What do you think?
Rate this book
The Panthers Can’t Save Us Now: Debating Left Politics and Black Lives Matter
Ending the horrors of police violence requires addressing economic inequality
In the wake of the mass protests following the police murder of George Floyd nearly every major consumer brand had proclaimed their commitments to antiracism, often with new ad campaigns to match their tweets. Very little in the way of police reform has been achieved. Still less was achieved around policies that might help the millions of black Americans living at or below the poverty line. Why has anti-racism been such a powerful source of mobilization but such a poor means of building political opposition capable of winning big reforms?
This volume revisits a debate that transpired during Black Live Matter’s first wave.
Writing against the grain of popular left sentiments, Johnson cautions against a new ethnic politics. Instead, he calls for broad-based left politics as the only viable means for ending the twin crises of racial inequality and police violence. Redistribution, public goods, and multi-ethnic working-class solidarity are the only viable response to the horrors of police violence and mass incarceration. It just so happens that fighting the conditions that make crime and violence inevitable is also the means by which we can build a working-class majority and a more equal and peaceful nation.
In the wake of the mass protests following the police murder of George Floyd nearly every major consumer brand had proclaimed their commitments to antiracism, often with new ad campaigns to match their tweets. Very little in the way of police reform has been achieved. Still less was achieved around policies that might help the millions of black Americans living at or below the poverty line. Why has anti-racism been such a powerful source of mobilization but such a poor means of building political opposition capable of winning big reforms?
This volume revisits a debate that transpired during Black Live Matter’s first wave.
Writing against the grain of popular left sentiments, Johnson cautions against a new ethnic politics. Instead, he calls for broad-based left politics as the only viable means for ending the twin crises of racial inequality and police violence. Redistribution, public goods, and multi-ethnic working-class solidarity are the only viable response to the horrors of police violence and mass incarceration. It just so happens that fighting the conditions that make crime and violence inevitable is also the means by which we can build a working-class majority and a more equal and peaceful nation.
186 pages, Paperback
First published February 22, 2022
24 people are currently reading
551 people want to read
About the author
Cedric G. Johnson
7 books8 followersCedric G. Johnson is associate professor of African American Studies and Political Science at the University of Illinois at Chicago. His book, Revolutionaries to Race Leaders: Black Power and the Making of African American Politics was named the 2008 W.E.B. DuBois Outstanding Book of the Year by the National Conference of Black Political Scientists. Johnson is the editor of The Neoliberal Deluge: Hurricane Katrina, Late Capitalism and the Remaking of New Orleans. His 2017 Catalyst essay, “The Panthers Can’t Save Us Now: Anti-policing Struggles and the Limits of Black Power,” was awarded the 2018 Daniel Singer Millenium Prize. Johnson’s writings have appeared in Nonsite, Jacobin, New Political Science, New Labor Forum, Perspectives on Politics, Historical Materialism, and Journal of Developing Societies. In 2008, Johnson was named the Jon Garlock Labor Educator of the Year by the Rochester Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO. He previously served on the representative assembly for UIC United Faculty Local 6456.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
August 18, 2023
Very spicy, with all this formation's virtues (a hard, anti-sectarian analysis of class, a terse line on particular popular forms of posturing) and vices (ostentatious disinterest in culture, that infuriating thing where Marxist academics have a go at other Marxist academics for being 'Marxist academics').
Read
August 1, 2022The scholarship on contemporary Black politics in the United States seems uniform in its approach. The discussion around anti-racism and the writings that have emerged to put forth that outlook has gone mostly unchallenged.
The socio-historical moment that Black politics finds itself in two years after the uprisings in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder is muted. It’s almost as if it never took place.
Despite all of the demands made by movements challenging racism, there’s very little tangible, long-lasting progress that resulted from it. Why is that?
Cedric Johnson posits an answer to this question in his latest book- “The Panthers Can’t Save Us Now”
The reader has to look past the sentiments that the title alone can raise. Taken at face value, the book could be perceived as disrespectful towards the legacy of the Black Panther Party. However, upon deeper investigation, the reader will see that Johnson has crafted an argument not against the BPP, but the current movements that take up the radical mantle without an intricate understanding of class politics in the Black community.
Please make no mistake: The Panthers Can’t Save Us Now is a polemical book. The central argument made by Johnson is that a broad-based class politics is the way forward, as opposed to a revitalized Black Nationalism.
