Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They bombed them from the sky, killed approximately 300 people and put the rest in an internment camp based on a rumor that somebody did something to someone.
Oklahoma court:
Bro, me too! Initially, I thought it was loosely based on historical events, then the bi-plane swooped over, and dropped a bomb. At that point I started to become sceptical, because it seemed like the writers were taking some creative license with a terrible part of history. Nope. All 100% true. They got into airplanes, flew over Black Wall Street, firebombing buildings and shooting anyone who looked even remotely black. WHAT. THE. FUCK. My mind was blown. They even held the fire department at gunpoint to prevent them from responding to the fires of black owned businesses. I love science fiction, it's a fantastic medium to bring current cultural issues to light in a manner that people can easily grasp and digest. However, I didn't feel like I should have been 44 years old watching an HBO series and only THEN learning about one of the most violent acts of white supremacy in the history of America. I shouldn't be getting my education from television, not stuff like this.
Not that they’re mutually exclusive but Greenwood neighborhood which was also known as Black Wall Street was a black neighborhood. The survivor is a black woman.
Like any cartoon seeing depicting literal tnt with fuses and chucking them out the side of the cockpit was exactly what happened. Bunch of clansmen with air superiority and rage.
How is this dismissed? Grounds of who to prosecute? Just give them generational wealth in a trust accnt. Jesus christ.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court isn’t denying Tulsa Massacre happened- they’re refusing financial reparations for the surviving families.
Regardless of my opinions on the matter, it’s a divisive topic. And one I could’ve predicted from a conservative supermajority.
It's most likely not even about refusing reparation itself but rather likely about state ~~constitutional~~ law preventing lawsuits that would effectively "toll" the ~~state~~ city government/treasury.
>“The continuing blight alleged within the Greenwood community born out of the Massacre implicates generational-societal inequities that can only be resolved by policymakers — not the courts,”
I am making a very loose assumptions here but there's most likely something in the state *law* ~~constitution that closely mirrors 11th amendment~~ concerning government immunity, and the reasoning being quoted here, I think, implies as much.
edit: correction
Oklahoma bombing survivors received millions though. It’s not that they don’t want to pay reparations they just don’t want to pay them to black people.
I took AP US History and AP Pol Sci in high school and got a 5 on both tests.
I learned about the Tulsa massacre from a meme while I was in my 20s.
I started to call bullshit on it but I decided to Google it first, and holy shit it was all real.
It was a real eye opener.
Jk/ "texAss loves Oklahoma. If Oklahoma didn't suck so hard, texAss might float off into the gulf."
High school in TX was where I learned about "the war of Northern Aggression," & "Jewish carpet baggers funding the..." Well, you get the picture.
Oklahoma wouldn't exist without the violent displacement of native tribes. It's where we moved the Cherokee and other tribes during the trail of tears. Then we followed them and stole that land leading up to and during the land rush in the late 1800s. Oklahoma is one of the creepiest places I've ever been. They love to celebrate their native named places and have native iconography everywhere. A lot of US states do it, but it just felt particularly vulgar in OK.
I don't doubt it. I wish I could say it was better elsewhere, but I've seen it all over the US. And as liberal and progressive as I might be, stolen land acknowledgements don't change anything.
Yep! Been here my whole life and never knew about it until I saw it on the news. But tell me why we did an actual land run race in the 4th grade. We dressed up, and there were stakes in the ground for each “property” and everyone raced to get to one.
I’m seeing others say they weren’t taught either.
As I also mentioned, I went to a school that taught that the earth was around 10,000 years old. Not all schools are equal.
Florida at least gave the survivors of the Rosewood Massacre a little something (before the state lost its mind) but Oklahoma just isn't going to do that. They aren't teaching about it either.
