This article was downloaded by: [Colorado College]On: 16 October 2014, At: 17:11Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Southern Communication JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsjc20

The rhetoric of Huey P. NewtonDavi Johnson aa Department of Communication , University of Georgia , 110Terrell Hall, Athens, Georgia, 30602 E-mail:Published online: 01 Apr 2009.

To cite this article: Davi Johnson (2004) The rhetoric of Huey P. Newton, Southern CommunicationJournal, 70:1, 15-30, DOI: 10.1080/10417940409373309

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940409373309

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

I THE RHETORIC OF HUEY P.NEWTONDavi Johnson

Popular and scholarly approaches emphasizing the radicality of Huey P. Newton and theBlack Panther Party neglect the more traditional aspects of Newton's rhetorical vision.Specifically, I analyze Newton's 1970 address to the Revolutionary Peoples Constitu-tional Convention as a hallmark jeremiad. This analysis illustrates the conventionalaspects of Newton's discourse as well as the amenability of the jeremiad to arguments forsubstantial social change.

A lthough scholars across disciplines are paying increasing attention to the BlackPanther Party (BPP) and Huey P. Newton (e.g., Cleaver & Katsiaficas, 2001;Hilliard & Weise, 2002; Jeffries, 2002; Jones, 1998), rhetoricians appear hesitant

to engage this multidisciplinary inquiry. The groundwork for such studies exists withinrhetoric (Campbell, 1972; Courtright, 1974), and the recent focus on Black leaders ofthe 1960s makes now a fitting time for renewed attention to Newton and the BPP (e.g.,Gallagher, 2001; Terrill, 2000, 2001; Yousman, 2001). Despite these patterns, there areno recent analyses of the BPP or Newton from an explicitly rhetorical perspective. Thisneglect is somewhat surprising given the discipline's history of a strong interest in socialmovements generally and radical Black movements specifically (see, for instance, Bur-gess, 1968/2001; Campbell, 1971; Cathcart, 1978/2001; Goldzwig, 1989; Gregg, 1971/2001; Scott, 1969; Scott & Brockriede, 1969; Scott & Smith, 1969/2001). Analyses ofradical activism typically attempt to justify unconventional tactics falling outside of tra-ditional norms of public communication. These justifications are motivated by theobservation that standards of rationality and decorum often preserve dominant inter-ests by making common channels of rhetorical influence inaccessible to oppressedclasses. Although these approaches offer considerable insight into the discursive opera-tions of radical Black movements, they frequently give short shrift to the more tradi-tional strategies employed by Black rhetors and the interrelationships between diverserhetorical acts.

Examining Newton's oratory within a critical orientation attentive to rhetorical tra-ditions, I draw attention to the polyphonic qualities of social movement discourse andsituate the BPP within a diverse tradition of radical Black rhetoric. Specifically, I exam-ine Newton's mastery of the jeremiad as a major form of his public address. Althoughthe jeremiad has long been recognized as a traditional and even hegemonic form ofrhetorical practice within the American tradition, there is an ongoing debate concern-ing its potential to function as a mechanism for social change (Bercovitch, 1978; Mur-phy, 1990; Owen, 2002). In short, because the jeremiad rests on appeals to traditionalAmerican values, some argue that the form is ill-suited to radical discourses and inevita-

Davi Johnson, Department of Communication, University of Georgia. An earlier version of this essay was presented at the2003 National Communication Association Convention in Miami. The author wishes to thank John M. Murphy for hisinsightful comments on previous versions of this essay and the reviewers for their helpful suggestions. Correspondence con-cerning this article should be addressed to Davi Johnson, Department of Communication, 110 Terrell Hall, University ofGeorgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 (e-mail: davij@uga.edu).

SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL, Volume 70, Number 1, Fall 2004, pp. 15-30

15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

16 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

bly reifies conservative values. However, the Afro-American jeremiad has been recog-nized as a unique modification of the jeremiad, adapted for a Black audience, andmore accommodating to activist purposes. Newton's public address combined elementsfrom both the Afro-American jeremiad and the jeremiad in general. His speech indi-cates that foundational values and their historical traditions are always constructed rhe-torically; hence, they are constantly available for redefinition and reappropriation.Newton strategically situated traditional American values within a historical perspectivethat allowed him to redefine the American dream as a socialist paradise where equalitybecomes consonant with equitable distribution of economic resources.

By focusing primarily on Newton's 1970 address to the Revolutionary People's Con-stitutional Convention (RPCC), I hope to simultaneously emphasize the traditionalaspects of Newton's seemingly radical rhetoric and illustrate the amenability of the jere-miad to arguments for substantial social change. In short, Newton's mastery of a conser-vative rhetorical form casts doubt on typical accounts that treat him and hisorganization as an aberrant and isolated social movement unconnected to broader rhe-torical traditions.1 Additionally, his subtle articulation of a radical content within thisconservative form lends insight into the ways in which the jeremiad can function in theservice of social change, further developing existing scholarship on the activist poten-tial of the jeremiadic form (e.g., DeSantis, 1999; Howard-Pitney, 1990). Newton's fail-ure to supplant his image as a radical militant suggests that the success of the jeremiadis not dependent on its activist or conservative content, but is instead a function of therhetor's relationship to his or her audience. In this essay, I summarize the historical sig-nificance of Newton and his relationship to the BPP, examine the jeremiadic rhetoricaltradition, and illustrate the complexity of both Newton's rhetoric and jeremiadic dis-course.

HUEY P. NEWTON AND THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY

As the primary leader of the BPP, Newton has come to symbolize and embody notonly the Party but also the very concepts of Black power and militancy associated withthe late 1960s and early 1970s. Although Breslauer (1995) describes Newton as "thesymbol of resistance for a movement which boasted particularly dynamic speakers" (p.Fl), Newton was neither an enthusiastic nor a particularly gifted public speaker. In hisautobiography, Newton (1973) reflected, "I am not very good at talking to large groups;nor do I enjoy it. Abstract and theoretical arguments interest me most, but they lack therhetorical fire to hold audiences" (p. 172). Indeed, Newton had little opportunity tospeak in public due to confinement. The BPP was founded by Newton and Bobby Sealein October 1966, and Newton was arrested for the murder of John Frey barely one yearlater on October 28, 1967.2 Newton's arrest had the paradoxical effect of catalyzing themovement as thousands of mostly young Black people were mobilized to challengewhat they had long perceived as an unjust and corrupt legal system. Thousands of sup-porters ranging from discontented college students to wealthy Hollywood typesattended the "Free Huey!" rally organized by the Panthers to draw national attention tothe plight of their leader. Newton was not released until August 5, 1970. While he wasbehind bars, the BPP had grown from its humble Oakland origins into a national orga-nization with considerable membership, aided in no small part by relentless media fas-cination with the gun-toting, beret-wearing Panthers.

