Talk:Battle of Athens (1946)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Opinion piece allowed?

The first link is an obvious biased article. Would it be wrong to remove it or not? Mr. Raptor 14:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd say keep it, since 1) it clearly illustrates the notable aspect of this article, that is, the Battle of Athens is often cited to bolster arguments against gun control, and 2) it includes details about the battle (albeit from the winners' perspective) absent from this article. However, I have added a mention that the article is biased pro-gun; not everybody is as NPOV as Wikipedia (*snort, chuckle*). Perhaps short descriptions of the other external links would be a good idea. In fact, adding more details of the battle would be a good idea, expanding this article beyond a stub. --205.201.141.146 16:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Importance of article for various Wikiprojects

Several of you are adamant that this article has "High" importance for several Wikiprojects (Law, West Virginia, and Military History), as well as "Medium" importance for Tennessee. I cannot fathom why this is included in the West Virginia wikiproject at all, and it is difficult to formulate any argument for why a brief local incident involving military veterans during peacetime in small-town Tennessee could possibly be of "high" importance in the global projects for Law (where, for example, Common law is rated "high") and Military History. I suppose you could argue successfully for higher than "low" importance in a Second Amendment wikiproject, but the 2nd Amendment is not the primary focus of Wikipedia:WikiProject Law and actions. --Orlady (talk) 00:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Battle infobox useage

{{Infobox type use}} In my opinion the"Battle of Athens" (1946), was more of a riot than a battle. As such, a more suitable infobox should be used. To call this riot a battle is to distort the facts surrounding this event. True war is between two nations and the Battle of Athens was too small and short to be called a civil war or an insurgency. There were also no signifigant aims to overthrow a government, only to enhance the fairness of the existing one, so it could not be called an insurrection either. --Ipatrol (talk) 19:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. Both sides were at least somewhat organized. One was the dejure government of the county. The other was organized enough to field a slate of candidates and run an organized campaign. In the end the veterans overthrew the sheriff and established a democratically elected administration for for the county. They did, in fact, overthrow a government -- just not a national government. A battle is a battle even without the surrounding events of a bigger war. This may not sound like a battle to you, but I'll respectfully disagree. I certainly would not call this a riot. The information fields in the infobox can be (and has been) filled in with appropriate values, which suggests to me that the infobox itself is appropriate. Ferritecore (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

A bit late coming in, but I have to agree with Ferritecore. This is, most clearly, a battle. Lolinder (talk) 01:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Reversion of new text

A missing information box was replaced by considerable text addressing the information that was missing. The information did have references. The references were all to the same book and perhaps not in ideal wiki format but they were there. True wiki tradition would be to take that text and improve it, not delete it. I didn't write it, but I'll put it back tomorow unless somebody beats me to it or gives a reason that can be discussed first. Ferritecore (talk) 03:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I have not investigated the text that was added recently and removed, but I do know that plagiarized content has been added in the past (and removed). The article needs to be expanded, but the expansion should be in the contributor's own words and supported by citations to reliable sources. Copy-pasted text will be deleted. --Orlady (talk) 05:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Unless the cited book has remarkably short pages we are looking at an allowable paraphrase at worst. Individual paragraphs from the deleted section cite several pages in refference. It is possible that these exact paragraphs appear in the book, but I'm guessing not. Another possibility is that the paraphrase is from another site. I'll look into it further. Ferritecore (talk) 12:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Found it, the paraphrased text is plagerized from another site. Too bad. Ferritecore (talk) 23:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Thompson submachine gun

There are claims that the GIs had managed to get at least one Thompson submachine gun but does anyone have a source backing the deputies possessing one or even using it? --74.232.40.204 (talk) 18:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The Full Story

I have/know most of the full story of The Battle Of Athens. Anyone interested in helping me add my information to this site? My grandfather was one of the GIs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.252.178 (talk) 05:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Use of "GI" and "ex-GI"

I'd like to point out that it's probably not correct to switch between these two terms ( "GI" and "ex-GI") in the article. As I understand it, there were no GIs, in the sense of currently enlisted military personnel, involved in the battle.

Furthermore, while it is notable that they were former GIs or ex-GIs, it is also true that their role in the battle was that of "aggrieved citizens". They were not then members of the military and were not under military command. I think it's best to point out that many or most of the participants were former GIs, but we should find some other way to refer to them collectively for the rest of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.142.4.32 (talk) 20:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I initially agreed, but Thesaurus.com says that veteran and GI are synonyms, and I'm inclined to believe them. http://thesaurus.com/browse/veteran Consistency is obviously necessary, and I'd be in favor of switching to something else altogether, if someone has a suitable alternative. Lolinder (talk) 02:06, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

"Veteran" is the neutral and accurate term. After all, who are we to know which of those recently-returned veterans were originally drafted ("General Inductees"--GIs) , and which of them enlisted voluntarily. BobbieCharlton (talk) 22:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

True. But I tried inserting veteran wherever GI showed up, and it led to some ambiguity. For instance, how would one substitute what currently reads "GI poll-watchers". "Veteran poll-watchers" could mean veterans watching the polls or long-time poll-watchers. Is there any way around this? Lolinder (talk) 23:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

How about "WWII Veteran poll-watchers"? BobbieCharlton (talk) 13:25, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I thought of that as well, but it's rather wordy, and there are quite a few places where the ambiguity would be present.Lolinder (talk) 22:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

