View all notes
Available query params: commented=1, untagged=1
The Black Panthers have never viewed such paramilitary groups as the Ku Klux Klan or the Minutemen as particularly dangerous. The real danger comes from highly organized Establishment forces—the local police, the National Guard, and the United States military. They were the ones who devastated Watts and killed innocent people. In comparison to them the paramilitary groups are insignificant. In fact, these groups are hardly organized at all. It is the uniformed men who are dangerous and who come into our communities every day to commit violence against us, knowing that the laws will protect them.
The movement was cresting around the country. Brothers on the block in many northern cities were moving angrily in response to the problems that overwhelmed them. New York and other eastern cities had exploded in 1964, Watts went up in 1965, Cleveland in 1966, and in 1967 another long hot summer was approaching. But the brothers needed direction for their energies. The Party wanted no more spontaneous riots, because the outcome was always the same: the people might liberate their territories for a few short days or hours, but eventually the military force of the oppressor would wipe out their gains. Having neither the strength nor the organization, the people were powerless. In the final analysis, riots caused only more repression and the loss of brave men. Blacks bled and died in the riots and went to jail on petty or false charges. If the brothers could be organized into disciplined cadres, working in broadly based community programs, then the energy expended in riots could be directed toward permanent and positive changes.
they wanted to merge with SNCC, as they received requests for help in starting new branches, but didnt have enough bandwidth (esp in the realm of "bourgeois skills")
[...] (This was in 1967, just after one of the longest, hottest summers in American history. Student consciousness had never been higher.) I talked about the necessity for Black people to gain control of the institutions in their own communities, eventually transforming them into co-operatives, and of one day working with other ethnic groups to change the system. When I had finished speaking, an informal dialogue began; almost all the students’ questions and criticisms were directed at the Black Panthers’ willingness to work in coalition with white groups. We maintained this was possible as long as we controlled the programs, but the students were opposed to working with white groups, or, for that matter, almost anyone but Blacks. While this viewpoint was understandable to me, it failed to take into consideration the limitations of our power. We needed allies, and we believed that alliances with young whites—students and workers—were worth the risk.
I pointed out that many young whites had suddenly discovered hypocrisy; their fathers and forefathers had written and talked brotherhood and democracy while practicing greed, imperialism, and racism. While speaking of the rights of mankind and equality for all, of “free enterprise,” the “profit system,” “individualism,” and “healthy competition,” they had plundered the wealth of the world and enslaved Blacks in the United States. White youths now saw through this hypocrisy and were trying to bring about changes through traditional electoral politics. But reality is impervious to idealism. These youngsters were discovering what Blacks knew in their bones—that the military-industrial complex was practically invincible and had in fact created a police state, which rendered idealism powerless to change anything. This led to disillusionment with their parents and the American power structure. At that point of disillusionment they began to identify with the oppressed people of the world.
By political strategy I mean this: I wanted to use the trial as a political forum to prove that having to fight for my life was the logical and inevitable outcome of our efforts to lift the oppressor’s burden. The Black Panthers’ activities and programs, the patrolling of the police, and the resistance to their brutality had disturbed the power structure; now it was gathering its forces to crush our revolution forever. Public attention was assured. Why not use the courtroom and the media to educate our people? To us, the key point in the trial was police brutality, but we hoped to do more than articulate that. We also wanted to show that the other kinds of violence poor people suffer—unemployment, poor housing, inferior education, lack of public facilities, the inequity of the draft—were part of the same fabric. If we could organize people against police brutality, as we had begun to do, we might move them toward eliminating related forms of oppression. The system, in fact, destroys us through neglect much more often than by the police revolver. The gun is only the coup de grâce, the enforcer. To wipe out the conditions leading up to the coup de grâce—that was our goal. The gun and the murder it represented would then fade away. Thus, for the Black Panther Party, the goal of the trial was not primarily to save my life, but to organize the people and advance their struggle.