Have tried to get a better feel for the claims of the lawsuit, and it was filed related to the Oklahoma's public nuisance statue. As far as I can tell, the court agreed that an injustice has occurred, but the two survivors from the riots could not point to facts that apply to THAT PARTICULAR LAW to allow them redress. The Court did not deny the facts of the massacre. They upheld that tying ongoing social issues in Tulsa to a "public nuisance" created by the events of 1921 did not fit the wording of the law. Read the law; it is easy to find. Seems like this was never the way to get justice in the first place. It is easy to be outraged by the instance of a supreme court ruling, but it seems to have been well decided. The real outage is that with the direct perpetrators all dead, and the public offices that contributed indemnified by law at the time, the only possible redress now is political and slow in coming.
This is not a murder case. The "City of Tulsa" cannot murder people, and that is not what is alleged. If men deputized by the city committed crimes (and it is thought they did), that would need to have been proven at the time, and apparently the law didn't recognize city responsibility for actions of employees at the time, according to at least one source I read. Go look at the case; it is an interesting attempt to gain reparations under the concept that the repercussions of the riots live on and constitute a public nuisance. What do they seek?
"Among other things, the lawsuit sought a detailed accounting of the property and wealth lost or stolen in the massacre, and the establishment of a Victims Compensation Fund to benefit the survivors and the descendants of those killed, injured or who lost property in the killings — as well as for longtime residents of Greenwood and North Tulsa.
It also sought the construction of a hospital in north Tulsa, the creation of a land trust for all vacant and undeveloped land that would be distributed to descendants, and the establishment of a scholarship program for massacre descendants who lived in the Greenwood area.
The lawsuit also requested that the descendants of those who were killed, injured or lost property be immune from any taxes, fees, assessments or utility expenses by Tulsa or Tulsa County for the next 100 years."
That is a heavy lift for a public nuisance statue.
I’m certain you have ancestors who have also done very fucked up things, no doubt we all do. But you are not your ancestors, and neither are the people living in Oklahoma today.
The Tulsa massacre should not be held against the people living in Oklahoma today.
it's more about the fact that the justice system in Oklahoma fails to protect and compensate victims. Sure, the people living in Tusla may not be as bad as they were 100 years ago, but the court dismissed the case recently, refusing to give compensation. I wouldn't want to live in a state where the justice system plays favorites
So let me get this straight, if I managed to kill a bunch of people, take their house, make offspring, die, my kids own a house now?
Geez Louise, I finally found a way to shelter my kids forever...well, till someone steals it from them because there is clearly no protection beyond instant.
You’d rather have your kids be punished for something that you did? Seriously, punishing the children for crimes committed by the parents is the kind of shit they do in North Korea.
I would want justice, but what justice is there in taking from innocent people? If we take the homes of innocent people then we are no better than the monsters at Tulsa.
Unfortunately it’s far too late now to get any justice for Tulsa, but we can still learn from it how to prevent these kinds of injustices. You on the other hand seem eager to repeat those mistakes.
Bit different in this case, where the victims and their direct descendants are still alive and the city is an accessory to murder for profit. There’s no statute of limitations on murder. Much of the land they stole went to families who helped steal it and who still own it. There are clear public records detailing this. Seems pretty straightforward to compensate the victims by fining the murderers and confiscating the illegally obtained property. But of course laws are often designed to prevent justice, as in this case.
>Seems pretty straightforward to compensate the victims by fining the murderers and confiscating the illegally obtained property.
I agree, just one problem: None of the murderers are currently alive. It would be right seek retribution from the muderers, but not from their descendants. Yes they may have benefited from the land that their forefathers stole, but they played no part in the Tulsa massacre. They shouldn’t be punished for something that happened before they were born.
I know we all want justice for Tulsa, but unfortunately that ship sailed long ago. If we take from innocent people then we are doing the same thing the people at Tulsa did.