As Lolinder points out, "veteran" can be ambiguous; that being so because it can be used as both an adjective and a noun. So, we could swing the sentence and use the plural noun "veterans": "Veterans monitoring the polls". That could work, couldn't it? --Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 01:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

That might work. It would be more complicated than a simple search/replace that I was looking at, but rephrasing everything is certainly an option. Lolinder (talk) 03:27, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

"G.I." has fallen out of use as a slang term for soldiers in general, and even in the period where it was used in this way it was an informal term, and would have only appeared in it's correct, more specific meaning in an encyclopedia. Since we have no indication that all involved parties were drafted enlisted men and the majority of WWII soldiers enlisted voluntarily, "WWII veterans" should be used instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.154.92.232 (talk) 00:07, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Plagiarism

What's going on on this page? This article's text is copied verbatim from the first external link! http://www.constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm. 87.114.16.64 (talk) 19:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

See No Dispute

In my careful review I do not see any dispute or lack of authenticity. Well-documented in every way!

Terry Hoggard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.128.20.222 (talk) 06:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request

Please change the current {{pp-semi-indef}} template to {{pp-protected}}. Thanks Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Check. Danger ^{High voltage!} 21:48, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

VFW Magazine

VFW Magazine has an article on this event:

Gibson, Kelly. "Ex-GIs Battle for the Ballot," VFW. Volume 99, Number 10 (August, 2012), pp. 26-28. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.113.166.15 (talk) 23:06, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect Link

The first reference is a bad link. I'm not sure how to fix it. This is the correct link.....http://www.americanheritage.com/content/battle-athens — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.159.185.67 (talk) 19:42, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Please WebCite and correct the above-noted link, at a minimum. If the event descriptions below aren't copyvios, add them too. (And if they are, delete 'em! I've no reason to think they would be, other than the editprotection history; I haven't looked at the editors edits or the article's history.) --Elvey (talk) 15:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done --j⚛e decker^talk 23:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Redlink pictures

Two links to photographs in the article are now redlinks. I don't find them on Wikipedia or on Commons searching with the string

Battle of Athens Tennessee

If they are not available, the picture links with captions need to be removed. Consider adding the Tennessee Historical Commission marker photo in Commons, File:Battle-of-athens-tennessee-marker1.jpg to the infobox.
SBaker43 (talk) 23:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I have reduced the protection. Please make the edit yourself. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:33, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Added battle and aftermath sections

They are (I think) pretty bare and straightforward. I used three sources not previously cited on the article. No copyvio (how easy was that?) The aftermath section could perhaps be expanded. Some sources speak of the limited impact of the event, while others link it to a postwar movement involving dissatisfied veterans taking back their rights. Anyway, at least now there's a description of the incident. Richigi (talk) 03:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 January 2013

The link to the American Heritage description of the battle is incorrect. It should be http://www.americanheritage.com/content/battle-athens. Smithkl42 (talk) 00:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Done Jnorton7558 (talk) 03:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Object to removal of polictical parties

From:

"In 1936 the system descended upon McMinn County in the person of one Paul Cantrell, the Democratic candidate for sheriff. Cantrell, who came from a family of money and influence in nearby Etowah, tied his campaign closely to the popularity of the Roosevelt administration and rode FDR’s coattails to victory over his Republican opponent."

Link:

It does the integrity of history no justice to omit the party where election fraud and ballot issues are the main subject. A reference exists to substantiate the information.

I request unlocking the page for addition of this relevant fact and reference.

Dave Thacker RadicalRC — Preceding unsigned comment added by RadicalRC (talk • contribs) 16:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

References

23 Feb 2013 Edit Request

1) The battle is mentioned in the novel Unintended Consequences. Please add text to this effect to the "In the media" section; books are a form of print media. The opening paragraph of the Battle of Athens article includes the following sentence: "The event is sometimes cited by firearms ownership advocates as an example of the value of the Second Amendment in combating tyranny." Unintended Consequences is one such example. According to the WP article on it, the book "has sold over 60,000 copies over four printings." The book is especially popular among Second Amendment advocates, including Timothy McVeigh.

2) Re: "A number of conflicts arose before the polls closed, the most serious of which was when deputy CM Wise shot and wounded a black man who was trying to vote." According to Egerton (p. 394) The "black man" was named Tom Gillespie and he "was assaulted by deputies after casting his vote," not for trying to vote. He was shot in the back when he tried to run from the deputies assaulting him. The American Heritage article isn't clear on the exact sequence but does indicate Gillespie already had a ballot when was attacked. The shooter, C. M. Wise, was later roughly handled by members of the Non-Partisan League and was the only deputy kept in jail after the battle. He was also the only person to face criminal charges for the events of August 1-2, 1946, was being eventually sentenced to 1-to-3 years in prison; Gillespie recovered. (Egerton pp. 395-396).

3) Re: the 29 January 2013 comment above "Object to removal of polictical [sic] parties," I agree the mention of the political party associations is informative and should be restored. Egerton (p. 393) says McMinn County "opposed secession in 1860 and voted Republican for seventy-five years after that" until "Democrat Paul Cantrell" took power in 1936. The Non-Partisan League slate included three Republicans and two Democrats and was endorsed "by the local Republican Party" (Egerton p 394). The cited American Heritage article also mentions the partisan associations of the key figures including Cantrell's ties to FDR's campaign.