Popular conceptions of the BPP as militant no doubt provided some benefit to theParty in terms of recruitment and national visibility; however, these negative depictionscontinue to shape the legacy of Newton and his movement. The BPP is viewed as "theimage of Black militancy" and "a potent symbol of racial chaos and upheaval," in starkcontrast to popular conceptions of the "down-by-the riverside dream of Martin LutherKing, Jr." (Del Vecchio, 1999; Hughes, 1998; Weiss, 1999). These accounts of BPP mili-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

THE RHETORIC OF HUEY P. NEWTON 17

tancy are so frequent that they constitute what Singh (1998) describes as the "Panthereffect," where "the figure of the Black Panthers evokes the catastrophic sense of Amer-ica's permanent racial chasm itself (p. 62).

The "Panther effect" is not isolated to popular accounts of Newton and the BPP butalso shapes scholarly discourse. For instance, Courtright (1974) writes that the BPPcrafted a rhetorical strategy around "arming themselves and using their guns to declaretheir manhood" (p. 249), characterizing members of the movement as militants whoviewed rhetoric as an act of force. Doss (1998) similarly focuses on Newton's sexualappeal and aggressive masculinity as the keystone of the BPP's attraction for young peo-pie.

My purpose is not to detail the shortcomings or falsehoods of this "Panther mythol-ogy" (Jones & Jeffries, 1998, p. 26), as others have succeeded admirably here (e.g.,Clemons & Jones, 2001). However, it is important to understand the backdrop againstwhich the rhetoric of Newton and the BPP is confronted. These few examples indicatethat in the popular mind as well as in academic scholarship, the Panthers are conceivedof as a separatist, militant, and isolated social movement. By examining Newton's dis-course in light of its participation in the longstanding jeremiadic tradition, I hope toprovide resources for better understanding the complexity of the BPP and its associ-ated mythology.

I have chosen to focus on Newton's September 5,1970 address to the RevolutionaryPeople's Constitutional Convention (RPCC) in Philadelphia, delivered only a monthafter his release from prison. The RPCC address is historically significant because it isNewton's first major public speech after his release from prison. The speech is rhetori-cally significant because it is the first explication of Newton's mature thought, whichwould come to be dubbed "revolutionary intercommunalism" for its emphasis on theeconomic interconnectedness of global communities (see Jeffries, 2002, pp. 78-82).

THE JEREMIADIC TRADITION

Recent scholarship emphasizes the importance of attending to rhetorical traditionsas a method of situating diverse and polyphonic oratory. Influenced in part by Camp-bell's (1986) concept of cultural grammar, Murphy (1997) defines rhetorical traditionsas methods of organizing the "'social knowledge' of communities" and making avail-able "symbolic resources for the invention of arguments aimed at authoritative publicjudgments" (p. 72). The flexibility of this approach allows critics to situate rhetoricaltexts within diverse argumentative traditions and account for the polyphonic and heter-oglossic nature of complex discursive arrangements. By encouraging an examination ofthe "dialogic encounter between immediate problems and ongoing rhetorical forms,"the critic may simultaneously evaluate the historical specificity of rhetorical phenom-ena and draw comparisons with other phenomena to invoke broader theoretical gener-alizations (Murphy, 1997, p. 74). Like Murphy, Jasinski (1997) employs the theoreticalinsights of Bakhtin to study the interaction of diverse traditions circulating within"dynamic, heteroglot, and polyphonic" rhetorical forms (p. 24). Similarly, Browne(2002) argues that Jefferson's inaugural is "at once forward looking and indebted tocertain rhetorical traditions" (p. 413), and he teases out these traditions to better situ-ate Jefferson's oratory. Finally, such an orientation allows the critic to move beyondideological criticism and attend to the "sheer rhetoricality" of texts that construct orinvoke "cultural fictions" shaped by historical patterns (see Hartnett, 2002, pp. 2-3, 24).

The jeremiad has frequently been described as a rhetorical tradition employed indiverse contexts, from campaign speeches (Ritter, 1980) and environmental policy pro-posals (Buehler, 1998) to anti-slavery appeals (DeSantis, 1999). The jeremiad is viewedas the secular adaptation of a sermonic form adopted from the European pulpit by thePuritans. For the latter, the jeremiad became less a pessimistic prediction of inevitable

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

18 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

social decline and instead a complex doctrine of both lamentation and celebration thatcalled upon a chosen people to turn from their errant ways and commit themselvesfully to their sacred mission.3 The "modern jeremiad" (Ritter, 1980) is a secular dis-course that has replaced religious authority with the foundational values of the Ameri-can dream. In this turn to civil religion, as Ritter (1980) describes, "the scriptures havebeen replaced by a rendering of the national past" and the sacred texts invoked are nolonger Biblical, but the words of Jefferson, Lincoln, and the nation's founding docu-ments (p. 158).

Ritter (1980) distinguishes between the past and history to emphasize the way inwhich jeremiadic discourse constructs a particular vision of the past rather thanattempts to document historical fact. As Bercovitch (1978) explains, the jeremiad restson ideological consensus and cultural myth rather than social reality, and Buehler(1998) notes that rhetors can offer unique constructions of the past to justify their cur-rent proposals. Although the jeremiad is often distinguished by common formal fea-tures (Carpenter, 1978), the content is at once common and particular: Rhetorstraditionally participate in the invocation of American civil religion by calling uponfoundational values as the basis of their persuasive appeals, but the ways in which thesevalues and their historical contexts are constructed and interpreted are often widelydisparate. The rhetorical power of the jeremiad is, as Buehler (1998) effectively pin-points, its ability to link even extreme proposals for change to concepts and ideals thatalready have currency in the audience's worldview.

THE AFRO-AMERICAN JEREMIAD

Moses (1982) suggests that the jeremiad is a particularly apt resource for Blackrhetors for this ability to blend conservative ideals with a radical vision. For Moses(1982), Black Americans' cultural identity or sense of group identification is not intrin-sic but is the product of the maintenance of a "social mythology" accounting for the ori-gin and destiny of Black peoples (p. vii). While this social mythology is itself a richsource of rhetorical traditions, it also participates in traditions common to the Ameri-can people in general, specifically the jeremiadic and messianic rhetoric associated withAmerican civil religion. The myths of "manifest destiny" associated with American civilreligion are often appropriated to confirm a special, messianic purpose for Black Amer-icans, and the jeremiadic tradition is invoked to account for the particular sufferingsborne by these chosen people. For Moses (1982), this tradition is a fusion of assimila-tion and separatism and is a response to the amphibious experience of simultaneousimmersion and oppression within American society. Howard-Pitney (1990) similarlydefines the Afro-American jeremiad as a messianic rhetorical form that signals both afaith in the American promise and a faith in the missionary destiny of the Black race, aposition often associated with ideologies of Black nationalism. While Black nationalismis often conceived of as a separatist philosophy because of its frequent emphasis on ter-ritorial independence (Moses, 1996), its rhetorical manifestations participate in bothassimilationist and separatist visions (Moses, 1990). Black rhetors including W.E.B. duBois, Frederick Douglass, and Malcolm X have made use of the jeremiad to challengethe nation to reform its errant ways and live up to its promises of freedom and equality(Howard-Pitney, 1990). In short, the jeremiad allows rhetors to criticize American soci-ety while simultaneously expressing faith in its ideals, resulting in a discourse that is atonce separatist and integrationist. Although the jeremiad is often thought of as a con-servative rhetorical form, Howard-Pitney (1990) points out that assenting to main-stream values provides an "ideological shield" for the advancement of more radicalcriticism, and that this assent often involves a subtle refashioning of the mainstream val-ues or cultural fictions invoked (p. 187).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

