Construe all you want. I prefer to examine the historical record or else I might end up drifting off into metaphysics like you do.
>
>I differ and so did Malcolm X who describes his relationship with the Klan
>at this point as one of "tacit agreement." What did he do or agree to do
>that he felt so "shameful" about?
To talk to people who are the enemies of black people was shameful. Isn't that obvious? The NOI is a highly disciplined group, just like the Catholic Church or the Socialist Workers Party. When priests who are in the closet are forced to defend the "homosexuality is sin" line in public, they would feel ashamed. What is your excuse? When you label Malcolm X as "cooperating" with Klan terror on the basis of no scholarly evidence, you should feel ashamed for lying. How do you expect to pass your orals with this kind of shoddy attitude.
Q: Rakesh, in your dissertation you state that Malcolm X made a deal with the Klan that if the NOI refused to come to the aid of SNCC, the Klan would return some favor in exchange. Can you document this?
A: It was in a San Francisco Chronicle article that slipped out of my grasp. Is that good enough? Can I get my degree now? I've been working on it for 12 years now and I'm getting sick and tired of having to provide documentation to support my empty editorializing, gosh darn it.
>At any rate, I am not sure that Malcolm clearly abandoned the lunacy of
>creating a separate all black nation in the South. His calls for guerilla
>warfare in the South may indeed only be a radicalisation of separatist
>struggle.
Yes, that radical shopkeeping business can be very counter-productive. My
dad owned a fruit and vegetable store in Sullivan County in the 1960s, but
sold fish as well in the winter when they didn't smell so bad. When an A&P
opened up in the next town, he lost half his customers. This led him to
launch the Revolutionary Shopkeepers Brigade. Joined by people like Schmuel
Bernstein, the next-door baker, they went into the Catskill forests and
organized guerrilla attacks on the trucks bearing goods to the A&P. This
band of plucky, mostly middle-aged, Jewish men held off 2000 or so Special
Forces personnel for nearly 5 years. My dad's motto was "Create 2, 3 many
Borscht Belts".
.
>So we go from debating whether Malcolm X cooperated or tacitly agreed with
>the Klan to the question of whether he only did so due to NOI discipline.
No, we don't. The main question still is "cooperation" with Klan terror. When you couldn't come up with facts to back this ridiculous charge, you referred to a fictitious San Francisco Chronicle article. I know what you can do. Why don't you emulate Sokal and just write a hoax version of such an article and post it here. And bring it with you to your orals.
>I just don't get why he is more well known or a greater hero than those
>who would never have lowered themselves into entering into any kind of
>relationship with the Klan and had been facing that terror straight on all
>along--Bob Moses, Forman, Baker, Len Holt.
That is because despite all your ultraleft rhetoric, you are a very conservative chap. It is the same reason you hate Fidel Castro. Your Marxism is of the most dessicated and intellectualized variety.
>I am sorry I don't still have the article with me. I lent it to someone
>and never got it back.
Yes, the dog ate Rakesh's homework.
> Would you be kind enough to
>reproduce more of his comments than you already have?
Do your own god-damned research. I am not your go-for.
Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)