4) No source is cited for the statement: "The new government encountered challenges including at least eleven resignations of county administrators" in the Aftermath section.

67.40.210.133 (talk) 01:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

 Partly done I added the mention of Unintended Consequences, changed the article to match what you said in request 2, as well as added {{cn}} next to the line "The new government encountered challenges including at least eleven resignations of county administrators". However, for request 3, I added the information from the 29 January 2013 request. Camyoung54 talk 15:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I have photos of the aftermath of this battle. How do I post them? campbelljeffc1@aol.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.166.80.168 (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Blocked Editing

Just was hoping to get a time frame on when the block would be lifted, if any administrator would know that. I would like to contribute to this page. Hope it opens soon.DaltonCastle (talk) 08:35, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

PS. Why did it get blocked, out of curiosity. I am still a newer editor, so I am still learning the ways of the Wiki.DaltonCastle (talk) 08:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I have lowered the protection. Please edit away. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Odd that someone felt the need to block editing but doesn't care enough to answer questions about the block (for years). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcgyver2k (talk • contribs) 15:09, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Aftermath Edit

A previous editor had, perhaps, confused or conflated the "resignation of seven Democratic members of the County Court and four Democratic members of the County School Board. The resignations leave both bodies without a quorum." (NY Times, "Regime Set Up by GI's Falls," January 12, 1947) With events subsequent to the election. The 11 resignations in January 1947 precipitated the fall of the GI coalition.

There was a wave of resignations after the battle, but they did not add up to 11. See "Town's GI Leaders Take New Offices" NY Times, August 6, 1946.

The article "Elected GI's Doubt Course in Athens. Safely in Office in Tennessee, Old Party Loyalties Arise to Hamper Their Plans" (NY Times Aug. 10, 1946) makes clear the situation which quickly evolved and resulted in the eventual fall of the non-partisan GI coalition.

Mark Lincoln (talk) 12:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

15 Feb 2013 Edit Request

The battle is mentioned in the novel Unintended Consequences. Please add text to this effect in the "In the media" section or other suitable place.

Please also add the following text to the Aftermath section:

Less than six months after their victory, the veterans were rent by divisions. Four of the five leaders of the GI Non-Partisan League declared in an open letter on January 11, 1947: "We abolished one machine only to replace it with another and more powerful one in the making."

Source: New York Times. "Athens, Tenn., Regime Set Up by GI's Falls". January 12, 1947; p. 6.

Thanks. 67.40.211.248 (talk) 06:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

 See WP:TRIVIA Toddst1 (talk) 06:46, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Toddst1, not sure how WP:TRIVIA applies to the second part of above request. Richigi (talk) 12:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

For the second part, form a proper citation if you want it added. I'm going to do your work for you. For example you should request something like the following be added:

In ''[[McDonald v. Chicago]]'', 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.<ref name="nytimes.com">{{cite news|last=Liptak|first=Adam|title=Justices Extend Firearm Rights in 5-to-4 Ruling|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/us/29scotus.html?src=me|accessdate=December 17, 2012|newspaper=The New York Times|date=June 28, 2010}}</ref>

Toddst1 (talk) 20:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I can make the edit myself, so no extra work for you. I was just checking to make sure that you didn't have some unstated reason for rejecting the second part of the above anonymous request. Thanks for clarifying. Richigi (talk) 21:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think WP:TRIVIA applies to either part of the request. The opening paragraph of the Battle of Athens article includes the following sentence: "The event is sometimes cited by firearms ownership advocates as an example of the value of the Second Amendment in combating tyranny." Unintended Consequences is one such example. According to the WP article on it, the book "has sold over 60,000 copies over four printings." The book is especially popular among Second Amendment advocates, including Timothy McVeigh.71.35.118.156 (talk) 19:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

A novel, particularly a highly biased one, makes a poor source. It might gratify a zealot, but not a historian. Unintended Consequences might be cited as a source when discussing the gun rights movement, it's constituents, or it's mythology, but not as a factual record. Mention of Athens in Unintended Consequences bears no coherent relationship to the events of 1-2 August 1946.

The ex-GIs involved were NOT crusading gun rights advocates. They were just young guys from mid-twentieth century East Tennessee, who did not like being screwed by the County Sheriff and his thugs for profit. The cops in McMinn County were paid by commission from the fines they generated and the people being arrested, beaten, and fined didn't like it.

There was a clear history of election fraud in McMinn County. The veterans held the right of the ballot to be sacrosanct and above all other civic virtues. Legal protests in 1940, 1942 and 1944 had been useless. it was apparent the election would be stolen they acted in anger. Their issue was the ballot, not the gun. See: Tenessee Veterans Wary Now, NY Times, August 18, 1946 Mark Lincoln (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Latest Edit to battle removed historical reference to voter suppression

Actually, I'm requesting edit because I cannot edit the page due to semi-protection.

