[sixties-l] Sixties-1: Re Black Panthers

From: Jeffrey Blankfort (jab@tucradio.org)
Date: Sun Jun 18 2000 - 21:00:28 CUT

  • Next message: radman: "[sixties-l] Fwd: An Interview with Mumia"

    I would just like to note that both Art Goldberg with whom, at best,
    I've had two conversations over the past two decades, and Stew Albert,
    whom I have not seen or spoken to in more years than I can remember,
    both emphasise the point that I made regarding Horowitz's decision to
    involve himself with Panthers: It was when others on the Left who knew
    better were moving quickly in an opposite direction.

    Art Goldberg also reaffirms my description of Horowitz as an armchair
    radical whose politics and activities were largely cerebral and
    unnconnected to the political activism that he superficially, as it
    turns out, supported. This lack of connectedness stood him in good stead
    when he sought the attention and checkbook of the notorious funder of
    right-wing causes, Richard Mellon Scaife (Heritage Foundation, Mt.
    States Legal Foundation, etc.) For more on Horowitz, check out David
    Corn's article in the Nation which is available on its website.

    What I also find interesting but not surprising is how Horowitz
    extrapolated from his experience with the Panthers a justification for
    his total, rabid, condemnation of anything that challenged the US
    establishment,capitalism, or US imperialism. I am left with the
    conclusion that his concern for the life and death of Betty Van Patter
    is not quite what Horowitz would like us and the world to believe but a
    convenient rationale for his becoming a well-funded schill for the
    forces of American neo-fascism, which is a more accurate description for
    the phenomena it implies than "conservative" or "neo-con."

    Jeff Blankfort

    Art Goldberg writes:
    > <http://www.salon.com/letters/1999/12/20/art_goldberg/index.html>


    > But there seemed to be a dangerous
    > undercurrent, and I and others close to the Panthers chose to pull back.
    > That's when David, against our advice, blindly rushed in. This was strange,
    > because in the '60s and early '70s, he almost never went to demonstrations.
    > He was always too busy writing. So when he describes himself as a New Left
    > activist, it's simply untrue. --
    > Art Goldberg

    Stew Albert writes:

    > As for David's work with the Panthers, he began doing this when most of the
    > Berkeley radicals were pulling away from them because we suspected links to
    > criminal activity and gangsterism. That he recruited a politically
    > experienced individual like Betty into that environment boggles the
    > reasonable mind. Art Goldberg is correct if David had asked me if it was
    > wise or safe to work would the Panthers, I would certainly have advised
    > against it. But back then David was the sort of guy who always thought he
    > knew the truth better than anyone else.
    > --
    > Stew Albert

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 19 2000 - 07:41:28 CUT