Although she fled, Mary Turner was captured at noon on May 19...

newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-tragic-forgotten-history-of-black-military-veterans

>Drawing on small-town newspaper and court archives, along with interviews of local historians and victims’ descendants across the South, “Lynching in America” tallied four thousand and seventy-five lynchings, at least eight hundred more than any previous count. The new report, “Lynching in America: Targeting Black Veterans,” concludes that, during the same period, “no one was more at risk of experiencing violence and targeted racial terror than black veterans.” The susceptibility of black ex-soldiers to extrajudicial murder and assault has long been recognized by historians, but the topic has never received such comprehensive standalone treatment.

Some choice quotes:

In a speech on the Senate floor in 1917, Mississippi Senator James K. Vardaman warned that the return of black veterans to the South would “inevitably lead to disaster.” Once you “impress the negro with the fact that he is defending the flag” and “inflate his untutored soul with military airs,” Vardaman cautioned, it was a short step to the conclusion that “his political rights must be respected.”
[...]
Whites speculated that, while stationed in Europe, black soldiers had enjoyed wartime liaisons with white French women, increasing their lust—which, in the white imagination, was already dangerously high—for sex with white American women. Many black veterans were denied the benefits and disability pay they’d been promised. In the first summer after the war, known as the Red Summer, anti-black riots erupted in more than twenty American cities, including Houston, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. “This is the right time to show them what will and what will not be permitted, and thus save them much trouble in the future,” one Louisiana newspaper opined, in an editorial titled “Nip It In the Bud.”

As E.J.I. staff examined these attacks in detail, they noticed that, often, the only provocation was a black man’s insistence on wearing his uniform in public. “It’s really shocking,” Stevenson said. “Just the sight of a black soldier, just the suggestion that he might take on that empowered, adult, mature identity—that could get him killed.”

[...]
After WWII, multiple veterans were attacked almost immediately, often by drivers or fellow-passengers on the buses and trains transporting them back to their homes. Many more soon realized that the G.I. Bill had been constructed in such a way that most of its benefits—including mortgage support, college tuition, and business loans—could be denied to them. Racial violence spiked.

Also:
Initially, these men were barred from combat, and instead assigned to service duties such as cleaning white officers’ quarters and latrines. Just as in the Civil War, only mounting casualties convinced the generals to allow black soldiers the privilege of risking their lives on the front line. And just as in the First World War, a vast chasm quickly sprang up between wartime rhetoric and wartime reality. Black soldiers stationed at military bases in the segregated South were forbidden from eating in restaurants that opened their doors to German prisoners of war.

>the hsitory of niggers in amerikka
>they fucked white women and the white men started keepin em down man we need more gibs
>germans were counted as white

It's pretty obvious he thinks that black neighborhoods getting shot up is a great thing.

Whites are unironically the most barbaric race there is. White people are responsible for both of the world wars and they have also carried out more genocides than any other race. But despite being the aggressors and the subjactors for most of their history, they often tend to have victim mentality. After refugees from war-torn countries (most of which were destabilized by the West) came to Europe and the non-white population of the EU increased by a couple percent, whites unironically started to believe that they are being genocided and they have almost elected political parties with fascist roots because of their persecutory delusions. No wonder why so many non-whites hate us.

because the picture isn't her

but its titled mary-turner1.jpg

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. The only difference between white people and other races is we hit a fucking good ass stride and took all the natural bad behavior of the human race to a new industrial level.

If Africa or Asia had achieved what Europe had achieved instead we'd all be bitching today about Black or Asian privilege.

leave, brainrent

who do I trust then???!

Southerners are subhuman, black or white.

> ends slavery
> promotes rights for women and homos around the world
> meanwhile, they cut the clits of girls in africa , they hang homos in the kiddle east and in china they shoot you for disagreeing with the goverment and bills your family for the bullet

>yall racist
>this study proves it
More niggers will die until they accept that the only path in life is to be and stay an 'uncle tom'

>stupid people are more likely to be racist
where does that leave those populations with the lowest IQs?

>Chicago had more than 700 murders in 2016
lole

But yeah keep asking about an American South from ancient history while a barbarous, savage hellhole like this still exists today in America.

Americans are savage people

Great whataboutism.

Disgusting

Sherman did nothing wrong except allowing the rebuilding of atlanta

The only secessionist caus ethat has ever had any legitimace is new afrika

>Her belly was slit open with a knife like those used "in splitting hogs." Her "unborn babe" fell to the ground and gave "two feeble cries." Its head was crushed by a member of the mob with his heel, and the crowd shot hundreds of bullets into Turner's body.
>photograph shows no sign of pregnancy, a slit open belly (which would have caused massive blood loss), or burns

Sensationalizing much?

