A Realistic Appraisal of Malcolm X and the Black Muslims by Kevin Alfred Strom American Dissident Voices April 3, 1993 Welcome to American Dissident Voices. I'm your host, Kevin Alfred Strom. There is a lot of interest these days, both among Blacks and Whites, among social scientists and commentators and among working people on the street - in the person and philosophy of Malcolm X, in the Black Muslim movement,and in Black Nationalism in general. In part, this is due to the recent movie by Black film director Spike Lee on the life of Malcolm X, and in part it is due to the rising Nationalist sentiment among Blacks in America, who increasingly reject the establishment's multicultural agenda and opt for a separatist ideology. On today's program, I am going to surprise you with my overall evaluation of this movement. I am also going to surprise you with some of the nearly unbelievable facts about this movement that the Liberal media have kept from you. Stay tuned for an amazing program - on American Dissident Voices. Who was Malcolm X? What is his significance for Americans? What is the history of the movement of which he was a part before his death in 1965? Today, thousands if not millions of White Liberals pay unthinking lip service to Malcolm X. It isn't because they've read his book or listened to his speeches or understand his ideas. It's primarily because it's currently fashionable to praise him. When it was currently fashionable in Liberal circles to praise Fidel Castro or Mao Tse-Tung, they would praise them too. The standards of what is or is not fashionable, that is, what is or is not "politically correct", are set not by the foolish and sometimes well-meaning Liberals themselves, but by the controlled mass media in this country, whose anti-American agenda is well known to all those who have studied the subject. Back when Malcolm X was alive and competing for the support of Blacks in America, the controlled media didn't have very much good to say about him at all. They called him an "apostle of hate." And actually, they had quite a bit of justification for that claim. Malcolm X once stated, referring to White people: "They're a race of devils! And I pray that God will strike them, put death in their families, death on their relatives and death on their friends. I pray that God will bring that on them. Yes, I pray that God will strike them with death, disease, and destruction and misery and grief...." Again he stated to his followers: "Why, you don't even know who the devil is. You think the devil is someone down inside the ground that's going to burn you after you're dead. Why, the devil is right here, on top of this earth. He's got blue eyes, blond hair, and white skin." I could quote Malcolm X literally thousands of times in the same vein. There is no doubt that he did preach hatred of White people. But was that the reason for the Liberal media's once-upon-a- time spurning of him, and their near-rapturous embrace and promotion of his competitor for Black political power, "Martin Luther" King, Jr.? I really don't think so. In reality, it was because Malcolm X's philosophy of independence and freedom for Blacks through racial and national separation did not fit in with the ruling establishment's plans for a New World Order in which all races and nationalities would lose their independence and freedom under a world government. On the other hand, "Martin Luther" King's vision of a raceless society was in tune with the New World Order now being slowly imposed upon an ignorant and degraded American population. The same selection process of who is to be praised and who is to be attacked in the mass media occurs among the contenders for White political power as well, of course. On the Left, those few like Gore Vidal and Paul Findley who dare to criticize the increasing hegemony of the Establishment and to name names of the conspirators and power manipulators are attacked and reviled; while those who meekly play the Establishment's game and con their true-believing followers with consummate skill like Bill Clinton and Senator Paul Simon are praised as men of vision and idealism. And on the right, kept creatures like George Bush or the national radio talk host Rush Limbaugh, who scrupulously observe the permissable limits of political debate set by their masters in New York, are promoted by the media as "respectable conservatives" and true spokesmen for the Right in this country; whereas truly independent men who fear no one and speak the truth as they see it, like Patrick Buchanan or the late Charles Lindbergh, are attacked as "isolationists," bigots, or worse. Now that Malcolm X is safely dead, of course, it is easy for the advocates of a diametrically opposite solution to the race problem in this country to paint him any way they desire, to serve their own ends. Sadly, that is the fate of many in these days of "politically correct" history rewriting. They may say today that Malcolm X, toward the end of his life, changed his political and racial views, in a direction more in line with what the Establishment-approved Black leaders like "Martin Luther" King were saying. That, so far as it goes, may be true. But what they don't tell you is that he never recanted any of his radical statements. And they also fail to mention that it is upon the reputation of the radical, Muslim, and separatist Malcolm X that the legend of his life has been built. Had he been nothing more than another NAACP clone, his life would have been of little note. .

For the latest contact, donation, and other update information regarding Kevin Alfred Strom, please visit his web page at Americafirstbooks.com. Please also visit kevin-strom.com, and revilo-oliver.com. Prices, addresses, and availability information pertaining to materials cited in his works are subject to change. Please also visit the America First Institute donation page.