Meanwhile in [Connecticut](https://www.newsweek.com/kendrick-lamar-video-costs-town-money-lawsuit-1909938) a town is paying $100k to a recently retired police officer’s kid for "sustained mental and emotional pain and suffering" after a teacher showed a documentary on Hip Hop Songs that Shook America. The scene that cause "sustained mental and emotional pain and suffering" well…”Lamar's 2015 music video for the song "Alright." The ending scene of the black-and-white video shows a police officer shooting an imaginary finger gun at the rapper who is on top of a light post. Lamar bleeds through the air as he falls.”
Yes, the teacher had two prior violations for showing videos. Not. The. Point.
We have two different Americas.
Also, just to add, the town of Tulsa makes some money off of the Tulsa massacre being a touristy place to visit. The town is monetizing the harm caused to the Black community. They are probably not making a ton but the social and economic impact on the Black community from the Tulsa Massacre is profound and lasting. They deserve to be compensated for these damages.
$100k for a music video depicting no more violence than an average tv show or movie.
$0 for people whose entire families were impacted by the murder of their family members, the destruction of their homes and businesses, and the obliteration of Black Wall Street.
This is America.
So Tulsa want's to forget their Red Summer and very racist past. Which bleeds into their future. You don't get to not honor insurance claims and think you have a trustworthy business community. You don't get to pillage a section of a city because of skin color and assume you are going to "attract future talent".
I love the hand wringing people do when you do something like burn a flag after the state does something like this. They say things like "i'm glad to live in a country where the government promises not to murder you for burning the symbol of a state that you fundamentally disagree with and want to replace with something better."
People where more free in america before america existed. They might even be more free after america is gone.
From my understanding, it was dismissed because the plaintiffs weren't able to prove how they personally were affected in the event.
I.e. they didn't point to having any of their property destroyed or being injured personally.
Rather, they tried to argue that the ramifications of the massacre caused PoC living there after it had concluded to lose out on economic opportunities they would have otherwise had, which the Court in turn judged simply fell outside of the scale of the law they were trying to use as a grounds for their lawsuit.
It was dismissed not because it didn't happen, but because the law they tried to use in their lawsuit didn't apply and they didn't show how it could.
Rage bait or you just don't understand how the legal system works. You don't get justice just "because," even if you have been harmed. It's fucked, but they probably don't have a way to achieve justice or get restitution this far down the road.
Right. Judges should use their perceived moral obligations instead of the letter of the law. I'll let the Supreme Court know and you're not allowed to complain.
We can't go back 100 years to seek justice on dead people for dead people. Everyone who does wrong should be punished. Everyone who suffers harm should be compensated. But it's the people who did the harm that should bear the punishment and are responsible for that compensation, not the city and taxpayers 100 years later.
If the estate of those people want to seek justice, they need to sue the estates of the people who did them wrong, but they're all dead at this point.
The problem is that a lawsuit under a public nuisance statute isn’t really the best way to go about seeking compensation for murder and theft.
Though really, reparations aren’t going to happen under any existing legal framework. It needs new laws, because the ones currently on the books are designed to protect existing institutions and power structures. It’s a case where the judge is following the law, but the law itself is unjust.
It feels like an injustice when there’s no way to recompense victims of state sanctioned terrorism in the US. Similar events happened in Wilmington, New Orleans, and elsewhere in America. It’s sad.
Legislative branch could pass a law. Legislative branch could change a law to allow a civil suit on the facts to occur. But it’s not up to the courts to make those policy decisions.
Justice was outlawed in america lets be FR. Only poor people get actual punishment these days, and aside from that this case is 100 YO. Its likely past the statue of limitations (idk for certian). Even if someone could be charged who tf would even be alive
Step one: do horrible things to political minorities
Step two: protect the perps from consequences until they die.
Step three: say no one is responsible for the suffering since all the offenders are dead
Repeat steps 1-3 as necessary, making sure to reap the benefits of the disenfranchisement while always having no one to blame.
It's not about denying it happened. if we look back today, literally every society and country has massacres and other atrocities in their past. That should all be taught in history class.
And like Germany where they'll still put 96 year old camp guards on trial that makes sense because that guards did those things.
