Jeffries, Judson L. (2002). Huey P. Newton: The Radical Theorist

	Jeffries, Judson L. (2002). Huey P. Newton: The Radical Theorist. Jackson, Mississippi: University Press of Mississippi. pp. xxvii + 195. $35     ISBN I-57806-432-5 Reviewed by Matthew W. Hughey Ohio University January 24, 2003 In the 1970s posters of the Black Panther Party’s (hereinafter the BPP) co-founder, Dr. Huey P. Newton were plastered on walls of college dormitory rooms across the country. “Many of those who followed or were frightened by Newton knew him from that famous poster (beret, black leather jacket, spear in one hand, rifle in the other, seated in a wicker chair) that decorated people’s walls, especially those of students [emphasis added] all over the world” (Jeffries, 2002, p. xvii). It was an image that depicted Newton as a symbol of his generation’s self-determinism, politicalization, Black intellectualism, and courage in the face of racism and capitalism. Today, there is an increased focus on the legacy of Huey P. Newton and the study of the BPP’s philosophy, especially after their recent 35th year anniversary conference held in April of 2002 in Washington, DC. Add to this increased attention, the recent reexamination of domestic, perceived violent and militant organizations, due to the fear and xenophobia related with the events of 9/11/2001, coupled with the recent congressional decision to institute the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS). A new work from Purdue professor of political science, Judson L. Jeffries, is Huey P. Newton: The Radical Theorist (2002) by University Press of Mississippi. Jeffries is also the author of Virginia’s Native Son: The Election and Administration of Governor L. Douglas Wilder (2000), and his work has been published in such periodicals as Western Journal of Black Studies, Journal of Political Science, and Ethnic and Racial Studies. Jeffries’ work is the most recent in a trend of scholarship on the BPP and Newton. He follows the path, but not the footsteps, of Pearson (1994), Jones (1998), and ex-Panthers Seale (1997), Hillard (2002), and Cleaver (2002). While many may not immediately see the connection between politics and education, consider the use of education as a political platform in most politicians’ pleas for election. Education is often seen as either Pandora’s box or a panacea, as social adrenaline or social anesthesia. The politics of education serve to either castigate the schoolhouse as the cause of all social ills or praise educators for their work in raising test scores as well as student self-esteem. Those still unsure of the relationship of politics and education need only to examine Senator Robert Dole’s insistence on eliminating the U.S. Department of Education, a stance that was included in the GOP party platform in 1996. This reviewer finds it imperative to denote the connection of the themes that are presented, notably, the positioning of Jeffries’ work within related literature, the added background information on the life of Newton, and the ideological connection and pedagogical similarity of Newton and Malcolm X. This review finds it critical and necessary to approach Jeffries work, inclusive of various themes. This is necessary not only because of the brevity of this review, but in order to provide background information on the understudied and misunderstood personage of Newton in conjunction with Jeffries’ work. While Jeffries approaches Newton from a political science background, he also illuminates Newton’s pedagogical milieu and his educational philosophy. In order to provide the reader with a clearer sense of the importance and educational merit of the work and Newton’s legacy, three key themes are addressed. First, the distortions and misrepresentations of Newton, secondly, Newton’s focus on educational and political self-determination and third, Newton’s impact as an educational philosopher on the established canon. Distortions and Misrepresentations of Newton Returning to dispute the popular image of Newton as a gun-toting thug, Jeffries includes Newton’s own words in reference to the aforementioned poster in the wicker chair, Everybody looks at that famous poster of me sitting in the wicker chair with a spear in one hand and a rifle in the other. But no one sees the shield there next to me. The shield explains the Black Panther Party best: we intend to shield our people from the brutalities visited upon them . . . ” . . .Newton laid much of the blame on the media for the distorted image of the Black Panther Party . . . (Jeffries, pp. 29-30). Jeffries attempts to undo the damage done from the media