After President Trump made the comment on 'partisan lynching'....a whole bunch of folks got all hyped-up because it's a forbidden word to use unless talking over blacks being lynched in the period after the Civil War (well over 150 years ago).
I sat for a while and pondered over the historical aspects of this.
If you study colonial history within the US, and history of the west....lynching isn't exactly a blacks-only 'thing'.
Between 1882 and 1967....almost 1,300 whites were lynched (I admit that well over 3,000 blacks were lynched in the same time period).
If you lived in Texas or any of the frontier states, and were caught cattle-rustling, stealing a horse, or possibly suspected of murdering someone's kin folks.....your skin color didn't really matter. It was a race by the Sheriff to find you....before the lynch mob did.
Just in California alone, there are a minimum of 120 Mexicans who were lynched in the twelve years prior to 1860.
If you use the Johnson County War of 1890....there were a minimum of 25 individuals either out-right shot, or lynched....over a four-year period.
Predominately black from 1900 on? More or less. But if you were using the comment 'partisan lynching'....it details out to a political topic....not a public execution. It means you get no judge, no jury, and no rights. In this case, 'partisan lynching' has no connection back to the 'death execution' chatter of the 1800s.
It's silly that politicians and journalists both wander into this topic, and hijack it for other purposes.
No comments:
Post a Comment