42
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 13:
Line 13: + + +
no edit summary
:I believe the difference is between a form of government that does not grant rights versus one that does. The United States is and was a Democracy. Positive changes were already taking place. The Panthers had just as much say as any other person in the country, but they found this to be insufficient and advocated arms to force their point of view. I am not wholly convinced they were terrorists, but the information provided in the article seems to point that way. I am open to being shown otherwise. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 14:26, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
:I believe the difference is between a form of government that does not grant rights versus one that does. The United States is and was a Democracy. Positive changes were already taking place. The Panthers had just as much say as any other person in the country, but they found this to be insufficient and advocated arms to force their point of view. I am not wholly convinced they were terrorists, but the information provided in the article seems to point that way. I am open to being shown otherwise. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 14:26, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
i don't think that they had the option to get their voices heard. a lot of them were from very poor backgrounds and being poor and black in america is not a good combination. the African American community in Oakland was facing severe police brutality from a police force that was overwhelmingly white. the Black Panther Party for Self Defense was formed as a way to combat racism in the Oakland police force.
in terms of terrorism, the Black Panthers never carried out attack against a civilian population. in California at least, they were allowed to carry the guns that they did. they never had a policy of aggression against the police and only responded with violence when faced with violence. none of that is the hallmark of a terrorist group. -[[user:emmagrrl|Emmagrrrl]]