Although called a Men’s Colony by the authorities, San Luis Obispo inmates know it as the California Penal Colony, which sums up what it is all about—a penal institution and a colonized situation. The state believes in the power of euphemism, that by putting a pleasant name on a concentration camp they can change its objective characteristics. Prisons are referred to as “correctional facilities” or “men’s colonies,” and so forth; to the name givers, prisoners become “clients,” as if the state of California were some vast advertising agency. But we who are prisoners know the truth; we call them penitentiaries and jails and refer to ourselves as convicts and inmates. This does not mean that we accept these labels as bad, only that we refuse to be deceived by the state’s duplicity.
laughed at loud at this
After my meeting with the warden I was assigned to a counselor, who proposed that I go through a “rehabilitation program” to prepare me to return to society. I felt no need to be rehabilitated; my only crime was to speak in defense of the people. But the counselor went on describing the program. As the first step in my rehabilitation, he explained, I was to work in the prison dining hall at no salary. Eventually I would be able to move into a job in one of the various prison industries, where the salaries ranged from a minimum of three cents an hour to a maximum of ten cents an hour.
I absolutely refused to engage in such exploitation, working at first for no salary and then for wages so low they could not be considered as salary at all. Instead, I offered a counterproposal. I would work willingly but only for a just compensation—union-scale wages. If they paid me union wages, and paid the same wages to all inmates, I would then be willing to work in any kind of job they chose. Further, I would also pay the cost of my room and board so that I would not be an expense to the state, even though it had put me there illegitimately. The staff, predictably, refused to consider this proposal.
amazing
There is a process of self-enlightenment that operates among inmates, a process that moves far beyond the level desired by the authorities. A “rehabilitated” prisoner may see the “incorrect” nature of his past actions. He may even see that the assault or robbery, or whatever, was a “mistake.” But he comes to see that “mistake” in a particular light. Many prisoners reach this point and fly past it to a deeper and broader assessment. They begin to assess society and see that their “crimes” were in part a result of a capitalist and exploitative society. Frequently, they become socialists, recognizing that capitalism has given birth to the murderous twins: imperialism and racism. These enlightened and politically conscious prisoners arrive at convictions that the authorities find unacceptable and threatening. Even though inmates at this point may have no intention of ever committing crimes again, they are held in prison for a longer time because of their new opinions rather than because of their prior activities. When they appear before parole boards, they are questioned not about the past but about their views of contemporary social issues. If they are honest and tell the truth, they are denied parole. They were sent to prison for what they did, but they are kept in prison for what they believe. These are political prisoners. George Jackson and Booker T. Lewis are two well-known examples, among thousands less visible.
I was such a political prisoner, but this did not discourage me during my twenty-two months in the Penal Colony; I knew that a political consciousness was growing among people both in and out of prison. I could see it when I talked with other inmates at mealtimes; we got into heavy raps about the situation in this country. It was obvious in the growing movement outside the prison—among students, welfare recipients, hospital employees, and community workers, to name only a few. This confidence lay behind my ability to withstand the oppression. They could lock up my body but not my spirit; that was with the people. The spirit of revolution will continue to grow within the prisons. I look forward to the time when all inmates will offer greater resistance by refusing to work as I did. Such a simple move would bring the machinery of the penal system to a halt.
Then we got into the heavy things—the reasons for my refusal to work, et cetera. I was ready for them. But when I gave my explanation, they replied that I wanted to pick and choose the rules I would obey and that this was a very arbitrary attitude. I responded by expressing a total lack of faith in the penal system and the parole board and let them know that I did not expect parole then or any other time. I told them I was willing to obey rules I disagreed with, but I would never obey rules that denied my dignity as a human being. Furthermore, I urged them to disobey those rules that violated their integrity and dignity. One of the board members, a Negro, was so shocked that he expressed doubt about my sanity. This is a good example of the mentality controlling prisons across the land, one so narrow that it regards human dignity and strength of character as abnormal.
parole board appearance
Many now recognize that most of the people in prisons do not belong there. When they can be motivated to believe that they have something to offer society, something desperately needed, which only they can contribute, then there will be no need for prisons. But each man must first be convinced of his own value and uniqueness, and that this uniqueness is his, and his only, to give to others. That is what true rehabilitation means.