The Black Panther Party in Newspapers

 

 

KU_Spencer_Black_Panther_t460

During the 1960s and 70s, newspapers were the main way that people found out the news. Because the majority of local and national newspapers were aimed at white people, the African-American community decided to develop their own newspapers. In fact, the first African-American newspaper in the United States was started in 1827. The Black Panther Party started their own newspaper, which began as a short newsletter in 1967 by the co-founder Huey Newton. These types of newspapers included news about the local black communities, events going on in the community, and were quite popular in major cities with large African-American populations. Today the Internet has taken over where newspapers left off, but you can see from examining the articles below, from different types of newspapers, that people had a range of opinions on the Black Panther Party, and that was reflected in newspaper stories at that time.

 

pic

Figure 1. Article from “New York Amsterdam News”

 

This first article, Figure 1, was posted in the New York Amsterdam News, the official African-American newspaper of New York City, in 1972. They were advertising for an event where the Black Panthers gave away free food packages and shoes to people in the local African-American community. This article fits several of Zelizer’s aspects of collective memory. First, it is material, as it was originally in a physical newspaper. It also can be considered usable, as it is advertising the giving away of food and shoes by the Black Panthers. While this article was not as much a story as it is an advertisement for charity, it still shows how the Black Panthers wanted to be seen in the local communities.

pic2Figure 2. Opinion article from “Chicago Tribune”

The article in Figure 2 came from an opinion piece in the Chicago Tribune, where they asked local people how they felt about the Black Panther Party. While there was a wide range of opinions on the subject, one man in particular, Gordon Terry, had very strong feelings against the Black Panthers. He described them as “a menace to society and a great disturbance factor in this country.” Clearly he had had some sort of bad experiences with or heard some bad things about the Black Panthers, as he had nothing good to say about them at all. The New York Amsterdam News was made strictly for the African-American community of New York City, while the Chicago Tribune was a nation-wide publication made for everyone. Obviously the audiences were much different, so different opinions were sure to arise, but there seemed to be a pattern of anti-Black Panther Party news in mostly-white newspapers in big cities, which was congruent with the dominant memory and view towards them in the country as a whole. This article is also usable, as it allowed for the opinions of the Black Panther Party to be known, but also for people to express how they felt on a controversial and significant topic at that time. It is material, since the Chicago Tribune was and is a physical newspaper,

http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/docview/119131922?pq-origsite=summon

The link above will take you to a newspaper article from the New York Times in 1970 about the occupation and protest at Columbia University by students, demanding reparations for the Black Panther Party. Interestingly enough, the majority of the protesters were white students who were a part of a larger national movement to show white solidarity for the Black Panthers. The title of the article should draw some attention initially, as the paper describes the students who are protesting as “militants”. Although a few hundred of the more violent protesters did break windows on campus after their rally, only a few actually participated in breaking the windows. Describing them as “militant” is problematic and surely inaccurate to say the least. Would they be described as militant if they were rallying against the Black Panther Party? The article also described the students who marched through campus throwing rocks through windows as “radicals”. While their actions were indeed radical, I don’t believe that the students’ ideas or protest itself was radical. This way of describing the students is dismissive towards their movement and gives the public the wrong idea of what was really happening at the protest.

The white students did still enjoy privilege; even though they smashed more than 30 window panes on campus and splashed paint on campus buildings, the local police and even the Campus Security decided not to intervene.  There was a bus full of Tactical Patrol Force policemen waiting in case things got too out of hand, but apparently the windows and paint on the buildings did not suffice a response.

 

 

Sources

“Black Panther Party giving free food, shoes at rally”. (1972, April 15).New York Amsterdam News, p. D8.

“mini’pinions: What do you think of the Black Panther Party?” (1970, February 19).Chicago Tribune, p. W6.

Montgomery, P. L. (1970, March 14). “Militants Occupy Columbia School: Reparations Demanded for Black Panther Party”. New York Times, p. 35.

 

 

John Africa and the MOVE Organization

John Africa

Figure 1: John Africa (MOVE)

Between 1965 and 1972, American focus was dominated by an unpopular war, new music, and the emergence of black power groups aiming to find equality in a country that refused to give equal rights to everyone.  From this time period came people and groups, such as Malcolm X and the Black Panther Party, whose main objective was to protect black families and interests through any means necessary.

Lost in the confusion of the time was a small group in Philadelphia called MOVE, whose members “adopted a back-to-nature lifestyle and who protested what they considered to be the profanities of modern society” (Dickson).  American memory glosses over the memory of move for multiple reasons, including the fact that MOVE’s ideology did not intersect with those of other black power groups and because they did not have a big, national showdown with a federal agency.