The edit before Jan 1, 2013 stated:

Polls for the county election opened August 1, 1946. About 200 armed deputies turned out to patrol the precincts—the normal complement of 15 deputies significantly augmented by reinforcements from other counties. A number of conflicts arose before the polls closed, the most serious of which was when deputy CM Wise shot and wounded a BLACK man who was trying to vote.[3]

Black was removed. This is a historical reference due to the use of southern governments to suppress the Black vote. Especially black veterans. This part of the document should be restored. I cannot edit this. AlexG-inUSA (talk) 17:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I have restored the word as requested. I removed it because none of the rest of the article talks about race, and it seemed irrelevant for that reason. -- Dianna (talk) 18:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I am attempting to add the reference to the Hallmark film without success. Please note reference: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103673/ Jogershok (talk) 06:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

There was blatant voter suppression including the shooting of one black man election day for trying to vote. (That will teach the %$@@#$ for having the money to pay the poll tax!) Mark Lincoln (talk) 23:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Background

The roots of the Battle of Athens go very deep, Eastern Tennessee bled from 1861 to 1863 and welcomed the Union Army as liberators. The Cantrell machine upset a political balance in the county that had existed since the Civil War, in fact since before the Civil War. Cantrell treated the Republicans of McMinn County with the particular bitter contempt that Southern Democrats harbored for Republicans until the Civil Rights and Voter Rights Acts turned Southern Democrats into Republicans. One of the Republican slogans in 1948-1948 elections was "Had Enough"? The young men of McMinn County had had enough. Their outrage had deep roots which the citizens of McMinn county had managed to paper over by the turn of the 20th century untill that balance of party power was disrupted.

Starting the story of The Battle of Athens story in 1936 ignores the roots. Minimizing the variety and extent of the GI's grievances does not do justice to them. They did not plot the overthrow of the Cantrell machine at the ballot box lightly. They were very worried about retaliation against their families. They regretted what they had to do. They were very careful after their coup to be very proper and limit their own power. They installed a Committee composed of citizens of known probity to rule until their election was confirmed and due process followed until they were installed in office.

Mark Lincoln (talk) 00:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Requested Edits

I think the blurb at the bottom of the first paragraph stating that this item is sometimes used by pro 2nd Amendment people to justify their points is an immature stab at conservatives and should be removed. Although it may be true it's anecdotal and serves no purpose other than to stir angst. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcgyver2k (talk • contribs) 15:08, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

The Battle of Athens was a footnote to obscurity until it was latched upon by the gun rights movement. I was first made aware of it in in 1976 by Goulden's book "The Best Years", in chapter 13, "Had Enough? Yes!" A trip to the city and a university libraries turned up a few newspaper and magazine references from 1946. . . and nothing more. In fact "The Best Years" is the OLDEST source cited in the Battle of Athens (1946) article except for press accounts of 1946-47.

Check out the citations for paragraph 1.

1. "abovetopsecret" It often has interesting documents but they are always void of critical study and scholarly analysis.

Mrs. Roosevelt was a passionate, advocate of Liberal Democracy. It is not surprising she would back actions utterly necessary to achieve that goal even if a majority of the persons involved were Republicans and their target part of the New Deal coalition. (Solid South, state Democrat organizations, city/county machines.) Reference: Ciment, James, Encyclopedia of the Great Depression and the New Deal Vol I, pg 6.

2. "Behind Blue Lines samizdat from the blue northeast" is scarcely the title of a dispassionate historical tract.

"When it comes to the Second Amendment, we’re used to hearing a lot of blather about how it’s a vestigial relic of a bygone era when we were all supposedly more savage than the domesticated people of today" - Behind blue lines

That specious straw man argument reveals the opinion of a person with a certain viewpoint critical to our discussion of the claim made in the first paragraph.

3. Best Second Amendment Video - Battle of Athens kickthemallout.com" It's name and source name make clear the gun rights connection.

4. "freedom-fightersforum.org." That site name reveals a certain political opinion. It is also a dead link.

Conclusion: The first paragraph is cited with sources which constitute proof that second amendment rights activists DO use The Battle of Athens as an argument for their case.

p.s. During 1945-1946 there was a great deal of unjustified fear that returning veterans were dangerously violent. Stories about veteran violence received unusual attention in the press. The GI cartoonist Bill Mauldin summed up the hysteria in his usual sarcastic way with a cartoon showing a couple reading a newspaper with a lurid headline "VETERAN KICKS AUNT." The man notes that "There's a small item on page 17 about a triple axe murder." Reference: Gouldin, "The Best Years 1945-1950," pg 38.

Mark Lincoln (talk) 19:55, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from this URL: http://www.constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm. It was introduced on April 16, 2008. Infringing material has been removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

One has to be VERY careful on this and any other subject to which people of great passion, but often of little scruples, are drawn. MANY questionable web sites engage in copyright infringement of each other and especially the American Heritage Feb.-March 1985 issue.

Rewrite, quote, give credit, cite. Don't be lazy. DO NOT Force the Wikipedia to Defend It's Self Against the Legal Consequences of Your Actions.

"Plagiarize, Let no one else's work evade your eyes. Remember why the good Lord made your eyes. So don't shade your eyes, But Plagiarize, Plagiarize, Plagiarize - Only be sure always to call it please 'research."

- Tom Lehrer, "Lobachevsky"

Also check your sources, check them against each other. Be ever vigilant about the possibility, probability in some cases, that a source might manipulate the data. Some times manipulation is innocent. Today I reversed the order of two sentences Bill White spoke in response to a question. White gave a general answer followed by a specific answer. I reversed the two sentences he spoke to make his answers more coherent. First the specific reply, then the generalized answer. I did not change his words, nor did I change their meaning. NO intent to misrepresent his reply. I just made it more readable.

