Talk:Red Summer of 1919

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)

---

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.

Violent reactions also occurred in the United States. Frustrated by the refusal of the peace conference to support the principle of racial equality or self-determination and angered by their own government's deliberate inaction in the face of blatantly illegal and discriminatory policies, many U.S. blacks resolved to demand their full rights of citizenship......These clashing attitudes exploded into open violence during the long, hot summer of 1919. From June to October, the United States witnessed major race riots in Chicago, Knoxville, Omaha, and the nation's own capital, Washingtom, D.C., among other cities. Lynchings, burnings, floggings, shocking terror, and destruction accompanied what some called nothing short of a "race war."....This "Red Summer" that followed the politicics and diplomacy of discrimination at the Paris Peace Conference, wrote John Hope Franklin, "ushered in the greatest period of interracial strife the nation had ever witnessed."

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.

Lauren's volume provides extraordinary analysis and insight into the politics and diplomacy of worldwide racial discrimination...Anyone concerned with this on-going problem....

--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)