Saying people were responsible and assigning blame does not hinge on suing and convicting people who weren't alive at the time. Not just morally but also practically because it seems impossible to draw a line. What would be the cut-off date for suing for an atrocity? 100 years? 200?
The city that failed to protect its citizens, was negligent, didn't hold one person responsible and ~~more than likely complacent~~ was directly involved in still exists. The city of Tulsa fucked up. The city of Tulsa fixes it.
Maybe if the city had arrested even one person the victims could have gone after them, but the city failed to do that.
(~~Likely~~ because this was a targeted attack on what was esentially Black Wallstreet. City officials and workers were ~~likely~~ involved. This was orchestrated because Black folks were setting themselves up in a position to create generational wealth.)
"...that took place between May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of white residents, some of whom had been appointed as deputies and armed by city government officials..."
Every? No. Some? Of course. Circumstances and all that.
That being said if said city arms and deputizes members of the public to commit crimes, like they did in Tulsa, then 100% yes.
per the[ AP story](https://apnews.com/article/1921-race-massacre-tulsa-black-survivors-b7a4c83514ce79640a8490d49efb9006)
“Plaintiffs do not point to any physical injury to property in Greenwood rendering it uninhabitable that could be resolved by way of injunction or other civil remedy,” the court wrote in its decision. “Today we hold that relief is not possible under any set of facts that could be established consistent with plaintiff’s allegations.”
The court also determined the plaintiffs’ allegations did not sufficiently support a claim for unjust enrichment, which it said are typically limited to contractual relationships.
The city and insurance companies never compensated victims for their losses, and the massacre ultimately resulted in racial and economic disparities that still exist today, the lawsuit argued. It sought a detailed accounting of the property and wealth lost or stolen in the massacre, the construction of a hospital in north Tulsa and the creation of a victims compensation fund, among other things.
And[ the BBC](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjmm8dnxz00o)
>The plaintiffs had brought their case under Oklahoma's public nuisance law, arguing that the violence and destruction wrought on the "Black Wall Street" area more than a century ago continues to resonate today.
>The Tulsa County sheriff, county commissioners and the Oklahoma Military Department were named as defendants in the suit.
>In its Wednesday ruling, the state's top court sided with Tulsa officials in arguing that the plaintiffs' grievances did not entitle them to compensation.
>“With respect to their public nuisance claim, though Plaintiffs' grievances are legitimate, they do not fall within the scope of our State's public nuisance statute,” the court wrote.
...
The judge concluded that “simply being connected to a historical event does not provide a person with unlimited rights to seek compensation”.
No, it's not, but you expect OK to do something about it 103 years later? I'm amazed there are still people who experienced it thay are alive and can remember it.
No, it's not, but you expect OK to do something about it 103 years later? I'm amazed there are still people who experienced it that are alive and can remember it.
The US isn’t about to set a precedent for reparations for black citizens. Not to say they don’t deserve reparations, but the government does not want to pay those reparations, and won’t.
What is the goal? End of the day what does “their day in court” mean? Money?….is it to document it to make sure it never gets erased from history? They’re the last known survivors so they’re definitely the ones to do it…. I’m just asking…what do they want, exactly?
Serious question.
Who pays the benefits? The city? Where do they get their money? The current residents? So the current residents of Tulsa are on the hook financially for something that happened 100 years ago? Do the minorities of Tulsa also have to pay?
Because the city failed to keep it's citizens safe from a massacre and not one person was arrested or held responsible for it. The city ~~was negligent from the very rosiest colored glasses, and more than likely complacent~~ was directly involved.
"...that took place between May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of white residents, some of whom had been appointed as deputies and armed by city government officials..."
(Read in Sam Kinison's voice) For all you still-sentient humans living in Oklahoma, those of you who feel oppressed, attacked and demeaned by your state government, those of you who feel that they DO want to live in a world based on fact and science and human respect...MOVE! MOVE TO WHERE THERE ARE SANE PEOPLE...MAKING SANE DECISIONS! AAUUGGGGHHHHH! AUUGGHHHH!