THE RHETORIC OF HUEY P. NEWTON 19

NEWTON AND THE RPCC

Although theorists have recognized that radical and apparently discrete rhetoricalacts frequently participate in more conservative or socially accepted traditions (Burgess1968/2001; Scott, 1973/2001), there have been limited attempts to situate the BPP orNewton within historical traditions and the impressions of aberrancy and isolationismfostered by mainstream media accounts persist. Katsiaficas (2001) pinpoints practices"emphasizing superficial characteristics and ignoring deeper connections to broaderhistorical currents" (p. viii) as a primary factor in common misconceptions about theaims and ideals of Newton and the BPP. Although Newton's early public discourse con-tained jeremiadic elements, his later RPCC address appealed to a broad coalition ofpolitically engaged citizens by downplaying racial division and highlighting economicinjustice as the nation's original sin in hallmark jeremiadic form. Yet, though Newtonfully participated in the traditional jeremiadic form, his originality is in recasting tradi-tional American values in an economic language that makes the American dream con-sonant with a socialist vision. The strategic use of the jeremiadic tradition in theadvocacy of a radical vision attests to the potential for the jeremiad to function in theservice of arguments for social change and, conversely, illustrates the extent to whichseemingly radical discourse participates in longstanding rhetorical traditions.

The RPCC address is considered Newton's first articulation of his mature philoso-phy dubbed "revolutionary intercommunalism" (Jeffries, 2002, p. 71). Newton's inter-est in the international situation was strong since the inauguration of the BPP4, asevidenced by the Party's platform including a demand for a UN plebiscite to determinethe destiny of the Black community (see Foner, 1995, pp. 2-3). Like King, Newtonstrongly opposed the Vietnam War, and he articulated his protest by offering to sendBPP members as troops in support of North Vietnam. As Newton's thought developed,he came more and more to recognize the inability of nation-states to function autono-mously in a global society linked economically where large corporations rather thanstrong national governments regulated the world's populations. Abolitionist and civilrights rhetors have frequently emphasized the international arena in their articulationsof the unique plight of African Americans.

The RPCC itself was crafted with a strong global emphasis and included, amongsimilar activities, a "Workshop on Internationalism and Relations with Liberation Strug-gles around the World" (see Cleaver & Katsiaficas, 2001, p. 289). Indeed, Newton's suc-cess at articulating the global dimensions of the Black struggle for equality led StuartHall to credit the Panthers and similar organizations with the transformation of the"third world" from a geographical descriptor to a metaphor encompassing social, eco-nomic, and cultural relations (Singh, 1998, p. 67). Newton's development of the inter-national argument is evident in his address delivered at the RPCC, a conventiondesigned with the express purpose of mimicking American colonial subjects by draftinga new Constitution better able to guarantee the promises contained in the original. Assuch, the context of the RPCC gave Newton ample opportunity to refine his own visionof the American dream and situate his audience historically as vital participants in thepursuit of the nation's original vision.

Specifically, Newton presented a jeremiad premised on three major strategies: (a) ahistorical narrative that situates the American dream in a material context, (b) anemphasis on the chasm between the rhetorical promise of America's founding and thesocial reality of its unfolding, and (c) an appeal to the audience to view themselves asspecial people with unique ability to bring about social change through the pursuit ofsocialist alternatives to the existing politico-economic structure. Although Newton'saddress was, for the most part, color-blind, he subtly carved out a particular role forBlack Americans, dabbling in the messianic rhetoric that infused his earlier speeches.5

In general, the jeremiad functions by constructing its audience as a chosen people spe-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

20 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

cifically designated to bring about desired changes. Specifically, the Afro-American jer-emiad appeals to Black Americans to recognize themselves as a special people whosedisproportionate sufferings confirm their privileged role in bringing about socialchange. Newton employed these rhetorical techniques to address a racially diverseaudience without neglecting the racially specific tenets of the BPP's philosophy. Withan emphasis on the materiality and actuality of historical processes in the context ofidealist and visionary values, Newton effectively redefined the American dream in amaterial context, implying that the true fulfillment of the American dream lies not incapitalist progress but revolutionary socialism.

REDEFINING THE AMERICAN DREAM: NEWTON'S DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM

The jeremiad is consistendy defined as including appeals to foundational values,secular or spiritual. However, the meanings of these values are not given, rather thesevalues function as "empty signifiers" or "floating signifiers," concepts that possess wide-spread and even universal appeal despite their fluctuating and contingent connota-tions. Newton was acutely conscious of the rhetorical nature of values and the extent towhich dieir meanings are determined by their historical situations, particularly by thematerial factors that provide the context for their interpretation and understanding. Inan address given at Boston College shortly after his RPCC address, Newton (1970/2002) described his method:

If we are using the method of dialectical materialism, we don't expect to findanything the same even one minute later because "one minute later" is history.If things are in a constant state of change, we cannot expect them to be thesame. Words used to describe old phenomena may be useless to describe thenew. (p. 26)

The twin emphasis on a dynamic material reality and the resulting contingency of lan-guage was central to the development of Newton's thought. Although Newton exhib-ited some suspicion about resurrecting linguistic elements associated with the past, hisconsistent appeals to American values illustrate his acumen at rhetorically adaptingthese values to new situations to serve his specific ends.

The RPCC provided an apt staging ground for Newton to develop his particular ver-sion of American values. Katsiaficas (2001) writes that the RPCC is the "key to unlock-ing the mystery of the aspirations of the 1960s movement," an event that, thoughneglected by most historians, is "the most momentous event in the movement duringthis critical period in American history" (p. 142). The RPCC, held in Philadelphia andprimarily organized by the Panthers, was attended by an extraordinary alliance of per-sons and organizations, ranging from the Students for a Democratic Society to the GayLiberation Front. Participants gathered to hear several speakers, most notably Newton,and to attend workshops with the goal of drafting and ratifying a new constitution.Newton's address was carefully crafted to take full advantage of the convention's theme.

Newton (1970/1999) opened his RPCC address with a genealogy of sorts, situatingthe promises of the Declaration of Independence in a specific material context. Hestated:

Two centuries ago the United States was a new nation conceived in liberty anddedicated to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness . . . The United States ofAmerica was born at a time when the nation covered relatively little land, a nar-row strip of political divisions on the Eastern seaboard. The United States ofAmerica was born at a time when the population was small and fairly homoge-neous both racially and culturally. Thus the people called Americans were a dif-ferent people in a different place. Furthermore, they had a different economic

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

THE RHETORIC OF HUEY P. NEWTON 21

system. The small population and the fertile land available meant that with theagricultural emphasis on the economy, people were able to advance accordingto their motivation and ability. It was an agricultural economy and with the cir-cumstances surrounding it Democratic Capitalism flourished in the newnation, (p. 156)

It is interesting that Newton (1970/1999) did not initially challenge the common patri-otic mythology of America's origination. Instead, Newton (1970/1999) affirmed thismyth by describing the nation's founding in positive terms as the initiation of "Demo-cratic Capitalism," a seemingly equitable system where people were "able to advanceaccording to their motivation and ability" (p. 156).