Once I had a row with a very opinionated editor who had quoted one line out of a telegram. Taken out of context the sentence appeared to affirm her pet theory. The whole telegram made it very clear that the sentence did not affirm the theory. Amidst the row no one bothered to check my well cited source. It was a recent publication by the foremost proponent of her pet theory. He is a honest if opinionated historian. Not only did he publish the whole, often misused by editing, telegram. In his book he presented the extensive evidence impeaching his primary witness and source at the front of his book. Honest, and clever.

Mark Lincoln (talk) 20:30, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Battle and its aftermath

I have tagged this article as needing information about the battle and its aftermath, as this is the material that had been inserted in violation of copyright and removed. This article could subsequently use some attention from somebody familiar with its subject to ensure that coverage is complete, while remaining copyright compliant. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Semi protection

I've indefinitely semi-protected this article as there has been repeated insertion of massive copyright violations for the description of the battle, copied from a Guns & Ammo magazine article by numerous IP editors. While it's clear that we need to describe the incident, we cannot do it in a way that violates the law. Established, registered editors can add it directly, or IP editors can place a draft here on the talk page and use the {{editprotected}} template to request that the draft be copied to the article. Toddst1 (talk) 14:58, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, that didn't work very well; The copyvio continues to be inserted. I've changed the protection to full. Please propose any suggested changes here on the talk page using {{editrequest}}. Toddst1 (talk) 14:03, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

The Pattern of Political Violence in Post War South East Tennessee

There was a pattern of violence in post-war South East Tennessee politics. As in Athens, the violence and use of arms seems to have been on all sides. There was a cultural problem in the region. The number of incidents in a number of contiguous counties during the post-war years establishes a context within the Battle of Athens was a part. Athens was not an event which stood alone. The violence later ceased. The fall of the Crump machine seems important, though violence was not generally associated with the machine in most of Tennessee. Brutality by Sheriff's deputies was very widespread throughout the South. So was the abuse of It seems at the very least Athens established an environment in the region which affected both sides in politics in SE Tennessee for years after the Battle of Athens.

There were several people killed in the violence in Polk County during the 1948 primaries. As late as 1951 the Polk County Good Government League used massed weapons to intimidate the opposition, the leader of that opposition was assassinated.

I stumbled upon the article "Ballot-Burning Is Charged" because it was placed below the article "Town's GI Leaders Take New Offices" in the Aug. 6, 1946 NY Times.

As it was related in subject, time, and from an adjacent county to McMinn I read it. I found it revealing of the times and a certain regional proclivity for using guns in elections (both sides armed up before the McMinn county election in 1946).

The story also smacks of corruption. Why did the Republican candidate steal the ballot box at gunpoint? Why did he order the ballots burned? Why was his election quietly approved two days after the theft, one day after the ballots were burned? Why did he admit to what were most certainly several crimes? I suspect that this story will be harder to research than Athens.

But the story says a lot about the cultural and political environment in Eastern Tennessee in summer of 1946. Thus I believe it adds to understanding the events in McMinn County.

So does the 31 July 1946 offer to the League by the VFW post in adjoining Blount County to send members to help watch the polls in Athens. Source: Post-Athenian, March 31, 1946, reported in American Heritage Feb/March 1985, Vol. 6, Issue 2.

The offer didn't exactly say "send troops," but . . .

I wonder what the noted VFW member and promoter Major General Smedley Darlington Butler, USMC ret. would have made of it all? But thats another story.

I found a number of instances of violence in adjacent counties in 1946-1951. Most involved the Athens inspired Polk County Good Governance League. Athens did not occur in a vacuum. It was part of a regional unrest during a particular period of time. I feel thoes additional items should be exposed to provide context. I posted them and then removed them so anyone wishing to investigate them may by checkin the old, removed, edit.

Mark Lincoln (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Missing section

The article is missing the, um, battle. Could somebody tell us about it? Speciate (talk) 13:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I fear that the people who are passionate about this subject assume that the rest of us know all about it, so the article is filled with interesting trivia but fails to tell the main story. As near as I have been able to make out, citizens (mostly ex-GIs) succeeded in ensuring a fair election by taking the law into their own hands against the corrupt crowd that controlled the county. My main source of edification was http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1985/2/1985_2_72.shtml -- a reference cited in the article that provides a long account of the event (and in which it is hard to identify the main event in the midst of the colorful details). --Orlady (talk) 14:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the above comment. But, even more that what happen in the battle, who won? I knew nothing of this event, read the entry and was left hanging. After looking it up at another site, I added a sentence to the article stating that Knox Henry won the election. There needs to be a description of the battle AND the aftermath. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.52.32.38 (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

As Speciate said, there is nothing here about the "battle" itself. I request that those knowledgeable about the subject, such as the members of the various WikiProjects above, please put information about the actual Battle of Athens into the article. Otebig (talk) 14:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, this article did lack the "battle" part (before). I have just recently added the "battle part" and some important events leading to it from the first article in the External Links section. It's far from perfect obviously, but better than nothing. 16 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.75.191.225 (talk)

Totally agree the "battle" needs to be described here. Please. Someone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.48.234 (talk) 14:13, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I expanded the battle section as best could be done with sources available on the Internet. I had four primary sources; 1. The Bill White Oral History Interview, White was in charge of the organized GI forces. The interview is easily and cheaply available. It also provides the, unfiltered, unedited account of a crucial member of the League, especially of the battle. 2. Selber's American Heritage article from 1985, written by a childhood witness to the battle. Very evenhanded. Uninfluenced by the, perhaps inspiring the, subsequent attention to the battle. 3. Byram's history of McMinn County, and 4. the archives of the NY Times which covered the story from the battle to after the collapse (in disgust) of the GI Nonpartisan League government. Aside from the White interview these were my primary sources because they were balanced and non-ideological.

