Is violence the answer? the black panther party

Better Essays
Is Violence the Answer?: The Black Panther Party
Organized in the 1960s at the height of the American Civil Rights Movement, the Black Panther Party emerged as a revolutionist group pioneering a strategy of militancy. The Party’s aims were to eliminate the discrimination challenging African-Americans in America since the time of slavery, and to protect their communities from police brutality. Inspired by contemporary radical leaders such as Malcolm X, the party recognized that in order to restructure American society so that civil equality was obtainable by all people, a much stronger opposition was necessary. Party members felt the passive resistance adopted by their predecessors fighting for equality proved futile, and therefore the Party endorsed new tactics of self-defense and violent resistance to secure their political and social rights as American citizens. However, the promotion and employment of open violence fueled the government with legitimate reason to battle for the Party’s eradication. Regardless of its success in instituting innovative community reforms in African-American neighborhoods, during its short existence the Black Panther Party was never able to achieve its fundamental goal of eliminating racial discrimination and ensuring civil equality for all when battling against an America averse to change.
The period ranging from approximately 1950s-1970s witnessed a rabid call for social change: in particular, the demand for civil equality. In 1966, frustrated by the lack of progress in the fight for equal rights for blacks, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale founded the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense. Outraged by instances of police brutality and violence toward civil rights workers and even innocent citizens, the Party adopted a policy of self-defense and militancy recognizing that “All history has shown that this government will bring its police and military powers to bear on any group which truly seeks to free Afrikan people” (Acoli 2). This new strategy of “fighting back” differed dramatically from the non-violent rebellion that leaders such as Martin Luther King, Jr. advocated. These non-violent leaders had adopted a strategy of building a respectful coexistence with the rest of society, which they hoped would eventually lead to social change. However, change was not transpirin...

... middle of paper ...

... for working to eradicate the Party. The reliance on open hostility therefore, undermined the Party’s mission and left it susceptible to charges of being too revolutionary. Fighting against the government, rather than collaborating with it as it the ultimate executor of social change gave the Black Panther Party little change to significantly remedy the inequalities so embedded in American culture.

Works Cited

Acoli, Sundiata. “A Brief History of the Black Panther Party. Its Place in the Black
Liberation Movement.” World History Archives. Ed. Haines Brown. 1995.
Hartford Wed Publishing. 24 Oct. 2002
Coombs, Norman. “The Black Revolt.” The Black Experience in America. 7 June
1993: Information Services Division. Electronic Archives. Leavey Library.
University of Southern California. Los Angeles, CA. 5 Nov 2002.

Murphy, Dean E. “Black Panthers, Gone Gray, Fight Rival Group.” New York
Times. 7 Oct. 2002.
Panther. The Black Panther Party. 23 Oct. 2002.
Shields, Katarina. In the Tiger’s Mouth. Philadelphia: New Society, 1994.
Get Access