The mid 20th century was a time of racial tension and political unrest not only in the United States but also on a global scale. This racial tension caused many civil activists to stand up and speak against the racial injustice that was going on during this time period. Martin Luther King Jr was one of these civil activists. He quickly rose to fame because of his many speeches on the subject and how he believes in a nonviolence approach. Other activists such as Malcom X disagreed with King and practiced a more radical approach. In King's speech "The World House", King clearly states how we are all brothers and that we should live together in peace and harmony. In Malcom X's speech at The Founding Rally of the Organization of Afro-American Unity, he contrasts Kings statement of nonviolence by saying that the African Americans want freedom by any means necessary. These two examples contrast each other and help show both sides of civil rights activists. Joseph Ross wrote an article explaining how "The World House" is relevant to modern day. When we consider the way these three sources are connected, it is evident that the conflict between the viewpoints of Martin King Jr. and Malcom X on social injustices was the key contributor to many ideas of this historical time in America. 

One major idea of this time period was peace. King was a major advocate of peace and this can be observed through his speech "The World House". This can be seen when King says, "We have inherited a large house, a great "world house" in which we have to live together   black and white, Easterner and Westerner, Gentile and Jew, Catholic and Protestant, Moslem and Hindu   a family unduly separated in ideas, culture and interest, who, because we can never live apart, must learn somehow to live with each other in peace." This quote is essential in helping King get his message across. While King mentions the issue of whites verses blacks, he also mentions everyone else who may be facing the same troubles. This shows that King is not solely concerned with what is going on in his own nation, but the world as a whole. King says all of this without wanting to be violent. While analyzing Malcom X's speech, it is evident that he does not share the same kind of care for the world and is more focused on what is going on in the Americas and in Africa. Malcolm X never states that he wants to unite the world, he instead states that he wants to unite all of the Africans of the world. Malcom X says "Because not only it is an organization of Afro American unity meaning that we are trying to unite our people in the West, but it's an organization of Afro American unity in the sense that we want to unite all of our people who are in the North America, South America, and Central America with our people on the African continent." This is different than what King was saying because Malcom seems to only be concerned with Africans whereas King is concerned with all cultures. Malcom claims he wants peace but contradicts himself by saying that he will achieve it "by any means necessary." Joseph Ross interprets Kings statement and applies it into modern day life. He says "It's true. No one is far away, not really. We must use this new reality to learn..." Ross is agreeing with what King is saying about everyone being one family. He is calling for people to use this information to try and make a difference in the world today.

Another major idea of this time period is equality. Both Malcom X and Martin Luther King Jr speak bountifully on equality. King addresses equality all throughout "The World House" just like when he says "The present upsurge of the Negro people of the United States grows out of a deep and passionate determination to make freedom and equality a reality "here and now." King is an advocate for equality and has become famous for his beliefs on it. Malcom X is also an advocate of equality. If you analyze these speeches, you can tell however that they have two different stances on how to obtain equality. One stance is Malcom X and he is not afraid to do anything in order to obtain equality. This is shown when Malcom says "We assert that in those areas where the government is either unable or unwilling to protect the lives and property of our people, that our people are within our rights to protect themselves by whatever means necessary. Malcom is essentially saying that he believes they have a right to protect themselves as well as their property. This approach is considered radical because Malcom is calling for people to attack if necessary. King believed in nonviolence. These two beliefs contrast each other and really show the opposite ends of the civil rights movement. 

Lastly, a major idea of this time period was poverty. In Kings book poverty was a major focus and he made that very clear. Poverty has always been an issue in the world and King openly provides his own solutions and ideas of how to get ride of poverty entirely. He shows his audience the importance of poverty when he says "Equality with white will not solve the problems of either whites or Negroes if it means equality in a world society stricken by poverty..." King is saying that equality is important but it would mean nothing if the world was still struggling with poverty. In his mind equality is not the only goal. He is showing how both are equally as important as the other. He is balancing the two out. Joseph Ross has his own thoughts on the message that King is attempting to get across to his audience. He says "We cannot just roll along blindly, refusing to look at the plight of those who lack the necessities for a dignified human life." Ross gives his own insight while also agreeing with what King is saying. Ross also thinks something should be done about poverty. King believes that the world he lived in back then had the opportunity to end poverty. He says "There is nothing new about poverty. What is new, however, is that we now have the resources to get rid of it." King wants an all out war on poverty and he thinks the richer nations should invest some of their vast wealth into develop the underdeveloped nations. He calls out nations by saying "Ultimately a great nation is a compassionate nation." King is explaining his views on poverty and what nations should be doing. Malcom X states his opinion on poverty by incorporating race into it. He talks about how black schools tend to be the poorer schools. The teachers are not as good in a poorer area so these black kids are stuck in a place where the only education option isn't all that advanced. 

Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcom X were a huge discussion in 60's. These men wanted a change and used the public to bring about change. After analyzing my two sources I have gained and alternate perspective on Martin Luther King Jr's The world house. At first glace the reader may not see the extent of Kings viewpoints against violence until they compare it to that of Malcom X. Being able to see these contrasting sides along with the secondary source allowed me to dig deeper into what King was saying. By comparing the nonviolent perspective of King and the Radical perspective of Malcom X the audience is able to see the extent of the two extremes. King is solely nonviolence and Malcom X wants nothing to do with it. My secondary source was an interpretation of "The Would House" by a credible editor. Ross was a great secondary source because he also analyzed "The World House" and provided his own interpretation. Having a second viewpoint can be important in widening a person's perspective but it can also be harmful and persuasive. In learning about history it is important to open your mind to all viewpoints and to every side. The same thing can be said about writing. Comparing King with two sources alters the perspective that is obtained.

