Talk:Black Panther Party

BPP not all-black membership

BPP actually had only a few non-black members. Two of them were Japanese. I don't know of the other but I remember reading about Richard Aoki being the Field Marshall. And I also read somewhere he was the co-founder, but there's not much evidence of it, except that he was friends with Huey P. Newton before founding of BPP. http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/Our_Stories/Chapter3/Richard_Aoki.html

I don't know if anyone wants to take account that BPP was not all-black. Just putting some interesting info out there.

Paracite (talk) 03:28, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Look here: http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com There's plenty of documentation about him. I guess he was the guy who armed and helped train the first BPP and was involved from the start. There were also Puerto Ricans and other Asians. This whole thing about the BPP being racist I suspect has never been true, and it's just negative propaganda that was spread. I think this needs serious revision, because the text makes it appear that the BPP started as racial separatists then, through politics, became less racist. In fact, they started out not racist, and during their formative years were communicating with all people. Later antagonism to black nationalism may have been due to FBI-COINTELPRO efforts to increase discord and violence between the various groups. Additionally, I have read copies of the Panther paper, and they did a lot of really tame, basically civic minded things in addition to their armed posturing and revolutionary rhetoric. --Purino (talk) 07:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

In the first year or so Newton and Seale were inspired by Stokley and the Black Power movement, but they rejected Black separatism completely by 1968 at the latest. At that point they became more focused on Marxist-Leninist analysis. I don't think it's fair to simply state that they were a Marxist-Maoist movement from the start. The primary and original influences came from Stokely Carmichael, Frantz Fanon, William L. Patterson and of course Malcolm. The BPP was not simply Maoist because it considered the Lumpenproletariat to be the true revolutionary class, against Marx, Engels and Mao. This idea they took from Fanon's book The Wretched of the Earth. The Party shifted considerably throughout its existence. If you read the newspapers, you'll notice how the ideology changes. When Cleaver traveled to North Korea the paper started publishing a lot of Kim Il Sung's work. And after the split in 71 with Huey's insistence on intercommunalism, the paper dropped its most violent rhetoric, and moved in favor of electoral politics and community building.

The Black Panthers were never racist, but you could argue that their essentializing of the police force as all "pigs" and the celebration of the death of any police officer was a disappointing and problematic position. You couldn't call it racism, but you could call it extreme prejudice. This treatment was given to black (nigger pigs, uncle toms) and whites (pigs) alike.

This topic about The Black Panthers and it's true nature and beginnings are even more relevant based on current events. We can learn from J Edgar Hoover's COINTELPRO program and perhaps use that example of what the Bush Administration may have looked into, as one of many ways, to sell the current war in Iraq to the public. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vargavision (talk • contribs) 21:51, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

• Posts from 2005 to Jan. 30th 2007 are now at: Talk:Black Panther Party/Archive 1.

Horowitz

i know others have said this before but the Horowitz rant is way too long and way too irreverent. there were and are plenty of criticisms of the BPP from prominent intellectuals and political and social figures and i don’t see why some obscure authoritarian leftist turned authoritarian rightist should get an entire paragraph in an encyclopedia article. Horowitz is a poor scholar and demagogue and no one outside his ideological niche takes him seriously. At least move it into a criticism section; a "political support" section should include just that not remarks about BP running drug and prostitute rackets with a article link in which Horowitz compares the activities of the BP with among other things Stalins "Katyn massacre."

Bloop bloop bloop. Your wish is my command. - N1h1l 00:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The argument for giving horowitz space here is that he did closely work with members of the BPP in the mid 70s and appears to have some firsthand knowledge of the events in question. this is what makes his criticism different from a lot of the hysterical and fantastic denunciations of the party. since the article he wrote is cited, people have the capability to decide for themselves whether or not his allegations have any merit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.70.248.38 (talk) 18:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC).

police openly involved in KKK statement

The statement about police in the south openly involved in the KKK has been tagged as needing a citation for a while. I've poked around, and I can't find anything that really fits. Most of the reports about police being openly Klan are from the 1920s or before. Someone recently added a few more book references, and I'm hoping that we can get this cited sooner than later. I think that if we can't, a statement like this might be better taken out until a citation does turn up. Smmurphy^(Talk) 04:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