Rather than refute this popular legend of origins, Newton (1970/1999) radicallycontextualized this beginning by emphasizing the specificity of demographic and eco-nomic circumstances. The racial and cultural homogeneity of the populace in combi-nation with an agricultural economy made possible the equitable opportunity foradvancement intrinsic to Newton's definition of Democratic Capitalism. Thus, Newtonparticipated in a certain idealization of America's birth, assenting to foundationalmyths associating the nation's founding with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,not merely as ideal principles but as real material possibilities potentiated by uniquedemographic and economic conditions.

Newton's claim that at the nation's birth "the people called Americans were a differ-ent people in a different place" foreshadowed his development of a historical narrativethat described the specific changes that fundamentally altered the meaning of thesecritical values. The nation developed into a "multi-limbed giant," expanding geograph-ically and drawing populations from Africa, Asia, Europe, and South America. As aresult of this geographic distribution and population explosion, a nation conceived bya homogeneous population in relative geographical isolation developed into a large,heterogeneous, and geographically expansive population. Newton (1970/1999) stated,"This change in the fundamental characteristics of the nation and its people substan-tially changed the nature of American society" (p. 157). Accompanying changes in theeconomic structure of the nation, as "a rural and agricultural economy became anurban and industrialized economy" where farming was replaced by manufacturing, hadprofound consequences for Democratic Capitalism:

The Democratic Capitalism of our early days became caught up in a relentlessdrive to obtain profits until the selfish motivation for profit eclipsed the unself-ish principles of democracy. Thus 200 years later we have an overdevelopedeconomy which is so infused with the need for profit that we have replacedDemocratic Capitalism with Bureaucratic Capitalism. The free opportunity of allmen to pursue their economic ends has been replaced by constraints (confine-ment) placed upon Americans by the large corporations which control anddirect our economy. They have sought to increase their profits at the expenseof the people, and particularly at the expense of the racial and ethnic minori-ties. (Newton, 1970/1999, p.157)

Economic changes favoring profit and the concentration of wealth in industries accom-panied by a diversification of the population have resulted in, according to Newton, apresent situation where minorities are specifically disadvantaged by a system that nolonger allows for the equality of opportunity necessary for Democratic Capitalism. New-ton (1970/1999) invented a new term to distinguish the economic realities of the cur-rent age from the more equitable social system present at the nation's founding:Bureaucratic Capitalism. Through this historical contextualization, Newton was able tosimultaneously affirm the mythology of America's egalitarian foundations while con-demning the modern manifestations of profit motive and racial inequality.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

22 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

Appeals to foundational values, such as equality of opportunity and the individualpursuit of life, liberty, and happiness, are often used as arguments against regulationsthat would impede the development of industrial strength and global capitalism. New-ton (1970/1999) strategically situated these values in a specific historical context to sug-gest that industrial capitalism mutates these values to such a degree that they are nolonger recognizable. Although this historical narrative is no doubt as simplistic as thefables it refutes, the accuracy of Newton's (1970/1999) historiography is less interestingthan its rhetorical utility. Through the lens of his dialectical materialism, Newton resitu-ated American history in such a way that modern capitalism appears as a perversion ofAmerica's foundational values. As Newton continued his jeremiad, he developed thedistinction between Democratic and Bureaucratic Capitalism to emphasize the hypoc-risy endemic to modern America.

IDEALS VERSUS REALITY: DIAGNOSING AMERICA'S HYPOCRISY

When viewed from the perspective of Howard-Pitney's (1990) definition of thethree elements constitutive of the rhetorical structure of the jeremiad, the initial part ofNewton's address framing American values in a specific historical/material context ful-filled the first function, oudining the promise or ideal state subsequendy abandoned.The second aspect, criticism of present declension or description of the retrogressionfrom diat promise, was carried out through Newton's distinction between Democraticand Bureaucratic Capitalism, which comes to be defined as a contradiction between thepromise of die idea of die United States and its unfolding material reality. As Darsey(1997) and Scott (1973/2001) have noted, radical rhetors often employ a "conservativevoice," claiming to be more true to traditional values dian the mainstream society. New-ton participated in this conservative voice by highlighting die hypocrisy operative in asociety where rhetorical ideals and material reality are fundamentally at odds.6

Newton (1970/1999) developed die second section of his speech by describing spe-cific manifestations of the contradictions that lie at die heart of modern society. Hestated, "The history of the United States, as distinguished from die promise of the ideaof die United States, leads us to the conclusion that our sufferance is basic to the func-tioning of the government of the United States" (p. 157). This conclusion is evidencedby examining "the basic contradictions found in die history of this nation" (p. 157).Newton continued to document die case for majority freedom and minority oppressionby examining two distinct historical examples: the case of the American Indians andthe case of slavery.

Newton's (1970/1999) choice of die American Indians as his first instance of evi-dence for American hypocrisy was a strategic way to modify the almost-exclusive focuson die situation of Black Americans found in his early discourse. This example pro-vided a more nuanced perspective with the capability of appealing to a racially diverseaudience while lending his rhetoric a more neutral and scientific tone. Newton (1970/1999) continued, "We find evidence for majority freedom and minority oppression in the facttiiat the expansion of the United States Government and the acquisition of lands was atthe unjust expense of the American Indians, who are die original possessors of the landand still its legitimate heirs" (p. 158). Newton cited die Trail of Tears and disappear-ance of other Indian nations as evidence of "the unwillingness and inability of this gov-ernment and tins government's Constitution to incorporate racial minorities" (p. 158).

Newton (1970/1999) introduced his next example in parallel fashion, giving theappearance of a scientific investigator providing a litany of factual data in support ofhypotheses: "We find evidence for majority freedom and minority oppression in thefact that even while the early setders were proclaiming their freedom, they were delib-erately and systematically depriving Africans of their freedom" (p. 159). These "basiccontradictions" were developed in the resulting three-fifths clause that denied African

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

THE RHETORIC OF HUEY P. NEWTON 23

Americans the status of full human beings in the interests of territorial expansion.These contradictions were, for Newton, not peripheral or accidental aberrations thatcould be corrected through simple legal remedies. He described:

These compromises were so basic to the thinking of our forebears that legalattempts to correct the contradictions through Constitutional amendmentsand civil-rights laws have produced no change in our condition. We are still apeople without equal protection and due process of law. We recognize thenthat the oppressive acts of the United States Government when contrasted withthe testaments of freedom, carry forward a basic contradiction found in alllegal documents upon which this government is based, (p. 158)

Here, Newton was both providing evidence of the nation's fall from its founding idealsas well as providing the foundation for his later arguments for radical social change.

