Black Panthers As Conservatives? Word?

I usually find the work of Gregory Kane to be well done and concise but today for some inexplicable reason Gregory Kane has apparently missed his morning coffee or something because he writes the following regarding the Black Panther Party:

When you go, remind them of one thing: Those reunions will be celebrating the greatest black conservative organization ever.

Yes, the Black Panther Party for Self Defense was, in essence, a black conservative organization. Oh, they didn’t call themselves that. And they didn’t vote Republican. In fact, they had little use for Democrats. Exhibit A for that is the cover of a June 1968 edition of the Black Panther newspaper showing the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy after he had been shot in California.

When I read this I had to read it twice because I could not believe that Brother Kane would attempt to connect the Black Panther Party for Self Defense with what we know of today as conservatism. This is the kind of misrepresentation along the lines of the black Republicans who created an radio spot with numerous historical inaccuracies. So what possessed Mr. Kane to make such a declaration?

But on many of their core principles, the Panthers were the forerunners of today’s black conservatives. Four examples prove my point.

1. The Panthers absolutely believed in the Second Amendment. Today’s black liberal Democrats scurry for the hills whenever anybody mentions gun rights. In 1966, Newton and Seale had the gall to tell Oakland and the world that both the spirit and letter of the words “a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” applied to black folks.

2. The Panthers believed black people could be racists. They totally rejected the nonsense that in order to be a racist, you have to have power. This foolishness has been stinking out black America for years. The way this particular line of reasoning goes is that since black folks have no power, we can’t be racist.

3.The Panthers started a free breakfast program for poor urban kids. Oh sure, they’d have preferred the government had done it. But when the government failed, the Panthers applied a simple conservative principle: If the government can’t or won’t do it, do it yourself.

4. The Panthers started free health clinics for poor urban residents. See example three for the reasoning.

5. The Panthers were anti-FBI.


Methinks Mr. Kane has mistook revolutionary with conservative. Given that Mr. Kane has decided to let the dictionary do the talking lets take him up on his reasoning. by the dictionary a conservative is:

holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics and religion.

Taking this approach what would a traditional attitude of a black person be holding at the time of the Panthers? traditionally Africans in America were to be subservient to white people and be satisfied with the racist policies of the US. Clearly since the Panthers were willing to confront the system of "racism" head on and change the "traditional" way in which black folk dealt with racism, they could not be seen as conservative in that light could they. That some so called 'Liberals" may be averse to gun ownership and use does not make the Panthers conservative anymore than being a Christian makes one a pacifist.

Let's look at the example of the free breakfast programs and clinics. How is it a "conservative" principle to do for self? Do for self is a human imperative that is only submerged to social contract. Of course it was the right thing to do but that does not let the government off the hook for failing to provide for the common good which is the duty of the government. If the government is not doing what it is supposed to do (a-la-Katrina) it is obviously the duty of the citizen to provide for himself but that does not let the government off the hook ad such programs should not be seen as a means to let the government off the hook either. It would seem to me that Kane is falling into league with Walter "Willy" Williams who thinks that the government shouldn't do a damn thing for anyone.

Taking on the anti-FBI stand, well I'm sure the conservatives claim to not want big government but I think Kane would be hard pressed to prove that todays conservatives, or even the previous ones would want the FBI abolished. J Edgar Hoover may have been a racist poof but in matters other than race, the FBI is how crime families and other large criminal organizations get dealt with. Kane ought to also remember that it was by butting in on states business, that many of the Civil Rights that Africans in America "enjoy" were implemented.

I wanted to leave the "racist" thing for last because I have a huge problem with the word as it is used. Mr. Kane's usage of the term in his article underscores the problem.

because one definition of racism is “hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.”

exactly the problem: "One definition" I despise when terms can change here and there depending on who the user wants to guilt trip. I have written extensively on the proper use of the term racist:

Race is a group of humans with common physical characteristics determined by their genetics. Ist implies the study of. Therefore a racist is someone who studies people with common physical characteristics determined by their genetics.

You'll find that this definition is not only etymologically correct but it also forces the user to be more precise with his or her discussion of the topic. So of course Black people can be racist as can anyone else on the planet. The power equation that is discussed by Kane is a particular form of racism, racism being, again by the dictionary:

a philosophy regarding race or a group of people with common physical characteristics determined by their genetics

One such philosophy is called White Supremacy which is defined by the good Dr. Welsing via Neely Fuller Jr. as:


"The local and global power system structured and maintained by persons who classify themselves as white, whether consciously or subconsciously determined. This system consists of patterns of perception, logic, symbol formation, thought, speech, action and emotional response, as conducted simultaneously in all areas of people activity (economics, education, entertainment, labor, law, politics, religion, sex and war). The ultimate purpose of the system is to prevent white genetic annihilation on Earth- a planet in which the overwhelming majority of people are classified as non-white (black, brown, red and yellow) by white-skinned people."

Thus the proposition that one has power in order to establish and maintain White Supremacy is readily apparent.
Of course what Mr. Kane is actually implying is that black people can prejudge other people and can make nasty statements or generalizations about other people. Of course he is right. however as with Huey and the guns, name calling is not a power move, the ability to self-determine is and to self determine one needs power.

I suggest that Mr. Kane drop his allegiance to the fluid definition of "racism" as practiced by the mainstream as it is used to equivocate black people's general reactions to the abuse of this society and the abuse that the society hands out to black folk. but until then count me as disappointed in Mr. Kane's latest.

Technorati Tags: Black Panther Party, Conservatism, Gregory Kane