and pseudo-scholars who would ignore the educational legacy of Newton. “. . . I argue that, contrary to the white media’s pejorative portrayal of Newton, he was one of the most important political thinkers and practitioners in the struggle for black equality during the 1960s and 70s” (Jeffries, p. xxvii). Thus, Jeffries’ attempt to portray Newton as a balanced figure automatically faces resistance from the status quo media, and posits Huey P. Newton: The Radical Theorist in direct confrontation with established perceptions of him and his legacy. Born February 17, 1942, in Monroe, Louisiana, Huey P. Newton’s powerful legacy to the BPP and the human rights struggle has long been obscured. Like many freedom fighters, he was a complex figure. His courage to address police brutality won him admirers in low-income elementary schools, college campuses, and select Hollywood circles. Today, his educational legacy is of value to those who are interested in the theories and action of Dewey (1938), Freire (1970), Asante (1991), Shor (1992), and hooks (1994). “. . . Dr. Newton, [was] a truly deep thinker . . . Luckily, some of his thoughts were placed down on paper, where they could be studied devoid of the excess of emotion that sometimes clouds our thinking” (Abu-Jamal, 2002, p. 1). As former Panther and political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal wrote, Newton’s words and theories remain with us from which both student and educator may benefit. Much like other historically misunderstood and undervalued educational activists, study of Newton must begin with his own words. As Muhammad (1999) wrote of Malcolm X (Newton’s ideological father), With all that has been written about him, the best voice to speak for Malcolm X is Malcolm himself (Goldman, 1979). His appeal to a broad African American constituency, . . . racial and ethnic group[s], does not guarantee that his work has been read critically. To understand the work as educational text, however, a critical reading . . . is imperative. Thus, serious study of Newton’s pedagogy, as with Malcolm X, must begin with his autobiography entitled Revolutionary Suicide (1979) and can be continued with his remaining four self-authored works; To Die for the People, (1973), In Search of Common Ground (1973), Insights and Poems (1975), and War Against the Panthers: A Study of Repression in America (1996) (his doctoral dissertation published posthumously). While his autobiography epitomizes a giftedly crafted educational narrative of human enlightenment and possibility, one must be clear that it is the means, and not the ends, to a more critical study of Newton’s pedagogy. Jeffries’ work does such, incorporating many scholars’ philosophical theories with Newton’s own ideas, allowing for a fuller and more balanced view of Newton as a leader, critic, philosopher, and educator. Jeffries’ book makes a valuable contribution to the scant literature on Newton, while also exposing the core tenets and evolving philosophies of Newton on education. Both conservative and liberal critics have painted either a harsh or underdeveloped view of Newton; either concentrating on Newton’s misdeeds or romanticizing his Black revolutionary rhetoric. In his introduction alone, Jeffries addresses some of Newton’s literary critics such as Tom Orloff of the San Francisco Chronicle, Stanley Crouch and author Hugh Pearson, who have labeled Newton as a “thug,” “criminal,” and “hoodlum,” respectively. Jeffries writes, Few can deny that Newton’s life was strewn with incidents of violence and his police record was long…. However, Newton’s struggles with police took place in a complex and troubled setting that included urban unrest, police brutality, government repression, and an intense debate over civil rights tactics. Stripped of context and interpretation, the violence of Newton’s life was made into an emphatic indictment of him. Suffice it to say that the above accounts provide little insight into Huey Newton—the freedom fighter, intellectual and revolutionary (Jeffries, p. xix). Jeffries’ work, like Newton, is already receiving criticism, ironically from a former leftist activist, and now far right political analyst David Horowitz, . . . Professor Jeffries pathetic book is published by the University of Mississippi Press. . . . The staggeringly vulgar politics manifest in much academic “scholarship” has already done enormous damage . . . America’s image of itself has been distorted by lies and prejudices that are manufactured, instilled and disseminated by its most eminent educational institutions and its most honored intellects (Horowitz, 2002). Horowitz