It is difficult to identify the moment at which MOVE was officially created, but it is clear that the philosophy behind the group comes from a man named John Africa.  Africa was born with the name Vincent Leaphart, but changed his name to John Africa in 1972 to represent the continent where life began.  Africa struggled with his education throughout his childhood, eventually being labeled as “mentally retarded” and functionally illiterate (McCoy).  In spite of this, John Africa managed to attract a number of people from the Philadelphia area who were willing to believe in his ideologies.  One of these disciples of John Africa was Donald Glassey, a graduate of the nearby University of Pennsylvania. Glassey was so fascinated by Africa’s teachings that he volunteered to write and compile Africa’s thoughts into a book.  It is apparent that many black rights groups and people gained acclaim and followers through the dissemination of literature, such as Gill Scott’s poetry or the Chapel Hill protest pamphlets.John Africa was tragically killed when the Philadelphia police department dropped a bomb on the MOVE household, killing John Africa along with five other adults and five children.  The clash between the MOVE organization and the Philadelphia police is similar to many other clashes during the black power movement, such as the Watts riots in Los Angeles.

Figure 2: News report of MOVE bombing (MOVE Bombing at 30)

MOVE’s doctrine relied on the “ideal that any religion or philosophy that prevents adherents from actively opposing exploitations and oppression was useless” (Floyd-Thomas).  In this way, MOVE can be linked to other black power groups of the day; however, MOVE separates itself from other groups through how it chose to go about their objective.  MOVE attempted to attack the American hegemonic memory by focusing on protest and activism in black culture.

I believe that MOVE is an important organization because it gives people another perception of how black activist groups worked in American society.  Unlike the Black Panther Party, MOVE did not seem to care about indoctrinating as many people as possible.  Instead, they let people with similar views come and join their community. It did not matter to John Africa whether the people joining him were black or white, he just wanted to create a community who stood up for what is right.  In addition to his drive to find good people, John Africa also recognized that he had a duty to revolt when he recognized that the needs of some people were not being met.  In a letter to the editor of the Philadelphia Tribune, Africa says “isn’t it correct to rebel against a system eating us, enslaving us, killing us?”(Abu-Jamal).  In this quote, Africa reminds us of how our country was founded on the principle that people have a right to protest in the event they are not being represented.  This notion adds credibility and historical precedent to his protest.

Figure 3: Documentary about MOVE (Brown)

Within his organization, John Africa’s memory has been sanctified and John Africa himself has been apotheosized.  Looking at their website, you can easily see how the remaining members of MOVE have intentionally capitalized every use of Africa’s name.  The website even capitalizes the word “He”, a sign of reverence usually reserved by Christians for their God.  To the MOVE organization, John Africa’s memory is more than just a man, it is an ideal and a way of life that was attacked and suppressed.  They have raised him up in this way in the hopes of remembering the values for which he fought.

Some people say that MOVE is an incredibly dense and difficult organization to interact with, leading to their alienation from other civil rights groups.  However, I believe that MOVE is just a group of people who are dedicated to their cause.  They believe that all life is sacred and they are willing to stand up and fight those who disagree.  John Africa’s legacy in this organization carries on through today and his writings continue to guide the organization’s philosophy.  Though the work and philosophy that MOVE advocates for may not be central in American memory and consciousness, it is important to remember that they fight for those who do not have a voice in order to bring about equality.

John Africa hug

Figure 4: Africa with MOVE family members (MOVE)

 

Works Cited

Dickson, Johanna Saleh. MOVE : sites of trauma.Princeton Architectural Press, 01 Jan 2002.

Floyd-Thomas, J. M. “The Burning of Rebellious Thoughts: MOVE as Revolutionary Black Humanism.” The Black Scholar 32.1 (2002): 11-21. Web. 17 Apr. 2017.

McCoy, C. R. (2010, August 5). Who was John Africa? Philly.com.

ABU-JAMAL, MUMIA. “John Africa.” Philadelphia Tribune (1912-2001), Sep 07, 1982, pp. 4, ProQuest Historical Newspapers: Philadelphia Tribune, http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/532800098?accountid=14244.

MOVE. (n.d.). John Africa. Retrieved from http://onamove.com/john-africa/

Brown, Kimmora. “John Africa’s MOVE Organization-K. Brown.” Youtube.com. 4–22 2012. Web. 19 Apr. 2017. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuS4sQ50sIU>.

“MOVE Bombing at 30.” Youtube.com. democracynow.org, Web. 19 Apr. 2017. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBZXRK_1vAQ>.