Oct 13, 2018 3 min read

This week (Oct. 15) in 1966, the radical organization called the Black Panther Party was officially formed by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. Originally created to monitor brutality against blacks by the police department of Oakland, Calif., as well as institute community and neighborhood social programs, it soon evolved into an organization dedicated to using violence to end America’s systemic racism and segregation.

Nationwide, shootouts between Panther members and police became commonplace, especially in big cities such as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and Los Angeles, and (exaggerating somewhat) FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover called the Black Panthers “the greatest threat to the internal security of the country.”

And as the party’s notoriety grew, so did its supporters, especially in the black community, who were tired of being second-class citizens, tired of being denied the equal opportunity to earn a decent living, and increasingly frustrated at the civil rights movement’s slow pace and minuscule progress on either front. That movement, led by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., was based on peaceful protest in which its members willingly subjected themselves to violence and jailings.

In contrast, the Black Panthers and their growing legions of followers thought the way to make real progress regarding equal rights was to literally fight fire with fire.

But there was a problem, as Dr. King repeatedly attempted to explain to Black Panther leaders in his meetings with them. Simply put, over the long haul, a disciplined and nonviolent movement such as his was far more threatening to the status quo than radical blacks with guns. For starters, in a prolonged firefight between the Black Panthers and the local and state police, or the National Guard, or the U.S. Army should it come to that, which side had more soldiers and more weapons? And did the Panthers really think their violent methods – bullets flying, blood flowing and bodies collapsing on the news every night – had a chance of winning over the majority of white Americans whose changing attitudes toward race relations were critical to racial progress?

By contrast, news footage and front-page photos and stories of peaceful protests, in which masses of people willingly submitted to beatings and jailings, all while singing gospel songs, praying and holding hands, were far more likely to make a positive impression on the many millions of fair-minded Americans. The pen plus the camera were far mightier than the sword.

Not that the Black Panthers didn’t bring about some needed changes (they actually did), but from Jesus, to Gandhi, to King, peaceful protests and a willingness to sacrifice for one’s beliefs – including all three of them sacrificing their lives – was and will always be more effective than violence in changing hearts and minds.

Bruce G. Kauffmann’s email address is bruce@historylessons.net.