Re: [sixties-l] a plea (Horowitz replies)

From: David Horowitz (
Date: Wed Jun 14 2000 - 20:32:56 CUT

  • Next message: David Horowitz: "Re: [sixties-l] Re:Horowitz and "discussion""

    Well, Stew, we all have sense of humors. But I certaintly don't remember your
    piece on Dillinger as a revolutionary being intentionally humorous. You also pass
    over -- typically -- my reference to J. Edward Epstein's NYorker piece in which
    he documents 348 criminal arrests, including wife-beating in 1969, which is to
    say in the third year of the Panthers' existence as a force on the left. Since by
    Huey's and Bobby's own admissions the Panthers began as a criminal street gang
    and recruited brothers off the block who had criminal records and criminal m.o.s
    what exactly changed? Marty Kenner and Art Goldberg to whom you make coy
    reference were both working for the Panthers in 1973 when I got involved and
    Marty at least was a big fan of Huey's right to the end and attended his funeral.
    Art may have as well. None of you ever said anything to me, or wrote anything to
    the effect that the Panthers were criminals. All criticisms of the Panthers were
    criticisms of their politics (as in Eldridge was a revolutionary and Huey had
    sold out). Eldridge went further and criticized Huey for doing coke -- boy if
    that were a criterion for expulsion from the revolutionary family back then, the
    movement would have been orphaned of its leaders, as you well know). But Eldridge
    was not criticizing the Party as such. Why is it so difficult for you to honestly
    confront what happened? wrote:

    > re Ted and David.
    > Now David is trying to set leftist against leftist. Let me explain what I
    > meant by describing the Panthers as turning pure criminal in the early 70's.
    > Of course they still engaged in political activity but their illegal activity
    > grew significantly and was no longer taking place just to support their
    > political program. In the 60's they were revolutionaries and there has never
    > a revolution violent or non - violent that did not frequently break the law.
    > But the stuff that started happening in the 70's was of a different caliber -
    > drug dealing, night club owning, prostitution etc - and the money wasn't all
    > going to support the politics. Criminal acts were being committed for their
    > own sake. This is widely known and it is described to some extent in David
    > Hilliard's autobiography. David Horowitz became involved with Panthers in
    > their criminal phase. It's true nobody was writing about this stuff at the
    > time. But lots of radicals were talking about it and breaking their
    > connection with the Party. David was friends with these people and it might
    > have occurred to him to ask them why they were all leaving. It seems
    > impossible to have been as close to Huey Newton as Horowitz was and not know
    > that he was addicted to cocaine and high living. Surely Horowiz must have had
    > some suspicions?
    > In another post David exposes me as some who once wrote that I thought John
    > Dillinger was a great revolutionary. I certainly wrote that, but David might
    > have added that I was also a founding Yippie with something of a sense of
    > humor. I once ran for Sheriff of Alameda County and challenged my opponent to
    > a duel. I don't think that back then even David thought I was serious.
    > Stew Albert

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 14 2000 - 21:29:29 CUT