It might not ultimately be possible to find a cite for that. It's one of those things that is presumed because of the nature of society before WWII. American society was strongly segregated in some regions, and less in others. The Klan was essentially a social organization akin to the Elks Lodge, and being a member was not considered extreme. People would not even have been asked if they were members, and people applying to the police academy may well have been members, without even thinking about it. It wasn't until the 60's and 70's that it was driven underground in some states. The Klan took a hit in WWII when it aligned itself with the Nazi Bund movement, and that was the beginning of the end. I say there would not have been a mention of it because it was just assumed, and would not have been worth mentioning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.145.59.90 (talk) 18:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Black Panther Party was Maoist NOT Democratic Socialist

Democratic Socialists advocated socialism through reform. The Black Panthers advocated Revolution. Democratic Socialists are usually peaceful, however the Black Panthers are famous for having marched around with loaded weapons. Also, the BPP sold Quotations from Mao Tse-tung in order to raise money to buy shotguns. They then made the Quotations mandatory party reading. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.174.121.248 (talk) 18:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC).

The main leadership of the BPP was Socialist, but it turned Maoist due to COINTELPRO interference - leaders being thrown in jail. To be revolutionary does not mean that you are Maoist. Also, people have a right to bear arms in the USA, and they were merely rtaining their right to do so. (NathanD 016 (talk) 17:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC))

The BPP was Maoist from the start. It remained a mix between Maoism and Democratic Socialism through out its existence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stripe66506 (talk • contribs) 20:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The BPP was indeed Maoist from the start and not just the little red book. Many of us own the complete works of Mao and taught classes from themOldpanther (talk) 20:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

I quite agree that this article seems to be in promotion of the Black Panthers. I had read the opening line of the article on the Nazi Party, which was as follows: "The Nazi Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, or NSDAP), English: National Socialist German Workers' Party), was a far-right, racist political party in Germany between 1920 and 1945." Now, to me, looking up the Black Panthers seemed like a good comparison, if the Nazi Party was racist then surely this would be under the Black Panthers. Instead, I read this article to some avail that the Black Panthers were just like Martin Luther King Jr, peaceful and using "self defense". Now keep in mind that "black nationalism" (one of the points of the black panthers) should be equated to "white power", but it is not. Even then, "white power" is a neonazi term, having nothing to do with the original party itself. Therefore I propose that if the word "racist" is to remain in the article Nazi Party, then the word "racist" should be inserted into Black Panther Party. Zchris87v 03:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

There are already a couple mentions of critics of the group, and descriptions of the groups activities that were illegal or (possibly?) immoral in the article. If you have some good information cited by a reliable source (no blogs, please), feel free to add them or bring them up here on talk. Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

• The Black Panther Party was not a racist group, and is not similar to the Nazis or white power organizations. The Black Panthers were an anti-racist, progressive left-wing group. The Nazis, while borrowing some leftist ideas, were a far-right, reactionary, anti-Semitic and racist party that carried out genocidal policies against innocent people. I suggest you learn more about both groups so you can avoid making more factually-incorrect and slanderous statements.Spylab 10:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Cleaver indicates that, at one point in his life, he viewed the rape of white women as "an insurrectionary act." Well that's not racist. Look, the point is that you cannot say that an entire party is completely not racist. Maybe the ideals weren't, but they had to have had their fair share of racist members. The same goes for the Nazi party, except its leader embraced the ideas. Automatically making all entities racist. As for the Nazi party being "white supremacist"? Keep in mind what "white" you're talking about - not the same "white" that the Black Panthers fought against. If anything, the Nazis were "Aryan supremacists". Look, go ahead and dismiss what I say if you want to, but there comes a certain 'crossing point' in every race battle where the question is if people are fighting against a racist group, or if the group just portrayed that way. There's a thing called "reverse racism", you know, and in striving for "equality" it seems like they may have overshot and led to the racial favoritism that now exists. Zchris87v 19:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Anyone who compares the Black Panther Party to the Nazi party, given whatever reasoning is just confused in my honest opinion..Mahmud II 23:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

In point of fact, the BPP advocated "all power to the people", which is elaborated upon by Fred Hampton quite famously in the documentary, "The Murder of Fred Hampton": "Black Power to Black people, white power to white people, brown power to brown people, yellow power to yellow people." The Chicago Panthers started the Rainbow Brigade and famously worked with the Young Lords, members of the Appalachian movement, the SDS (and to their regret, the Weathermen). Racists believe in theirs as the superior race; the Panthers advocated self-reliance and were seeking revolution as a means for exercising self determination. To compare them to the Nazi Party is not only insidious and indicates a questionable agenda. None of the BPP's leaders, no matter how megalomaniacal they may have become, advocated the extermination of white people. Further, their agenda wasn't aimed at hating anyone, but rather at empowering people who where at the bottom of the socio-economic rung in their communities, and preyed upon by the police.