>Why was the American South such a barbarous, savage, hellhole after the Civil War?
>devastating war that results in the death of 1/5th of the adult male population (including a disproportionate number of educated men) and the annihilation of an entire society
>be surprised when the region is gripped by violence decades later

It's as if you've never read about the aftermath of any major war ever.

>Whites speculated that, while stationed in Europe, black soldiers had enjoyed wartime liaisons with white French women
Probability: 0.
Blacks weren't even allowed in military brothels, and soldiers in general weren't in contact of civil populations. A woman at that time would have lost everything if she had an affair with a random soldier, let alone a black foreigner. Besides, Americans didn't stay that long and the blacks were a handful.

He supplied proof in his link. You have to scroll down and click the sources and references tabs and each expanded section has links from published works about this event.

However, I know that this won't satisfy you so carry on your denial of ugly truths that don't conform to your worldview.

You are right that very few European women would consort with black soldiers. Doesn't change the fact of what the American public thought at the time. You line you quoted even said speculated.

Is "whataboutism" where something completely irrelevant is discussed ad nauseam when there are actual problems currently being ignored because they're inconsistent with the narrative being pushed?

We're on a history board. We discuss history. The lynching of black people is something that has extremely significant historical impact within the United States. I'm not sure where you get the idea that it is irrelevant.

Additionally, while you are correct that shootings in Chicago are a topic of importance it doesn't fall within the 25 year rule. You specifically mentioned Chicago in 2016.

Lastly, why do you feel that racially targeted lynchings are irrelevant? They help explain a great deal of context of race relations within the United States in a historical sense.

I loved that episode

Lynching only became a phenomenon in this country at all after slavery was abolished and niggers became useless thugs. Radical egalitarianism's crank utopian maxims don't fare well in reality. The freeing of the niggers was a deliberate curse on the South by jealous Yankees who thought slavery was bad mmkay and couldn't get rich like the slaveowners did and they were the ones pushing for violent insurrection to get their way.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beecher's_Bibles

it's a different woman

Africans are crazy user, even if slavery never happened blacks would still attack whites.

Lefty pol was right whiteoids are fucking Obsessed with the bbc

Look up the dewitt brothers
>le ebil dixie
I thought the purpose of a board like this was to get away from cliches.

Then move away from them

Funny, I often hear from a certain group on this site that "stereotypes exist for a reason". Really makes you think.

>but x group is nearly as retarded as I am
Wtf I love hysterical misrepresentations of history now

>Why was the American South such a barbarous, savage, hellhole after the Civil War?
Post war reconstruction was never going to be a fast process, so it's no surprised shit like this happened in the south of all places.

They knew how to handle shit back in the day.

If only man..

Handle what in the day? Lynching war veterans?

>mobs
Fucking hell, not even once. There is one and only one solution for these people.

This nigga knows.

Why should White Southerners want to be ruled over by blacks who probably hate them and yearn for revenge, and why shouldn't they use every weapon at their disposal to prevent that?

I don’t live among whites

>help, we're being oppressed by 20% of the population

A whine so good that they brought it back for the "war on Christmas"

This is pretty obviously exaggerated bullshit

I don't understand where you're going with that. Even without lynchings blacks had no political power in reconstruction and post reconstruction south.

How in God's name were black people ruling over white people. Historically, it was the complete opposite. Black Southerners lived at the mercy of what white southern voters allowed for them.

There have been situations where a small population ruled over the greater majority (South Africa and Rhodesia come to mind).

However, you are right about the Southern US. Black people there were a minority and had no political power.

There was way more black people in the South before the great migrations.

That's only because the White Southerners took action as soon as they lost the civil war, to prevent that from happening.

The KKK, in its first iteration, was a national liberation movement.

Where the hell would slaves who were just freed find the resources, equipment and organization to mount an effective coup on existing Southern leadership post Civil War.

That's completely ignoring that occupying Northern troops and leadership wouldn't allow it. You think the Federal government would let troops stationed in the South sit around while black people seize power?

The idea that the KKK was protecting the south from a meaningful black takeover is absolutely laughable.

Are you naive enough to think awful things have never happened, or are you mistaken in thinking OP's image is of Mary Turner?

>Black people there were a minority and had no political power.

South Carolina wouldn't be a white-majority state until 1930.

Even precolumbian cultures were brutal as fuck. Then there was Indian wars, independance wars, slavery, civil war, the Frontier clusterfuck, then war, war, civil fights, war, war and war, all saesoned by the highest crime rate possible...
Africa seems quiet by comparison.

Really?

I mean, IIRC, tons of Vietnamese dudes during World War 1 were known to have apparently gotten together with many French women.

Do they not count or something, cause they're technically colonial subjects?

>According to investigator Walter F. White of the NAACP
stopped reading there

So they did all that to her and the dressed her up in a clean dress to hang her?

