Why would you want, at this late date, to be praising a thug like Huey Newton,
who in his own autobiography says that he robbed vehicles parked outside the
emergency entrance of a county hospital -- i.e., his victims were poor blacks
who were in state of distress? When a gang takes to the streets armed with
shotguns to keep the police from protecting citizens in a poor community from
predators like him and his gangster buddies, why on earth would someone who
calls himself a progressive want to celebrate them asopponents of police
repression? It's true from our point of view they said the right things. But
look what they did. They murdered more than a dozen people, committed arson and
armed robbery, extorted the inner city, dealt drugs, raped their women. How
much lattitude do you want to give them for being politically correct? Just
curious.
I may not be reading your second paragraph correctly but are you suggesting
that law abiding blacks like Jackie Robinson, Oprah Winfrey, Colin Powell,
Clarence Thomas did not ascend the ladder of success by following the system?
Not to mention all those 6 figure income academics -- Cornel West, bell hooks,
Henry Louis Gates, Robin D.G. Kelley, Angela Davis (oh, I could go on and
on)...
Your third paragraph is so confused. Are you suggesting that the police bombed
the church in Birmingham (not "Atlanta") where four black girls (not "half a
dozen") were killed? Do you really want to argue that the "white power
structure" never played by the rules? How do you explain how the left was able
to purge conservatives from the liberal arts faculties of every major
institution of higher learning and make them the main political base of the
left?
monkerud wrote:
> I don't mind crawling out on this limb .... despite Horowitz's condemnation
> of the Panthers as street punks, they were the first people in my
> generation to stand up to government repression, the police who ran
> unmolested through black communities and others who robbed the community.
> And they did it with guns. Scared the hell out of white Republicans and
> racist. It was about time.
>
> How we have a Reagan supporter who talks about other "law abiding" blacks
> and how they went right up by following the system. Unbelievable! Certainly
> when the police were murdering black people and dropping tons of bombs in
> Southeast Asia, you could cut them some slack. But no, a squeamish, "they
> weren't playing by OUR rules."
>
> No absolutes from me. Wouldn't accept any critique from those like DH here,
> not when the US government and police departments across the country were
> getting off scott free. (They are still trying to bring those who killed
> half a dozen little girls in Atlanta to justice!) I found the Panthers in
> Oakland a mixture, approved of some people's actions and not others. But
> yes, I sympathized with them. Justice only for whites and only those blacks
> who played by the rules while the white power structure NEVER played by the
> rules. I think not David. Privilege begets such views....
>
> best, Don
>
> >Ah, the illogic of the left. The Panthers began as a street gang and
> >ended up as a street gang but somehow in between they transformed
> >themselves into an uplifting vanguard of the revolution -- until of
> >course the evil empire's dirty tricks.... Get a life.
> >
> >Forget the ideological claptrap in your next comment (lumpen and all
> >that) and explain how white leftists like you, who presumably did not
> >have these inner city handicaps supported them so fervently. Also
> >explain how Huey Newton's brother Melvin (to take one lumpen example
> >among many I could cite) became a professor, a law abiding professor who
> >at least in his personal life seems not to have raped, beaten, or
> >otherwise abused anyone. I could name you a dozen Panthers I knew, who
> >worked in the Panther school and who also were not given to lumpen
> >excess. I thought Stalinism was passe, but you seem to regard people --
> >or at least dark-skinned people, as sociological stick figures who have
> >no control over their
> >own actions.
> >
> >Also, while we are on the subject of "deep thought," kindly explain to
> >me what a non "Machiavellian" interepetation of "by any means necessary
> >would be."
> >
> >Mr. Henderson's purpose is to obuscate to save leftists like you from
> >having to confront the crimes of your movement and really think.
> >
> >Art McGee wrote:
> >
> >> Fascinating. I knew from his writings that Mr. Horowitz
> >> wasn't that deep, but I had yet to experience it firsthand.
> >>
> >> >Actually, what Pearson's book shows is that the Panthers
> >> >were an urban street gang,
> >>
> >> The members of the Panthers started out in street gangs
> >> and yes, the Panthers were an outgrowth of that activity.
> >> Everyone knows this, especially those of us still on the
> >> Left. This says absolutely nothing about the nature of what
> >> they were ultimately trying to accomplish, just as the fact
> >> that Malcolm X was once a "hoodlum" and spouted "racist"
> >> ideology says nothing about what he eventually became or
> >> what he was trying to accomplish.
> >>
> >> >which engaged in serious criminal violence against its own
> >> >members, against black inner city communities
> >>
> >> Once again, because of your lack of intellectual depth, you
> >> seem to have missed this:
> >>
> >> "The BPP did not fully appreciate the necessity for cultural
> >> transformation in the movement. Instead, they promoted a
> >> "revolutionary culture" that was amorphous and self-serving.
> >> It was rooted in a Machiavellian rationalization of
> >> Malcolm's "by any means necessary" dicta whereby members
> >> simply legitimized their lumpen activities by asserting that
> >> these were somehow "revolutionary." This approach was used
> >> especially to sexually exploit women, to character
> >> assassinate rivals, to rationalize the misuse of BPP funds
> >> by the national leadership, to justify internecine violence,
> >> or to excoriate rival organizations (such as with the NOI,
> >> SNCC, RNA [Republic of New Afrika], and Us organization)
> >> within the Black Power movement. This glorified lumpenism
> >> was so expansive that Hilliard (1993, pp. 339-339) reports
> >> that Huey even came to require that BPP members watch The
> >> Godfather, as he began to argue for a "progressive
> >> capitalism" (Newton, 1971). Allegedly, the Panther
> >> nightclub, The Lamp Post, even became, among other things, a
> >> front for prostitution and funding source for Huey's and the
> >> Central Committee's personal indulgences."