Although Newton would ultimately conclude his jeremiad by arguing for a fulfill-ment of America's founding promise, this fulfillment could not be achieved throughexisting legal mechanisms. In order to argue for a substantial revamping of America'spolitical and economic structure, Newton was required to effectively solder the nation'sfall from its originating ideals to its current politico-economic arrangement. Thus,Newton argued that the hypocrisy manifested in the treatment of the American Indiansand Black slaves was not peripheral to the design of the nation's political economy, butwas in fact basic and central to its functioning.

Newton (1970/1999) walked a fine rhetorical line in order to both assent to found-ing ideals and argue for a radical undermining of the nation's political, economic, andlegal structure. Even in the excerpt above, however, he continued to positively value theideals associated with America's promise (for instance, equal protection and due pro-cess of the law) while thoroughly condemning the material structure that had sinceunfolded. Newton developed this line of thought by describing the contradictionbetween a majority who "have seen the fruits of their labors in the life, liberty, and hap-piness of their children and grandchildren" and a Black minority who "have seen thefruits of their labors in the life, liberty, and happiness of the children and grandchil-dren of their oppressors" (p. 159). The appeal to foundational values persisted along-side a condemnation of the material structures developed to achieve these values.

Newton's (1970/1999) critique of America's political and economic structure wasextended to a criticism of the mainstream civil rights movement as an organizationattempting to use the existing structure to achieve its ends. Newton situated himself asone who previously shared the civil rights movement's hope that the government wouldmodify its practices to include minorities. He continued, "We did not recognize, how-ever, that any attempt to complete the promise of an eighteenth-century revolution inthe framework of a twentieth-century government was doomed to failure" (p. 159). Justas the specific material circumstances made equal opportunity possible at the nation'sbirth, its material circumstances at the time of Newton's speech were incompatible withthe rhetorical ideals of America's promise. These material circumstances included theconcentration of wealth in the hands of a few industries in an increasingly globalizedeconomy. Thus, "The Constitution set up by their ancestors to serve the people nolonger does so, for the people have changed" and "the people of today stand waitingfor a foundation of their own life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" (Newton, 1970/1999, p. 159).

Newton (1970/1999) paralleled the globalization of the economy with the earlyshift from Democratic to Bureaucratic Capitalism, oudining a cycle of hypocrisy thatcan only be broken with a new material order. He says:

We note that the government continues its pattern of practices which contra-dict its democratic rhetoric. We recognize now that we see history repeating

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

24 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

itself, but on an international as well as national scale. The relentless drive forprofit led this nation to colonize, oppress, and exploit its minorities. This profitdrive took this nation from democratic capitalism and underdevelopment tobureaucratic capitalism and overdevelopment. Now we see this small rulingclass continues its profit drive by oppressing and exploiting the peoples of theworld. . . .We gather here today to let it be known at home and abroad that anation conceived in liberty and dedicated to life, liberty, and the pursuit ofhappiness has in its maturity become an imperialist power dedicated to death,oppression and the pursuit of profits, (p. 160)

Newton's historical examples of the American Indians and the Black slaves were con-nected to broader contradictions associated with the concentration of wealth in thehands of a few at a global level, providing a historical narrative that effectively high-lighted the hypocrisy central to America's democratic rhetoric. Newton continued toassent to these rhetorical ideals, invoking life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness asworthwhile and just promises that could not be fulfilled without substantial changes inthe economic and political structure of American, and even global, society. By describ-ing this hypocrisy and tightly linking it to America's existing legal and economic system,Newton fulfilled the jeremiadic requirement of delineating America's fall from its foun-dational promises while laying the groundwork for his later arguments for radical socialand economic change.

DEFINING THE AMERICAN DREAM MATERIALLY:NEWTON'S RADICAL JEREMIAD

The jeremiad has been distinguished as rhetorical genre not only by its structuralcomponents (i.e., construction of promise, explanation of failure to achieve the prom-ise, and resolving prophecy) but also by the particular way in which it defines its audi-ence. Carpenter (1978) explains that the jeremiad "accomplishes its goals rhetoricallyby a process leading readers to view themselves as a chosen people confronted with atimely if not urgent warning that unless a certain atoning action is taken, dire conse-quences will ensue" (p. 104). The Afro-American jeremiad in particular has beendescribed as a rhetoric that constructs a unique identity for African Americans as cho-sen people whose disproportionate suffering is directly related to their special role asagents for social change (Howard-Pitney, 1990; Moses, 1982). Newton's (1970/1999)jeremiad combined racially-specific and universal appeals to an ethnically diverse audi-ence, ultimately calling on themes of a universal humanity to ground his claims forsocialism.

After his historical narrative oudining America's foundation and fall from its origi-nal democratic promise, Newton (1970/1999) initiated a significant break and reciteddie platform of the BPP. Each of the 10 planks are similarly worded, beginning with"The Black Panther Party calls for . . ." followed by a specific component of the plat-form. For instance, "The Black Panther Party calls for freedom and the power to deter-mine our destiny" (p. 160). The inclusion of the BPP platform is somewhat curiousgiven the restrained, race-neutral approach of the rest of die speech. Even when New-ton cited the case of slavery and Black Americans as examples for American hypocrisy,these instances were cited in an academic, almost scientific tone and were not articu-lated as emotional appeals to a racially-specific audience. The BPP platform as vocifer-ous political advocacy (it is highlighted in capital letters in the print version of hisaddress) seems out of place amid the restrained, abstract discourse that surrounds thissection.

There are at least two possible explanations for this break: First, Newton, famous forfounding the BPP, could be living up to the expectations of both his Black and mixed

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

THE RHETORIC OF HUEY P. NEWTON 25

audiences that he would address the unique plight of Black Americans and rally mem-bers of the BPP to further action. Second, though the BPP platform was racially-specific(only Blacks could be members of the Party), its appeals had a universal cast—freedom,full employment, decent housing, etc. are not racially-specific goals, nor were theyworded as aims exclusive to the BPP or Blacks in general. Thus, Newton could havebeen subtly highlighting the universality of the BPP's platform by including the plat-form within this speech. The inclusion of the BPP platform is reminiscent of Newton'searlier rhetoric that was heavily messianic in character—perhaps here he was remind-ing Blacks that although the project of reconstructing American society is universal,Blacks and the Black Panthers specifically were the vanguard of the revolution and hada particular role to play in a more general social movement.

After this break, Newton (1970/1999) resumed his speech with potent appeals tohis audience, encouraging them to see themselves as uniquely situated to bring aboutsubstantial change in the national, and global, order. Here, Newton took full advantageof the context of his address, associating his present audience with the nation'sfounders and capitalizing on the rhetorical resources provided by the associationsbetween the historical and the modern constitutional convention. Newton again statedthat the very structure of current society is contradictory and continued:

For this reason we assemble a Constitutional Convention to consider rationaland positive alternatives. Alternatives which will place their emphasis on thecommon man. Alternatives which will bring about a new economic system inwhich the rewards as well as the work will be equally shared by all people—aSocialist framework in which all groups will be adequately represented in thedecision making and administration which affects their lives. Alternativeswhich will guarantee that all men will attain their full manhood rights, thatthey will be able to live, be free, and seek out those goals which give themrespect and dignity while permitting the same privileges for every other manregardless of his condition or status, (pp. 161-162)

Newton had come full circle from the initial stages of his address where he outlined thepromises of America. His concluding advocacy resonated with these American ideals,"to live, be free, and seek out those goals which give them respect and dignity," empha-sizing equality of opportunity that is defined in material, specifically economic, terms("a new economic system in which the rewards as well as the work will be equally sharedby all people").