Leaving room for scholars to respectfully disagree, Johnson makes his case with citations of key points in American history. Daring to push against the contemporary orthodoxy of anti-racist scholarship, Johnson also makes a cogent argument advocating the necessity of reviving the labor movement.
The Panthers Can’t Save Us Now is an interesting and necessary read for anyone who wants to wrestle with the implications of modern-day progressivism. It points a way forward when so many contemporary views appear to be caught in a perpetual feedback loop.
The socio-historical moment that Black politics finds itself in two years after the uprisings in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder is muted. It’s almost as if it never took place.
Despite all of the demands made by movements challenging racism, there’s very little tangible, long-lasting progress that resulted from it. Why is that?
Cedric Johnson posits an answer to this question in his latest book- “The Panthers Can’t Save Us Now”
The reader has to look past the sentiments that the title alone can raise. Taken at face value, the book could be perceived as disrespectful towards the legacy of the Black Panther Party. However, upon deeper investigation, the reader will see that Johnson has crafted an argument not against the BPP, but the current movements that take up the radical mantle without an intricate understanding of class politics in the Black community.
Please make no mistake: The Panthers Can’t Save Us Now is a polemical book. The central argument made by Johnson is that a broad-based class politics is the way forward, as opposed to a revitalized Black Nationalism.
Leaving room for scholars to respectfully disagree, Johnson makes his case with citations of key points in American history. Daring to push against the contemporary orthodoxy of anti-racist scholarship, Johnson also makes a cogent argument advocating the necessity of reviving the labor movement.
The Panthers Can’t Save Us Now is an interesting and necessary read for anyone who wants to wrestle with the implications of modern-day progressivism. It points a way forward when so many contemporary views appear to be caught in a perpetual feedback loop.
January 18, 2024
cedric johnson contends that the left must move away from race-based analysis of inequality in the US towards class, and for the most part I agree. I think it's a hard but necessary pill for liberals to swallow that identity politics often are a way to use minorities to uphold the status quo, a big reason why I changed ideologies from democrat to socialist. black/poc elites are no better than white elites, and we must work to ensure neither continue to exist. however, i feel that johnson was slightly too extreme in his shift to class analysis and dismisses real instances of racism that occur, even to poc who are in those elite positions, and the way that white working class citizens have historically not always stood in solidarity with their fellow poc working class (think working class trump supporters). one point johnson argues is that that policing disproportionately affects black people not because of racism, but because black people are overly represented in the poor neighborhoods policing occurs most. but then he doesn't really go into /why/ black people are overrepresented in the first place, which is due to lack of post-civil war reparations, which occurred because white people enslaved them. he also tries to use the desegregation of the military as a good thing because it increased black employment without doing an anti-imperialist analysis of the military, which was kind of strange to me. Instead, I believe that race and class need to be equally considered in socialist analyses in order for society to move forward.
March 7, 2022
This is a collection of essays in conversation with each other about whether or not the Black Lives Matter movement is an effective method of enacting radical change in the United States. The book's primary author is Cedric Johnson, as he wrote the first two essays collected here; the next two are critiques of Johnson's essays by a progressive liberal and then by another Marxist, and the final essay is Johnson's response to the critiques.
I don't disagree with Johnson's main point in a general sense, but he does an absolutely terrible job articulating it. The critiques presented of Johnson's initial essays are valid, while his rebuttal is unsatisfactory. Johnson seems to deny the existence of racism as a structural force. Race is indeed a superstructure that only exists to introduce more hierarchical division into society by warping class into something more arbitrary, but it is also true that race is the lens through which most Americans have been forced to interpret oppression and hierarchy, which DOES give it real power.
Johnson fails to remember that superstructure also shapes the base, and his stubbornness in the name of "historical moments" and "Marxist analysis" is foolish. Marx himself wrote of the essentialness of understanding the present moment through the historical materialist lens, but Johnson does not provide anything remotely close to the sort of analysis that would live up to Marx's standards. He gets close at times, but his refusal to understand the imposed primacy of race in the United States today leaves the totality of his argument unsatisfactory.
