Though I was not directly responsible for the January 17, 1969 UCLA campus shooting deaths of John Huggins and “Bunchy” Carter, I have come to understand the ways my participation in a “warrior mindset” contributed to the violent scenario that resulted in their deaths. While it is certainly no secret that the FBI’s counter intelligence program (COINTELPRO) was an external factor in the infiltration of the organizations Us and the Black Panther Party that exacerbated the conflict, this warrior mindset provided the internal basis for the violence. Ideological conflict was exploited and turned into violent conflict.
For historical clarity, I think it is important to note that this warrior mindset of the 1960s didn’t just arise out of a vacuum. It emerged from a violent and oppressive condition of racial segregation . It began as frustration over the nonviolent strategies of the civil rights movement and rose to a more militant demand for basic human rights. A warrior mindset accepted violence “necessary” and for a “good cause,” but a fundamental and problematic challenge for the Black Power Movement then arose: how can we challenge and change a violent and racist culture without becoming corrupted and violent in the process?
I entered the restorative justice dialogue with Ericka Huggins, John’s wife, not to take responsibility for two murders I did not actually commit, but because I hope to set an example for others to realize that mindsets, and not just the acts, are forms of violence. In addition, what I’m confessing to and repenting from is a mindset; a mindset that fostered the atmosphere that help cause the deaths of two human beings. It’s so easy for a person to attempt to absolve himself from acts of violence with words like, “They started it! I was there, ready to get down with my homies, but I didn’t fire the fatal shot. I didn’t kill anyone!” But if this person promoted a warrior mindset, there is still responsibility for violence.
In a previous article I defined warrior mindset as a mindset that is essentially militaristic and confrontational, “commandist” and combative; a mindset that finds justification in violence and accepts casualties of war over preservation of life. A “gang banger’s” mentality falls into this category. Gangbangers are essentially soldiers in a sort of civil war.
This is also true about patriarchal mindsets. Even if a person hasn’t directly participated in an act of domestic violence, this is the question they must ask themselves: in what ways have we contributed to or in any way validated a patriarchal mindset in which women are devalued and objectified? In what ways have we been complicit through our inactions?
Like so many men growing up in patriarchal societies, I internalized the male-role belief system. Even in my revolutionary heyday, I accepted the broader cultural premise that elevates a belief in the innate superiority of men over women; and viewed the role and rights of women in restrictive and subordinate terms. I was God of my home with ultimate authority over any and all decisions. My wife was my queen whose principle roles were to inspire me, educate our children and to participate in social development. Her greatest quality was her femininity; and she could not be feminine unless she was submissive. We were products of a patriarchal society that assigns roles, stereotypes and attitudes based on gender inequality.
Now, years later, I finally see the damage this mindset creates. How can we as men challenge ourselves and examine our own views and consider the impacts, thoughts and words – let alone our actions/inactions — have on wives and daughters and mothers and sisters?