Podcast Summary
Podcast: New Books Network
Episode: Meredith L. Roman, "The Black Panthers and the Soviets: A Comparative History of Human Rights Movements" (Bloomsbury, 2025)
Date: October 5, 2025
Host: Dr. Miranda Melcher
Guest: Dr. Meredith Roman
Overview
This episode explores Dr. Meredith Roman’s new book, The Black Panthers and the Soviets: A Comparative History of Human Rights Movements, which examines parallels and differences in human rights activism between the Black Panther Party in the United States and Soviet dissidents during the Cold War era. Dr. Roman unpacks how both groups emerged in response to distinct but oddly complementary systems of state violence and repression, and compares their rhetoric, strategies, challenges, and the state responses they encountered.
Key Discussion Points and Insights
Origins and Motivation for the Book
[02:28–05:28]
- Dr. Roman’s academic background combines Soviet history and comparative Black history.
- Inspiration came during a Phi Alpha Theta student conference panel on Soviet dissidents, which highlighted a lack of contextual comparison to U.S. repression (notably the Black freedom struggle).
- Roman describes discomfort with a Cold War framing that positioned the U.S. as uniquely "free," inspiring her comparative approach.
“It was an all white space, and it seemed like a Cold War legacy of talking about how awful the Soviet Union was…in a way that reinforced this understanding of the United States as a place where such atrocities…could not exist.”
— Meredith Roman [04:18]
Comparative Contexts: Desegregation and Destalinization
[06:13–10:02]
- Both the Black freedom struggle and Soviet destalinization occurred in tandem, aiming to fulfill national promises of justice and equality.
- U.S. and Soviet leaders both pursued reforms for domestic legitimacy and global influence—especially with decolonizing nations observing.
- Initial reforms led to significant backlash in both societies—anti-democratic in forms unique to each system.
“Stalinization or Stalinism and Jim Crowism were systems of…injustice that were upheld by violence, that were making it harder for leaders to sell these systems on a global stage…”
— Meredith Roman [06:37]
- The suppression and reversal of reforms created space for grassroots movements: the Black Panthers and Soviet dissidents.
Shared Goals and Language: Naming and Ending State Violence
[10:15–17:13]
- Both the Panthers and Soviet dissidents defined themselves around ending state violence—physical and systemic.
- Soviet activists: “rights defenders” (pravozashchitniki).
- Black Panthers: Chose the image of the panther—defensive, not offensive.
- Both groups expanded notions of violence to include systemic harms: inadequate housing, education, healthcare (Panthers); repression of expression, assembly (dissidents).
“Ending violence, ending state violence…was an overarching goal and naming that violence, because…authorities didn’t see this as violence.”
— Meredith Roman [11:45]
- Each group wielded “human rights” language differently:
- Soviet activists: prioritized civil and political rights.
- Panthers: focused on economic and social rights, realms neglected by the U.S. civil rights movement due to anti-communist pressures.
Lack of Awareness and Deliberate Separation
[17:13–22:13]
- Neither group acknowledged—or sought connection with—the other.
- Cold War politics and propaganda prompted resentment and ignorance toward each other's struggles.
- Soviet dissidents resented official praise of Black activists; Panthers ignored Soviet dissidents, dismissed the USSR as imperialist, and focused on solidarity with the Global South.
“It’s tragic…that Cold War politics prevent either side from really engaging with…paying much attention to the other.”
— Meredith Roman [17:27]
Investigating and Documenting State Abuses
[22:28–29:57]
- Both movements prioritized documenting local abuses:
- Panthers’ newspaper chronicled police brutality and systemic violence in Black communities.
- Soviet samizdat (esp. Chronicle of Current Events) tracked repression, often anonymously, and circulated information abroad via translation and radio.
“That impetus to bear witness, I think, is one of the most salient features.”
— Meredith Roman [26:41]
- Despite different publishing environments, both groups had an urge to “at least bear witness,” even when the possibility of justice was remote.
Relationship with Mainstream Media
[29:57–38:57]
- Both groups saw mainstream media as complicit in silencing or distorting their perspectives:
- Soviet media was strictly state-controlled, but overexposure risked turning dissidents into folk heroes.
- U.S. media, while not censored, criminalized Black radicals, dismissing or pathologizing Black communities and legitimizing state violence.
“They both claimed that their societies were free of lawlessness…And the only sources of…lawlessness…were the members of the ‘Soviet dissident movement’ or the Black Panthers themselves…”
— Meredith Roman [37:47]
Law Enforcement Tactics: Division and Repression
[38:57–47:51]
- Both the KGB and FBI used infiltration, surveillance, and sowing internal divisions to weaken the movements.
- The U.S. context allowed for more extensive informants, and the Panthers underestimated the government’s willingness to employ illegal tactics.
- Noteworthy episodes:
- KGB compelled high-profile Soviet dissidents to recant, demoralizing the movement.
- FBI and Chicago police’s assassination of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark increased community support for the Panthers, prompting a shift to less visible forms of disruption and internal sabotage.
“The emphasis on dissension, sowing betrayal, dissension, division is the way that the FBI and the KGB see as the path towards neutralizing both movements.”
— Meredith Roman [45:50]
Parallels—But Not Equivalence
[47:51–48:43]
- Roman cautions against oversimplifying the cases as identical.
“I would never want anyone to walk away with the idea that I’m claiming these movements and the repression that they experience are the same…But we shouldn’t let those differences delude us into thinking there are also no parallels or similarities…on the side of activists as well as authorities.”
— Meredith Roman [48:15]
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
-
On the origins of the book:
“It seemed like a Cold War legacy…reinforcing the understanding of the United States as a place where such atrocities and authoritarian tendencies could not exist.”
— Meredith Roman [04:18] -
On defining violence:
“…violence was understood not just in physical terms, but more metaphorical terms as the violence of impoverishment and being deprived of these rights.”
— Meredith Roman [12:36] -
On documentation and justice:
“…there’s no justice for the families of police brutality in the United States, at the same time, at least we want to bear witness.”
— Meredith Roman [26:50] -
On sowing division:
“The emphasis on dissension, sowing betrayal, dissension, division is the way that the FBI and the KGB see as the path towards neutralizing both movements.”
— Meredith Roman [45:50]
Timestamps for Key Segments
- [02:28] Dr. Roman’s academic background and book origins
- [06:13] Comparative discussion: desegregation and destalinization
- [10:15] Shared goals: defining and naming state violence
- [17:13] Cold War politics and lack of mutual recognition
- [22:28] Documenting state abuses and the role of grassroots journalism
- [29:57] The role and limitations of the mainstream press
- [38:57] Law enforcement tactics: surveillance, infiltration, and sowing division
- [47:51] Nuances in parallelism—caution against equivalence
- [48:59] Preview of future research directions
Concluding Thoughts
Dr. Meredith Roman’s research contends that, despite distinct environments, both the Black Panthers and Soviet human rights defenders emerged in response to domestic and international pressures for reform, employed innovative grassroots documentation, and were met with sophisticated state efforts at division and criminalization. While there are limits to comparison, her work encourages consideration of the transnational patterns of state repression and the global language of human rights activism—a perspective that remains potent and relevant today.
Next steps:
Dr. Roman is seeking to expand on connections between U.S. narratives about Soviet dissidents and American self-identity as a “refuge from state violence,” especially the intertwining of anti-communism and white supremacy in the shaping of human rights discourse.