In the case of Byrum I know what his sources were; T.H. White's 1947 article in Harpers Magazine, Tennessee State Library and Archive, the archives of the The Daily Post-Athenian and Etowah Enterprise, and the Athens and Etowah public libraries.

Mr.Selbel did not list his sources but as an Athens resident he would have had easy access to Mr. Byrum's sources.

The NY Times was, and is, the national newspaper of record. Also I have access to it's online archives. The Times front page on August 2nd is a mite embarrassing as no Sheriff was killed, but that article makes it clear the Times was set up to cover the Tennessee state races, and ran the sensational news as best it could. The headline typo "AYORLESS ATHENS CALM IN CLEAN-OUT" caused a chuckle. The Times follow-up piece Tennessee Veterans are Wary Now, They Move Cautiously Lest 'Direct Action' Be Abused" is especially important as it is a background story on the post battle situation rather than a time compelled attempt to cover breaking news. It makes it clear the veterans were worried their action would lead to unnecessary/unjustified bloodshed or the use of GIs in partisan warfare.

The NY Times August 2nd says "A crowd estimated at 1,000 persons stormed the two story Athens jail. . ." Later on page 10 it quotes The Athens Post-Athenian publisher Lowell F. Arterburn as hearing shots . Mr. Arterburn also "said some 2,000 persons were milling about the streets" These are the earliest estimates of the number of people present and may well be why numbers as high as 2,00 are cited in in stories about the battle. It is interesting that eye-witness Lones Selber made no estimate of the number of persons assaulting the jail. Bill White makes no mention of numbers larger than a crowd of about 200 involved at any point in the day. He only indicates about 60, "the little gang I had," being involved in the jail siege. We may assume that there were some folks drawn by the shooting, and for the "score of fist fights" reported by Mr. Arterburn there must have been some on each side of the dispute. Exactly how many of Mansfield's "deputies tried to get into the jail and how many escaped from it we do not know. It might well be many simply fled when the shooting started. There were well over 100 unaccounted for the next morning.

Bill White's interview is very informative about the League, the Battle, and the aftermath, and his service in the Marines, and the basic attitudes of an "ole dumb East Tennessee hillbilly" (his words). White exudes a point of view from the white lower class of East Tennessee in the mid-20th century. His interview leaves very open the question of whether the Democrats might well have won the 1936 Roosevelt landslide election honestly. "My daddy voted for Roosevelt, He liked Roosevelt, but was a Republican." And; "I liked Roosevelt because he brought us out of that Depression we was in. And we were in a bad one, it was a rough go for everybody. He brought us out of that and I liked it. But I’m a Republican, . . . " When asked: "When Pat Mansfield was in office before you left, where they stealing the ballot boxes and stuff like that then? Or did that start while you were gone?" Bill White replied "Oh yeah. They’d been doing that for a while. They even said Paul Cantrell done some of that. I don’t know if Paul Cantrell did, you know, but some of them Republicans said he did. Of course, they’d say he did whether he did nor not."

Bill White thought well of Paul Cantrell: " . . . Paul Cantrell was a well-known popular … man in the country and he was a Democrat too. And that was a Democratic administration. And he’d won three elections in a row for deputy. . . " White also made it very clear who their target was. Not the "machine" but rather Pat Mansfield: "Now, Paul Cantrell didn’t have anything to do with them thugs and things like that because that was Pat Mansfield. He was the one that brought the liquor and the gambling and the thugs and the things into McMinn County. He was out of Georgia. So ... he was the man we were after, wasn’t Paul Cantrell."

Needless to say the Bill White interview raises many questions about some of the more mythologized accounts of the Battle of Athens.

If anyone only read three sources on the battle; Lones Selbert's American Heritage article, the NY Times article "Tennessee Veterans Are Wary Now," and the Bill White's Interview are the ones which would inform them best about the background and happenings in Athens, Tennessee, on 1 August 1946.

The sources I wish I could have had: I would like to read Byram's book on The Battle of Athens, but I am not so interested I am willing to blow $95 on it. I would like to read T.H. White's article on The Battle of Athens in Harpers Magazine Jan.-Feb. 1947, but it would take a $50 subscription and I am not that interested.

I started to fill one "citation required" and ended up filling out the entire article. There was lack of substance and context which begged to be addressed, especially as there has been so much misinformation and even disinformation that has appeared on the Internet. It turns out you can find enough on the internet (the only book from my library cited is Goulden, "The Best Years") to gain perspective and understanding of the now almost mythical Battle of Athens Mark Lincoln (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Some Sources, outline of facts of the altercation.