>bought niggers and make them work over there for free
>complains about niggers
emm sweaty i think you're dumb

Blacks are well over 70% of the population in southern cities.

Reconstruction ended in 1877 and lynching didn't hit their high until the 1890s when Jim Crow laws came about.
>The idea that the KKK was protecting the south from a meaningful black takeover is absolutely laughable
Literally what?
See above

meant for t
too
Also this
theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/16/slavery-starvation-civil-war

>tons of Vietnamese dudes during World War 1 were known to have apparently gotten together with many French women.
Big doubt. The Annamites were the lowest, no even trusted enough to be combatant, they were employed as shell porters, things like that. That said maybe it was less shameful to date them than to date a black, due to basic racism, but it still must have been super rare. Keep in mind that women had a huge social pressure in a rural catholic country, those who were known to be "at fault" were immediately labeled prostitute and ostracised for life.

I'm not sure what you're arguing. To be perfectly honest it sounds like you're agreeing with me on my

>The idea that the KKK was protecting the south from a meaningful black takeover is absolutely laughable

Are you trying to argue that black slaves had any real chance of seizing power in post the Reconstruction era South?

>Are you trying to argue that black slaves had any real chance of seizing power
Of course not, they were too literate, incompetent, and disorganized to even attempt it. But for these very reasons, their presence was a great danger to southern society.

It was apparently not that rare though.
I remember reading about it in a book about the role of colonial subjects in WW1, and really didn't seem to be at all like what you're saying.

Their whole purposed was undermining nigger rule. There were even anti-klan federal laws passed over it.

>implying the North wasn't already on a course to eclipse the South both in productivity and wealth before the bill of emmancipation

3/10, made me snort

Example: a woman who had a kid with a French soldier from her own village, if they wren't married and the guy died, it would have make her a "fille mère" (girl mother), a whore, and no one would have hired her because of the shame attached to her. She would have been forced to move in a big city to be forgotten. Unfortunately it happened in a lot of cases...
Now imagine a girl having an affair with an outcasted Annamite...

Again, what nigger rule? Sure, there was chaos but I fail to see any substantiated nigger rule following the end of the Civil War.

>dem niggers a' gettin' uppity agin!
>better lynch a few to show em wut.
>that one poor black guy dowm the road gets it in the neck

I didn't used to support Sherman's ride to the sea very much but, I must conclude that the wantom violence and lack of care towards their fellow humans by the South wholly justifies his actions. I would add that it is even unfortunate that he was not given free reign to work out the South's problems.

>I am conceited and do not examine all points of view and accounts which I then collate and analyse with parsimony

Looks like the brainlet is IN

That Minority had the zupport and the backing of an empire

>>Although she fled, Mary Turner was captured at noon on May 19.The mob of several hundred took her to the bank in Brooks County near Folsom Bridge, over the Little River, which forms the border with Lowndes County. According to investigator Walter F. White of the NAACP, Mary Turner was tied and hung upside down by the ankles, her clothes soaked with gasoline, and burned from her body. Her belly was slit open with a knife like those used "in splitting hogs." Her "unborn babe" fell to the ground and gave "two feeble cries." Its head was crushed by a member of the mob with his heel, and the crowd shot hundreds of bullets into Turner's body.

That's not what the OP pic looks like. So how do you explain the difference between the photo and the description? Did they do all the rest of that stuff posthumously after hanging her to death? Why the discrepancy?

This, without sports or music blacks are nothing but feral savages that cause rampant crime in America.

I don't know about American blacks, but French blacks deployed to occupy the rhine certainly did have relations with German women.

I asked a pretty clear question, could you give me an actual answer instead of avoiding? Define "whataboutism" since you tried to invalidate my legitimate post with that term.

>The lynching of black people is something that has extremely significant historical impact within the United States.
Wut.
How did the lynching of a handful of black people magically have a significant historical impact?

>Where the hell would slaves who were just freed find the resources, equipment and organization to mount an effective coup on existing Southern leadership post Civil War.

>niggers can now vote
>niggers turn out in droves to vote for some Radical republican bank-rolled carpeting-bagging educated nigger from Chicago because he's a nigger
>niggers outnumber whites so the nigger candidate wins
>niggers now have political power over whites in the South

It's not complicated user.

Yes, user. We all watch Birth of a Nation too. The difference is we could tell it was propaganda, and you couldn't.

>How did the lynching of a handful of black people magically have a significant historical impact?

>Handful

>historical consensus in the north
>le ebil propaganda

>Never invent the wheel
>Sell your own people into slavery
>Commit more murders than every other race combined
>W-wipypo be da reel sa-vuh-jizz
Why are black people so pathetic?

what·a·bout·ism
ˌ(h)wədəˈboudizəm/
nounBRITISH
the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue.
"the parliamentary hearing appeared to be an exercise in whataboutism"