I don't disagree with Johnson's main point in a general sense, but he does an absolutely terrible job articulating it. The critiques presented of Johnson's initial essays are valid, while his rebuttal is unsatisfactory. Johnson seems to deny the existence of racism as a structural force. Race is indeed a superstructure that only exists to introduce more hierarchical division into society by warping class into something more arbitrary, but it is also true that race is the lens through which most Americans have been forced to interpret oppression and hierarchy, which DOES give it real power.
Johnson fails to remember that superstructure also shapes the base, and his stubbornness in the name of "historical moments" and "Marxist analysis" is foolish. Marx himself wrote of the essentialness of understanding the present moment through the historical materialist lens, but Johnson does not provide anything remotely close to the sort of analysis that would live up to Marx's standards. He gets close at times, but his refusal to understand the imposed primacy of race in the United States today leaves the totality of his argument unsatisfactory.
July 20, 2022
While I did enjoy the points and sentiments presented within this book which I haven’t seen fully fleshed out until now, there are still a few problems I have with this publication.
Although this critique seems very surface level, I still believe that the amount of elongated terms and layered academic writing fundamentally work in hypocrisy of what Johnson is fighting for. For the majority of his essays, he is arguing that the most effective way to tackle the heaps of issues within America is through joining together as third and working class citizens rather than focusing on race, but he proceeds to establish these beliefs in a highly academic way of writing, using constant litanies of complicated terms which make his writing difficult to read or understand without a college-level education, which is what lower classes often lack. Academic writing has always been an unsaid institutionalized way to gatekeep certain discussions and education from the less educated/privileged, so it’s just puzzling to me to see Johnson upkeep this pattern when fighting so hard for lower class citizens which often don’t have the money to peruse higher educations, though I suppose since he has a PhD, it might be hard to break out of the habit of layered academic writing or simplifying what he’s saying when there are already terms that explain what he needs established.
I did enjoy how he included two differing opinions from his own since they voiced a few of my concerns, and it was interesting to see how he combat them as well. Although I still wasn’t fully convinced of his narrative by the end, I found his rebuttal easier to read, probably because he had a more systematic way of addressing his disagreements and explaining them in detail. Either way, including differing opinions within your own publication is admirable to me whether I end up agreeing or not.
Although I know there were good arguments and sentiments expressed within this book, I already know I’ll need to reread it in it’s entirety with a dictionary by my side if I want to fully grasp what Johnson is saying, which is a shame since I was so excited to read this and apply what I learned to my life when I first bought it.
Although this critique seems very surface level, I still believe that the amount of elongated terms and layered academic writing fundamentally work in hypocrisy of what Johnson is fighting for. For the majority of his essays, he is arguing that the most effective way to tackle the heaps of issues within America is through joining together as third and working class citizens rather than focusing on race, but he proceeds to establish these beliefs in a highly academic way of writing, using constant litanies of complicated terms which make his writing difficult to read or understand without a college-level education, which is what lower classes often lack. Academic writing has always been an unsaid institutionalized way to gatekeep certain discussions and education from the less educated/privileged, so it’s just puzzling to me to see Johnson upkeep this pattern when fighting so hard for lower class citizens which often don’t have the money to peruse higher educations, though I suppose since he has a PhD, it might be hard to break out of the habit of layered academic writing or simplifying what he’s saying when there are already terms that explain what he needs established.
I did enjoy how he included two differing opinions from his own since they voiced a few of my concerns, and it was interesting to see how he combat them as well. Although I still wasn’t fully convinced of his narrative by the end, I found his rebuttal easier to read, probably because he had a more systematic way of addressing his disagreements and explaining them in detail. Either way, including differing opinions within your own publication is admirable to me whether I end up agreeing or not.
Although I know there were good arguments and sentiments expressed within this book, I already know I’ll need to reread it in it’s entirety with a dictionary by my side if I want to fully grasp what Johnson is saying, which is a shame since I was so excited to read this and apply what I learned to my life when I first bought it.
February 20, 2024
This book is a collection of essays that begins with Cedric Johnson’s essay that bears the name of the title, a follow-up essay also written by Johnson, four essays that respond with both agreements and criticisms of Johnson’s critique of the Black Lives Matter movement and the identity politics within, and a final response essay by Johnson himself. Johnson’s main critique is that the current movement is based on racial disparity alone, and does not include class disparity in the equation when there are discussions surrounding mass incarcerations and police brutality against black bodies.
