434
PETER BROOKS
Violence: what did that mean in the context being created for
New Haven May 1 - some gassing, a little Macing, some clubbed
heads or a shootout? A fragment of our nightmare was realized May
3, in Kent, Ohio. The Guard in New Haven, too, had live ammuni–
tion in their rifles.
I was made aware of the evolution from nonviolence within
the Movement in Washington on November 15. The dense crowd
in which I was at the foot of the slope up to the Washington Monu–
ment was invaded by a wedge of club-carrying, helmeted, short–
haired and totally antipathetic young, who reminded one more of
the hoods of yesteryear than the Woodstook Generation. They weren't
much interested in peaceniks like Pete Seeger; they chanted "Free
Bobby Seale" at every opportunity and donned their battle gear when
David Dellinger announced the evening ra:1ly at the Justice Depart–
ment. Even among those whose commitment to nonviolence had
previously seemed an ultimate tenet of faith, there was evidence of
wavering toward a new position, which more or less stated that to
talk of nonviolence didn't make sense: since violence was exercised
upon them, was ingrained in American society, they could not be
held responsible for their violent response. I had heard the same argu–
ment in France in 1968, but it was more frightening here since the
context of violence was so much more real. I am not at all sure what
the first "orders" for the May Day demonstration were. I suspect they
have been of an anything goes nature. Certainly the word was abroad
at other campuses that this was to be the biggest riot of all time. At
first, the white radicals of Panther Defense did not seem to want
to make any specific commitment to nonviolence. But by the time
of May Day minus two or three, things looked slightly better. New
Haven Black community organizations had denounced white radical
exploitation of their grievances, and had organized to keep high
school students away from the demonstration and to police their
neighborhoods. The chairman of the Strike Steering Committee, Bill
Farley, had made a strong statement against "provocateurs" in his
news conference. Representatives of the Monitoring Committee re–
turned from a meeting with
Ann
Froines convinced that Panther
Defense wanted a peaceful demonstration, though they found serious
deficiencies in the organization of the rally. Most of all: a clear signal
had come from the New Haven Panthers that the cause would not
be served by violence. Big Man was very clear and forceful on the
