Hillary and the Black Panthers

Cleon said:
You didn't bother reading the link, did you?

Well...Since he'd do the same thing today, probably not, no. However, Hillary did nothing that is remotely similar to that (nor would she be particularly inclined to today). Which you would know if you bothered reading the Snopes link.
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see how many tools continue to post in this thread without reading the link in post #3. You and your "reality-based world".

Daredelvis
 
linusrichard said:
It'd be a shame to have a president who condones torture. I mean - another one.

Seriously, though, it's hard to take this kind of criticism seriously from someone who has cited davidduke.com (or maybe it's .org, who cares?) as a source.

That is - coming from MaGZ, this can't really be interpreted as "She shouldn't be allowed to be president because she supported a domestic terrorist organization," but rather "She shouldn't be allowed to be president because she supported the wrong domestic terrorist organization."


Personally, I'm not a fan of violence, and therefore, not of the Black Panthers. (Also not a fan of Clinton - a separate issue.) However, the Panthers are almost infinitely better than the KKK, and considering also the level of Clinton's support (according to the Snopes article, I mean - newsmax and freerepublic are not reliable sources), along with the fact that she didn't appear to do anything illegal at all, even accepting the worst interpretation - no, she obviously shouldn't be disqualified from the presidency for this non-issue.
Click to expand...

You are mistake. I did not provide any David Duke links.
 
tomwaits said:
Granted, I don't know much about it (I was only born in 1985!) but from what I've seen the Panthers weren't that bad for the most part. A lot of their activities revolved around patrols where they would monitor police activies to make sure there was no brutality going on (although, this comes from Bobby Seale so take it with a grain of salt).

The problem is that the views of the party were highly diverse. Some of them were more "revolutionary" then others, which would understandably cause public opinion to paint them as violent and anti-white.

As for the "self-defense" doctrine, I am torn. Non-violence is, to me, the most effective and benevolent strategy for civil rights, but it's hard to denounce self-defense, especially when I've had it pretty easy for my life.

Anyway, I'd be glad if someone had their own opinion on the Panthers that was around during the 60's and 70's.
Click to expand...

New Haven Black Panther trials
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Haven_Black_Panther_trials
 
The Painter said:
Yeah, Kill all the Whiteys. That's not so bad.
Click to expand...

"Off the Pigs!" Was their slogan.

Recently I saw a documentary on the radical days of Berkeley. One outspoken Panther in the film later became a Hollywood star.

Any guesses?
 
Puppycow said:
I'm not saying its good, just understandable. If someone pushes you what do you do? do you push back or not? The Nazis commited genocide on defenseless people. The Black Panthers were trying to defend defenseless people who were being oppressed, no?
Click to expand...

You are ignorant of how dangerous the Panthers were.
 
The Painter said:
I got your source right here. I lived through it.
Click to expand...

Please comment. I remember them from the news coverage but never meet any. I did find a Black Panther pamphlet once which I kept. It basically was Maoist in orientation, also a lot on Fanon.
 
Yes, the Black Panthers were bad.

Yes, Hillary Clinton helped to monitor a trial of Black Panthers activists for civil liberty violations.

No that doesn't make Hillary illegible for public office.

In fact it just proves that Hillary cares so much about Human Rights that she even worked to make sure that the rights of people as bad as the Panthers were not violated.

No, I am not a liberal partisan. It is just that MaGZ is enough to make Nixon vote Democrat.
 
Wow, so anyone who supported the basic tenets of Communism as set forth by Marx is directly responsible for Stalin's atrocities?
Even those who had no way of knowing what the actual practices in Communist countries were?
I'm fairly certain the Hillary was never welcomed into the private meetings of the Black Panthers. If they were willing to torture their own officers to death upon suspicion of police complicity, I find it hard to believe that they would have welcomed a rich little white girl into their sanctum sanctorum.
 
fuelair said:
One of the neat things about the Black Panthers was their newspaper. They, quite intelligently, put out a well written - in standard English - paper which espoused their views. Doesn't mean I agreed with all their points (I don't agree with all of anybody's points AFAIK).
Click to expand...

