[king_jester]

> Peaceful protest doesn't lead to a majority backlash, whereas aggressive, militant tactics do.

Uh what!? Nonviolent protestors and activists faced tremendous amounts of violence for their activity in the civil rights movement, including being murdered. Freedom riders being attacked and having their buses attacked and burned, bombing of churches, lynch mobs, being assaulted at sit ins, etc.

> MLK and his movement are remembered for boycotts and protest leading to the Civil Rights Act. The Black Panthers are remembered as being violent and divisive.

Black Panthers were a group that was systematically attacked and dismantled by state and federal police. Further, black panthers are remembered for a variety of things, like school breakfast/lunch programs, providing community safety when the police were aggressors, and tons of political discourse, among other things.

> For all the good you do can be wiped out in one instant by a single bad.

Making villains of the Black Panther Party in media and gov't circles is heavily tied to the system racism that spurred the creation of the BPP. Trying to blame all black people for the behavior of the BPP or claiming that the BPP somehow set black people back is a hugely racist claim.

[Zimahl]

First, try to not be so inflammatory with your comments. At no point did I blame all black people for the behavior of the BPP or claiming that the BPP somehow set black people back. I merely stated that many of their tactics did not help the cause that they were for.

And, yes, nonviolent protesters can and do face a very large amount of violence. But being violent back tends to solve nothing and MLK knew that. He also knew that with enough favorable support he could affect change.

Further, black panthers are remembered for a variety of things, like school breakfast/lunch programs, providing community safety when the police were aggressors, and tons of political discourse, among other things.

I think you'd be able to find positives with a lot of fringe groups that take aggressive stances on issues. Sea Sheppard and Earth First are two environmental groups that have or continue to take this approach. But the fact remains that there is a lot of public backlash against these groups because of their tactics, even though you or I may agree on them.

[king_jester]

Elsewhere is this thread, you said:

> The exact type of rhetoric from a Black Panther that doesn't help his cause one iota. This is why MLK gets a national holiday and Carmichael is a footnote.

BPP and MLK are fundamentally about the advancement of black people from being considered 2nd class and subhuman. Of this cause you say BPP do not help their cause because of use of violence, this is a way of saying that the actions of BPP and the behavior of its members, who are predominantly black, are responsible for keeping their status in society from not improving. The realty is racism in the US has a long and violent history, that racism is what keeps black people and communities from improving their lives and status. Resistance to that violence is NOT responsible.

> And, yes, nonviolent protesters can and do face a very large amount of violence. But being violent back tends to solve nothing and MLK knew that. He also knew that with enough favorable support he could affect change.

That is true, but MLK was also keenly aware of the need for self defense and that not all forms of violence are unjustified[1][2][3]. Obviously this is a big split of ideology between MLK and BPP, but both MLK and BPP affected some kinds of change.

[1] http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/encyclopedia/documen... [2] http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/09/the-secr... [3] http://www.philosophy.uncc.edu/mleldrid/SAAP/CLT/DP02.htm