As many of you know, I am now rather conservative politically. When I was young I wrote about a famous rape case in the US, and defended the Left. Now that my politics have changed, should I revise my history? A few months ago Smithsonian Mag on line published an article on the old Scottsboro case of the 1930s. I immediately replied, and the next day. But no replies were posted. Today I decided to check, and my comments were there. My own politics have changed, but history has not changed. Facts do not change with fashions.
Alice George wrote the article "Who Were the Scottsboro Nine?" in the Smithsonian on line, 23 March 2020. She has a doctorate. My comments are below.
humura • 2 months agoThis is not for posting. I sent in 2 posts already. I have published several articles on Scottsboro beginning in the 1960s. My British research was never published - thus the link between the SDC, Robeson and Kenyatta. So that should be of general interest. Hugh Murray
humura • 2 months agoOne more thing. In the UK in the 1930s a Scottsboro Defence Committee was established with 2 co-chairs. One was the American Paul Robeson, who had been an All American football player at Rutgers, earned a law degree, but then became known on stage as a singer and actor. In the 1930s film version of "Show Boat," he sang "Old Man River." In the UK he starred in a number of films and befriended some African students studying in Britain who were extras in the films. Britain still held the largest empire in the world prior to WWII, and many colonials would appreciate films with a Black star. The other chair of the Scottsboro Defence (Brit. spell) Committee was an African, Johnstone Kenyatta. By the 1950s, in America Robeson's career had withered because of the blacklist. And in Kenya, Johnstone became Jomo Kenyatta, the leader of the Mau Mau rebellion against British rule in that country. The Scottsboro cause had brought together many from various parts of the world.
humura • 2 months ago • editedScottsboro is important for many reasons, but one reason - the role of the Communist Party and its fronts, like the International Labor Defense, in moving the case beyond the small court-room and into the streets around the world. The NAACP sought an attorney to represent the boys in the initial trials. The ILD moved in and wanted to direct the case, and fought with the NAACP to get the support of the boys and their parents. The NAACP wanted a defense in the courtroom; the ILD wanted more, not just a good defense attorney but agitation outside the courtroom. Through the world-wide communist movement, one of the Scottsboro mothers toured Europe, telling of the oppression of Blacks in America. Einstein and many of the notted intellectuals of the day signed petitions to save the Scottsboro boys, sent to officials in Alabama! The Garvey newspaper showed a Scottsboro protest in (pre-Hitler) Germany. The ILD won the first US Supreme Court case maintaining that the initial defense was no defense, and a new trial was required.
The ILD led a March on Washington in 1933 emphasizing the Scottsboro case, and one woman who picketed the White HOuse (FDR and the Democrats were not interested in ending lynching, legal or not.) was Ruby Bates, one of the alleged victims. She had testified in the 2nd trial that there was no rape. The doctor who examined the girls told Judge Horton in private, that the girls were laughing when he examined them re the "rape." He was convinced they had not been raped, but refused to say so on the witness stand, and if the judge required that he testify, he would lie.
The Communist led effort saved the Scottsboro boys and led to a combined, legal inside the court defense WITH an effort on the streets, on the media, agitation with which we are now familiar. The Scottsboro boys were innocent and deserved the support. In much of the 1930s and until the mid-50s Communists, were often leaders in the civil rights movement, from sit-ins in Baltimore and DC around 1950 and the Progressive Party anti-seg campaign throughout the South in 1948. The NAACP was not always the leader, and often opposed to action.