I found three original sources you can work with. First, The Toledo Blade , August 2, 1946, pages 1 and 4, the article entitled Gun Battle with Deputies Won by Tennessee Voters http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ifVOAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7P8DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6978,269557&dq=battle-of-athens&hl=en

The facts which can be gleaned from this article are as follows:

The altercations started on August 1, 1946. Two ex-G.Il. observers, Charles Scott, Jr. and Ed Vestal had gone down the voting place at the city light and water building. At the voting place were seven "special deputies" sworn in the day before by the sitting sheriff. The special deputies had been sent to all the voting places, and many of them were from out of the area. The deputies reputedly threatened to kill Scott and Vestal, and refused to let them leave. When the deputies were distracted by a couple of newpapermen, Scott and Vestal escaped by breaking through a glass door. Next a group of ex-G.I.s went to the light and power company building and overpowered and seized the deputies. At about the same time, the G.I. contingent received news that Thomas Gillespie, 50 an African American farmer had been shot by one of the special deputies at another voting place. At Niota, a small community close to Athens, the G.I. faction took over one of the voting places. Sheriff Mansfield at this point sent between 4 and 12 special deputies to each voting place. The deputies started driving people away from the doors to the polling places, fistfights broke out in several places. The Sheriff had all the ballot boxes hauled to the jail. The G.I. poll watchers started getting beaten up and about 20 of them were hauled off to jail, along with the ballot boxes. The G.I. group surrounded the jail, demanding that the poll watchers be released, and the ballot boxes be counted in public. Someone in the crowd shot at the courthouse and the people inside replied with substantial fire at the crowd. This paper reports that the mob had submiachine guns, rifles, pistols, shotguns, tear gas, knives and clubs. A general gun battle lasted into the small hours of the next morning. Just after midnight one of the special deputies threatened to "shoot three of the veterans in here, ulness you break it up." It does not appear in this article, but soon thereafter several sticks of dynamite were ignited near the jailhouse, and those inside the jail finaly surrendered. The deputies, in leaving, ran a gauntlet and some were beating up pretty severely, until a couple of people in the G.I. faction made speaches, telling them that they didn't want to be involved in murder.

The article mentioned a Ralph Dugan. Byrum reports the name as Ralph Duggan, and Bill White as Ralph Dougan. Byrum grew up in Athens, Bill White was the leader of the "fighting bunch." Who's right?

BTW, Ralph whatever his name actually was, was the lawyer amongst the bunch. He and Otto Kennedy (a civilian advisor to the League) did the GIs great service by reigning in their actions. Duggan also instructed the GIs how to avoid incriminating themselves when the FBI showed up to investigate the Armory burglary.(White Oral History Interview)

The photo was one of several printed by the NY Times.

A second article, is at http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=MeQ-AAAAIBAJ&sjid=zEwMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5931,2620229&dq=battle-of-athens&hl=en The Tuscaloosa News, August 7, 1948, page 3 Firewords in Tennessee Election. This article mentiones the dynamite attack, and tells that the defenders of the jail were then taken to the courthouse, but later returned to the jail, put in cells. It also describes a minor riot thereafter in which cars with decals supporting the old faction were torched and burning for hours thereafter. Deputy C.M.Wise was knocked down repeatedly and was released only when a man named Bill Cook cautioned the crowd against murder, as did a veteran named Ralph Dugan who was a major player in the G.I. Nonpartisan movement. The G.I. campaign manager was named James Buttram, and he too was a major player in the movement.

A third article is http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=sPUaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=y0wEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6192,4362590&dq=james+buttram&hl=en The Pittsburg Press, August 2, 1946, 75 Besieged Deputies Surrender; Governor Cancels Militia Call. pages 1 and 8. It adds that all the special deputies were eventually released by the G.I. faction, other than Windy Wyatt, who was charged by the veterans with shooting the African American farmer, Gillespie, at the polls. Wyatt was badly beaten by the mob. A similar conflict was threatened at Etowah, eight miles to the east, but there the machine people conceded before it got out of hand, and allowed the G.I. poll watchers to keep charge of the ballot boxes. Some of the major players were the GI's candidate for sherif Knox Henry, and the machine's candidate Paul Cntrell,who had held the job job three terms previously. Sheriff Pat Mansfield, who swore in the special deputies disappeared when things got dicey, and Mayor Paul J. Walker, left town three days before the election. The Governor had called out the National Guard initially, but withdrew the order before it was implemented. The G.I.s won the election.

Among the three articles, you can get enough of the gist of what went on to draft up a discussion of what went on.

Hypercallipygian (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Deputy who shot the old farmer was C.M. "Windy" Wise, not Windy Wyatt as in the Pittsburgh Press. Cantrell & Mansfield escaped via ambulance during the siege of the jail. Athens Mayor Paul Walker was on vacation, there was no connection between his absence and the election. Etohwah is in McMinn County and one poll watcher there was arrested for requesting (allowed by law) that the ballot box be opened to ensure it was empty before the election. Paul Cantrell was in Etowah to supervise while Pat Mansfield oversaw operations in Athens. There is no evidence that fraud at the Etowah precinct was intended. Ballot fraud was intended at three specific precincts in Athens.

Newspaper accounts especially need to be checked against each other as the pressure is on the reporter or correspondents to produce fast and errors easily happen. I have found as many as three different spellings of the same man's name in Battle of Athens sources. Those were sources written many decades after the incident.

Mark Lincoln (talk) 20:22, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2016

Please change

McMinn County's had around 3,000 returning

to

McMinn County had around 3,000 returning

because the change would involve a simple grammatical correction.

