To what extent was King the most significant civil rights leader ?

apply to busses as well, and as a result be de-segregated. This was a massive victory for the local black community in Montgomery, but perhaps even more importantly catapulted King straight into the political limelight. His brilliant oratory skills that helped win this boycott brought him national fame, and the King movement of non violence was thus born. In 1958 he published his book “A stride towards freedom” which outlined his non violent and progressive views. He was nearly killed in Harlem while promoting it and his survival greatly increased his profile. A key factor was that he was from the south, where the majority of African Americans lived and where discrimination was at its highest.  His message of integration and peaceful means of protest not only appealed to his black followers, but also to large numbers of white sympathizers. At the end of the day those in the positions of power who could pass the laws King needed where almost entirely white, and his open and peaceful approach won him much support from white politicians as well, which proved invaluable in the future. What makes King stand out is his sheer number of legal achievements. In an almost identical manner to that of the Montgomery bus boycotts, King organized a similar sitin in Greensboro at a segregated café, which spread statewide and soon resulted in cafes being desegregated as well. Similar was true of interstate transport, and it was mainly due to Kings “freedom rides” of 1961 that these too were desegregated. In 1963 King led a crowd of 250,000+ including many whites on a march through Washington and to a TV audience of millions recited his famous “I have a dream” speech. His dream was for legal racial equality, and in 1964 he got it. The Civil Rights Act was passed banning segregation in public places and providing the first legal recognition of equality. Yet King did not stop here, and the following year after another march the voting rights act was passed giving the votes to millions of blacks. It is fair to say that in terms of furthering the civil rights of African Americans in the eyes of the law, King was vital. However, Kings tactics did have some downsides. Firstly he was rather unsuccessful amongst northern African Americans who didn’t connect with his strong Christian ethos and passive methods. Secondly while his “reforms” in theory were massive steps forward, in reality had little effect. Schools were officially de-segregated but in reality many remained all black or all white and many blacks were threatened in the south to not vote. Many started to criticize him for being naïve and too compromising, and that the only way to alter the role of blacks in American society in reality was by more radical methods. His chief opponent in methodology terms was Malcolm X. Malcolm X, was essentially the north’s answer to King. He had a very different upbringing, he was born into poverty, his father supposedly murdered by the KKK, was a former criminal and later converted to Islam. His main difference with King was over methods. He advocated a more hardline and radical approach and as a result appealed more to the younger African Americans in northern ghettos. He held a no tolerance view and thought that if blacks wanted freedom then they would have to go and get it themselves. He is often said to have “awoken black consciousness”, a long term result that arguably significantly outweighs any legislation, especially in the eyes of oppressed black Americans. He supported black nationalism and helped rejuvenate the message of 1920’s Garveyism, gaining widespread support from those willing to force change onto America rather than wait for it. Racial pride and self defense coupled with blatant violence and riots led to black communities being viewed more seriously and with some sense of fear. He was also a strong leader, a stark icon of the black communities not willing to roll over but rather fight for their rights, even today he is still idolized by many young black Americans. Compared to King he may not have had as many physical “victories”, although he could be credited with the affirmative action plans of the 1970’s which provided black quotas for jobs and education, but rather was a symbol of black pride and the “alternate approach”. In evaluation we must point out that X was very northern centric, and had little to no impact in the south where the bulk of the black population lived. His methods were also significantly criticized. The justification behind lynching and white supremacist groups in the south was that the freed black man was a “violent animal” who would be a sexual menace to all white women. By advocating violence, X played into the hands to groups such as the KKK who could use his actions as evidence of that their propaganda was true. He also alienated the entire white population of the USA and made political dealings with politicians almost impossible. His actions could be argued to have actually been a major hindrance to the civil rights movement, leading to the fragmentation of leadership and support, the loss of political influence and the eventual infighting within the civil rights movement. At the end of the day it was his own movement, the Nation of Islam, that assassinated him.