has hotly criticized other scholars who would uphold Newton’s pedagogical legacy. In his condemnation of Jennings (1999) work, “Social Theory and Transformation in the Pedagogy of Dr. Huey P. Newton,” Horowitz attacked the piece calling it a “preposterous article” (Horowitz, 2002). Much like Jeffries, Jennings is able to transcend the shortsighted views of Newton and write of his educational legacy, “Newton forged . . . a curriculum for revolution that combined theory with militant action. . . . Newton’s philosophical legacy was his tendency to recast his ideology as necessary in order to advance a working theory of empowerment” (Jennings, 1999, p. 91). Jeffries writes, “the indulgence in character assassination, petty fault-finding, and the subjectivity in which most of the reviews/critiques were written help to undermine Newton’s credibility . . .” (Jeffries, p. 146). While Jeffries makes many statements like these throughout the work, he backs off from fully supporting Newton as a truly serious thinker. He states, “granted, for the most part Newton’s books are not scholarly, but they show him to be an evolving theorist . . .” (Jeffries, p. 146). Overall Jeffries takes a monumental step forward in the scholarly recognition of Newton and is very careful, but perhaps too cautious, to paint a picture of Newton as a human figure, inclusive of flaws. Newton’s Educational and Political Self-determination Any serious study of Newton must begin with a study of his ideological forefather, Malcolm X. Newton sought to model his own ontology and organizational structure on the foundational pattern of Malcolm X. “The only one we thought had promised long-term success was the Organization of African-American Unity started by Malcolm X, but Malcolm had died too soon to pull his program together. Malcolm’s slogan had been ‘Freedom by any means necessary’” (Newton, 1995, pp. 106-7). The life and teachings of Malcolm X touched an emotional cord with Newton. Newton found that he could relate to Malcolm because they were both from similar backgrounds and fought similar struggles. Newton (1995) remarked further that, “Malcolm’s influence was ever-present. We continue to believe that the Black Panther Party exists in the spirit of Malcolm. . . . Therefore, the words on this page cannot convey the effect Malcolm has had on the Black Panther Party, although, as far as I am concerned, the Party is living testament to his life work” (p. 113). Jeffries writes, “. . . culture and politics were essential components in the quest for black liberation . . . the essence of what Fanon, Malcolm X, and Newton were all about” (Jeffries, p. 56). Newton was the definition of a student-centered educator. He was able to “talk the talk and walk the walk” that others would understand. Importantly, he spoke the language of those that most needed the message of re-education and “deschooling” (Illich, 1971). Newton recruited those blacks whose backgrounds were similar to a young Malcolm X: the unemployables, gangsters, hustlers, and convicts. . . . needless to say Newton’s work with the black underclass defied the claim by sociologists that attempts at organizing and sustaining a mass organization among the lower rung of society was fruitless” (Jeffries, pp. 10-11). Newton’s theories are equitable with the ideas of “progressive” education espoused by Dewey (1938) and the current trend to retire “tracking” systems that impose a limit on the success attainable by the student. Newton sought to center people in their own destiny. Newton strived to destroy that objectification of the lower classes, most often witnessed in the remedial classes of our schools today. “Newton went door to door to find out what the residents needed to sustain a better standard of living. . . .In response, the Black Panther Party instituted a free breakfast program for schoolchildren; a clothing and shoe outlet, and elementary school [emphasis added] a free medical clinic, and a number of other survival programs, . . .” (Jeffries, p. 17). Newton’s theories, while centered on Black self-determinism, also reached out to lower class Whites. “ ‘. . . the White working class is used as pawns or tools of the ruling class, but they too are enslaved.’ Newton’s point is well founded” (Jeffries, p.22). Preceding Freire’s landmark work Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970), Newton felt that the White ruling class employed the technique of “divide and rule.” Freire writes, “concepts such as unity, organization, and struggle are . . . dangerous. . . .And the more alienated people are, the easier it is to divide them and keep them divided” (Freire, 1970, pp. 141-2). Newton as Educational Philosopher It is Jeffries’ chapter six that truly delves into the span of Newton’s ideology on education and equality. “Newton was particularly concerned with the educational system. Point five of the Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program indicates that Newton found the American educational system to be grossly inadequate” (Jeffries, p. 92). Point five of the BPP platform read, #5 WE WANT education for our people that exposes the true nature of this decadent American society. We want education that teaches us our true history and our role in the present-day society. WE BELIEVE in an educational system that will give to our people a knowledge of self. If a man does not have knowledge of himself and his position in society and the world, then he has little chance to relate to anything else (Newton, 1996, p. 120). Huey P. Newton’s own formal educational career spanned three decades. His miseducation of self began in grade school, where, During those long years in the Oakland public schools, I did not have one teacher who taught me anything relevant to my own life or experience. Not one instructor ever awoke in me a desire to learn more or question or explore the worlds of literature, science, and history. All they did was try to rob me of the sense of my own uniqueness and worth, and in the process they nearly killed my urge to inquire” (Newton, 1995, p. 22). Jeffries explains that Newton’s “experiences in school were characterized by assaults on his self-esteem and led him to believe that being black meant being ‘stupid,’ and therefore he felt ashamed” (p. 92). Jeffries portrays Newton’s development as the hallmark of many dominated people’s educational experiences today. Jeffries points out that many young Black men and women, as well as other people of historically dominated cultures, were being told lies, and kept from learning about the more “embarrassing” aspect of U.S. history such as the African Slave Trade, the Trail of Tears and the Women’s movement for human justice. Jeffries illuminates Newton’s early naiveté in failing to grasp the, “seriousness of the school system’s assault on black people. . . .Alvin F. Poussaint has stated that the pattern of teaching white supremacy has been a part of the education process in both ‘integrated’ and segregated schools throughout the United States” (Jeffries, p. 93). By illuminating the roots of Newton’s struggle with formalized education, Jeffries depicts first, the character of a young man in constant transformation of intellect and self-image in the face of adversity. Second, he lays down a vicious indictment of the savageness of the mis-educational system for people marginalized by the status quo and third, he simultaneously praises those progressives within the system that are from, but not of, the traditional authoritarian school of thought. Accordingly, Newton would write of his first and only positive educational experience which came during sixth grade from a teacher named Mrs. McLaren who, “. . . never raised her voice. She was a tranquil person, at ease and peaceful, no matter what was happening. . . She was the exception to the rule” (Newton, 1995, p. 21). Jeffries speaks of Newton’s stance on status quo education processes as criminal. Jeffries delineates Newton’s condemnation of educational practices as an intentional avoidance of teaching the ability to dialectically deconstruct and analyze the world. Jeffries asserts that Newton felt students were given a “conglomeration of facts” (Jeffries, p. 94) to memorize, which would only result in an oppressive continuance of the status quo. Of course, such teaching of analytical and critical thinking skills would be “counterproductive for the survival of the system of oppression” (Jeffries, p. 94). In June of 1980, Newton’s three decade long encounter with formal education finally culminated with the receipt of his Doctor of Philosophy degree in the History of Consciousness, from the University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC), a fact overlooked by many scholars. Jeffries however, makes this fact known early on in his writing, and subsequently references many of Newton’s graduate papers on educational, political and philosophical topics, such as, “The Historical Origins of Existentialism and the Common Denominators of Existential Philosophy,” “The Roots of Existential Philosophy in Western Thought,” and “Can Religion Survive?” (Dr. Huey P. Newton Foundation Inc.). Jeffries dedicated much effort and space in his work to the existential theories of Newton with the canon of accepted “great minds” of philosophy. What is crucial to this assertion is that, Jeffries is one of the first, and possibly the very first accepted academic, to posit Newton’s ideas on an equal platform with recognizable theories from post-modernism, existentialism, and cultural centrism. “Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Karl Marx are considered four of the leading theorists on the existence and development of humankind . . . it will be worthwhile to compare, to some degree, the work of these theorists with Newton’s (Jeffries, p. 42). Beginning with Hobbes, Jeffries examines his idea of the innate selfishness of humanity and brings into question Hobbes idea of egocentricity. Opposite of Hobbes, is Newton’s view of the nature of humanity to search for the power to free themselves from all that unjustly controls them. To Jeffries, this brings Newton’s idea of a people’s quest for power and freedom inline with Locke and Rousseau who maintain that one is born free. “Both Locke and Newton think that people should be concerned with the well-being of other individuals . . . Similarly, Newton believed that the state’s duty was to preserve its citizens and to ensure that every person is afforded an equal opportunity to live a prosperous and harmonious life” (Jeffries, p. 42). Following up the similarities of Locke’s and Newton’s ideologies, Jeffries examines Newton’s theory of “Reactionary Suicide” in connection with the ideas of Fyodor Dostoevsky on poverty and beggary in Crime and Punishment. “Reactionary Suicide” was first penned by Newton in the forward to his autobiography. Within the work, Newton delineated a prime choice that the educationally oppressed must make; that of “reactionary” or “revolutionary” suicide. Reactionary suicide being the choice of the oppressed to either submit to the state of oppression or fight for revisions and “crumbs” within the educational system, knowing that one will never supercede the system. It is the allegiance to the principle of obedience as the highest virtue, no matter what the cost of injury or life to self or others. Conversely, revolutionary suicide is the allegiance of self to truth; it is the dedication of one to the removal of oppression and its systematic perpetuated inequalities. Further, it is the acquisition of wisdom and knowledge, attained through a life of service to others and continued education. Jeffries continues the exploration of what many deemed the “genius of Huey P. Newton.” He highlights Newton’s redefinition of the Oedipus complex from being centered on sex, to that of a focus on perceived power, and Newton’s dismissal of Hobbes’ focus on fear as a positive attribute to one of a negative virtue that actually keeps the oppressed in their state of oppression, much as Paulo Freire wrote of the “fear of freedom” (1970). Through Jeffries’ study of Newton’s academic papers on existentialism and ancient philosophy, he elucidates Newton’s more obscure philosophical works. Jeffries presents Newton’s thoughts on Nietzsche and psychological warfare, Bakunin’s fatalistic view of revolutionaries, Plato’s “cave” analogy, and Marx’s theories on existence and social consciousness. What Jeffries concludes is that Newton’s theories center on a spiritual and optimistic view of humanity in which, “the dignity and beauty of people rests in the human spirit, which makes them more than simply a physical being. This spirit must never be suppressed for reasons of repression or exploitation” (Jeffries, p. 52). Jeffries begins his final chapter about Newton by writing, “A genuine intellectual possesses at least two characteristics—the desire to tell the truth and the courage to do so” (Jeffries p. 120). Jeffries went on, in the same page, to quote the renowned sociologist J. Herman Blake (and actually misquotes him, writing that Blake referred to Newton as the “quintessential teacher,” whereas he actually referred to Newton solely as “a teacher”) in, In Search for Common Ground (1973). Blake states, “Well, Huey, I would say that you are more of a teacher than a leader or a father figure [emphasis added]—a teacher in the sense that your approach is to provide people with processes by which they can arrive at answers rather than give them the answers themselves” (Newton & Erikson, 1973, p. 142). Conclusion There has, in recent years, been an intense debate over Newton’s image. The mainstreaming of Newton has most recently been witnessed by Spike Lee’s one-man film “A Huey P. Newton Story” starring Roger Guenveur Smith, and the 1995 film “Panther” directed by Mario Van Peebles. This trend may unintentionally support a view of