To say that the BPP were the equivalence to the Nazi’s really is not a fair comparison. They never (thankfully) gained any real political power and spent most of their time infighting. Like most elements of the New Left the BPP was/is a synthesis of Mao’s lil Red Book, Castro Worship, and revolutionary politics blending Black Nationalism and elements of the NOI. Was the BPP racist, I am not sure … the black nationalism and NOI segments of them most certainly were and many of their members were little more than brown versions of Tom Metzger, but as with anything, find a good source, and for something like this, find many good sources and include it in the article. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 21:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

While I'll be the first to say that many Panthers were misguided in some of their actions, I find comparing them to the Nazi party atrocious and bordering on racist. First and foremost, nether black nationalism nor black power are racist philosophies. Certainly there were people with racial prejudice who espoused these philosophies as apart of a black supremacist ideology, but that does not make these philosophies racist. In much the same way that Socialism is not racist despite the Nazi Party being a Socialist party. Black power and black nationalism were born out of desires for a better social standing and self-defense against an unimaginable degree of racially motivated violence. Emmit Till wasn't the only African American to end up in a river for a triviality. The idea behind black power was to encourage people to stand and defend themselves against racism. It was not a call for racial terrorism nor the extermination of whites. Black nationalism was based on the same idea except the idea was why stay where you're not wanted. Black nationalist and black separatist leaders encouraged people to form their own communities and social services for safety, self-respect, and dignity. I notice how no one ever complains about Garvyism or the Back to Africa movement when they complain about Black nationalism. Secondly, I would prefer it if the Black panthers had become a serious, stable political party. It would have been far better than the outcome. There would have never been enough political support locally let alone nationwide to implement any Communist policies. But, I feel that the likeliest outcome would have been that they would have brought a great deal of attention to several social issues, most importantly poverty, and forced more mainstream political parties to address them seriously.

Now that I'm done soapboxing, I sincerely apologize. I also sincerely apologize to anyone who may find my words offensive and I hope that no one will take them personally but instead will see them as an attempt to approach truth and reconciliation over a most troubling time in our history. I will endeavor to recruit someone from WP:AFRO or another relevant wikiproject to make this article and other associated articles accurate and neutral. I ask for your patience and support in the process of repairing this article. CJ 00:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

First of all in the Black Panther Party racists of all types were considered the enemy. Particularly so-called Black Nationalist. An out dated position faulted with the rise of corrupt Neo-colonialist policies in Africa.As a matter of fact many Black Nationist groups (with FBI help set out to destroy the Party. Zchis87 you are very mistaken.Oldpanther (talk) 23:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Citation needed, and about NPOV

There are still two {{fact}}/citation needed tags left in the article, both in the "Conflict with law enforcement" section. I think if noone has a citation for those sentences (I couldn't find any), it is time we pull them out. In the meantime, please feel free to add {{fact}} anywhere you see something that isn't cited and should be. Also, the NPOV tag may never be removed, but it is worth a try. In my mind, what we need is some sources that criticize or talk about the criticism of the BPP that don't refer to ideologues like Horowitz, but stick to respected analysts. This would allow us to write a better criticism section and to add some balance to the lead. The thing is, so many young scholars have a romantic view of what the BPP was that doing a Google scholar search gives almost entirely positive articles [1]. I suppose that some of the articles talk about some criticisms, but I'm fairly frustrated with looking. If you know of a good article of book that will fit, and don't have time to add the material to the article, let me know. Thanks, Smmurphy^(Talk) 07:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Anyone that's interested. Try looking for Black people who didn't like the Panthers or the Black power movement. Most people associated with the non-violent movement didn't like their philosophies because they believed very strongly in retaining the moral high ground by not engaging in violence. Basically, A kid getting the crap kicked out of him on national television is far more sympathetic if he's not fighting back. CJ 10:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, Hugh Pearson has a book, The Shadow of the Panther: Huey Newton and the Price of Black Power in America, that fits the bill. It seems like it was a bit controversial, concentrated on the BPP's thuggary, but that Pearson was respected and the work wasn't widely discredited. I'm going through it, and will make some (major?) additions to the article from it soon. Let me know if you've any reason to think that the book isn't reliable. Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Pearson's book is excellent. I think it's credible, because he bases a lot of it on his own interviews with former BPP members. I would also suggest looking at some of the old journalism by Kate Coleman. I think Pearson gives the relevant cites. She was a leftist journalist, and the first to break the story of the BPP's extortion racket against black businesses and its other financial shenanigans.

