Talk:1912 racial conflict in Forsyth County, Georgia

Typo

Why does this have such a torturous title, with a typo in it? it is difficult to access. "Racial conflict of the county? That's a strange expression. Why not in the county? May need to move to something more logical, or at least punctuated correctly.Parkwells (talk) 18:36, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Has any attempt been made to recover property that was stolen(no sale)? Sounds similar to the Salem witch trials - somepeople got some valuable land for free from old women who had no heirs. Did the black man confess in court or just by word of mouth of the police. 2601:181:8301:4510:7801:3EA6:ACE0:49B5 (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

I also consider this to be an awkward title but can't think of anything better. If somebody comes up with a really good title, let me know or just suggest it on this page and we'll move it. In the meantime, I've created a redirect to the article page 1912 Racial Conflict in Forsyth County Georgia which corrects somewhat your minimum complaint. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 18:50, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

what a mystery

"As in all Georgia school systems at the time this building was built in 1927, it was for white students only. Cumming and Forsyth County had a very low number of African-American residents by this time and tradition has it that the remaining African-Americans left the county soon thereafter." --from the National Register registration document for NRHP-listed Cumming Public School-Cumming High School (currently a redlink, to be an article soon). No African-American rural churches listed in this county. --doncram 00:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

"alleged attacks of two white women"

Is there any question that the two white women were attacked? If not, then the attacks were not "alleged." I think it would be more accurate to say "...attacks on two white women, allegedly by black men..."

Any thoughts on this from the full-time contributors? 2605:E000:CA45:AA00:E83D:BBB0:FE37:1AF2 (talk) 04:29, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure about this "attack" but that word was tossed around pretty loosely in those days, particularly when describing the interactions of black men with white women. I'd leave it as it is until a source shows up. Carptrash (talk) 15:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

You are right, there were real attacks, I switched the "allegedly" around, check it out. Carptrash (talk) 16:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

This would call for going back to contemporary sources, but my sense of it is that the existence of the attacks is not confirmed. deisenbe (talk) 17:33, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

I think you @Deisenbe: are right, I was confusing it with the second attack in which the girl was, I think, killed. I read a book about all this that I believe is at the library where I volunteer on Monday, so if it is there I will check it out and deal with a bunch of the citation needed tags. Carptrash (talk) 21:56, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

From the recent book, Blood at the Root: A Racial Cleansing in America (probably the one you are thinking of), questions the "attack" of Ellen Grice while the girl Mae Crow did die from her attack. There were convictions in both cases so in general, "alleged" would be dropped, but these century-old cases are called into question nowadays. Perhaps they shouldn't be combined together. StrayBolt (talk) 23:40, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

The two incidents are not combined in the article, only here on the talk page. Both are necessary for the story of what happened. And yes, I think that is the book. Carptrash (talk) 04:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

They are combined in the phrase "attacks of two white women" in the first sentence. I suggest rewriting the first sentence into two. Proposed first sentence: "In 1912 Forsyth County, Georgia, two separate attacks on white women resulted in accusing blacks and ended with ethnic cleansing of over 1,000 blacks from the county." StrayBolt (talk) 09:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Well go ahead, but I am not sure that there were two attacks. The book is at the library, not checked out, I'll get it tomorrow. Perhaps changing "attacks" to "incidents" is one solution. A few other changes need to happen to make that scan properly, but it's a thought. Carptrash (talk) 16:47, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Is the current title appropriate?

