Malcom X is an interesting one - if he lived to lets say eighty, he'd have died in 2005! Its not entirely impossible to imagine a 97 year old Malik el-Shabazz wandering around. Thats a very interesting thing to think about. I wonder if the Nation of Islam, or another form of African-American Islam would have become more mainstream?
In John Lewis’s March, he recounts meeting Malcom X in Nairobi in 1964, not long after he left the Nation of Islam. Malcolm’s talking points during there meeting seem to be rooted in what I would best describe as a hodge podge of Anti-Imperialist, African Socialist, Islamic Socialist, Anti-Capitalist elements.
If Malcolm X was to continue, I could see him being a supporter of the type of tactics that Fred Hampton used in the late 60s.
Malcolm X is a far more interesting counterfactual. His politics and tactics were very much in flux at the point that he died, taking on more conciliatory and pacifist rhetoric, and it's far less easy to predict the trajectory over the following years and decades. And given that he was in better health than the contemporary he frequently derided it's plausible that, as Mumby says, he's a presence in American life and politics well into the 2000s, maybe into the 2010s, maybe even now.
Where might he have gone? Politics is downstream from personality. And Malcolm X's personality was loud, extroverted and frequently volatile. He actively courted controversy, reveled in outrage and frequently fell out with colleagues and allies. At the same time those traits were tempered (or sometimes magnified) by constant introspection and cerebral political analysis. His personality, like his politics, was definitely softening round the edges at the time of his murder. But I also think it's unlikely it would stay in one place for very long.
(And on the subject of his personality; can you
imagine what he'd be like on Twitter?)
So while I agree that he likely would've gotten stuck into politics and tactics of Fred Hampton (although as Mumby mentions, the radicalisation of civil rights movements is at least partially butterflied by Martin and/or Malcolm not being assassinated) and loudly support them in provocative manners. I'm not sure if it would stick, especially considering how such groups receded in scope and influence through the 1970s. I think over his long life his style and tone and
cause célèbres could potentially vary quite a bit.
Unlike MLK I think Malcolm's image and reputation would be unrecognisable if he had lived a natural lifespan. His image is far more deeply intertwined with his martyrdom than King's and his image is also linked with the inflammatory, confrontational politics he was only starting to move away from in the final year of his life. How he would be seen today is very much an open question that can be answered only through interpretation and imagination.
It's tempting to imagine him on a rightward trajectory similar to
Roy Innis, eventually backing Republicans and conservative causes first out of accelerationism and then sincere principle which remaining consistently hateful of establishment liberalism. Plausible, perhaps tragic - he'd certainly be looked at a rather tragic figure who talked radicalism then sold out - but not the most likely.
I think what's more likely is a status and reputation similar to Louis Farrakhan OTL: a highly influential activist and public figure - perhaps something of an elder statesman - but one who becomes a great liability to a lot of his radical causes and allies. I certainly doubt he makes it into the new millennium without some rather unsparing public "re-evaluation" of his more offensive comments and allies and Malcolm X was not exactly the personality type who favoured public contrition.
On that note, both Martin and Macolm were both very lucky to have died decades before #MeToo.