Newton as just another “American” activist to which the country may lay claim to developing and as a result, may lead to an outright dismissal and “normalization” of his cultural background and legacy as a leader, activist, theorist, intellectual, and educator. Today’s typical United States history high school textbook not only neglects to mention Huey P. Newton but also disregards the existence of the BPP and their educational/service legacy altogether. Therefore, the educational scholars amongst us like Jeffries must write this new chapter in U.S. history and discover the allegorical significance and legacy of Newton. His educational experiences growing up were central in his conception of the self, and his experiences are not unlike many students today, who find themselves marginalized by race, gender or class. Newton’s development into a philosopher of gigantic stature is not lost on Jeffries, rather it is celebrated, for Newton was able to keep the balance of academic and activist, manifesting a “praxis” of which Freire spoke (1970). Judson L. Jeffries work is a testament to the revolutionary pedagogical style and intellectual legacy of Newton. Judson’s portrayal of Newton is refreshingly accurate; he takes on Newton’s critics and elevates the position of Newton’s writings and life from that of thug and activist, to educator and theorist. If there is a negative aspect of Jeffries’ work is that he at times appears to hide in the shadows of neutrality and impartiality, unwilling to go that extra step in fully characterizing Newton as an academic or part of the Black intelligentsia that has within its ranks, W.E.B. DuBois, Frantz Fanon, and Cornel West. However, Jeffries detachment is by no means to be the hallmark of Huey P. Newton: The radical theorist, for Jeffries maintains the uniqueness of Newton and ultimately leaves the reader with an image of Newton as an educator and “an inspirational model on which to build for a better future” (Jeffries, p. 136). References Abu-Jamal, Mumia. (2002). [Col. Writ. 10/3/02] “The Genius of Dr. Huey P. Newton.” Asante, Molefi Kete. (1991). “The Afrocentric Idea in Education” Journal of Negro Education. 60(2): 170-180. Dewey, John. (1938). Experience and Education. (1997 ed.). New York, NY: Touchstone. Dr. Huey P. Newton Foundation Inc. Collection, M864, Dept. of Special Collections, Stanford University Libraries, Stanford, Calif. hooks, bell. (1994). Teaching to Transgress: education as the practice of freedom. New York, NY: Routledge. Goldman, P. (1979). The death and life of Malcolm X. (2nd ed.). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Horowitz, David. (2002) “Black Panther Scholars.” Front Page Magazine. Downloaded from the World Wide Web on Nov 2, 2002: http://www.frontpagemag.com/blog/BlogEntry.asp?ID=11 Illich, Ivan. (1971). Deschooling Society. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Jennings Jr., Michael E. “Social Theory and Transformation in the Pedagogy of Dr. Huey P. Newton: a nativist reclamation of the critical ethnographic project.” Educational Foundations, Winter 1999 Vol 13, #1, pp. 77-94. Freire, Paulo. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. (2000 ed.). New York, NY: Continuum. Muhammad, Najee E. (1999). “Review of The Autobiography of Malcolm X.” Educational Review. Retrieved October 22, 2002 from http://edrev.asu.edu/reviews/rev45.htm. Newton, Huey P. (1996). War Against The Panthers: A Study of Repression in America. New York, NY: Harlem River Press. Newton, Huey P. & Huggins, Ericka. (1975). Insights and Poems. San Francisco, CA: City Lights Books. Newton, Huey P. (1973). Revolutionary Suicide. (1995 ed.) New York, NY: Writers and Readers Publishing. Newton, Huey P. & Erikson, Erik H. (1973). In Search of Common Ground. (first ed.). New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Co. Newton, Huey P. (1972). To Die For The People. (1999 ed.). Morrison, Toni (ed.). New York, NY: Writers and Readers Publishing, Inc. Rogers, Cornish. “Demythologizing Huey Newton.” Christian Century, August 15-22, 1973, p. 795. Shor, Ira. (1992). Empowering Education: Critical Teaching for Social Change. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. About the Reviewer Matthew W. Hughey Ohio University Matthew W. Hughey is an instructor in the Cultural Studies in Education program within the Department of Educational Studies at Ohio University. His research interests include critical race theory, Whiteness studies, inequality in education and critical pedagogy, liberation theology and spirituality within social movements, the Black Panther Party and the legacy of Dr. Huey P. Newton.