Pcvcolin (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:07, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

:

The language in the piece seems overly dramatic and not befitting of an Encyclopedia. Definitely reads like a dramatic narrative of good versus evil rather than a dispassionate report of events. Soxwon (talk) 06:00, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more. This page needs a heavy facelift as well as editing from someone who is personally and morally disinterested in the details of the conflict. This page appears to be written by the son of one of the vigilantes rather than a historian of the times 2601:480:8507:C2E0:68A7:340:99A9:737D (talk) 19:29, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Scant accounts

There are few accounts of this action and in true typical fashion, The folks that both witnessed and participated in this unpleasant requirement for freedom were not very eager to speak about it.

 The ONE book that I've been able to find, that documents this part of Tennessee
History deals with 1st hand accounts by a native of McMinn county and is an excellent read.
"The battle of Athens" by C. Stephen Byrum, gives account from both points of view
and so far as I've read, proves the adage that "you cannot rule a free man, nor chain him. 
the best you can do is kill him".  

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.41.255.195 (talk) 12:12, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The Battle of Athens received a great deal of press at the time, as did Southeast Tennessee political violence 1946-1951. Most of the coverage was critical or very critical.

From the early 50s to 1976 there is next to nothing to be found, then there was mention of the Battle of Athens in Joseph Goulden's "The Best Years 1945-1950" (pgs 228-229). Then nothing until the responsibly written American Heritage article of 1985, which seems to have sparked a lot of interest from the gun rights movement. Since that artcle there have been a plethora of articles of varying quality, often simply plagiarizing the American Heritage article. Few cite sources beyond each other.

C. Stephen Byram, historian of McMinn County, wrote a 1987 book "The Battle of Athens in 1987. I have seen it advertised for about $70 used or $133 new. The book was re-issued in 1996 in shorter version (280 pgs vs 301) as "August 1, 1946. The Battle of Athens." That will set you back $95 used, $318 new. Dr. Byram grew up in McMinn county, graduated from Tennessee Weslyan College in Athens, has a Masters of Divinity from Southern Seminary, and has a Doctor of Philosophy degree from University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He has written or co-authored many books specializing (but not constrained too) books on religion and for young adults. I have not read his books on the battle and have found no professional reviews. I cannot vouch for them. His history of McMinn County is available free if you want to check it out. It is a responsible work of history. See references.

One of the persons who interviewed GI "fighting band" leader Bill White for the UT Knoxville oral history program, Brandi Wilson, grew up and attended school in Athens yet was not aware of the battle until the time of the interview. (Bill White Interview for Veteran's Oral History Project, see references)

A few years back the McMinn County Historical Society initiated a "Battle of Athens Project" and issued a map of the battle in 2014 (copy of map & legend in my possession). A check in early April 2016 of McMinn County Historical Society shows no record of their Battle of Athens Project and no explanation as to why it disappeared.

There was a made for TV movie in 1993, which bears only slight relationship to events in Athens, and was set in Texas, not Tennessee. There was a specious novel of 1996 sometimes cited as a source (some folks don't know or can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality). Both are connected in time with the Militia movement of the 1990s, which blew up (literally) in Oklahoma City. The timing of the TV show may be entirely coincidental.

Mark Lincoln (talk) 20:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

What is puzzling is the apparent silence of both the Crump machine and the GI Non-Partisan sides following the aftermath. --Naaman Brown (talk) 13:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Reagan not a vet

Ronald Reagan never served in WW II, making a lie of the article's contention that EVERY president from '52 to '92 served. And Johnson only "served" on a technicality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.248.214.103 (talk) 14:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree. The statement in the article is overreach in analyzing the results of this incident. Of all of them only Kennedy and GHW Bush were in combat. --23.119.204.117 (talk) 05:00, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Reagan was a WWII veteran, but did not serve in combat.

Ronald Wilson Reagan enrolled in a series of home-study Army Extension Courses on 18 March 1935. After completing 14 of the courses, he enlisted in the Army Enlisted Reserve on 29 April 1937, as a Private assigned to Troop B, 322nd Cavalry at Des Moines, Iowa. He was appointed Second Lieutenant in the Officers Reserve Corps of the Cavalry on 25 May 1937. On June 18 of that year Reagan, who had just moved to Los Angeles to begin his film career, accepted his Officer's Commission and was assigned to the 323rd Cavalry.

Lieutenant Reagan was ordered to active duty on 19 April 1942. Due to eyesight difficulties, he was classified for limited service only, which excluded him from serving overseas. His first assignment was at the San Francisco Port of Embarkation at Fort Mason, California, as liaison officer of the Port and Transportation Office. Upon the request of the Army Air Forces (AAF), he applied for a transfer from the Cavalry to the AAF on 15 May 1942; the transfer was approved on 9 June 1942. He was assigned to AAF Public Relations and subsequently to the 1st Motion Picture Unit in Culver City, California. Reagan was promoted to First Lieutenant on 14 January 1943 and was sent to the Provisional Task Force Show Unit of This Is The Army at Burbank, California. Following this duty, he returned to the 1st Motion Picture Unit, and on 22 July 1943 was promoted to Captain.

In January 1944, Captain Reagan was ordered to temporary duty in New York City to participate in the opening of the sixth War Loan Drive. He was assigned to the 18th AAF Base Unit, Culver City, California on 14 November 1944, where he remained until the end of the war. He was recommended for promotion to Major on 2 February 1945, but this recommendation was disapproved on July 17 of that year. On 8 September 1945, he was ordered to report to Fort MacArthur, California, where he was separated from active duty on 9 December 1945. (from https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/sreference/military-service-of-ronald-reagan ) 79.186.246.113 (talk) 11:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)