one cause, two ideas

Reading is always cool. Its always fun to read an interesting book. But I completely love it when I get a series to read. When you like a particular topic and then you get two or three books one after another to read. My favourite example was when I read Wisdom of the Crowds, followed by The Search followed by The Google story. It seemed like a trilogy of sorts. They all contribute to a deeper understanding of the topic.
While a series in a particular topic is fun, I have had the greatest fun reading two books which are in opposition to each other. Their roots are so similar but the protagonist choose to take drastically different paths to reach what essentially be a single goal. A prophet of hate versus an apostle of peace. Forgive the clichés. But the two books I have had the greatest fortune of reading back to back are – Malcolm X and Invictus. One is the biography of Malcom X, the big black leader from US who spread hate against the ‘white man’ and the other is on how Nelson Mandela spread peace and reconciliation with the ‘white man’. Invictus was originally published as playing the Enemy. I think they changed the name once it got made into a movie ‘invictus’.
But the two books offer an interestingly stark opposite. Both the men faced discrimination thanks to the color of their skin. They both came back from their jail terms, completely changed. But I just loved how one preached hate and the other went out of his way to preach love. Their mission in many ways was the same… uplifting their people.
Malcolm X answer was to create greater differentiation. Change the religion, build higher walls and create greater cohesion. Though he seems to gave changed his world view after coming in from his trip to Mecca. But still there was still hate and anger in him. A rabble rousers with strong oratory skills. A debater who could twist and turn topics on its end. A bull dozer.
Contrast with Mandela who it seems had basic oratory skills. Whose greatest weapon was the charm offensive, who wanted to win hearts and reconcile with those who hated him. In the books he comes across as a shrewd but honest politician who smartly managed those around him to ensure they are enlisted for his greater cause.
Both books to my mind were a bit disappointing. As in they weren’t that bad but they had the potential to be absolutely great. But then on the other hand if they had used to much prose then they would risk being even more one sided than what they turned out to be. But still that is no excuse not to read them. I understood a lot about the segregation in both the countries, while it also helped me reinforce my stand on dialogue. Malcolm taught me what not to do and Mandela taught me what to.
As a kid I think I was fooled into thinking that those with the strongest and forceful argument said with the most emphasis is what is needed to succeed. All this would get enforced by the guys who win the debates and elocution competition. Complete emphasis on the style of debate rather than the substance. I have always felt that simple well thought of arguments are pretty much lost on the judge. The crowd and the judge fall for the Malcolm X of the speakers. These boys (like me) believe that just because they have superb oratory skills they can succeed in life. They use their power or talking and debate to get them out of shit all the time. Office are full of bosses that get swayed to powerful speeches and presentations. What is the substance of the same? How should one dig deeper and find a solution. How one should avoid rhetoric and focus on simple truths and principals that get you forward.
Over aperiod of time, I have come to slowly hate my argument skills. I find it irritating that I have to use empty arguments to make points. Simple concepts simply explained have no meaning for people. And I possibly am not patient enough. Sometimes I feel hat the means justify the end. Give them the oratory that they require and forget the small simple truths… as long as you know you are doing what’s right.
Similarly it is also difficult to sell some vendor internally if the vendor comes across a s timid sweet guy as oppose to the brash suit clad big show. Style is so dam important. There is no dearth of the flaky rascals who put so much emphasis on style and completely gloss over substance. They are obviously getting results and hence they continue to do what they are doing.
What to do. Stay at the grid… keep at it. and pray… books like this remind me that I must keep my guard. I must not let myself be misled by the flaky guy.. that’s easy. More importantly I must be aware of the simple sweet guy who possibly has more substance than anyone else. I have tried many of these in the past. They have invariably been good. They have given stellar results, but the bosses just do not seem to care. We will change the world for sure. Its take one soul at a time. One project at a time. We need to notice and support more Mandela’s and fewer Malcolms.

Clarification- I got nothing against Malcolm X. I think he seems to be a genuine but a bit confused guy. He was shot early before he could possibly understand himself. He was possibly as important to black America as another black leader. To my mind he was young blood led by someone. My emphasis is on their styles and the choice they took. To my mind both are heroes who tried to change the lives of their people. That is commendable enough. I just believe that one way is far superior to the other. I still believe in ‘gandhigiri’.
Also both are the truth, both had a reason, both had valid arguments. i dare say - a case of opposites reconciling. They did - I dont knwo how but in my mind they did.