Talk:Red Summer/Archive 1

Untitled
The page is vague, detail poor, and lacks NPOV. Details on the Red Scare page regarding this Red Summer indicate that there were 36 bombs mailed out on May 1st 1919, an act of terrorism that is believed to be instigated by the Communist party of the USA. This page has no mention of this act, preferring to claim that lack of labor price controls caused race riots - a spurious claim at best. Octothorn 05:06, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Uh, the Red Scare page does not have anything on bombs during May 1919.-212.85.24.83 13:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

It's called "Red" Summer as in "Bloody" Summer. It's not a reference to anything leftist, though confusion is understandable.

Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 17:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

- I did a little fact checking on your Red Summer Riots supposedly initiated by whites against innocent blacks. I did a random check on this site ... including these alleged 'riots':: Syracuse, NY, Ocmulgee, Ga., Sylvester, Ga., Putnam County, Ga.,  Monticello, Miss., Scranton, Penn., Bloomington, IL., Newberry, S.C., Texarkana, Tx., Coatsville, Pa.... Either there was no riot at all!...or your facts are wrong, or it was blacks that initiated the confrontation. I'm not surprised, as I have seen so many instances where Wiki obfuscates facts, distorts facts or peddles outright lies to conceal blacks provocation of white people i.e. promote black victimization. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.240.54.110 (talk) 04:44, 7 October 2018 (UTC) To anon

This page needs a rewrite. Right now it's a mess. It makes categorical statements, such as the opening one, "Red Summer is a term coined by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)".... OK, never heard that before, state the source. The tone of this page says that the Red Summer was basicly a war of whites against blacks. Was this the case? Were there NO whites on the Left in this fight? The ACLU? United Methodists? The suffurage movement? Was it strictly white against black? This short page paints that picture for me and it doen't ring true. Is Red Summer a subset of the Red Scare? If that's true, it should be linked in the text and the history categories. This page has been under the 'Articles lacking sources' category for some time. It needs to be brought up to Wiki standards. Mytwocents 05:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

-

The term "by any means necessary" in this article is confusing. The link to the term says the phrase was coined by Sartre in 1965 and popularized by Malcolm X. If the Red Summer was in 1919, it doesn't seem possible that this statement is true.--K2rk 15:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

-

npov
what specific changes are needed to remove the NPOV label. Thanks Hmains 01:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

label
I have removed the label on the article. No one responded with any statement of problems.

james weldon johnson
I just added the point that "Red Summer" was coined by author James Weldon Johnson.. heres the source for it, I just am not familiar with wikipedia syntax to actually footnote it.. but it is sourced...

Altman, Susan. "Red Summer." Encyclopedia of African-American Heritage, Second Edition. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2000. American History Online, Online (9 February 2006)

I am doing a term paper on the Red Summer, so may add more stuff later, if I have time... --Evolrewsna 03:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

references...
the first reference "Red Summer - A Season of Fear" is total crap.. I'm sorry, it's used (at least where it is linked from) as an educational tool... I doubt the validity of it... or at least I would not stake anything worth anything on it... --Evolrewsna 03:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

delete "by any means necessary"

 * --black leaders promoted self-defense by any means necessary.

According to the linked article, this phrase was coined in 1963 so it is inappropriate to use it in this context. AdamRetchless 15:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Many
Many of those called black in the article were really mulattos.

Don't attempt to "re-write" history
I know that Wikipedia is open to everyone and allows edits from all people in the wiki community; but it is not ok to attempt to re-write history! I recently views the "Red Summer of 1919" article, and noticed that someone edited the contents of the page to read...."whites were attacked"....were it should read "blacks were attacked." This occurred ~ 3 times in the brief article. Therefore, I believe this edit was intended to dismiss historical fact. If you are made uncomfortable by historical truths; then that is a personal problem you need to address on your own time. Do not edit articles according to your interpretation of historical fact. If we permitted this then there would be articles that reinforced racist believes such as " the holocaust is only a myth “and” the bombing of Hiroshima never happened " all the time. The deletion of "black" and the insertion of "white" shows definite racist implications. I have a master's in African American Studies and I assure you.....the Red Summer was an attest to the endurance and perseverance of the African in America; and it it's also a testament to how far American has come in the 500 year history of the plight of all her people. Out of respect for all those who visit the site; DONT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN AGAIN.

