Talk:Lucy Parsons
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
| If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments. |
Nice job on this and other anarchist- and labor-related articles! It's clear you're serious about your work and I'm very impressed. Oh, yeah: it'd be great for you to log in -- I want to watch more stuff that you do. -- ESP 01:30 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)
This article currently states that Lucy Parsons renounced anarchism as counter-revolutionary in 1939. While I have no reason to doubt this claim in itself, it appears to contradict a claim that Parsons renounced anarchism "along with" Voltairine de Cleyre in 1909. Since both of these statements were inserted into the respective articles by the same person, and that person happens to be Bob Black who has a rather tarnished history in the anarchist movement, I'm requesting a fact check to reveal the source for the information.
The article should mention that in 19th Century Chicago, Anarchism was a catch-all description for all labor radicals, including Marxism, socialism, etc. Few of the so-called anarchists of that time and place can be called true anarchists, in the sense that we know them. Albert Parsons once made the comment that if the capitalists wanted to call him an anarchist he gladly accepted the label. Many of these same "anarchists" were also members of the Workingmans' Party, which supported the Chinese Exclusion Act.
It would be helpful then to briefly define "true anarchism" as we know it today and to link to a broader article on the subject. Very well-written article. User:Okelle
Contents |
[edit] CP information
The information stating that Lucy Parsons never joined the CP is incorrect. According to both versions of her biography available at www.lucyparsons.org (The Lucy Parsons Center) she did join the Communist Party in 1939. Dandannoodles
[edit] CP dispute
Again, it has been changed back to "Parsons never joined the CP," now citing one (1) work for this against every other biography--even ones by anarchists--without any mention in the discussion area. This is absurd. Cite relevant evidence in discussion, or go with the consensus. Dandannoodles
[edit] Reverted again
Citing one article which asserts (providing no actual evidence) that Lucy Parsons never joined the Communist Party as enough evidence to warrant changing the entire section, which had been balanced as at least a subject of dispute in order to appease this ludicrous theory, constitutes a total abandonment of scholarship as well as a brazen display of intellectual dishonesty. Yet the page is changed back again and again without any discussion on the part of the person(s) changing it.
Even the CP claims Lucy Parsons was a member, and whatever my own misgivings about the CPUSA, I suspect they have membership records. Aside from this, all other reputable _scholarly_ biographies of Parsons point out that she was, at one time, a CP member.
So discuss this point, or so we can try and reach some understanding, or stop changing the piece. Dandannoodles 15:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Knights of Labor condemnation
Curious why someone removed this:
- For ten years until that point, she had been a member of the Knights of Labor, which condemned the Haymarket defendants.
I'm not saying the removal is unjustified-- but the Knights did condemn the Haymarket rally and the riot, per James Green, page 193 of Death in the Haymarket.
I don't know about Lucy Parson's membership in same org, and so cannot vouch for that. Richard Myers 08:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
