Talk:1876 South Carolina gubernatorial election

Black Democrats?
One anonymous reader insist there were few black Democrats. And it is true as Simkins and Woody reported, black Democrats were systematically harassed and discriminated against by other blacks, to prevent them from voting.(Simkins and Woody p 512-13)  More recently Poole has found considerable evidence; to quote from his article in the Journal of Southern History:  blacks, in the "view of Hampton and many other Democratic leaders, would have a role to play in the new post-Reconstruction order. "Black Red Shirts" made a prominent appearance in many of the parades and were often placed conspicuously on the speakers' platform. One observer noted that Democratic campaign managers appeared "solicitous about them and gave them front seats on the stands." (p 583) In one city, a local black leader testified that he had "voted as many [black Democrats] as between one and two hundred at Abbeville" (p 583) [Poole "Religion, Gender, and the Lost Cause..." J Southern History, Vol. 68, No. 3 (Aug., 2002), pp. 573-598] Northern newspaper reporters on the scene said that about 7000 blacks were enrolled in colored Democratic clubs. (Simkins and Woody p 511-12). Rjensen (talk) 07:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, Edmund Drago documented black Democrats and black Red Shirts in his 1998 history, but they were certainly not the only blacks to suffer intimidation related to voting.Parkwells (talk) 13:49, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


 * There were and there may have been some who were voluntarily so. Given the very widespread violence against African American voters though, it's likely the vast majority were coerced. The claim that blacks thought life was better under slavery from the same book I just marked as dubious. No doubt such testimony was produced and documented at the time, but whether it was coerced should be considered. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:54, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

POV and lack of cites
By the lack of cites, there is much unsourced material presented here, and a bias that suggests the black militias were responsible for most of the pre-election violence, which is not supported by the consensus of historians on this period. The Red Shirts have been called the "military arm" of the Democratic Party by historian George Rable; they practiced intimidation and violence at Hamburg, Ellenton, Charleston and other places. The only incident in which more whites were killed than blacks was at Cainhoy, near Charleston. Will be adding content and cites to provide more documented material. Meanwhile, Ehren K. Foley's South Carolina during Reconstruction website provides an interesting overview and has a deep list of sources. See General Martin W. Gary's "Plan of the Campaign of 1876".Ehlen K. Foley, "Sites of Violence: Cainhoy Riot," South Carolina during Reconstruction website, Citations: "Plan of the Campaign of 1876", Papers of Martin Witherspoon Gary, South Caroliniana Library, Columbia, South Carolina.Parkwells (talk) 13:49, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * This article's emphasis on Republican violence against African Americans is pretty bizarre and based on a single source that isn't online for me to check. I cleaned up a lot of the unsourced and unlikely claims. The timeline really needs work though. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Re Drago: he zeroes in on a small black element that opposed the mainstream of black opinion in 1876. a major university press book is vetted by numerous editors and outside reviewers, and represents a consensus of scholarship. that is exactly the level of reliability Wikipedia wants. the reviews of Drago have been favorable,. The book is available free through any public or academic library. Inclusion of Drago's findings are appropriate in the context of a fringe element among black voters.  using it to divert attention from the main facts is a serious distortion, and RevelationDirect is justified in revising it.  All the RS are in agreement at the high level of Democratic violence. See also 1) Richard Zuczek,  "The last campaign of the Civil War: South Carolina and the revolution of 1876." Civil War History 42.1 (1996): 18-31.  he writes: " the 1876 gubernatorial campaign in the Palmetto State was really a military operation, complete with armies, commanders, and bloodshed. Indeed, South Carolina might be a classic case of insurgency, with an attempt to overthrow, by terrorism and violence, a standing government."  2) Ronald F. King, "Counting the Votes: South Carolina's Stolen Election of 1876" Journal of Interdisciplinary History (Autumn 2001), Vol. 32 Issue 2, pp 169-191. states: "Application of social science methodology to the gubernatorial election of 1876 in South Carolina confirms charges of fraud raised by Republicans at the time of the election.... [the result] was the product of massive voter fraud and intimidation of black voters." Rjensen (talk) 05:45, 25 August 2017 (UTC)