“estimated 300 people were believed”
Nothing says “myth” like “estimated” and “believed”. I know there was an incident back then, and I believe people might have been killed in it, but until they have something more concrete I’m going to file this with “revisionist nonsense to justify reparations”. Too many people believe hundreds of thousands of blacks were lynched in the South while hundreds of thousands of their churches were burned; this nonsense is tiresome...
“Reparations?” What were almost a million men killed in the civil war, unknown number wounded, maimed and stricken mentally ill and the TRILLIONS of dollars spent just since 1965?
And the rape statistics are even more “disparate” (since Hussein likes that word)-app 100 black on white rapes per day on average (including elderly women, 70yo and above), who are often beaten/tortured/murdered into the bargain, while app 10 or less, on average, white on black rapes.
And never mind all the false accusations against white men by black women, like the Duke lacrosse team, for which the perpetrator of the false accusation is hardly ever prosecuted, and certainly never berated in the msm.
It really happened.
http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/T/TU013.html
It happened in Arkansas a few years earlier. When I was a kid I heard old folks talking about Elaine, Arkansas.
http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=1102
The revisionism on “race riots” in America has been going on for a long time. When I was in college many moons ago, I found an old book in the library chronicling race riots in America, that was written back in the 80s, before the PC rot had set in. I read it, and much to my surprise, it told a much different story from what you see in any modern media about race riots, lynching and the like.
First, I learned from the book that race riots didn’t just start in the 60s with the civil rights movement. They were happening throughout the 20th century, and were maybe more prevalent (by number of incidents if not scale) in the 20s and 30s than they were in the 60s. Also, I learned that the race riots actually happened more often in the Northern cities than they did in the South. The third thing I learned was that the blacks were out in force attacking white neighborhoods just as much as whites were getting together and attacking black neighborhoods.
The pattern seemed to be that one person or small group of one race would get hurt or murdered in the other race’s neighborhood, and this would trigger vigilantes going into that neighborhood to seek revenge. So, the igniting incidents were about the same, whether whites or blacks started the conflict, and the only real difference was in the tactics of the vigilantes. Blacks would rush into a neighborhood in large groups on foot, or on public transit, while whites would get in their cars in small groups and drive over to the other neighborhood. I believe whites were also more likely to use firearms, probably because, like the cars, they just had more of them than blacks did.