Wow, standard English and everything. Who'd have thunked it!?
 
Darth Rotor said:
Why do you say that, particularly the infinitely part?

DR
Click to expand...

Well, "infinitely" might be hyperbole, but as far as why I say the Panthers were better than the Klan - I guess it would be that the Black Panthers were motivated by self-defense, the Black Panthers were not mainly driven by racial hatred, the Panthers were out to resist oppressors, not to further oppress the already-oppressed... I could go on and on. Honestly, I think it's weird to even have to give reasons, because it should just be obvious.

As I said, I'm not a fan of violence. I'm also not a fan of Marxism, and particularly Maoism. So, I don't really like the Black Panthers. But compared to the worst terrorist organization in the history of the U.S., yes, they're much better.
 
linusrichard said:
Well, "infinitely" might be hyperbole
Click to expand...
OK
but as far as why I say the Panthers were better than the Klan
- I guess it would be that the Black Panthers were motivated by self-defense,
Click to expand...
Revolutionaries and self defense? I suppose it depends on where you sit.
the Black Panthers were not mainly driven by racial hatred,
Click to expand...
Nope. Try again. Racialist motivation is a core part of their organization.

Ever meet any?
the Panthers were out to resist oppressors, not to further oppress the already-oppressed...
Click to expand...
I thought about this one.

The Panthers were certainly a resistance movement. Yes.

Strangely enough, the early versions of the Klan were something of a resistance movement, in terms of resisting the Reconstruction and its effects, but the Klan has of course morphed a bit since then, with the 20th century version being most certainly not a resistance movement, given its power base.
I could go on and on. Honestly, I think it's weird to even have to give reasons, because it should just be obvious.
Click to expand...
Not really, you assign a value while I'd rather look at the similarities and differences. They have both.

The core distinction between two racially, racialist, and racist based groups seems to me mostly in your eyes, on the color of the skin, and a virtue assigned, or not assigned, to one color, and an assumption or two along the way.

That the Klan was able to blend into "the mainstream" far more easily than the Panthers I'll not dispute, which perhaps accounts for its longevity, and the difficulty in addressing some of its more odious habits.
As I said, I'm not a fan of violence. I'm also not a fan of Marxism, and particularly Maoism. So, I don't really like the Black Panthers. But compared to the worst terrorist organization in the history of the U.S., yes, they're much better.
Click to expand...
Different, certainly, and when you consider the position of societal underdog on a racial basis, OK, that is a core difference in motivation, as opposed to the Klan's support of second class citizen status for "their racial and cultural inferiors." IIRC, the Klan also has a case of the ass about Jews, Catholics, and a few other subsets.

So if "infinitely" is set aside, you find less to dislike about the Panthers than the Klan.

DR
 
Last edited:
Darth Rotor said:
OK

Revolutionaries and self defense? I suppose it depends on where you sit.

Nope. Try again. Racialist motivation is a core part of their organization.
Click to expand...
Not in the same way it was for the Klan.


Strangely enough, the early versions of the Klan were something of a resistance movement, in terms of resisting the Reconstruction and its effects, but the Klan has of course morphed a bit since then, with the 20th century version being most certainly not a resistance movement, given its power base.
Click to expand...
I think what you say about the early Klan is somewhat up for debate, but it looks like we agree about the later Klan.
Not really, you assign a value while I'd rather look at the similarities and differences. They have both.
Click to expand...
Just because I'm comfortable assigning values doesn't mean I don't want to look at the similarities and differences. But I don't really see the problem with assigning values too. There are similarities and differences between the Klan and the Democratic Party. There are similarities and differences between the Federalist Society and al Qaeda. There are similarities and differences between poop and peanut butter. Why be shy about assigning values?

