What was different about the approach Martin Luther King, JR. took compared to Malcolm X? King believed in civil disobedience, while Malcolm X believed violence was sometimes appropriate
King used the religion of Islam to support his ideas, while Malcolm X was a devoted Christian leader.
King supported the police and their right to maintain order, while Malcolm X fought against the police.
King focused on improving urban areas, while Malcolm X focused on civil rights in rural areas.

King believed in civil disobedience, while Malcolm X believed violence was sometimes appropriate.

Explanation:

Martin Luther King and Malcom X were two of the most prominent civil rights leader at some point until both were assassinated. They believed that African Americans deserved more civil rights than was being given to them but went about the struggle to attain it differently.

Dr. King for believed in civil disobedience where people who march peacefully and occupy certain places in a peaceful manner. This along with with well worded speeches spread their message.

Malcom X on the other hand, believed that violence was sometimes necessary and to this end, the Black Panthers which he headed would be found armed quite a number of times. They even engaged in armed conflict with the police sometimes.

social contract theory basically says that all individuals are born equal, and provided a god given right to consent to be governed. american government is based of this

thomas hobbes and john locke said that we are selfish, individualistic, and constantly at war with each other, therefore we need to be controlled. 

government is defined as the legitimate use of force to control human behavior within territorial boundaries, here comes in hobbes and locke.

hobbes takes the part about controlling human behavior. while locke takes the part of legitimate use of force, since force is not legitimate unless there is consent of the people. 

there are basically 3 goals of the government: 1) maintain order by protecting life and property. 2) providing public goods, those which are typically not provided by the public sector, such as roads and education. 3) promote equality be it political, opportunist or outcome equality.