There has been discussion on the (Gun control's racist reality: The liberal argument against giving police more power | Salon.com) and for a long time on the right noting potentially racist elements in the history of gun control laws.
Right. And my point is: history nuthin’! If the BLM armed themselves today, lots of GOP politicians would start supporting gun control measures.
I find it easy to harshly judge people who steal, kill, rape, and torture, especially when 99% of black people of that time did not respond to racism by becoming psychopathic.
The corollary being that if one generally opposes racism, one should also generally oppose gun control.
That only follows if you think good laws cannot be created by bad motivations. I don’t believe that, and I doubt you do either.
(And, for the record, I’m not a gun control supporter.)
I’d judge them harshly too, but most Black Panthers didn’t do those things.
I’ve also read that the existence of the Black Panthers may have made it a lot easier for racist-pandering politicians to “compromise” with MLK Jr. and other more peaceful protesters, since by comparison, they were much less threatening.
In the US, even then, there is very little excuse for brutalization.
Gun rights advocates that I know support a big tent. If you believe in the cause, all are welcome.
I’ve never been a fan of hereditary dictatorships, even seemingly benevelant ones which by all appearances is what we’ve had with the Black Panthers in Wakanda. It’s not just a cultural thing because they wield true political power, and even an enlightened leader like T’challa has his drawbacks. The fact is that vibranium is a resource needed the world over, and the Black Panthers’ historic reticence on the state of supply and miserly distribution of same far outweighs any benefits their rule creates locally.
Plus, they apparently just put silver stripes on the uniform for some ungodly reason and that breaking with tradition is something I see as a bad sign.
I agree. Fortunately, the target of my speculation was not gun rights advocates, but the subset of gun rights advocates called GOP politicians–many of whom are more politically vulnerable to white nationalists than to firearm civil libertarians. I guarantee that Rubio’s supposed flip-flopping on citizenship will be much more politically powerful than Trump’s same flip-flopping on gun control, and not just because Trump is more teflon.
The Black Panthers did not even exist before late 1966 and did not become famous until 1967. Reverend King had already won his important victories by that point. They had nothing to do with any civil rights progress if anything their violence and criminality probably hurt the movement.
Nonsense and poppycock. Western imperialism at its most corrosive. They have something you want–or rather Tony Stark and your other corporate overlords want–so you cry and moan about it and demand that they play nice and share it with you. With the implicit threat of economic or even military intervention if they do not.
No. No more. Wakanda for the Wakandans.
I stand corrected – I was thinking of Malcolm X and his organization.
I’ll note that your characterization of the BPP seems to buy into the FBI’s COINTELPROhook, line, and sinker. The idea of black people showing willingness to use force to protect black people from oppressive authority seems to spark a particular strain of fear in many. To me, it seems like a pretty natural reaction to a government and society that, for centuries, was the active and violent enemy of black people.
I think the concern is the reverse; that good motivations will lead to racist effects.
I think I’ve hijacked this thread a bit, so I’ll stop now, and I’ll offer you the final word along this line if you like.
I’m not sure that they would. I think that the GOP would just catogorize the armed BLM’s as “bad guys with a gun”. Reinforcing their views that an blacks to targeted by police had it coming, and that gun control measures should be loosened so that law abiding citizens can stand their ground against these armed thugs.
So what you are saying is that every time their is a famine or a disease or a tsunami we are supposed to help out because we are part of the global community and because Bono tells us to. However, when their is a windfall we are not supposed to participate? Why don’t the Black Panthers do anything about the deplorable conditions on the rest of the continent. Why does a giant space rock landing in their back yard make them better than everybody else.
Again, this Wakandan selfishness and isolation can be seen again and again.
Two years after T’challa went public a group of Americans of African descent took on his name in admiration of what he stood for. Did T’challa help them or become their leader like an MLK? No he deliberately spurned this group by changing his hereditary title yo Black Leopard." This snub and repudiation is at least partly responsible for the path the American Black Panthers took as they devolved into selfish crime and never really accomplished anything possible. As the final insult, after the downfall of this party, T’challa changed his name back to Black Panther.
Thanks for the fun.
The cool thing is that the Black a Panthers were likely inspired by the comic and the comic really did change the name to avoid the association.
Except that MLK already showed that non-violent protests were more effective than violent ones. The BP formed to deal with very real problems but then they just made them worse.