Someone above alluded to drawing a comparison with the BLM. I would have been less likely to see the similarities before watching this flick than after. One thing I guess I didn't fully realize is how young the founders were. I went into the movie not having read extensively about the Panthers. I was familiar with some of the names and major events but not much of anything in detail. I have to admit....their philosophy is substantially LESS anti-white than I had perceived. It seems pretty clear that they made a distinction between white elites and white poor.

A really interesting distinction between the panthers and BLM seems to be that there is much less focus on capitalism with BLM. I've noticed that in reading about MLK this month too. Almost all of the black activism in the 60's had a strong foundation in communism/socialism.

Here's a really interesting Hillary Clinton quote from a couple days ago:

"Yes, does Wall Street and big financial interests, along with drug companies, insurance companies, big oil, all of it, have too much influence? You're right. But if we were to stop that tomorrow, we would still have the indifference, the negligence that we saw in Flint. We would still have racism holding people back. We would still have sexism preventing women from getting equal pay. We would still have LGBT people who get married on Saturday and get fired on Monday.”

She's been trying to appeal to BLM.....so it would appear that Clinton THINKS that BLM doesn't draw the same parallel between race inequality and capitalism that the black activism of the 60's did. Do you guys think she's right? I've watched a couple speeches and seen alot of internet discussion about BLM. I haven't perceived the same focus on capitalism either. The lack of black voter support for Bernie seems to suggest the same thing too. Is it fair to say that for BLM....racism cannot be fixed by overthrowing capitalism?