I think the feeding scheme that the black panthers had was fucking remarkable and one of the best examples of building a mutual aid society in the cracks of state-capital around. If we can provide basic needs for people that's probably the best way to get them on board with our shit.

Don't know much about them or Malcolm X though outside of having watched a few documentaries a while ago.

I mean later on, not so. Its easy to confuse Anti-Imperialist or Post-Colonial thought with Racism some times. Note, the Brother Malcolm went to Hajj where basically the Racist view dissipated but the Anti-Imperialist view was still present. again most of the extreme views dissipated later in life but his ideas on defence on minorities are still one of the most influential aspects of his thought.

I know he was a authoritarian, racist and ultra nationalist.

I'd like to see a citation on him being a racist. He was still very much a sexist authoritarian, but that's par for the course when it comes to black nationalists; scratch that, nationalists in general.

Though I think there could be some interesting discussion about cop patrolling and the use of guns to protect minorities.

...You might want to rephrase that; it sounds like you believe that a police force can be formed to protect minorities using guns. I assume you're referring to the Black Panthers' use of firearms to protect black people from police brutality and how those tactics would useful to today? Insofar as how that links to anarchism, I always thought that the general idea of pro-gun ideas from anarchists could be crudely simplified as "minorities should have firearms in order to protect themselves from fascists that work inside and outside of the law", which I don't think is wrong so much as it is overly simple and ineffective in modern times for various reasons.

The Black Panther Party was easily the most influential and genuine revolutionary group in American history.

Others have noted quite a bit so I don't feel the need to repeat what others have said in a lot of areas. A few things though:

• Pre-Hajj Malcolm was not really authoritarian at all...not in the traditional sense anyway. He was very defferent to, and unequivocal supportive of, Elijah Muhammed...who I would say was quite authoritarian. He was not about himself as leader, which could be implied from your text. If you'd still argue he was, which I believe there is some grounds for, it would be that he was highly religious and similarly believed people should submit to God. So religious authoritarianism of a sort, but that's another matter entirely. There's also the matter of separating authoritarianism from militarism. Cuz he was a militant...no doubt about that.

• Black people in the USA flatly cannot be racist. They can espouse racist ideas...which he did pre-Hajj. Being a racist, as a label, implies power that blacks in the USA do not have and have never had.

• He was a Black Nationalist...which as far as nationalism goes is somewhat of a fantasy. The idea is that the US would give black people their own land and give the ability of self-determination. The problem with labeling a Black Nationalist, especially one from that time, as a Nationalist in the traditional sense is that Black Nationalists by and large did not have a true idea of a nation-state. They couldn't even say one way or the other if they would be a collection of federated cities or a democracy or a republic, etc. Their ideas were bound in relation to.their oppression, so they never even got to the point to see if they really were nationalists in the sense you would consider major political groups as nationalists.

• Post-Hajj Malcolm is the closest thing to a mainstream militant non-race-exclusive leader this country has had in over a century. Certainly the only one with his platform who was Black. John Brown comes to mind...but he wasn't black and frankly didn't have Malcolm's platform either. There are serious issues with the idea that a leader is needed for the work he proposed...but there is no arguing he was that person.

• He was sexist in the same vein as most conservative religous leaders...which is to say 100% sexist. No way around that one.

The Black Panthers on the other hand...there's way too much there to talk about anything specifically. You'll need a more concrete question for that discssion i think.