Verklempt 20:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've got some notes from the first half of the Peason book, I'll put them in now. The last part of the book, about the BPP's decline, talks about Coleman. But it also focuses quite a bit on the role Horowitz played. I think on this article in past discussions, there has been some trepidation about emphasizing Horowitz's role and his ideas, so I think it should be discussed here first. I don't really know one way or another how to play it. Coleman seems to rely heavily on Horowitz, while I think Pearson has distanced himself from Horowitz somewhat (see quote in this article from the Nation 2003) which makes me feel more comfortable with him as a reference in general. Anyway, I think I'll add some of this stuff, and see where it goes from here. Its a new section called violence, and a bit on Seale and Newton and the founding. I'm not planning on changing the lead just yet, but it could be cleaned up as well. Let me know what you think -and fix my mistakes ; ) Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

There is some linkage between Horowitz and Coleman. She has published about the BPP in Horowitz's online magazine. They have in common that they were both leftist supporters of the BPP, who later changed their opinion of the group. However, if you look at Coleman's early journalism, I think it would be mistaken to attribute Horowitz as her major source. Her article on the BPP's finances is well worth obtaining. Horowitz is not her source for that.Verklempt 22:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

That is a good point, the financing of a lot of these 60s leftist groups was strange and interesting (and encyclopedic, I suppose). Coleman isn't the only source for that, but I'm sure it would work fine. I think I'll hold off making any more major changes until what I just added is digested a bit. If you have it, I think it would be ok to add some about it, though. Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

While it is true that some individuals and indeed some chapters of the BPP used extortion and other criminal activities. As policy and in most what we called the Points of Attention and rules of Disipline as layed down by Mao were striktly adhered to.People were purged for striking women,robbing stores and many things that would surprise those of you who were not there.Among the worse crimes was COMBAT LIBERALISM, email me (THayes9154@aol.com) and I will tell you what that was or look it up. But those of you who want to remember us as a gang of thugs are wrong.Oldpanther (talk) 16:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

References/Footnotes

I decided to change the style of the footnotes to a double colume layout to make it more manageable, also, I changed the title to References for obvious reasons
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver And The Vandal Watchman (Talk) 14:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

"Revolutionary Suicide"

As Bobby Seale wrote 'Seize the time' Huey P Newton wrote 'Revolutionary Suicide'. It's an obscure book and out of print but it should be mentioned somwhere in the article.  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 10:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It should be noted that Revolutionary Suicide was largely written by J. Herman Blake and that Newton's input was minimal. See Roz Payne, 'WACing off' in Lazerow and Williams (eds.), In Search of the Black Panther Party pp. 174, 180n22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jswba (talk • contribs) 16:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

But how did J. Herman Blake end up with so many details about Huey's life and ideas? Did he just make them up, or, perhaps, Huey did have quite a bit of input in chronicling his own life... So let's be clear that J. Herman Blake might have been mainly responsible for writing the work, but he was recording ideas and a life story provided by Huey. So Huey's input was more than "minimal" concerning his own life record.67.197.147.44 (talk) 10:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Racism

I once edited black the black panthers page to also to mention the they were rasicts and compared then to the kkk. Then i was acussed of vandalism by wiki. ITs commoms knowledge that they were basicaly the black klan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.253.210.249 (talk) 02:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

If it is common knowledge, then you won't have any trouble finding a reliable source. - N1h1l 14:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

That's not true at all. There were some black vigilante groups in rural areas, but the BPP was not one. It was primarily a communist political organization that operated in public, and the names of the leaders were well known. The klan was a vigilante group, espousing white supremacy and a conservative ideology sympathetic to fascism, who operated under hoods to preserve secrecy, and who attacked families.

