An Afro-Indigenous History of the United States

American, French, and Russian Revolutions. While many read this speech
as an outline of Malcolm’s belief in the need for revolutionary violence—
juxtaposing it against the use of nonviolence—I understand this speech to
be a call for Black land ownership in the US, different from the vision of
Elijah Muhammad. While Muhammad wanted a separate land in order to
build a Black nation, it was solely so it could be left alone. Through his
reading of historical revolutions, Malcolm, on the other hand, believed the
only way to get land was through revolution. For Malcolm, land was a
necessary condition of Black liberation in the United States.
Malcolm began “Message to the Grassroots” by stating, “I would like to
make a few comments about the difference between the Black Revolution
and the Negro Revolution.” To make this argument, he defined the term
“revolution” by offering historical examples. Malcolm explained, “When
you study the historic nature of revolutions, and the methods used in a
revolution, you may change your goal and you may change your mind.” He
continued, and here I quote at length:
Look at the American Revolution, in 1776. That revolution was for
what? For land. Why did they want land? Independence. How was it
carried out? Bloodshed. Number one it was based on land—the basis
of independence. And the only way they could get it, was bloodshed.
The French Revolution, what was it based on? The landless against
the landlord. What was it for? Land. How did they get it? Bloodshed.
Was no love lost, was no compromise, was no negotiation. I’m telling
you, you don’t know what a revolution is, cause when you find out
what it is, you’ll get back in the alley, you’ll get out of the way. The
Russian Revolution, what was it based on? Land. The landless against
the landlord. How did they bring it about? Bloodshed. You haven’t
got a revolution that doesn’t involve bloodshed. 46
While he is simplifying the goals of these revolutions for his particular
audience, his point should not be understated. Malcolm was very adept at
discussing political revolutions on the African continent and throughout the
underdeveloped world. His discussion of land poses a difficult question that
he, and those that tried to follow his logical conclusion after his
assassination struggled with: How can you compare the decolonization
efforts occurring on the African continent with what should happen in the