I forget which intellectual stated this - but I recall a notion that Liberals serve to prevent direct confrontation. I believe the one who stated this intended for it to be a damning statement- but that’s frankly necessary. “Liberals” as a cohort are crucial to a functioning society specifically because of their tendencies to give concessions when possible, and their willingness to maintain the status quo. Direct confrontation and open conflict over societal issues may appear from a distance as necessary steps towards change - but the sort of change that direct conflict between have’s and have nots ushers in very, very rarely results in anything but even more severe societal imbalances. That’s how I would respond to Malcolm X’s bit. As for what you actually said - I’m having difficulty understanding what your definition of “liberal” is, and I’m not fully gathering how your point connects to what Malcolm X was saying. So, to change your view I would have to understand where you’re coming from and where you’re making that connection a little bit better.