Regards,

Klmcnair (talk) 23:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Who the hell are you to tell anybody to "Don't ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN AGAIN" Its stupid posts like this that make it seem justified that this thing happened. The bombing of Hiroshima was racist? Ummm, go back and get a masters in something else rather than reverse discrimination ok!! Whites were attacked in this just as much as blacks were. Blacks were defeated for the most part which is why a lot of people today are still pissed off.

Regards YankeeRoman(65.222.151.74 (talk) 14:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC))

Reaction of refusal of the racial equality proposal
deleted on 18:29, 8 October 2010 as rm post hoc propter hoc logic. See below. Power And Prejudice: The Politics And Diplomacy Of Racial Discrimination Westview Press (1988) ISBN 0813306787 is written by American historian Paul Gordon Lauren.

below is the citation of the book page 99.

below is comment by Jerome J. Shestack Chairman, International League for Human Rights and former U.S. representative to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights citing from back cover of the book.

--Bukubku (talk) 23:24, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Did you read this article carefully before inserted this material? The generalist work you cite is contradicted by all the specialized studies cited elsewhere in this article. Each violent episode arose from the standard turf wars based on local conditions. Often blacks were responding to white attacks, which could hardly represent a response on the part of American blacks to the relatively obscure workings of the peace conference. I suspect your knowledge of the period is slight and you have been misled by one author who is trying too hard to make connections. Closer observers recognize this as a period of heightened racial strife, but all set the "riots" in the context of high unemployment, high inflation, and black frustration following loyal service in the segregated military. For the sake of completeness, I've been considering expanding this section with info on renewed segregation under Pres. Wilson, but no one who has looked at these events carefully would ever drag Versailles into the picture. In fact the entire article is a persuasive argument against viewing the violence as politically imspired. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 13:42, 9 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I read the book and your comment. Your comment is one wikipedian's original opinion. We should respect more reliable and verifiable historian's work rather than one wikipedian's OR.--Bukubku (talk) 10:50, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Reliance on contemporary press coverage
The article relies overly on press coverage in terms of cites, which doesn't give much sense of how historians have evaluated the times and causes, but adds much inflammatory language of the time. I think it needs more perspective from books and articles written by historians about this period. As it is, you read much of the rhetoric then.Parkwells (talk) 16:24, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Article needs recatergorization and rewrite
This article is in need of reworking, and whoever categorized it clearly misunderstood the meaning of "red" in this context. This shouldn't be in the socialism project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.77.142 (talk) 02:46, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 23 October 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved Fuortu (talk) 05:58, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Incorrect Date
The date of the riot in New London, CT was May 29, 1919. The NY Times article that is referenced in the Chronology section incorrectly listed the date as June 13, 1919. I corrected the Chronology table but I'm not sure how to noted that the date was incorrect in the referenced article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreimiller (talk • contribs) 19:26, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Red Summer (1919) → Red Summer – Unnecessary disambiguation. – Gorobay (talk) 22:23, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:00, 23 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Not sure I can complete this one, Red Summer of 1919 currently redirects to this version of the title too, so I'm actually unsure which title is more common for the target of the article.  Steven   Crossin  23:28, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 14:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination. &mdash;Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 04:42, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Events section
Suggest the length of the description of the Washington riots and Elaine massacre should be shorter to match those of the other events listed. Both are currently lengthy, yet have their own Wikipedia entries. A single paragraph summary for each would be more consistent. Jkline1605 (talk) 16:51, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Serious errors here'1919 Red Summer'. I have researched most of them...this is what I came up with.

* Syracuse, NY: This seems to be it. LINK

* Ocmulgee, Ga.: No evidence of an actual "riot" - attacking innocent blacks. Three negro churches and a lodge were burned. It seems a negro, Eli Cooper, was deliberately stirring up hatred against white people, and not just demanding an "uprising" but actually planned a racial attack right down to the specific day, including that negroes " ...wipe out the white people" - a racially motivated massacre in the works. White people responded to this threat by lynching Mr. Cooper. The physical structures that were burned were determined to be associated with the meeting places of Eli Cooper and his fellow negro supporters.LINK

* Sylvester, Ga.: Nothing on the Internet to indicate a riot actually occurred.

* Putnam County, Ga.: Nothing on the internet about this race riot. Could it be that Wikipedia is reporting on this riot>>>Link

* Monticello, Miss.: No evidence of this riot on the internet.