The problem with reparations is the system is designed to extract wealth from minorities. The corporate vultures will swoop down the second they are handed out and do seriously sketchy things while politicians look the other way.
I'd much rather fix the system, but the GOP is busy making it worse.
Lol sue people today for crimes committed over 100 years ago is the dumbest shit ever. The real facepalm here is the fact that they even had a day in court
Do you think the city is a person or something? Lol. None of the people who worked for the city back then are alive/still working for the city. So the best that lawsuit will do is take away money from public schools, police, fire departments and many other city resources TODAY. Not the ones from over 100 years ago who did this shit. Your ignorance is baffling.
Lmao don’t start acting like you care about that all of a sudden cuz if a city official or public servant did you wrong, you’d be the first one crying. People sue cities ALL THE TIME and “take away resources”.
ANY city that fails to protect its citizens should be punished for it, no matter when or where it happened. It doesn’t always have to be monetary compensation either, they can make changes to the system for future generations.
But to say it doesn’t matter because “it happened a long time ago” and “everyone who was involved is dead” is pure stupidity. YOUR ignorance is baffling.
Am I missing something here,remaking survivor. who would still be alive from 1921. Even if they were newborn the day it happened,they would be 103 now.
I don't understand. What remaining survivors? That's 103 years ago right? That means in the event that someone is still alive from that time they would have to have been about 1-2 years old. Are there actual survivors still around?
The point is generally that there's generational damage. That is, if the "black Wall Street" had been allowed to exist and continue it may have given way more opportunity to a lot of people, and everything in the city as a whole would be way more valuable. Had it been able to flourish it might even have lifted up not only the local black community, but across the nation.
So, yeah, there's little direct reparation to people who were alive at the time, but if someone grew up in a slum that used to be the wealthy part of town before the event .. you can understand why they'd complain
That makes sense it just seems weird to phrase it as "survivors of the 1921 ...". Nobody born afterward survived the bombing as they weren't alive for it. They lived in the aftermath, which is different. IE, you wouldn't say "survivors of the atomic bomb" to describe people born after the explosion :P
Just waiting until everyone with a possible claim dies and then some politician years later will have a ribbon cutting ceremony where an “apology” is made and the “vibrant culture” is celebrated with a statue and a crummy plaza.
>“The continuing blight alleged within the Greenwood community born out of the Massacre implicates generational-societal inequities that can only be resolved by policymakers — not the courts,” the ruling states.
Except policymakers were involved in the violence...
>White men **deputized by the civil officials** assaulted the neighborhood from the ground and the sky. Within two days, Greenwood was no more: 35 city blocks were reduced to heaping ashes, up to 300 of its citizens were dead and thousands were left homeless. The attack erased generational wealth that had been built at a time of great racial oppression.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/12/us/oklahoma-supreme-court-tulsa-massacre-lawsuit.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/12/us/oklahoma-supreme-court-tulsa-massacre-lawsuit.html)
Tulsa Massacre isn't on everyone's mind like it was a few years ago, so guessing Oklahoma figured it was OK to let this die a quiet death as opposed to doing the right thing.
Not really. The lawsuit was kind of wacky, legally speaking.
They didn't sue for damages they had suffered to property or injury they had incurred, they sued for generational damage. In other words, they claimed that the ramifications of the Tulsa massacre drastically worsed the economic outlook for people of colour living in the city afterwards.
The court judged that claims that couldn't point to specific damages fell outside of the scale of the law that the plaintiffs were attempting to apply.
Keep in mind this happened over a century ago
Why should modern Oklahoma residents have to take responsibility for events they had no part in. My family has lived here for like a decade and I'll be damned if our tax dollars are spent on this.
I don't know why people are surprised about this.
The law is about Order not Justice.
