New Vs Old Black Panther Party "Black Power!", "Black Power", "Black Power?" A rhetoric once chanted with pride and ambition, now mumbled in chaos and differing perspectives. Untried potential of the NBPP versus Maturity and dependable wisdom of the old BPP. Each rebelling towards a common focus "A violent civil disobedance, informed representation of afro-american culture, and political equality." But when did such a strong unified front, collaspe into just a watered down panther logo? Why is the New Black Panther party underminding the old, and why is the old Black Panther Party shunning the New generation, when both have the same common goal. The original name of the Black Panther Party was "Black Panther Party for Self-Defense." Founded
…show more content…
Every last iota of a cracker, I hate it." This divide between the common groups not only misrepresents and splits the common goal, but it waters down the message to the audience of what goal they are trying to achieve. It confuses the identity and beliefs of the African-American culture because it gives the impression of non-unified core, and internal divide. Bobby Beale one of the founding members quotes, "Just to hate another person because [of] the color of their skin or their ethnicity we dont do that. Thats not what the goal objective is. The goal objective is human liberation. The goal objective is the greater community cooperation and humanism." But when asked about a similar objective and overall portrayel of black culture Chairman Shabazz answers with aggressive and defiant stance saying, "We have been passive for too long!, Kill every goddamn Zionist in Israel." With this seperatist rhetoric and different expectations on both sides it doesn 't give a accurate depiction of black representation or any clear political …show more content…
But "the goal objective was to get rid of institutionalized racism," is what Bobby Seales hope and organzied to achieve. Bringing in that political power was forcasted as change that would domino into a reality of lasting equality. However, the NBPP look at political envolement took a newer outlook. "We keep begging the white man and white institutions to make you free! No wonder we are free! Your enemy cannot make you free, fool!." One argues institualized change is the only form of political achievement in office. On the other hand one argues for self and relying on "our people" as the only way to achieve any real political success. Again a common goal mudded in the pitfalls and differences of new tatics of the NBPP and the old ideal of the past which ultimatley effects THE
Every last iota of a cracker, I hate it." This divide between the common groups not only misrepresents and splits the common goal, but it waters down the message to the audience of what goal they are trying to achieve. It confuses the identity and beliefs of the African-American culture because it gives the impression of non-unified core, and internal divide. Bobby Beale one of the founding members quotes, "Just to hate another person because [of] the color of their skin or their ethnicity we dont do that. Thats not what the goal objective is. The goal objective is human liberation. The goal objective is the greater community cooperation and humanism." But when asked about a similar objective and overall portrayel of black culture Chairman Shabazz answers with aggressive and defiant stance saying, "We have been passive for too long!, Kill every goddamn Zionist in Israel." With this seperatist rhetoric and different expectations on both sides it doesn 't give a accurate depiction of black representation or any clear political …show more content…
But "the goal objective was to get rid of institutionalized racism," is what Bobby Seales hope and organzied to achieve. Bringing in that political power was forcasted as change that would domino into a reality of lasting equality. However, the NBPP look at political envolement took a newer outlook. "We keep begging the white man and white institutions to make you free! No wonder we are free! Your enemy cannot make you free, fool!." One argues institualized change is the only form of political achievement in office. On the other hand one argues for self and relying on "our people" as the only way to achieve any real political success. Again a common goal mudded in the pitfalls and differences of new tatics of the NBPP and the old ideal of the past which ultimatley effects THE