I found Johnson’s critique very well researched from a class and labor perspective and something that stood out to me was his perspective on how the Black Lives Matter movement felt very much like a marketing campaign at certain points with the founders getting into arguments with individuals wanting to use the hashtag. He writes how it showed more entrepreneurial product branding than something born out of a social struggle and that was interesting to note (pg43).
He also criticizes the idea of black exceptionalism and how trying to establish a collective unity amongst Black Americans is not possible because there are differing politics between what Johnson identifies as the Black Bourgeois and the Black working class, using examples of how Black Americans who buy into the neoliberalization of their communities and will eventually push/vote for more policing and will be harder on crime (pg46, 53)
As far as the responses go, the essays critiquing Johnson’s essay do bring up solid points, however, Johnson’s follow-up essay at the end acknowledges said critiques and even points out their arguments still rely on not only the neoliberal identity politics, but also the hopeful outlook that the Democratic party would unite the large demographic of black voters. Johnsons writes about the Democratic Party “What should be clear to anyone paying attention is that the New Democrats are much more willing to embrace versions of liberal anti-racism than they are willing to make substantial commitments to broadly redistributive public policy. (Pg171). After reading this, I can only think of the recent event when most of the propped up “good guys” in the Democratic Party (Bernie, AoC, etc) voted to send more of the United States’ money to Israel, rather than call for a permanent ceasefire and invest that money into affordable housing and healthcare for millions of Americans that cannot afford either.
I found Johnson’s critique very well researched from a class and labor perspective and something that stood out to me was his perspective on how the Black Lives Matter movement felt very much like a marketing campaign at certain points with the founders getting into arguments with individuals wanting to use the hashtag. He writes how it showed more entrepreneurial product branding than something born out of a social struggle and that was interesting to note (pg43).
He also criticizes the idea of black exceptionalism and how trying to establish a collective unity amongst Black Americans is not possible because there are differing politics between what Johnson identifies as the Black Bourgeois and the Black working class, using examples of how Black Americans who buy into the neoliberalization of their communities and will eventually push/vote for more policing and will be harder on crime (pg46, 53)
As far as the responses go, the essays critiquing Johnson’s essay do bring up solid points, however, Johnson’s follow-up essay at the end acknowledges said critiques and even points out their arguments still rely on not only the neoliberal identity politics, but also the hopeful outlook that the Democratic party would unite the large demographic of black voters. Johnsons writes about the Democratic Party “What should be clear to anyone paying attention is that the New Democrats are much more willing to embrace versions of liberal anti-racism than they are willing to make substantial commitments to broadly redistributive public policy. (Pg171). After reading this, I can only think of the recent event when most of the propped up “good guys” in the Democratic Party (Bernie, AoC, etc) voted to send more of the United States’ money to Israel, rather than call for a permanent ceasefire and invest that money into affordable housing and healthcare for millions of Americans that cannot afford either.
July 22, 2023
3.5 stars because of length. I would've appreciated more essays pushing back on contemporary (Black) progressive ideology.
This is a collection of essays where Cedric (and others) debate the political and ideological legitimacy of Black Lives Matter, snd many on going issues with Black political thought/actions today and addressing past Black political engagement.
I started this essay collection months ago, and just finished it today.
But this was rsally interesting to read, as it is very difficult to find any class analysis at all from progressives and Black liberals in general refuse to engage class realities at all (even among or between Black people).
I know a lot of Black liberals enjoyed his first book, BLACK MARXISM (which I have not read), but they should definitely read this as well.
Pushing back on ahistorial, or outright falss claims, from Black liberals about Black history is paramount.
I also liked the inclusion of Bayard Rustin, who white Quakers are obsessed with since he is a famous gay, Black Quaker. But they never talk about his politics, as expected, so this book can be a nice foray into Rustin and his political work during the civil rights movement.
This is a collection of essays where Cedric (and others) debate the political and ideological legitimacy of Black Lives Matter, snd many on going issues with Black political thought/actions today and addressing past Black political engagement.
I started this essay collection months ago, and just finished it today.
But this was rsally interesting to read, as it is very difficult to find any class analysis at all from progressives and Black liberals in general refuse to engage class realities at all (even among or between Black people).
I know a lot of Black liberals enjoyed his first book, BLACK MARXISM (which I have not read), but they should definitely read this as well.
