Talk:Jayuya Uprising

?
The statement that 70% of Jayuya was destroyed after air and land bombardment is false. Proof lies in the fact that the loss of life putting down the rebellion was minuscule, less than a handful of nationalists died in that minor putsch. How someone can account for a bombardment of the magnitude described on a tiny hill town would cause no casualties is a laugh.

I also disagree with the statements that the PRican flag was banned and that espousing independence publicly was banned, since many leader of PRican independence were never jailed for speech. This and a series of articles in Wikipedia ignore the electoral failure of the nationalists. Peaking in elections in the mid-30s, but always a minority, they quickly became an irrelevant force in electoral politics. This played a strong role in their choice to advocate violence. Finally, the articles ignore the proto-fascist qualities of the Nationalist party.


 * Articles in Wikipedia depend on reliable verifiable sources which are cited. Wikipedia is not about what we like or dislike. In Wikipedia editors can not be baised and express their personal opinions and points of view. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:16, 20 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Can you list the proto-fascist qualities of the Nationalist party? The archival evidence (most of the sources in this article) shows there weren't any. If possibly there were few, they were over-amplified by the United States government to excuse repression of a national liberation movement. Making outlandish claims like this requires you to provide evidence. ExampleUser777 (talk) 16:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Maybe the magnitude may not have been as cited in many websites however, I believe in that old saying "A picture is worth a thousand words". Therefore, I invite you to view these pictures: * Furthur Photos of the Revolt. Another thing, Jesus T. Piñero, was appointed governor by the United States and therefore had to respond to the President himself. It was during the "Cold War" era and when anything or anyone who spoke against the government of the U.S. was either considered a communist or simply anti-american. While it is true that the Nationalist Party at first participated in the electorial process without any success, they then adopted the philosphy of obtaining independence by any means even with the use of violence.

Since, this was against the democratic principals of the United States, Governor Piñero forbide any political speech that would advocate Independence through violent means. All this occurred during the era known as McCarthyism. In case you are not familiar with that era, here is a website that you may look up: Age of McCarthyism. The flag of Puerto Rico did not become the official flag until 1954 and was considered a symbol of independence. Ref: Flag of Puerto Rico "The flag soon came to symbolize the ideals of the Puerto Rican independence movement of the time". Therefore, its public display was forbidden, the only flag allowed to be displayed in public was the U.S. flag. Even today, while in the United States we display our flag as a sign of our cultural hertiage and unity, in Puerto Rico it is rare the house where you see a Puerto Rican flag waving outside without the fear of being tagged an "independentista". Take care, Tony the Marine 19:15, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Wonderful that the writer didn't identify himself... he would have denied the Holocaust...


 * There's a famous incident that happened after the Uprising at the nearby town of Orocovis. Close to 3,000 people were arrested and jailed across Puerto Rico as a result of the uprising. And there was this store owner in the town I mentioned who was jailed for a day from flying the Puerto Rican flag from the balcony of his home. The local Police confiscated his flag. When he returned the next day, he got and flew a bigger flag, and was thus arrested and sentenced to spend a full month in jail. His flag was confiscated also. His son, quite annoyed by the situation, then painted a 20 feet by 10 feet image of the flag in the side of the store. "Let them take away that one, if they dare!", was his response. He was harassed by the Police, but the incident then caught the eye of the Puerto Rican press. His father was released soon after, and the Police didn't bother either one afterwards...


 * A local from Jayuya told me that the actual figure of buildings destroyed by the U.S. Air Force could actually had been close to 40%... but think of it... they were bombing civilians in what they considered U.S. soil. That's one of the best kept secrets of the Cold War... Demf (talk) 04:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your defense Tony the Marine. I salute you. ExampleUser777 (talk) 19:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

The so-called "gag law," Law 53, may have indeed existed, but its purpose was for the insular government to have a blunt instrument to use against the Nationalists without having to resort to the niceties of due process. This was wrong in its intent and application, but the fact remains that while I was growing up in Puerto Rico in the 1950's (I was born in 1946) THERE WERE PUERTO RICAN FLAGS everywhere, from gift shops to people's houses. The Partido Independentista Puertorriqueno, which was a legitimate political party pursuing independence through legal and constitutional means, flew Puerto Rican flags everywhere. My own uncle ran for Mayor of Guaynabo twice, on the PIP ticket, with Puerto Rican flags flying everywhere. NOBODY cared, because they were not espousing violence. Albizu Campos and the Nationalist party simply advocated a violent overthrow of the insular government, and their answer to everything was guns and bombs. Of course the government and police pursued them ruthlessly. In my opinion, too ruthlessly, and the treatment accorded Albizu Campos was a tragedy of the highest order, but please do not generalize or push an idealized romantic fiction about "oppression" of anybody who flew a PR flag or argued for independence. The harsh treatment was meted out to those VERY few who were advocating and planning armed insurrection, as any governmnet would do.98.170.197.222 (talk) 04:20, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Further prove
Further prove about the prohibition of the public display of the Puerto Rican flag as cited from: Estado Libre Associado

'''"The flag was created in 1895, by the Puerto Rican section of the Cuban Revolutionary Party, which advocated independence for Puerto Rico and Cuba from Spanish rule." (...) "Its design is the same as the Cuban flag, but with the colors inverted. It has five horizontal stripes, alternating red and white, with a white star on a blue triangle in the extreme left." (...) "Before 1952, police arrested anyone displaying the flag on charges of insubordination against the United States. When Puerto Rico became a Commonwealth that year, the flag became the island's official emblem."'''

Unsourced assertions
This article and the one on Blanca Canales say she was a leader of the Jayuya uprising, as if to add to her stature, but there is no substantive evidence cited for that, only that she stored arms and raised the Puerto Rican flag. There must surely be better sources that the lightweight websites generally cited in these articles, and not more advocacy websites, but journals or academic books.Parkwells (talk) 20:52, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, the photo of troops was clearly labeled as "Puerto Rican National Guard", not US Army national troops. Too much POV pushing on these related pages.Parkwells (talk) 20:55, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


 * This article has been built over the past eight years - with contributions, input and sourcing from over fifty editors. On December 7, 2012, an editor who is new to this article, deleted major portions of the article. Of course, all editors are invited to contribute to Wikipedia. But evisceration of a long-standing article, over a period of a few minutes, with no prior discussion or consensus, is not an appropriate way to edit. Please exercise more care in this and other articles. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 01:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Concur with Nelson. It appears this may be an attempt by Anglophone U.S. citizens to whitewash unpleasant details from the article. ExampleUser777 (talk) 16:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Photo caption was wrong
The details of the photo of troops clearly says they were Puerto Rican National Guard. An RS needs to be provided to change it to US National Guard.Parkwells (talk) 14:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

US President role
The US President does not declare martial law in a state or lower-level jurisdiction; that is done by regional authorities, likely the Puerto Rican governor of the time. Parkwells (talk) 14:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Problems with sources
As noted before, there are problems with sources in this article. This is the English-language Wikipedia, so the reliability of the article is adversely affected by having most secondary sources be in Spanish. Raw primary files, especially from a commercial website, do not constitute Reliable Sources; the FBI files are impossible to access, and a range of 20 pages is not accurate for a cite. I have deleted content supposedly derived from that source, but indicated it as an External Link. The NY Latino Journal link has stopped working. Editors should seek English-language histories or academic studies to support content of the article.Parkwells (talk) 14:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)