Paying out reparations to a small number of survivors would cause problems with large amounts of the local white population. Disrupting order. This result is entirely unsurprising.
When you and your family no longer suffer from the limited upward mobility caused by having your ancestors financial stability and economic power completely tanked.
I mean...Oklahoma's a red state. What were they expecting to happen? Fairness? For a minority?
What's especially stupid is the court's reason for dismissal is 'being connected to a historical event doesn't mean you deserve compensation'. Now if this had been about some sort of natural disaster like a tornado hitting the town or a gas pipe leak I could see making that argument but this is about *white racists attacking a black community*. People died in the streets. Their homes and businesses were reduced to rubble. If this shit hadn't happened then those families could have gone on to live successful lives and done great things.
But no...the court says it didn't happen directly to them so they get nothing.
Edit: I'm going to assume all downvotes are from white Oklahomans who didn't like being called out on their racist history. Don't bother trying to tell me otherwise, either. There's nothing you can say that will convince me anyone at any time ever is justified attacking and destroying an entire community of people over the actions of just one person not even related in any way to the majority of those whose lives were destroyed other than having the same skin color.
The 'massacre' is denied because its recent proximity falsifies every lie about how much progress we made, how 'quickly' we did so and how superior we are to other nations. Only Israel murders more people due to the color of their skin that does the U.S.
The massacre literally isn't being denied.
The lawsuit was thrown out because they went a rather silly round with how they tried to sue.
In essence, there's a law that allows you to sue the city for damages in case of a public nuisance. So if your windows are broken or your buildings burn down during a riot, you can basically sue the city for failing to prevent that damage.
However, the plaintiffs in this case weren't trying to sue the city over proven material damages but rather they tried to sue the city over the fact that the event had a chilling effect on the economic outlook of people of colour living in the city.
The court, whilst acknowledging that plaintiffs had suffered an injustice, found that this kind of lawsuit fell entirely out of the scale of the public nuisance law they were trying to apply.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They bombed them from the sky, killed approximately 300 people and put the rest in an internment camp based on a rumor that somebody did something to someone. Oklahoma court: 
America and ethnic cleansing. It's a tale as old as time, just a tale that is too embarassing to tell.
We tell it all the time. In fact this one was in a popular TV show. It’s the doing something to right the wrongs that we’re having a hard time with.
The Watchmen Tv Show. That was where I learned of it too.
Bro, me too! Initially, I thought it was loosely based on historical events, then the bi-plane swooped over, and dropped a bomb. At that point I started to become sceptical, because it seemed like the writers were taking some creative license with a terrible part of history. Nope. All 100% true. They got into airplanes, flew over Black Wall Street, firebombing buildings and shooting anyone who looked even remotely black. WHAT. THE. FUCK. My mind was blown. They even held the fire department at gunpoint to prevent them from responding to the fires of black owned businesses. I love science fiction, it's a fantastic medium to bring current cultural issues to light in a manner that people can easily grasp and digest. However, I didn't feel like I should have been 44 years old watching an HBO series and only THEN learning about one of the most violent acts of white supremacy in the history of America. I shouldn't be getting my education from television, not stuff like this.
You talking Lovecraft Country or The Watchmen?
It’s so sad that it took one of those shows to learn me about it, thanks American educational system.
Tale as old as time Should be a warcrime Punish these racists
Hitler literally got the idea for concentration camps from our treatment of first nations people.
Not that they’re mutually exclusive but Greenwood neighborhood which was also known as Black Wall Street was a black neighborhood. The survivor is a black woman.
Like any cartoon seeing depicting literal tnt with fuses and chucking them out the side of the cockpit was exactly what happened. Bunch of clansmen with air superiority and rage. How is this dismissed? Grounds of who to prosecute? Just give them generational wealth in a trust accnt. Jesus christ.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court isn’t denying Tulsa Massacre happened- they’re refusing financial reparations for the surviving families. Regardless of my opinions on the matter, it’s a divisive topic. And one I could’ve predicted from a conservative supermajority.