For Newton (1970/1999), the renewal of America's early ideals was only possiblethrough a rewriting of the Constitution, the task for which his immediate audience hadassembled. Although Newton did not believe in the realistic efficacy of such anundertaking7, he capitalized on the rhetorical situation and used the Convention'sostensible purpose to make his point that the founding ideals could not be realizedwithin the prevailing political, economic, and legal setting.8

Newton (1970/1999) concluded his address by appealing to universal human char-acteristics, transcending race and nationality and implying a truly global audience:

The sacredness of man and of the human spirit requires that human dignityand integrity ought to be always respected by every other man. We will settle fornothing less, for at this point in history anything else is but a living death. WEWILL BE FREE and we are here to ordain a new Constitution which will ensureour freedom by enshrining (cherishing) the dignity of the human spirit,(p. 162)

Although Newton's jeremiad did not include a specific scenario of catastrophe thatwould result barring immediate action by his audience, his stark reminder that the sta-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

26 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

tus quo is "a living death" provided a compelling rationale for the construction of a newConstitution, which for Newton became consonant with replacing existing social struc-tures with a socialist order. For Newton, nothing less than the universal human spiritand dignity of man were at stake and he encouraged his audience to view themselves asuniquely well-situated to achieve noble and consequential ends.

CONCLUSION

Newton's (1970/1999) RPCC address fulfills the functions of jeremiadic discoursewhile explicitly refashioning the cultural fictions associated with the American Revolu-tion and the promises of the founding documents. Economic equality emerges as thecentral component necessary for the realization of the ideals of life, liberty, and thepursuit of happiness declared at the nation's inauguration. Newton's abstract and argu-mentatively sophisticated address ultimately resulted in ambivalent consequences. New-ton (1973) wrote that the crowd seemed displeased when their expectations of militantdemagoguery were not fulfilled:

As I talked, it seemed to me that people were not really listening or even inter-ested in what I had to say. Almost every sentence was greeted with loudapplause, but the audience was more concerned with phrasemongering thanideological development. I am not a good public speaker—I tend to lectureand teach in a rather dull fashion—but the people were not responding to myideas, only to an image, and though I was very excited by all the energy andenthusiasm I saw there, I was also disturbed by the lack of serious analyticalthought, (p. 332)

Yet, Newton's proclivity toward abstract thought and academic discourse resulted in aninvitation to speak with Erik Erikson at a series of roundtable discussions hosted by YaleUniversity only a few months after his RPCC address (subsequently published as New-ton & Erikson, 1973).

Though Newton was aware of his shortcomings as a public orator, his RPCC addressand his other writings evidence the fact that, for Newton, language mattered. In the his-tory of disagreement over the capacity of the jeremiad to operate as an expression ofdissent in the service of radical social change, critics suspicious of a progressive func-tion for the jeremiad often fail to account for the profoundly rhetorical nature of tradi-tional values and the capacity for them to be appropriated and rhetorically redefined inthe service of arguments for significant change. For instance, Murphy (1990) writesthat the jeremiad transforms dissent "into a rededication to the principles of Americanculture" and hence precludes a critical examination of the system or the Establishment(p. 402). He subsequendy states that the jeremiad is severely limited and "cannot serveas a vehicle for social criticism" (p. 404) because it is doomed to rely on the precepts ofthe past. Although Murphy's presuppositions about the jeremiad are to an extent accu-rate, what he fails to realize is the fact that the past and the "principles of American cul-ture" are not static entities or predetermined forms, but radically contingentpossibilities amenable to diverse rhetorical visions.

Thus, it is true that Newton's jeremiad involves "a rededication to the principles ofAmerican culture," but in his rhetorical vision, these principles become consonant withsocialism. As Hartnett (2002) points out, these American principles are cultural fictionsthat have no foundational meaning but are always rhetorical products open to refash-ioning and rearticulation. Newton radicalized the meaning of traditional values, but hisparticipation in a conservative rhetorical form casts doubt on common portrayals ofNewton as a radical demagogue who was wholly in opposition to mainstream society.His strategy of "dissent by assent" indicates Newton's considerable skill at taking part in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

THE RHETORIC OF HUEY P. NEWTON 27

mainstream rhetorical traditions and his mastery of the discourse of traditional Ameri-can values.

Ultimately, perhaps more can be learned from Newton's failures than his successes.Although Newton successfully infused a conservative rhetorical form with an undeni-ably radical content by refashioning traditional values in socialist garb, Newton failed tochange his popular image as an aggressive demagogue. Ironically, though Newton'smastery of a rhetoric of traditional values could not supplant his public image as a mili-tant, his immediate audience faulted him precisely for his failure to live up to this mili-tant persona. These twin failures indicate the importance of attending to contextualfactors when considering the political possibilities of the rhetorical jeremiad. Scholarswho argue that the jeremiad is inherently a conservative discourse take as case studiesrhetors who were viewed already as authoritative "insiders" in relation to their targetaudience when they spoke (Buehler, 1998; Murphy, 1990; Ritter, 1980).

DeSantis (1999) explicitly recognizes that a successful jeremiad is only possiblewhen the speaker is clearly perceived as a member of the community he/she is address-ing. Because Newton was already considered an outsider, a militant revolutionary whoposed a threat to traditional values, even if he had articulated a more reformist content(for instance a moderate redefinition of the American tradition), he could not haveimproved his public image. If the jeremiadic form limits radical advocacy, perhaps thisis not because the jeremiad's necessary appeals to traditional values amount to a restric-tion on content (because values can always be redefined to accommodate revolutionaryvisions). Rather, as DeSantis (1999) suggests, and Newton's example confirms, the suc-cess of the jeremiad largely depends on the status of the enunciator in relation to his/her audience. Murphy (1990) argues that the "Jeremiahs gain in prestige and staturebecause they are perceived as speaking for fundamental national values" (p. 411), butthe Newton study suggests a different formulation—Jeremiahs can successfully speakfor fundamental national values only when they already have the requisite prestige andstature. Murphy concludes that the "rhetorical form of the jeremiad clearly limits therange of political choices that are available" to the rhetor (p. 412), however, Newton'saddress illustrates that these limitations are misunderstood when they are simply viewedas formal restrictions on content. The jeremiad's success (or failure) is not a directfunction of its political content, but its success is limited to instances where an insider,one who is already perceived as rightfully sharing or claiming ownership of communityvalues, refashions these values for new purposes. Thus, Newton's example suggests thatfuture work on the jeremiad cannot limit itself to textual analysis but must attend tocontextual factors, particularly the relationship between the rhetor and audience.

