Log in

View Full Version : Huey P. Newton/China



Art Vandelay
2nd September 2013, 15:30
So it is well known about Huey's, as well as many other panthers, interpretation and implementation of maoism. Obviously I have my political disagreements with some of his more abstract theoretical conclusions, however the BPP was one of the most successful 1st world revolutionary movements and one which needs to be studied and in many ways emulated. So I was finishing up reading Huey's autobiography 'Revolutionary Suicide' yesterday, when I came across the following passage, in the second last chapter, entitled 'China', which deals with his 1 week trip there in between his 2nd and 3rd trials for the murder/manslaughter of Officer James Frey:


Everything I saw in China demonstrated that the People's Republic is a free and liberated territory with a socialist government. The way is open for the people to gain their freedom and determine their own destiny. It was an amazing experience to see in practice a revolution that is going forward at such a rapid rate. To see a classless society in operation in unforgettable. Here, Marx's dictum - from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs is in operation.

How on earth, could the co-founder/leader of one of the most successful 1st world revolutionary movements ever, an intelligent man capable of teaching himself to read as an adult by studying Plato's Republic over and over, a man who showed throughout this book such a solid grasp on dialectical materialism, on contradiction, on the interpenetration of opposites, etc...how the hell did he say something so incredibly idiotic and demonstrably false? First off Marx's dictum that he quotes, was Marx's idea of what would take place in communism, not in the lower phase or socialism, (wherever you fall on the whole socialism/communism distinction) etc. Secondly how the fuck does Huey state that China was a 'classless society.' First off the state still existed and since it is a by product of class society, its save to state the classes continued to exist. On top of this Mao was known for his contribution to 'Marxism' of 'even after socialism is established class warfare continues to exist.'

Does anyone have any explanation for this seemingly idiotic slip up Huey made in his autobiography? I have a hard time believing that it was just a mistake that no one noticed; was this a popular view in the black panthers? Does anyone know of Huey or other members of the BPP stating anything similar?

khad
2nd September 2013, 16:08
Huey Newton also said that Marx and Lenin didn't like to work. And since when did Marx love the lumpenproletariat?

The answer to your question is that Newton never had a good grasp of Marx at all. Successful? Lol.

bad ideas actualised by alcohol
2nd September 2013, 16:25
Huey Newton also said that Marx and Lenin didn't like to work. And since when did Marx love the lumpenproletariat?

The answer to your question is that Newton never had a good grasp of Marx at all. Successful? Lol.

Most succesful in the sense that it came closest to being a mass-movement. Of course it never succeeded in becoming one, the efforts to make it one (food-programme) were met with the most hostile response (understandably) from the US because that would make the BPP be able to develop a mass-movement (militias are less effective in doing that, food-programmes are).
In this sense they were (the most) succesful, but in the end they failed (and their theoretical understanding was, as most of the left's back then, dominated by stalinism).

khad
2nd September 2013, 16:28
Most succesful in the sense that it came closest to being a mass-movement. Of course it never succeeded in becoming one, the efforts to make it one (food-programme) were met with the most hostile response (understandably) from the US because that would make the BPP be able to develop a mass-movement (militias are less effective in doing that, food-programmes are).
In this sense they were (the most) succesful, but in the end they failed (and their theoretical understanding was, as most of the left's back then, dominated by stalinism).
If they were actually Stalinists, they wouldn't have bothered with the prison gangs that riddled their ranks with informants.

bad ideas actualised by alcohol
2nd September 2013, 16:41
If they were actually Stalinists, they wouldn't have bothered with the prison gangs that riddled their ranks with informants.

In the theoretical part of the part I think they were indeed stalinists, support for China, their "anti-imperialism" and support of Juche are a clear indication that their political ideology was dominated by the 'real-existing' socialisms.

khad
2nd September 2013, 17:00
So? All the theoretical rigor in the world won't save an organization whose every third member was a snitch.

In the theoretical part of the part I think they were indeed stalinists, support for China, their "anti-imperialism" and support of Juche are a clear indication that their political ideology was dominated by the 'real-existing' socialisms.
Huey's anti-statist intercommunalist theory was more akin to proto-negrite crap about the multitude.


the United States is no longer a nation but an empire, nations could not exist, for they did not have the criteria for nationhood. Their self-determination, economic determination, and cultural determination has been transformed by the imperialists and the ruling circle. They were no longer nations. We found that in order to be Internationalists we had to be also Nationalists, or at least acknowledge nationhood. Internationalism, if I understand the word, means the interrelationship among a group of nations.

But since no nation exists, and since the United States is in fact an empire, it is impossible for us to be Internationalists. These transformations and phenomena require us to call ourselves "intercommunalists" because nations have been transformed into communities of the
world. The Black Panther Party now disclaims internationalism and supports intercommunalism.

bad ideas actualised by alcohol
2nd September 2013, 17:05
So? All the theoretical rigor in the world won't save an organization whose every third member was a snitch.

Huey's anti-statist intercommunalist theory was more akin to proto-negrite crap about the multitude.

I'm not arguing the BPP could've been "saved".

khad
2nd September 2013, 17:09
I'm not arguing the BPP could've been "saved".
And intercommunalism, the professed doctrine of the BPP, has what exactly to do with "stalinism," exactly?

Huey Newton didn't think China was a class society because he didn't believe that nation states existed anymore. Pretty simple.