I would like to raise a question about the appropriateness of the current title of this article, however, I cannot really think of a better title myself. I consider that the current title suggests that there was a conflict, which would imply that there was violence committed by both sides, which may not have been the case at all. Another possibility is to replace 'conflict' with 'cleansing'. However this fails to capture the whole event, as the cleansing campaign was only the last part of the event. If anyone can think of a better title than the current one, please move it there. Mako001 (C)  (T)  09:34, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mako001, I recently picked up a copy of Blood at the Root and I plan to expand this article as I read, but I do agree that the current title doesn't seem appropriate. FWIW, googling "racial cleansing" gives us a lot of results, indicating that may be what the event is most commonly known as. Compare that in particular to a search for "race riot", which produces very little. We don't have a lot of similar examples if the lack of linked articles at this page is to be believed, but there are a number of WP articles with "ethnic cleansing" in the title. Oh and then there's 1885 Chinese expulsion from Eureka. Based on all that, would you have a preference between "1912 racial expulsion from Forsyth County" or "1912 racial cleansing in Forsyth County"? I'm leaning towards the first option, but not opposed to the second. And I personally don't have an issue naming the article this way, even if, as you point out, that doesn't fully capture the whole event. Alyo (chat·edits) 14:48, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure really, I guess both cleansing and expulsion still leave the issue that it doesn't quite capture the entire event, and instead seems to only cover the latter portion of it. I'm wondering if "racial violence" might suit to cover the first portion though, possibly included along with ethnic cleansing. So "1912 racial violence and ethnic cleansing in Forsyth County". That title seems rather clunky though. Another option is to restructure it to focus on the ethnic cleansing, and make the references to the proceeding violence a bit of a "background", however that would essentially be article hijacking, unless most of the academic focus is on the ethnic cleansing. Just my thoughts. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 04:05, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Mako001 You're definitely right that the current section on the actual expulsion is extremely underdeveloped, and the fact that it's titled "Aftermath: racial expulsion" makes it sound as though it's just a minor consequence, rather than the focus of most of the sources coming out today. The framing of this event in most of the sources I see centers on the expulsion/nightriders, with the aftermath being the current state of Forsyth county (still very white and with residents citing the expulsion as recently as 1987). The alleged rapes are told within that framework, but as the lead-in to the expulsion: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] (+the entire BotR book itself). Now that I've looked a little more, I definitely think it's appropriate to flesh out the article and reframe it so it tracks with how this is usually described in sources, i.e. as an expulsion event. Alyo (chat·edits) 15:42, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Well, then I'd say go ahead. Given that, as you have found, most attention is actually on the ethnic cleansing, the article as it is currently is not giving due weight to the ethnic cleansing. Since that is the case, there would be no issue with this, just make sure that you make it clear what you are doing, and why you are doing it (I.e, to reflect the weight given by reliable, published sources). If anyone objects, stop, and direct them here, as we currently have a consensus (of two, but it's still consensus) here to change the articles main focus and the respective weight given to each part of the event. They will need to gain consensus to keep it how it is, and especially, they will need to show that it doesn't contravene the policies on due weight in its current state. I don't think that there should be too many issues though, since the traffic here isn't exactly massive. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 16:14, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Appreciate the comments. I think I'll work on some expansion first, and then move this to 1912 racial expulsion from Forsyth County. Alyo (chat·edits) 16:20, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

I think "ethnic cleansing" or "racial cleansing" might be better, as that is usually what this sort of thing seems to be referred to as, or is there a specific reason why "racial expulsion" would be more suitable? Whilst the term "etnic/racial cleansing" is seemingly euphemistic, as I understand, it was actually coined as deliberately being ironically euphemistic. Although "racial expulsion" is a more descriptive title, I'd say that, since most articles on similar events are titled "cleansing" that probably should be what is done here as well? The Chinese expulsion from Eureka is somewhat different, since, as I understand, they weren't actually expelled from somewhere that they considered "home". In any case, a few redirects from other possible titles might be helpful as well. I'm not particularly concerned what it ends up being called though, so long as it ends up at a more appropriate title than the current one, which is currently about as appropriate as a smoking ad in a kindergarten. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 22:49, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

In my head the sources used "expulsion" more than "cleansing" but after looking again, you're totally right. And also right about anything being more appropriate than the current title. Ergo: 1912 racial cleansing in Forsyth County. Alyo (chat·edits) 00:06, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution's Increasingly diverse, Forsyth County faces racist past

Here is an article from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on about Increasingly diverse, Forsyth County faces racist past (Subscription required). Rjluna2 (talk) 15:38, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Rjluna2 Thanks! Alyo (chat·edits) 13:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)