Sam Pawlett.
Nathan Newman wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rakesh Bhandari <bhandari at phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>
> >Well, we agree that there was tacit agreement with the Klan. You try to
> >construe tacit agreement to simply mean a meeting--a chewing of the fat
> >with Klan buddies. But what was tacitly agreed upon in that meeting? Can
> >that reasonably be construed as cooperation? I am putting forth the
> >argument that what must have been tacitly agreed to can be so construed.
> >And that is what Malcolm X was so shameful about.
>
> I think the reality is part way between Louis and Rakesh, since there is
> no question the NOI was collaborating with both the Klan and the Nazi
> Party. And Malcolm knew about this and said nothing publicly as SNCC was
> terrorized down South. But Malcolm also cannot be completely dismissed as
> favoring such agreement with the Klan/Nazis.
>
> A good example of this ambivalence is in Malcolm's relationship with James
> Farmer of CORE (see Farmer's autobiography p. 226). Farmer knew of the
> NOI/Nazi relationship from a mailing by the American Nazi Party's George
> Lincoln Rockwell back in 1961. Farmer privately confronted Malcolm with
> the letter which read in part, after discussing a meeting with Elijah
> Muhammed detailing the two groups mutual commitment to white-black
> separation:
>
> "The Honorable Elijah Muhammed and I have worked out an agreement of
> mutual assistance in which they will help us on some things and we will
> help them on others. Can you imagine a rally of American Nazis in Union
> Square protected from Jewish hecklers by a solid phalanx of Elijah
> Muhammed's stalwart black stormtroopers."
>
> At the time, Malcolm told Farmer he had not know of the meeting and that
> he would raise hell over the issue. Malcolm said nothing publicly so it
> is hard to say what part this conflict had in his pulling away from the
> NOI, but soon after the meeting with Farmer, he called Farmer to warn him
> that Nazi youth would be picketing CORE's offices. Whether he made simili
> ar warnings to other black activists based on internal NOI info on white
> racists, I don't know.
>
> Malcolm's actions are shameful in any case and Rakesh is right that there
> are a range of militant activists like Foreman, Baker, and Hamer who
> should be respected at least on Malcolm's level. On the other hand, even a
> nice liberal like Taylor Branch in his recent installment of his King
> biography highlighted (sympathetically) how important Malcolm's voice was
> as a militant counterpoint to King, especially in the urban areas largely
> untouched by the early civil rights activism.
>
> --Nathan Newman