Monday I visited office hours with a quick question about X and what exactly he wants in "The Ballot or The Bullet." But what was a quick question turned into a 30 minute discussion about not only me, but Justin trying to figure out what exactly X wanted, among other things. Now we lightly touched on this in discussion yesterday but didn't really get much into it. I thought I'd share some of our insights.
First, why don't we just try to answer the question, what does X want? Well he wants freedom and equality. That's it, done right? Well no, there is much more to this question. How does he want to achieve it? Does he have a plan? What kind of freedom and equality does he want? What is the problem? All of these are parts of the question, and the answer to each separates people such as MLK.
To start to answer this question, we should first look to Zizek. Zizek makes two distinctions between civil rights activists and protesters. There are two kinds, the heretics and the perverts. Now where both identify a problem, the difference occurs in the courses they take. A pervert has a clear goal in mind, with a set plan to reach that goal. However, on the other hand, a heretic does not have a goal or a plan. They identify the problem, but they do not know how to fix it or what the end result should look like. As Zizek puts it, "[they] need time to construct [their] own new language, time to formulate." The heretic is about figuring out the solution. Now Zizek doesn't say that the heretic will never know what to do and will always be yelling "Fire!" but they do not know off the bat. Now the question arises, is X a heretic or a pervert, does he know what he wants? I say no, he's a heretic. Sure X gives us an idea of how to start fixing the problem, but unlike someone such as MLK, he seems to have no clear plan or goal. X expresses a clear anger with the system, and doesn't seem to want the hold hands, apple pie version of American freedom. In fact, Justin and I read his speech as being angry with these very things.
Now it is important to make the distinction that just because heretics don't have a set plan, they are not just yelling fire for the sake of chaos, nor will they never figure out how to fix the problem. X seems to suggest a plan in his speech, but is it truly a plan? He advocates the ballot or the bullet, but gives no guidelines or manual. When does the switch occur? To what extent do we follow the bullet? What is the end goal? What does freedom look like? He provides no clear answers, and perhaps because he does not have them. He doesn't just seem to want equality, he wants something more. Now what that is I have no idea. Perhaps the message is lost in transcription and history. Maybe you had to be there to understand. What ever the answer, I'll leave it up to you. But before I go I just want to leave you with an audio of the speech, because certain things you just need to hear for yourself. Now I know it's long, it is the entire speech, feel free to skip around or not even listen at all, up to you.
You have very valid points. In his speech, he doesn't really dive into the details of ways to acquire freedom, if that's what he's really after. Yes, he pin points the problem, ie. no equal rights, thus making him either a hysteric or pervert. Also,the solutions he gives that could potentially solve this problem are the ballot or the bullet. I feel like he knows what he wants in the end, which is civil rights/ equal rights. Therefore, I would categorize him as a pervert, because he knows what he wants and sort of knows how to get it (ballot/ bullet). However, I may have just assumed that he wanted civil and equal rights, because that's what we think every African American wanted at that time.
You make a good point that X's speech seems like it is just full of anger and doesn't outline an exact guideline for exactly how to fix the issues he brings up. You say X is a heretic (I assume you mean hysteric, which is the term Zizek uses). Have you ever considered that a inspiring civil rights speech such as this is not the place for step-by-step instruction? X could possibly have a very detailed plan of what he wants, but does not wish to bore his audience with complexity, and instead empowers them with fiery language. I encourage you to read my post "What do you want, X" (coincidentally our titles are very similar!). My post expands on this subject and I'd love to get your input.
I'd also like to note that I agree with you when you say that X doesn't what equality, but something more, which in my mind, may not be beneficial to society. Lastly, I think the point you bring up about a hysteric eventually figuring out what he wants very interesting. It gives the the perspective of X being a hysteric more credibility.
This was a very interesting post, Abhilash, with lots of valid points. I agree with Irene in that Malcolm X can be considered a heretic or a pervert, because he does lay down the means that he intends to use (i.e. ballot or bullet) while mainly trying to incite a sense of urgency around the situation. However, the fact that he doesn't lay out a road map for what he wants does not necessarily make it less effective. In fact, I found his speech to be very effective and I thought his passion or anger was key to the point he was trying to make. After reading the speech, I didn't see any other intentions with his rhetoric other than ending oppression and gaining equality. So, maybe you can expand on this idea that he wants "more". I know our class had some mixed reactions to the speech, so I found your insight really interesting.
You have very valid points. In his speech, he doesn't really dive into the details of ways to acquire freedom, if that's what he's really after. Yes, he pin points the problem, ie. no equal rights, thus making him either a hysteric or pervert. Also,the solutions he gives that could potentially solve this problem are the ballot or the bullet. I feel like he knows what he wants in the end, which is civil rights/ equal rights. Therefore, I would categorize him as a pervert, because he knows what he wants and sort of knows how to get it (ballot/ bullet). However, I may have just assumed that he wanted civil and equal rights, because that's what we think every African American wanted at that time.
ReplyDeleteYou make a good point that X's speech seems like it is just full of anger and doesn't outline an exact guideline for exactly how to fix the issues he brings up. You say X is a heretic (I assume you mean hysteric, which is the term Zizek uses). Have you ever considered that a inspiring civil rights speech such as this is not the place for step-by-step instruction? X could possibly have a very detailed plan of what he wants, but does not wish to bore his audience with complexity, and instead empowers them with fiery language. I encourage you to read my post "What do you want, X" (coincidentally our titles are very similar!). My post expands on this subject and I'd love to get your input.
ReplyDeleteI'd also like to note that I agree with you when you say that X doesn't what equality, but something more, which in my mind, may not be beneficial to society. Lastly, I think the point you bring up about a hysteric eventually figuring out what he wants very interesting. It gives the the perspective of X being a hysteric more credibility.
This was a very interesting post, Abhilash, with lots of valid points. I agree with Irene in that Malcolm X can be considered a heretic or a pervert, because he does lay down the means that he intends to use (i.e. ballot or bullet) while mainly trying to incite a sense of urgency around the situation. However, the fact that he doesn't lay out a road map for what he wants does not necessarily make it less effective. In fact, I found his speech to be very effective and I thought his passion or anger was key to the point he was trying to make. After reading the speech, I didn't see any other intentions with his rhetoric other than ending oppression and gaining equality. So, maybe you can expand on this idea that he wants "more". I know our class had some mixed reactions to the speech, so I found your insight really interesting.
ReplyDelete