> >>
> >> You see, the difference between a Black Nationalist like Mr.
> >> Henderson, who wrote the review, and a bitter old-man like
> >> Mr. Horowitz, is that while they both have a sharp critique
> >> of the Panthers, Mr. Henderson's purpose is to teach so as
> >> to advance a continuing struggle, while Mr. Horowitz's
> >> purpose is to take us back to the days of Jack Benny and
> >> Rochester. This accounts for the more complex and fleshed
> >> out critiques coming from Mr. Henderson, as opposed to the
> >> all too familiar simplistic ranting eminating from Mr.
> >> Horowitz.
> >>
> >> >and against law enforcement officers
> >>
> >> I won't even go there, cause if they didn't, I might be
> >> disappointed. ;->
> >>
> >> >while using a political rhetoric that snookered the left
> >> >then (and obviously some leftists today who have learned
> >> >very little in the intervening years) into thinking the
> >> >Panthers were "revolutonaries" who would make things better
> >> >rather than worse, as they did.
> >>
> >> And that political rhetoric was? Just a small example would
> >> be sufficient.
> >>
> >> >The reviewer claims that Cointelpro was the principal agent
> >> >of the Panthers destruction.
> >>
> >> No, what he said was (in context):
> >>
> >> "Pearson is correct that the BPP's downfall cannot simply be
> >> attributed to COINTELPRO, though it was a principal agent of
> >> its destruction. For the most part, however, COINTELPRO was
> >> an external manipulation that capitalized on internal
> >> weaknesses and contradictions. We are reminded of one of the
> >> major lessons of Cabral: "That in the general framework of
> >> the daily struggle this battle against ourselves--no matter
> >> what difficulties the enemy may create--remains the most
> >> difficult of all."
> >>
> >> In other words, he's actually placing the RESPONSIBILITY for
> >> the behavior on the Panthers, something that hacks like you
> >> like to throw around rhetorically as being what's missing
> >> from society. The diference is, he understands the concepts
> >> of complexity and contradiction, something you apparently
> >> missed while still in school.
> >>
> >> Take Ghandi for example. A lot of people think Ghandi was
> >> one of the greatest people that ever lived. However, Ghandi
> >> was also a supporter, or rather, he never fought against,
> >> the internal caste system WITHIN Indian society, that
> >> relegated people such as the Dalits to "bottom-class"
> >> citizenship in India. Are we supposed to hate Ghandi now?
> >> Do we ignore all his teachings? No, we acknowledge and
> >> recognize his contributions AND his flaws.
> >>
> >> >Since Cointelpro was folded in 1970 and all the Panther
> >> >leaders -- Newton, Seale, Hilliard, Brown etc -- were
> >> >involved in its self-destruction, I would like to hear
> >> >how the government is to be blamed for this mess.
> >>
> >> First, the idea that an operation like COINTELPRO had some
> >> specific end date is like saying that your fall ends after
> >> you go splat on the ground. Sure, you're not falling
> >> anymore, but now you've got this dead thing to deal with. In
> >> addition, I reject the idea that it ever ended, or rather, I
> >> believe it may have mutated into something else, but it
> >> never ended. Of course I don't trust an agency or records
> >> that come from an agency bent on the destruction of American
> >> citizens like myself, so that's probably where you and I
> >> differ.
> >>
> >> Second, there were several different incarnations of the
> >> Panthers, so someone would have to remind us of who was
> >> running what, when.
> >>
> >> Third, as is the case with obsfucating conservatives, you
> >> once again chose to completely ignore all the comments the
> >> reviewer made about the internal problems and the personal
> >> responsibility (I know you love when I say that) the
> >> Panthers themselves had for what happened. So, for those who
> >> might still be under your magic spell, let me break it right
> >> quick (again):
> >>
> >> "Pearson is correct that the BPP's downfall cannot simply be
> >> attributed to COINTELPRO, though it was a principal agent of
> >> its destruction. For the most part, however, COINTELPRO was
> >> an external manipulation that capitalized on internal
> >> weaknesses and contradictions. We are reminded of one of the
> >> major lessons of Cabral: "That in the general framework of
> >> the daily struggle this battle against ourselves--no matter
> >> what difficulties the enemy may create--remains the most
> >> difficult of all."
> >>
> >> and
> >>
> >> "The BPP did not fully appreciate the necessity for cultural
> >> transformation in the movement. Instead, they promoted a
> >> "revolutionary culture" that was amorphous and self-serving.
> >> It was rooted in a Machiavellian rationalization of
> >> Malcolm's "by any means necessary" dicta whereby members
> >> simply legitimized their lumpen activities by asserting that
> >> these were somehow "revolutionary." This approach was used
> >> especially to sexually exploit women, to character
> >> assassinate rivals, to rationalize the misuse of BPP funds
> >> by the national leadership, to justify internecine violence,
> >> or to excoriate rival organizations (such as with the NOI,
> >> SNCC, RNA [Republic of New Afrika], and Us organization)
> >> within the Black Power movement. This glorified lumpenism
> >> was so expansive that Hilliard (1993, pp. 339-339) reports
> >> that Huey even came to require that BPP members watch The
> >> Godfather, as he began to argue for a "progressive
> >> capitalism" (Newton, 1971). Allegedly, the Panther
> >> nightclub, The Lamp Post, even became, among other things, a
> >> front for prostitution and funding source for Huey's and the
> >> Central Committee's personal indulgences."
> >>
> >> Art
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 13 2000 - 00:53:34 CUT