That they even get mentioned in the same breath, or compared to each other is clear proof of the power of the mainstream propaganda machine and its power to rewrite history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.121.132 (talk) 07:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

The Black Panther party is registered as a 'black hate group' by the Southern Poverty Law Center. This whole black panther article looks to be written by Black Panther fanboys. They are the black kkk.

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/type.jsp?DT=3

How can they be the black KKK when they where communists and the KKK was anti-communist? How can they be ethnic nationalists like the KKK and still be Internationalists and Maoists? The Black Panther Party gave free breakfasts to children and the KKK committed acts of violence against children. The Black Panther Party created survival programs the KKK lynched people. There where MANY differences to say the least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.61.194 (talk) 19:35, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

You've confused the Black Panther Party with the New Black Panther Party, which is a completely separate and unrelated organization. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 19:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Ten Point Program

I think it would be great to make a page about the Ten Point Program. It seems like a really vital part of this topic. Does anyone have any suggestions before I go ahead and do that?--DerRichter 22:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Section 4.1 Criticism - Violence

"They often took advantage of a little known California law which made it permissible to carry a loaded rifle or shotgun"

The aforementioned little-known California law is merely a restatement of a better-known supreme law of the land; namely, that people have the right to bear arms, with no infringement whatsoever. DayKart (talk) 10:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Widening Support

Quotes by Jane Fonda can't stay in without sources and citations.--Parkwells (talk) 00:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

RAM

References are needed for the note that Seale and Newton were members of RAM. The standard sources (Pearson, Joseph etc.) maintain that they were members of the Afro-American Association prior to forming the BPP. User:jswba —Preceding comment was added at 16:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Filing candidates

Have the Black Panther Party ever nominated candidate to political offices? Chimeric Glider (talk) 22:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Good question. "Minister of Information" Eldridge Cleaver ran for president in 1968 on the Peace and Freedom Party ticket, but I don't know whether the BPP ever ran a candidate of their own in any election. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 22:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Elaine Brown ran for a position on Oakland's City Council in (April) 1973 and Bobby Seale ran for Mayor in the same election. Brown lost by 4,000 votes and Seale came second to the incumbent mayor John Reading, but lost the runoff election a month later. The information can be found in numerous books dealing with the BPP and in Robert Self's American Babylon (an excellent history of race and suburbanization in Oakland). Jswba (talk) 09:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Malcolm X a Black Panther?

I deleted "MALCOM X WAS IN FACT A BLACK PANTHER ==". While I haven't done any research on either the man or the organization, *was* Malcolm X a Black Panther? If he is, it should have been better phrased or whatever... Red dwarf (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Malcolm was never a member of the BPP. In fact he was dead before the party was created.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 17:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

My recollection is that one of the first actions by the Panthers was providing protection for Malcolm's widow, Betty Shabazz, when she visited San Francisco or Oakland. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 19:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

LEGACY? LINKS?

the New Black Panther Party is not the legacy of the original BPP. They don't even have the same ideology or beliefs. Such a shame that a 3rd rate, non sustainable program, racist, ignorant organization is liked to the BPP.

Secondly an effort was made to link the NBPP with the BPP but no mention of the lawsuit the members of the BPP waged against the NBPP for use of their name. If anything the NBPP should be removed from this article

If you want to talk about legacy talk about the social programs that were started and are now standard in our society.

Lastly, why are the outgoing links so critical? Yes the BPP had it's problems. But you mean to tell me we should spend more time reducing its legacy than actually trying to find neutral links that provide educational information?

Everyone has an "opinion" let's gets some links that are FACTUAL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Faithevansfanatic (talk • contribs) 16:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

"Social agitation"?

I'd watch the NPOV on that. It definitely has negative connotations. Wikifried (talk) 20:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Hoover quote

Note that the quote by J. Edgar Hoover is given twice in the introduction. Perhaps this should be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.66.226.95 (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Clumsy writing

Much of this article is clumsily written and requires copyediting. This includes the first line of the main body, "In 1966, Huey P. Newton was released from jail." Besides the sudden statement of this tantalizing fact, there is no indication why Huey Newton was in jail and on what basis he was released, giving the impression, correctly or not, that the article begins in the middle of the story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.66.226.95 (talk) 13:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

• • • I agree, this article is written badly. most of the content is repetitive, and phrased badly.. it should be rewritten more coherently.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.33.23 (talk) 02:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

• • • Go for it. Jswba (talk) 15:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Seale/Newton name swapping

Someone keeps insisting on putting Newton's name first, because he was the brain of the project.