Pushing back on ahistorial, or outright falss claims, from Black liberals about Black history is paramount.
I also liked the inclusion of Bayard Rustin, who white Quakers are obsessed with since he is a famous gay, Black Quaker. But they never talk about his politics, as expected, so this book can be a nice foray into Rustin and his political work during the civil rights movement.
November 2, 2023
Intellectually rigorous and ranges, quite smartly, far from widely accepted viewpoints on racism, leftist politics, BLM, the Black Power Movement, and social justice reform. I loved every bit of what Johnson writes. He obviously has a deep-seated respect for his place in the discussions he involves himself in, but he never shies from pointing out, with facts, when accepted narratives are based on falsehoods, misperceptions, and self-interested posturing by his opponents or dissenters. I won't even try to summarize, just read this.
"Taxonomy is not critique".
"Taxonomy is not critique".
April 5, 2023
Tracked this down immediately after reading his new book (After Black Lives Matter), which I thought was a big shrug of the shoulders. This one is better — the polemic is juicier and better targeted. I wish they gave him better interlocutors in the response and I still think he is wishy-washy about the relative importance of relating to the Democratic Party, but otherwise he puts in a good showing here.
January 2, 2026
interesting read that expanded my critical thinking skills on affinity-group organizing and material progress towards the welfare state and community world-building. what do we want & how do we get it. found supporting evidence to be quite shaky and unsatisfactory, but intelligent and useful points nonetheless.
September 6, 2024
Excellent
November 15, 2022
short text about black lives matter and criticism of their techniques. i am undecided about the text, as I found the structure quite bizarre - the first chapter was the original text and the following were reactions and responses. equally i am undecided about what i agree with in the text, as the text felt very academic and at times I struggled to extract information from the text.
March 13, 2023
Huzzah, finished a book! Been a minute since that happened. Anyway, for starters - the book was definitely a bit over my head and a bit bland to read. I’m sure for some this is riveting all the way through, because at times it was for me, but it was just a bit too intellectual for me, I hate to say.
Beyond that though, it was a really intriguing read. I am really glad to have read it and I’m glad it generally exists because like… I think it is good to critique our current movements when they could be doing more. And look, Black Lives Matter is fantastic; however, I think back to the words of Kim Foster in the summer of 2020 where she was like, “We literally have so many people on our side right now protesting, and so much momentum. And we’re just gonna focus policing? When we could be demand better wages and protection and this and that and the other thing? In the middle of a pandemic?” Because yeah, I do think BLM can be a bit… narrow-minded. Importantly narrow-minded, but even still.
Johnson in specific focuses on adding class to the BLM analysis. I’m all about it, but I’m just a little stupid so I don’t totally understand what he’s talking about lol. But it is a good critique that not a Black people have the same experience - that experience is differentiated by class. And to pretend that all Black people do have the same experience is not politically advantageous as it ignores the particular struggles of lower class Black people. Similarly, you write off lower class white people who are also struggling, and they are quite a politically advantageous group.
I also really enjoyed the last essay on current Leftism and Democrats. Don’t know that I have a whole lot to say about it, just that I agree that the Democratic LOVES progressivism as long as we don’t challenge private property.
Beyond that though, it was a really intriguing read. I am really glad to have read it and I’m glad it generally exists because like… I think it is good to critique our current movements when they could be doing more. And look, Black Lives Matter is fantastic; however, I think back to the words of Kim Foster in the summer of 2020 where she was like, “We literally have so many people on our side right now protesting, and so much momentum. And we’re just gonna focus policing? When we could be demand better wages and protection and this and that and the other thing? In the middle of a pandemic?” Because yeah, I do think BLM can be a bit… narrow-minded. Importantly narrow-minded, but even still.
Johnson in specific focuses on adding class to the BLM analysis. I’m all about it, but I’m just a little stupid so I don’t totally understand what he’s talking about lol. But it is a good critique that not a Black people have the same experience - that experience is differentiated by class. And to pretend that all Black people do have the same experience is not politically advantageous as it ignores the particular struggles of lower class Black people. Similarly, you write off lower class white people who are also struggling, and they are quite a politically advantageous group.
I also really enjoyed the last essay on current Leftism and Democrats. Don’t know that I have a whole lot to say about it, just that I agree that the Democratic LOVES progressivism as long as we don’t challenge private property.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews