downplay of the Dr. King propaganda spewed by mainstream media and mainstream thinking blacks.
Growing up in the 1990s I used to hear mainstream Blacks and media favorably compare Martin Luther King to Malcolm X. Martin Luther King was considered the premier leader for Blacks and Malcolm X was that secondary, “other” leader.
The media bastardized both leaders’ ideals into a simple narrative: Martin = non-violence (good), Malcolm = violence (bad).
Martin was for integration, Malcolm for segregation. Integration = good. Segregation = bad. That’s what we were taught.
Martin was labeled a civil rights activist. Malcolm was labeled a separatist—a term with negative weight. Meanwhile, the violent Jim Crow system Malcolm reacted to wasn’t labeled nearly as harshly.
And I believed this narrative as a young person.
The Shift in Understanding
As I studied Malcolm X more deeply, his ideas made more sense. Dr. King’s views—especially the watered-down version—were simply more comfortable for mainstream audiences.
Malcolm didn’t promote separation for its own sake. He questioned why Black people should endure humiliation just to integrate into hostile environments. His solution was simple: build your own institutions.
Malcolm’s stance on violence was also misunderstood. He didn’t promote violence—he promoted self-defense.
As he said, if you’re already “catching hell,” you might as well defend yourself.
Nation Building vs Integration
Malcolm’s vision included global awareness. He pointed out that while Blacks were outnumbered in America, globally they were part of the majority.
Over time, I also realized Dr. King evolved. He began speaking about economic empowerment and the circulation of Black wealth.
That’s the version of Dr. King rarely highlighted.
Different Strategies, Same Goal
Dr. King had more mainstream support and funding, which allowed his movement to gain traction faster.
Malcolm X, Marcus Garvey, and Elijah Muhammad built grassroots movements—which are much harder to scale.
Dr. King’s broader vision included: reparations, economic circulation, and systemic change.
Impact and Legacy
Despite the differences, Dr. King accomplished major change:
Segregation laws were dismantled. “Whites Only” signs disappeared. Public access expanded.
These changes were driven by the Civil Rights Movement—with Dr. King leading the charge.
But let’s be clear: Dr. King was not soft.
The mainstream portrayal of him as purely passive and “kumbaya” is incomplete. Many of his speeches were strong, demanding, and unapologetically pro-Black—even before his 1966 meeting with Elijah Muhammad.
