In the Port Huron Statement (1962), the Black Panthers' Ten-Point Program (1966), and Cesar Chavez's "Letter from Delano" (1969), what common problems are identified within American society? What are some of the differences? What role did each of these documents suggest Americans should play in achieving social justice? Are their arguments persuasive? Why or why not?

The writers of all three documents express their distrust of authority and call for a reordering of society. The "Port Huron Statement" finds fault with the establishment and their hypocrisy and calls for a "new left," run by young people, to reorder national policies. The "Port Huron Statement" mentions in particular the troubled existence of the young in a world overshadowed by nuclear threat and the need for new values in foreign policy.
The Black Panther's "10-Point Statement" also calls for a reordering of the government so that black people are better able to control their own destinies and receive justice. Like the "Port Huron Statement," this document demands that more power be distributed to the people. Unlike the "Port Huron Statement," it also calls for black people to arm themselves for the purposes of self-defense. Finally, Chavez's "Letter from Delano" calls for migrant workers to strike, taking action into their own hands, to demand justice. Like the Black Panthers' document, it suggests that violence is at times necessary to achieve this justice. You may have other ideas about the commonalities and differences among these three important historical documents. I will leave it to you to decide if the documents are persuasive. They were persuasive to young university students, members of the Black Panthers, and members of the United Farm Workers when the documents were written.
https://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/111huron.html

https://libraries.ucsd.edu/farmworkermovement/essays/essays/Letter%20From%20Delano.pdf

https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/workers/black-panthers/1966/10/15.htm