First, such a claim needs to be backed up.

Second, even if it is backed up, there should be a Wikipedia policy that discusses this and it should be invoked. Otherwise, if the editor wants to insist on it, he/she needs to rewrite that section indicating clearly that Newton was the brains of the project, and indicating clearly Seale's lesser role. Trying to indicate this by merely rearranging the order is not, AFAIK, a standardized way. Beetle B. (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was common knowledge that Huey ran the party, designed the party, and all major changes to the party were by his command. He even kicked Bobby Seale out of the party. How did he have the authority to do that if he wasn't the primary one in charge? Whatever, leave it the way it is. Wikipedia is an "at-a-glance" resource anyway. People who are serious about knowning the nuances and important details will do the necessary research and find what I have said all along: Huey Newton was the brain behind the Black Panther Party 208.104.101.26 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:26, 3 August 2009 (UTC).

"Common knowledge" doesn't have a place in Wikipedia. And as I said, even if what you say is correct, it doesn't really warrant a name swap. You can easily edit the article and fill in the details of each's involvement.Beetle B. (talk) 14:30, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

User 208ff. is surely right? Eldridge Cleaver might have been a serious pretender to the throne for a time and for a number of Panthers, as far as I know. There also seems to have been a certain tension between the Oakland chapter and the rest of the country.--Radh (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Surely you guys could get together to construct a section of the page on this very issue? Seale's autobiography gives most of the credit to Newton but we have to remember that _Seize the Time_ was constructed by Cleaver and Seale through a series of (occasionally drunken) taped conversations during Newton's incarceration and was clearly an attempt to reinforce the Newton Mythology during the 'Free Huey' campaign. Cleaver also had great influence over the direction of the Party during Newton's incarceration -- hence Newton's attempt to wrest control back upon his release. Isn't asserting that Newton was the brains behind the operation a little too simplistic?

In any case, Newton and Seale simply reflects common parlance, like bacon and eggs, salt and pepper, Tom and Jerry etc. etc. Jswba (talk) 15:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what there is to discuss. Everywhere I've checked, both are credited as being the founders. I wouldn't mind a deeper investigation on who played a bigger role, but to the best of my knowledge Wikipedia has no policy for such cases. I think arguing about whose name should come first in the absence of an agreed upon Wikipedia policy is simply a wasted effort. The assumption that the ordering matters is a bad one.

As I said earlier, people are free to highlight the differences in contribution between the two in the article, so that it becomes explicit rather than implied by a name ordering. Beetle B. (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't think it is too simplistic to say that it was Huey's party, being that he kicked both Eldridge Cleaver and Bobby Seale out of the party. The party was essentially his brain child. Eldridge joined the party because he was impressed with Huey's fearlessness and violence. Newton was the face of the party and the most powerful person in the party. Even when he appointed Elaine Brown the first chairwoman of the party, after dismissing Bobby Seale and fleeing to Cuba to avoid charges for another crime, he was giving Brown orders on how to run the party from Cuba. He trained her, as he did other members, in the philosophy HE created for the party. And when he decided that the party would no longer be known for their violence, but instead move to educate and uplift the community, it was Cleaver who found himself out of the loop (although he did start his own faction). So Huey's ideas were the ones that predominantly permeated the Panther classrooms and meeting rooms. 208.104.106.6 (talk)

I fail to see any relevance in your comment is (beyond refuting another comment). The subject at hand is whether Seale was a cofounder, and whether there exists a formal reason to swap the two names when listing the founders.