The core distinction between two racially, racialist, and racist based groups seems to me mostly in your eyes, on the color of the skin, and a virtue assigned, or not assigned, to one color, and an assumption or two along the way.
Click to expand...
No. Not only is that untrue, but I think it's unsupported by anything I've said. The difference - to me - is the relative positions of power between the group and their victims/targets, and their core motivations. The Panthers targetted certain white people (usually cops or other authority figures) because they observed (correctly, as it turns out) that most of the people of privilege and power in this country are white, and that believed that it was people of privilege and power who were oppressing the black community. Is that okay? No. But - the Klan targetted and targets any and all black people and Jews because they plain hate black people and Jews. Is this worse than what the Panthers did? I feel comfortable saying yes. Find me a country where the economic and political power structure is black and white people are a disadvantaged and oppressed minority, and I will value the white so-called "racist" group over the black racist group in that country.

Too, I don't happen to believe that "Kill all the Whiteys" (as someone posted above) is an accurate representation of the Black Panther "platform." If I can be shown to be wrong on this, I'll rethink my relative valuations of the two groups.
Different, certainly, and when you consider the position of societal underdog on a racial basis, OK, that is a core difference in motivation, as opposed to the Klan's support of second class citizen status for "their racial and cultural inferiors."
Click to expand...
There you go.
IIRC, the Klan also has a case of the ass about Jews, Catholics, and a few other subsets.
Click to expand...
That too.
So if "infinitely" is set aside, you find less to dislike about the Panthers than the Klan.
Click to expand...
Yes. I think "infinitely" is always going to be kind of a nonsense word when comparing two groups. Do I like the JREF "infinitely" more than the American Nazi Party? Do I like Modern Lovers "infinitely" more than Nickelback? No... it's silly - hyperbole - read it as "very much."
 
linusrichard said:
Find me a country where the economic and political power structure is black and white people are a disadvantaged and oppressed minority, and I will value the white so-called "racist" group over the black racist group in that country.
Click to expand...
Look no farther than Mugabe Land, unless all the whites have simply left. An odd sort of ethnic cleansing has been going on there, in terms of making it difficult to be white and live there.
Too, I don't happen to believe that "Kill all the Whiteys" (as someone posted above) is an accurate representation of the Black Panther "platform." If I can be shown to be wrong on this, I'll rethink my relative valuations of the two groups.
Click to expand...
A part of it was simply inimical to Whitey, but certainly not the whole of it. Some of it was a more purely empowerment deal.

Cheers. Thanks for your elaboration. :)

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
Look no farther than Mugabe Land, unless all the whites have simply left. An odd sort of ethnic cleansing has been going on there, in terms of making it difficult to be white and live there.
Click to expand...
Zimbabwe did spring immediately to mind while I was writing that, but I don't have enough information. I do know that the political power structure is black, but I'm not sure if the white farmers have economic power there or not. It's possible that, if the white farmers were to organize an armed resistance against the Mugabe regime, I would consider them "less worse" than the government, but I don't have all the facts. There are a lot of differences to take into consideration - for example, blacks in America have been disadvantaged and oppressed since they were brought here against their will centuries ago, whereas whites in Zimbabwe enjoyed power and privilege (as Rhodesians) until only a few decades ago. Likewise, the Mugabe regime, as horrible as it is, is motivated by an arguably understandable (not to say legitimizing) ressentiment that is absent (or at least unjustified) in the Klan. So the equation is somewhat different - without more information, I'm not sure how it would turn out.
Cheers. Thanks for your elaboration. :)
Click to expand...
Back at you!
 
Puppycow said:
Speaking of ignorance, aren't you a holocaust denier and 9/11 conspiracy theorist? With all due respect, I'm afraid that pretty much demolishes your credibilty from the get-go. Sorry.

I looked up the wikipedia article on the Black Panthers and I didn't find anything too suprising. It's about what I expected. Compare to the KKK.
Click to expand...

I’m a holocaust skeptic because I have read Butz’s book. My views on 9/11 are a bit complicated, but I reject the idea it was an inside job.

As to the Black Panther wiki article, they really toned the article down. You need to do more independent research on the topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom