Talk:And you are lynching Negroes

Delisted as Good Article
Suggestions on how to resolve the multiple issues with this article are present at Talk:And you are lynching Negroes/GAR SFB 16:26, 19 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I disagree with some of the suggestions there -- it might be nice if this article could be validly related to the personal lived experiences of United States Black people in some way, but it's not essential, since (as I said previously, see talk page archive 6): "There was a duel of propaganda rhetorics and propagandists, and in fact neither side cared all that much about the fate of actual Black people (who were mostly rather distant, socially and/or geographically from where the propagandizing was going on). The whole thing was mostly not even really about Blacks, but about propaganda memes and tropes that were conveniently at hand for lazy propagandists." AnonMoos (talk) 18:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

This article should discuss modern usage
Russian and particularly Chinese media, politicians and diplomats seem to increasingly try to deflect criticism of their human rights abuse with whataboutism about BLM, George Floyd, and so on. Some source review:


 * Kremlin TV Loves Anti-War Protests—Unless Russia Is the One Waging War (The New Republic, 2014) - specifically mentions this saying in the context of Russia's invasion of Ukraine
 * Soviet Propaganda Back in Play With Ferguson Coverage (The Moscow Times, 2014) - specifically mentions this saying in the context of the above and Ferguson
 * The New Cold War, And Australia’s Role In It (Gizmodo, 2015) - specifically mentions this saying and notes the criticism of racism in US was even voiced by North Korea
 * Donald Trump’s Whataboutism (The Diplomat, 2016) - specifically mentions this saying
 * Give back Gibraltar before criticising us, says Russia (The Sunday Times, 2017) - specifically mentions this saying
 * Fanning the Flames of America's Racial Tensions Is As Russian As Vodka and Blini (Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, 2018) - specifically mentions this saying
 * Donald Trump’s America Can’t Fight Xi Jinping’s China (FP, 2019) - specifically mentions this saying
 * Iran Plays the Race Card (Newsweek, 2020)
 * As U.S. Injustices Rage, China’s Condemnation Reeks of Cynicism (FP, 2020) - relevant context
 * With Support for ‘Black Lives Matter’ China Crosses a Thin Line (The Diplomat, 2020) - relevant context

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:18, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Background / Context
Per reasons cited in the Good Article delisting, this article would be improved by adding background and context to racial affairs in the U.S., and specifically to the actual practice of lynching. I would probably do this as an introductory subsection under History, or possibly as a new introductory section, which draws upon Lynching in the United States and specifically refers readers to that article as "Main". The discussion here should be brief, as it isn't the primary subject of this article. Another user recently tried to add something like this under a new subsection titled "Racism in American History". Unfortunately, that contribution has a long list of problems including clear NPOV issues. I spent a couple hours trying to see if there was something salvageable. However, several specific factual claims seem to contradict the Lynching in the United States article, and as all of the citations are in Persian, I can't validate these claims or evaluate reliability of the sources. Removing the problematic parts would leave almost nothing, so I'm going to remove it and hopefully something better can be worked into the article. I do, however, want to be clear that I am sympathetic to the user's intent. There just isn't much to work with to improve the contribution. CAVincent (talk) 06:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @CAVincent I concur that such a section should not be referenced using Iranian sources (particularly as Iran is a state rife with anti-American unreliable propaganda). At the same time, yes, a brief historical context about the American lynchings would be useful. I propose adding the brief section to the history, with main pointing to the Lynching in the United States article, and with a brief summary, perhaps limited to just the opening sentence from the lead: "Lynching in the United States was the widespread occurrence of extrajudicial killings which began in the pre-Civil War South in the 1830s and ended during the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s. ". While historical context and linking to that article in prominent way is a good idea, we have to be careful to avoid having this article hijacked by anti-American agents, keeping in mind WP:UNDUE and the existence of Russian web brigades, particularly active in the recent days. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:15, 3 March 2022 (UTC)


 * As explained above and in the archives, the main topic of this article is propagandizing that was somewhat remote from actual Black people, so such explanations would be background. "Racism in American History" is an open-ended topic which could fill a 40-volume encyclopedia, so it would be more desirable to have a more specific starting point, something like "Lynching in the 20th-century United States" (or even more specific than that, if possible)... AnonMoos (talk) 13:38, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Redundant sentence added to lede
The final sentence of the lede (its own paragraph) states "Supposedly, use of phrases like these, exemplifying the tu quoque logical fallacy, was an attempt to deflect criticism of the Soviet Union by referring to racial discrimination and lynching in the United States." Everything contained in this sentence has already been stated in the lede. Furthermore it begins with "Supposedly", which is not in accordance with the style manuals that WP recommends, as well as it lacking an article following "Supposedly". Unless anyone would care to defend the sentence's retention, I will delete it. Bricology (talk) 07:36, 24 March 2022 (UTC)


 * How about just removing 'supposedly'? It's bad WP:EDITORIALIZING, but the rest of the summary is fine. Unless it is indeed simply redundant. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:02, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Carmack
The following content was removed as unsourced. Leaving it here in case someone can verify this. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

The use of the phrase as a reference to demagoguery and hypocrisy is traced to U.S. senator Edward W. Carmack during a May 31, 1902, speech in the U.S. Congress, where he said "Senators on the other side of the chamber began to wave the bloody shirt again...[saying] You are lynching negroes in the South. We are lynching them in the Philippine Islands." Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)


 * It is sourced - the date of the speech in Congress and the name of the speaker is there, which is in the US Congressional Record. Minimax Regret (talk) 16:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)


 * It's interesting, but I'm not sure it has much to do with the Soviet propaganda rhetoric which is the main focus of this article. AnonMoos (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I agree. It doesn't belong here.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

It is different in Bulgaria
Don't know about other countries but in Bulgaria we use this line in a different sense. It comes from a joke where a Russian guy is presenting the newest Soviet car and an American ask him questions about its performance, which the Russian ignores. At the end the Russian gets annoyed and ask him "And why are you beating up the Negroes?". The joke ridicules the shortcomings and inefficiencies of the communist system and its response to criticism by whataboutism. It is still used today to ridicule whataboutism or to expose somebody who lacks real arguments. 91.139.166.157 (talk) 14:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)