Bobby Seale's name can remain where it is, but the history of the party speaks for itself. And the Black Panther Party was Huey's party. 208.104.103.235 (talk) 04:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

And BTW, it was very poor etiquette to overwrite someone's comments on the discussion page. Beetle B. (talk) 23:23, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Must have been an error, because I had no intention to erase anyone's comment. But when I looked at the history of this page, apparently I accidently erased someone else's comments while posting my own. 208.104.103.235 (talk) 04:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Newtons' orders to beat a woman panther

"In 1977, after Newton returned from Cuba and ordered the beating of a woman Panther who organized many of the Party's social programs, Brown decided she needed a break and left the Party."

i think dropping such a "bomb" without elaborating even slightly is absurd.. it raises so many question as to the way the party worked, its morals, Newtons character, etc... it can't be just there to explain Browns depatring of the party, it has too much impact.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.33.23 (talk) 02:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Umm...Then feel free to elaborate and write it in a better manner.Beetle B. (talk) 14:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Angela Davis

• Ebony says, that Angela Davis was a Black Panther Party member for a short time in 1969, but then was made to choose between the CPUSA and the BPP by the Panthers. (Feb 2007, P. 196).
• The Angela Y. Davis Reader, ed. by Angela Davis with Joy James (google books) flatly assertes Davis' BPP membership, but goes on to portrait her as always switching between a membership, which did not want to know too many details of the inner workings of the machine and an outsider position as a fellow-traveller. The Reader does not mention BPP pressure to choose.
• In her later book Imprisoned Intellectuals Joy James writes of Angela Davis' membership not only in the Panthers (P. 62), but also in the Black Panther Political Party, Los Angeles, using (on page 182) the very same language as used in the earlier Angela Davis chapter of Imprisoned Intellectuals and also in the Davis Reader for Davis' attitudes towards the BPP to now describe her stance towards this BPPP. She thinks the LA BPP were affiliated with the Oakland office (and has a footnoted source for this fact). But other sources of the Davis BPPP membership do imply a firm commitment to this LA group. And all sources I can find on google books say the BPPP was a SNCC grouping not even friendly with the BPP and one goes so far to say the BPPP was armed and ready to challenge the Oakland Panthers.

This would leave us with an undisputed 1967 BPPP membership and a 1969 BPP membership, which had for some time not been not mentioned or explicitly denied (e. g.: Bettina Aptheker) in the literature on the period, but which is now boldly and cautiously asserted by Angela Y. Davis herself.

Ĩ also find it a bit strange that The Black Panther Party for Self-Denfense gets mixed up in a book written by Davis' co-editor of her Selected Works with a small Los Angeles band of Black revolutionary nationalists (I assume) called Black Panther Political Party.--Radh (talk) 08:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, but does this have anything to do with the article as it currently exists? Are you suggesting that certain information be added or changed? Whatever her exact relation to the BPP, I think it's clear that Davis was not really a leader of the group, so I don't know that her involvement is worth mentioning. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 08:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Angela Davis is worth mentioning. Geeze! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.145.59.90 (talk) 18:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

• In Angela Davis' autobiography I believe the following information can be found: The Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and the Black Panther Political Party were separate groups with different political lines. The two independent organizations simply happened to be founded in close succession to one another & with similar names. The BPP-SD requested the BPPP change the name of their organization but the two groups were unable to come to a compromise. I do not have a copy of Ms. Davis' autobiography so I can not confirm this fact however I do believe it to be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.33.94.184 (talk) 07:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Douglas Gary Freeman

Just noticed no article about him, though there's a fair amount of news about him.

Is Mississauga man a terrorist or a lonely father?

"He is barred from re-entering Canada, in part because the federal government considers him to have been part of a terrorist organization — the Black Panthers, a militant black power group that ceased operating in the mid-’70s.

“It can physically ache to be apart from my family,” Freeman says in his first interview since he was arrested in March, 2004, outside the Metro Toronto Reference Library, where he worked as a librarian’s assistant. “Often, I awaken in the middle of the night and look around and begin to weep.”

Until his gunpoint arrest, Freeman, an African-American, had spent more than half of his life living peacefully in Canada. His kids were all born in Canada. Two are elementary schoolteachers, one played in the Canadian Football League and the other is an aide to Premier Dalton McGuinty.

But here’s the problem: He fled the U.S. and charges of shooting white Chicago police officer Terrence Knox in the arm in 1969. Freeman said he jumped bail only after he says he was shot at — he doesn’t know by whom — and threatened by two white men in suits while awaiting trial.

Freeman was 19 at the time. He maintains he shot Knox in self-defence, after the officer...,"

CTV page
What it takes to be a "Freeman" again....

Here's his website.
206.130.173.55 (talk) 18:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Black Panther Party

are a bunch of nigger faggots who need to be cleansed from this Earth, or at least sent back to Africa where they belong.