Kwame Ture on liberals
"The way the oppressor tries to stop the oppressed from using violence as a means to attain liberation is to raise ethical or moral questions about violence. I want to state emphatically here that violence in any society is neither moral nor is it ethical.

It is neither right nor is it wrong. It is just simply a question of who has the power to legalize violence.

Let me give an example: If I were in Vietnam, if I killed thirty yellow people who were pointed out to me by white Americans as my enemy, I would be given a medal.

2/

I would become a hero. I would have killed America's enemy--but America's enemy is not my enemy. If I were to kill thirty white policemen in Washington, D.C., who have been brutalizing my people and who are my enemy, I would get the electric chair.
/3

It is simply a question of who has the power to legalize violence. In Vietnam our violence is legalized by white America. In Washington, D.C., my violence is not legalized, because Africans living in Washington D.C., do not have the power to legalize their violence.
/4

I used that example only to point out that the oppressor never really puts an ethical or moral judgment on violence, except when the oppressed picks up guns against the oppressor. For the oppressor, violence is simply the expedient thing to do.
/5

Is it not violent for a child to go to bed hungry in the richest country in the world? I think that is violent. But that type of violence is so institutionalized that it becomes a part of our way of life. Not only do we accept poverty, we even find it normal.
/6

And that again is because the oppressor makes his violence a part of the functioning of society. But the violence of the oppressed becomes disruptive. It is disruptive to the ruling circles of a given society.
/7

What we want to do for our people, the oppressed, is to begin to legitimatize violence in their minds. So that for us violence against the oppressor will be expedient. This is very important, because we have all been brainwashed into accepting questions of moral judgment
/8

when violence is used against the oppressor.

Now, I think the biggest problem with the white liberal in America, and perhaps the liberal around the world, is that his primary task is to stop confrontation, stop conflicts, not to redress grievances, but to stop confrontation.
/9

and this is very clear, it must become very, very clear in all our minds. Because once we see what the primary task of the liberal is, then we can see the necessity of not wasting time with him. His primary role is to stop confrontation. Because the liberal assumes a priori
/10

that a confrontations not going to solve the problem. This, of course, is an incorrect assumption. We need not waste time showing that this assumption of the liberals is clearly ridiculous. I think that history has shown that confrontation in many cases has resolved
/11

quite a number of problems--look at the Russian revolution, the Cuban revolution, the Chinese revolution. In many cases, stopping confrontation really means prolonging suffering. The liberal is so preoccupied with stopping confrontation that he usually finds himself defending
/12

and calling for law and order, the law and order of the oppressor."
/13

-The Pitfalls of Liberalism

This essay is found in Stokely Speaks, pgs. 165-175

I believe it's transcribed here as I didn't type it all out. https://unableunwilling.wordpress.com/2016/06/03/the-pitfalls-of-liberalism-by-stokely-carmichael-kwame-ture/