Newton's socialist vision was in many respects radical, to be sure, but by artfullydefining this vision with a traditional vocabulary, Newton showed that his rhetorical ori-entation was not, or at least not solely, one of opposition and negation, but a skillfulblend of assent and redefinition. Newton (1973) wrote of the importance of languagein crafting visions for the future and interpreting events of the past:

The Black Panthers have always emphasized action over rhetoric. But lan-guage, the power of the word, in the philosophical sense, is not underesti-mated in our ideology. We recognize the significance of words in the strugglefor liberation, not only in the media and in conversations with people on theblock, but in the important area of raising consciousness. Words are anotherway of defining phenomena, and the definition of any phenomenon is the firststep to controlling it or being controlled by it. (p. 181)

Though Newton and the BPP were unique and in many ways more radical than theircontemporaries, they participated in a tradition of Black activism spawning centuries.In the face of the persistent "Panther mythology" that still exists today, it is time for rhe-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

28 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

torical scholars to revisit the legacy of the Black Panther Party and examine the rich-ness and diversity of their contributions to American public address.

NOTES1Jones and Jeffries (1998) provide an excellent review of the general tendency to mythologize Newton

and the BPP, specifying the frequent focus on the organization as radical and isolated from other socialmovements. In specifically rhetorical scholarship, Courtright (1974) and Campbell (1972) focus on the radi-cal nature of BPP and its leaders. In her insightful examination of Eldridge Cleaver's rhetoric, Campbell(1972) situates the Panthers within a "rhetoric of dissent, confrontation, alienation, and revolution" (p. 142).Courtright (1974) more boldly writes that the BPP crafted a rhetorical strategy around "arming themselvesand using their guns to declare their manhood" (p. 249).

2Newton was not convicted for the murder of Frey. In a three-month long trial, Newton presented over4,000 pages of testimony, including the Declaration of Independence. He was convicted of manslaughter andsentenced to 2-15 years before the California Court of Appeals reversed the conviction in a 51-page opinion.Details about the trial are available in Foner's (1995) introduction to The Black Panthers Speak as well as New-ton's (1973) autobiography and War Against the Panthers, Newton's (1996) published dissertation.

3For a detailed examination of the genealogy of the jeremiad, see Bercovitch (1978).4See, for instance, Clemons and Jones (2001) as well as Cleaver (1998).5Newton's messianic tendencies surface throughout his career and are implied by the titles of his autobi-

ography, Revolutionary Suicide (1973), and his published speeches, To Die for the People (1999). His (1967/2002;1967/2002) early speeches, including "In Defense of Self-Defense I" and "In Defense of Self-Defense II," alsoexhibit a strong messianic character.

6Darsey (1997) states, "It is common for radicals to claim to be the true keepers of the faith; they opposetheir society using its own most noble expressions and aspirations" (p. 9). In a much earlier essay dedicatedto this issue, Scott (1973/2001) writes, "Dwelling on the hypocrisy of the dominant society, the radical is quiteapt to sound the conservative voice . . . Unable or unwilling to be free of some quite traditional values, theradical is likely to claim in some way or another that he is true to those values whereas conventional peoplebetray them" (p. 85).

7See Hilliard, 1993, pp. 302-304, 312-313. Newton viewed the RPCC as a misplaced expenditure ofresources trying to attempt a national organization rather than a more practical focus on building local basesof power. Additionally, the RPCC bore the mark of Eldridge Cleaver's planning and Newton and Cleaver wereincreasingly divided on their visions for the future of the movement.

8Although the Black Panther Party was born in the spirit of Black nationalism, by the late 1960s Newtonfirmly espoused socialism as the best method of political and economic organization. Newton's emphasis oninternational socialism later developed into "revolutionary intercommunalism," an ideology that included acritique of the nation-state along with its socialist framework. Newton was skeptical of the RPCC's ability tobring about a socialist alternative. For Newton, the RPCC was not radical enough and only a true revolutionon a global scale would bring about the structural changes necessary to achieve social and economic justice.Additionally, the RPCC was too much talk and too little action—Newton and the BPP had always emphasizedaction. For instance, the early Oakland-based programs offering free breakfast for children and free shoesand clothing to needy community members were part of the Panther's struggle to bring about real changethrough grassroots activism. For a good discussion of Newton's socialist vision and the Party's ideologicaldevelopment, see Jeffries (2002).

REFERENCES

Bercovitch, S. (1978). The American jeremiad. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Breslauer, J. (1995, January 19). Taking Huey off posters and onto the stage. Los Angeles Times, p. F1.Browne, S. (2002). "The Circle of Our Felicities": Thomas Jefferson's First Inaugural Address and the rheto-

ric of nationhood. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 5, 409-438.Buehler, D. O. (1998). Permanence and change in Theodore Roosevelt's conservation jeremiad. Western Jour-

nal of Communication, 62, 439-458.Burgess, P. G. (2001). The rhetoric of Black power: A moral demand? In C. E. Morris, III & S. H. Browne

(Eds.), Readings on the rhetoric of social protest (pp. 180-190). State College, PA: Strata. (Original work pub-lished 1968)

Campbell, J. A. (1986). Scientific revolution and the grammar of culture: The case of Darwin's "Origin."Quarterly Journal of Speech, 72, 351-176.

Campbell, K. K. (1971). The rhetoric of radical Black nationalism: A case study in self-conscious criticism.Central States Speech Journal, 22, 151-160.

Campbell, K. K. (1972). An exercise in the rhetoric of poetic justice. In Critiques of contemporary rhetoric. Bel-mont, CA: Wadsworth.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

THE RHETORIC OF HUEY P. NEWTON 29

Carpenter, R. (1978). The historical jeremiad as rhetorical genre. In K. K. Campbell & K. H.Jamieson (Eds.),Form and genre: Shaping rhetorical action (pp. 103-117). Falls Church, VA: Southern States CommunicationAssociation.

Cathcart, R. (2001). Movements: Confrontation as rhetorical form. In C. E. Morris, III & S. H. Browne (Eds.),Readings on the rhetoric of social protest (pp. 102-112). State College, PA: Strata. (Original work published1978)

Cleaver, K. (1998). Back to Africa: The evolution of the international section of the Black Panther Party(1969-1972). In C. E.Jones (Ed.), The Black Panther Party reconsidered (pp. 211-251). Baltimore: Black Clas-sic Press.

Cleaver, K., & Katsiaficas, G. (Eds.) (2001). Liberation, imagination, and the Black Panther Party. New York: Rout-ledge.

Clemons, M. L., & Jones, C. E. (2001). Global solidarity: The Black Panther Party in the international arena.In K. Cleaver & G. Katsiaficas (Eds.), Liberation, imagination and the Black Panther Party (pp. 20-29). NewYork: Routledge.

Courtright, J. A. (1974). Rhetoric of the gun: An analysis of the rhetorical modifications of the Black PantherParty. Journal of Black Studies, 4, 249-267.

Darsey, J. (1997). The prophetic tradition and radical rhetoric in America. New York: New York University Press.Del Vecchio, R. (1999, January 7). A full revolution: Ex-Panthers invoke 1960s passion for 2000 Oakland

council race. The San Francisco Chronicle, p. A15.DeSantis, A. D. (1999). An Amostic prophecy: Frederick Douglass; The Meaning of Fourth of July for the Negro.

Journal of Communication and Religion, 22, 65-92.Doss, E. (1998). Imaging the Panthers: Representing Black power and masculinity, 1960s-1990s. Prospects: An

Annual of American Cultural Studies, 23, 484-512.Foner, P. S. (Ed.) (1995). The Black Panthers speak. New York: Da Capo Press.Gallagher, V. (2001). Black power in Berkeley: Postmodern constructions in the rhetoric of Stokely Car-

michael. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 87, 144-157.Goldzwig, S. R. (1989). A social movement perspective on demagoguery: Achieving symbolic realignment.

Communication Studies, 40, 202-228.Gregg, R. B. (2001). The ego-function of the rhetoric of protest. In C. E. Morris, III & S. H. Browne (Eds.),

Readings on the rhetoric of social protest (pp. 45-59). State College, PA: Strata. (Original work published1971)

Haiman, F. S. (2001). The rhetoric of the streets: Some legal and ethical considerations. In C. E. Morris, III &S. H. Browne (Eds.), Readings on the rhetoric of social protest (pp. 10-25). State College, PA: Strata. (Originalwork published 1967)

Hartnett, S. (2002). Democratic dissent & the cultural fictions of Antebellum America. Urbana: University of IllinoisPress.

Hilliard, D. (1993). This side of glory: The autobiography of David Hilliard and the story of the Black Panther Party.Boston: Little, Brown.

Hilliard, D., & Weise, D. (Eds). (2002). The Huey P. Newton reader. New York: Seven Stories.Howard-Pitney, D. (1990). The Afro-American jeremiad: Appeals for justice in America. Philadelphia: Temple Uni-

versity Press.Hughes, J. (1998, May 3). Former Panther Eldridge Cleaver: A relic with a cause. The Seattle Times, p. L5.Jasinski,J. (1997). Heteroglossia, polyphony, and The Federalist Papers. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 27, 23-46.Jeffries, J. L. (2002). Huey P. Newton: The radical theorist. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.Jones, C.E. (Ed.). (1998). The Black Panther Party reconsidered. Baltimore: Black Classic Press.Jones, C. E., & Jeffries, J. L. (1998). "Don't believe the hype": Debunking the Panther mythology. In C. E.

Jones (Ed.), The Black Panther Party reconsidered (pp. 25-56). Baltimore: Black Classic Press.Katsiaficas, G. (2001). Organization and movement: The case of the Black Panther Party and the Revolution-

ary People's Constitutional Convention of 1970. In K. Cleaver & G. Katsiaficas (Eds.), Liberation, imagina-tion and the Black Panther Party (pp. 141-155). New York: Routledge.

Moses, W.J. (1982). Black Messiahs and Uncle Toms. University Park: Pennsylvania University Press.Moses, W. J. (1990). The wings of Ethiopia. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Moses, W.J. (Ed). (1996). Classical Black nationalism. New York: New York University Press.Murphy, J. M. (1990). "A Time of Shame and Sorrow": Robert F. Kennedy and the American jeremiad. Quar-

terly Journal of Speech, 76, 401-414.Murphy,J. M. (1997). Inventing authority: Bill Clinton, Martin Luther King.Jr., and the orchestration of rhe-

torical traditions. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 83, 71-89.Newton, H. P. (1973). Revolutionary suicide. New York: Ballantine.Newton, H. P. (1996). War against the Panther's: A study of repression in America. New York: Harlem River Press.Newton, H. P. (1999). To the Revolutionary People's Constitutional Convention: September 5, 1970. In T.

Morrison (Ed.), To die for the people (pp. 156-162). New York: Writers and Readers Publishing.Newton, H. P. (2002). In defense of self-defense: June 20, 1967. In D. Hilliard & D. Weise (Eds.), The Huey P.

Newton reader (pp. 134-137). New York: Seven Stories Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4

30 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

Newton, H. P. (2002). In defense of self-defense II: July 3, 1967. In D. Hilliard & D. Weise (Eds.), The Huey P.Newton reader (pp. 138-141). New York: Seven Stories Press.

Newton, H. P. (2002). The correct handling of a revolution: July 20, 1967. In D. Hilliard & D. Weise (Eds.),The Huey P. Newton reader (pp. 142-146). New York: Seven Stories Press.

Newton, H. P. (2002). Speech delivered at Boston College: November 18, 1970. In D. Hilliard & D. Weise(Eds.), The Huey P. Newton reader (pp. 160-179). New York: Seven Stories Press.

Newton, H. P. (2002). On Pan-Africanism or communism, December 1, 1972. In D. Hilliard & D. Weise(Eds.), The Huey P. Newton reader (pp. 248-254). New York: Seven Stories Press.

Newton, H. P., & Erikson, E. H. (1973). In search of common ground. New York: Laurel.Owen, S. A. (2002). Memory, war and American identity: Saving Private Ryan as cinematic jeremiad. Critical

Studies in Media Communication, 19, 249-282.Ritter, K. W. (1980). American political rhetoric and the jeremiad tradition: Presidential nomination accep-

tance addresses, 1960-1976. Central States Speech Journal, 31, 153-171.Scott, R. L. (1969). Justifying violence: The rhetoric of militant Black power. In R. L. Scott & W. Brockriede

(Eds.), The rhetoric of Black power (pp. 132-145). New York: Harper & Row.Scott, R. L. (2001). The conservative voice in radical rhetoric: A common response to division. In C. E. Mor-

ris, III & S. H. Browne (Eds.), Readings on the rhetoric of social protest (pp. 74-87). State College, PA: Strata.(Original work published 1973)

Scott, R. L., & Brockriede, W. (Eds.) (1969). The rhetoric of Black power. New York: Harper & Row.Scott, R. L., & Smith, D. K. (2001). The rhetoric of confrontation. In C. E. Morris, III & S. H. Browne (Eds.),

Readings on the rhetoric of social protest (pp. 26-33). State College, PA: Strata. (Original work published1969)

Singh, N. P. (1998). The Black Panthers and the 'undeveloped country' of the left. In C. E.Jones (Ed.), TheBlack Panther Party reconsidered (pp. 57-107). Baltimore: Black Classic Press.

Terrill, R. E. (2000). Colonizing the borderlands: Shifting circumference in the rhetoric of Malcolm X. Quar-terly Journal of Speech, 86, 67-85.

Terrill, R. E. (2001). Protest, prophecy, and prudence in the rhetoric of Malcolm X. Rhetoric & Public Affairs,4, 25-53.

Weiss, H. (1999, February 22). "A Huey P. Newton Story" at the Museum of Contemporary Art. Chicago SunTimes, p. 23.

Yousman, B. (2001). Who owns identity? Malcolm X, representation, and the struggle over meaning. Commu-nication Quarterly, 49, 1-18.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:11

16

Oct

ober

201

4