* Scranton, Penn,: No evidence of this riot on the internet.

* Bloomington, IL : No evidence of this riot on the internet. Well, there is this one, where twenty negroes attack a white woman Link

* Newberry, S.C. : No race riot here. A black ex-soldier "insulted a white woman". He was arrested then whisked away by the sheriff to another county. A small number of white men came calling at the jail...only to discover the negro was not there. That was the end of it. Link '''
 * ''' Darby, PA : If one did occur, the newspapers missed it. A negro, who was employed by a very well liked middle-aged white man, brutally murdered his employer - skull crushed - in an apparent robbery. Feelings among many white men for a lynching were high... but it never happened. Link


 * Texarkana, Tx.: No evidence of this riot on the internet.


 * Coatsville, Pa. :No evidence of this riot on the internet. Link


 * Hattiesburg, Miss.: No evidence of this riot on the internet

* Philadelphia, Pa. : No real riot situation occurred. White and black youths squared off and some fist fights broke out. The details to this insignificant event are lacking - like what the flashpoint was. Here's the gist of it: Link


 * Port Arthur, Tx.: No riot occurred. Two black males were smoking and irritating a white female passenger on a street car. White males came over and demanded the negroes put their cigarettes out. They continued to blow smoke in the direction of the white female. A fight erupted and the two blacks -who deliberately provoked the incident - got the worst of it.

* Bisbee, AZ (note: this one hardly qualifies as a white-male provoked riot, but here it is) Flashpoint: Negro soldiers from the 10th Calvary, who were said to be "drunk" beat up a white male soldier who had made a disparaging remark toward them. The sheriff of the town requested the negro soldiers give up their revolvers to avoid further trouble - this was a civilian-run town and local law enforcement was the law, so the sheriff had every legal right to request the negroes' weapons. Had the negroes did what was legally required of them to do, which was to surrender their weapons and then return to their base, there would have been no further problem. Instead, not only did the negroes refuse to surrender their weapons but, to add to the provocation, they stayed in town. This, of course, was a deliberate effort by the negroes to upstage the sheriff, local law enforcement and to establish supremacy. The sheriff reacted to this criminal challenge by the negroes and formed a posse to disarm them and all the other negro soldiers in the town (numbering about 100). Predictably, the negro soldiers - with their supremacist attitude - decided to draw their weapons on the local law enforcement officers and shoot at them ... and a street battle ensued. The melee lasted about an hour before the negro soldiers, realizing they couldn't win (or ran out of ammunition) decided to surrender.

Wiki: "At least eight people were shot or seriously wounded in total: Four of the Buffalo Soldiers were shot, two were beaten, a deputy sheriff was "severely injured," and a Mexican bystander named Teresa Leyvas was struck in the head by a stray bullet."

* Longview, TX Flashpoint: A black male was lynched for crawling into a white female's bedroom. A local black male, who was a reporter for a black militancy newspaper called the Black Defender, wrote an article in that newspaper ... stating that the lynched black man and the white female were actually secret lovers desiring to run away together. The article even put words into white female's mouth inferring she was madly in love with the lynched black man - and that the black man was lynched because of this love affair. The brothers of the white female became enraged upon learning of this article...and, to defend the honor of their sister, went after the black reporter and beat him terribly. No other negro was injured in this incident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.117.57.158 (talk) 18:11, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * In the Chronology section most of these are dealt with. At the time the white press was covering up lynching and race riots. As shown in the article and referenced multiple times the ones you couldn't find are referenced in a NY Times October 5, 1919. That article researched all these incidents. This is talked about in the notes. -- Thats Just Great (talk) 18:35, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

"negro" vs. "Negro"
I changed lowercase "negro" to capitalized "Negro" in the article, in the three places that were not in quotations, in accordance with the mid-20th-century practice of attempting to remove some of the disparaging implications. See discussion in African Americans:
 * By the 1940s, the term was commonly capitalized (Negro); but by the mid-1960s, it was considered disparaging.

"Negro" was accepted as normal by many, as both endonym and exonym, until the mid-1960s. The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King used the capitalized form in his writings; so did William C. Sullivan, the head of COINTELPRO, in a memo two days after the "I Have a Dream" speech (given on Aug. 28, 1963), as did many other gevernment employees who, partly yielding to J. Edgar Hoover's firm beliefs, considered King dangerous and feared communist influence on Black people. --Thnidu (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2021 (UTC)