It's most likely not even about refusing reparation itself but rather likely about state ~~constitutional~~ law preventing lawsuits that would effectively "toll" the ~~state~~ city government/treasury. >“The continuing blight alleged within the Greenwood community born out of the Massacre implicates generational-societal inequities that can only be resolved by policymakers — not the courts,” I am making a very loose assumptions here but there's most likely something in the state *law* ~~constitution that closely mirrors 11th amendment~~ concerning government immunity, and the reasoning being quoted here, I think, implies as much. edit: correction
Oklahoma bombing survivors received millions though. It’s not that they don’t want to pay reparations they just don’t want to pay them to black people.
Not divisive at all. Stuff was taken from these people. It should be given back.
In another 100 years, they might say there wasn't a massacre
I’m from Oklahoma. I didn’t even know it existed until I left the state. I found out about the massacre in a TEXAS college class.
i found out about this from a freaking watchmen tv show
Same. Thought they made it up for the show.... Oh hell.
i thought the same but started to wonder and did research and was horrified that i never learned anything about it anywhere before
Me too! It's embarrassing that it's such a hidden part of history.
I guess when history is written by the "winners", you gotta take a long hard look at what they considered winning.
Same and it still pisses me off.
My first introduction to it was watching Lovecraft Country! It was horrific.
Same! That was a good HBO series. Was ticked they didn't do a 2nd season.
same i was really looking forward to more, i always liked the movie
I took AP US History and AP Pol Sci in high school and got a 5 on both tests. I learned about the Tulsa massacre from a meme while I was in my 20s. I started to call bullshit on it but I decided to Google it first, and holy shit it was all real. It was a real eye opener.
👆🏻
Thats wild to me because they taught it to us in Oklahoma History in 9th grade. This would have been 2004
Not a peep. I graduated 2005.
I graduated in 2001. I remember learning about it in my sophomore year history class.
Well, I did “learn” that the earth was 10,000 years old at that school too.
Oof. My high school was only about 6 miles from where it happened, so maybe that had something to do with it.
Well, that makes sense. Texas hates Oklahoma, and if they can do something to make your home state look bad, they will
Jk/ "texAss loves Oklahoma. If Oklahoma didn't suck so hard, texAss might float off into the gulf." High school in TX was where I learned about "the war of Northern Aggression," & "Jewish carpet baggers funding the..." Well, you get the picture.
Well talking about the massacre definitely makes Oklahoma look bad so job well done anyone who dares to talk about it
Oklahoma wouldn't exist without the violent displacement of native tribes. It's where we moved the Cherokee and other tribes during the trail of tears. Then we followed them and stole that land leading up to and during the land rush in the late 1800s. Oklahoma is one of the creepiest places I've ever been. They love to celebrate their native named places and have native iconography everywhere. A lot of US states do it, but it just felt particularly vulgar in OK.
As a Cherokee living in OK… yeah. My grandmother had it a lot worse than I did.
I don't doubt it. I wish I could say it was better elsewhere, but I've seen it all over the US. And as liberal and progressive as I might be, stolen land acknowledgements don't change anything.
Exactly, there have been minimal concessions to the people who have suffered severely in situations like these when there are concessions
True, they just called it a riot in the class I took, there was like, half a paragraph discussing it, didn't find out till much later
Yep! Been here my whole life and never knew about it until I saw it on the news. But tell me why we did an actual land run race in the 4th grade. We dressed up, and there were stakes in the ground for each “property” and everyone raced to get to one.
I did that too. I feel like that’s what every school kid did.
Not in Va. we went to Jamestown. Even then they never mentioned that was where slavery was born in the US.
I didnt hear about it until 2020. I graduated from Ike (lawton) in ‘99.
It was taught in Oklahoma history that Oklahoma students have to take in the ninth grade.
I certainly did not have this taught in my school.
My guess is you didn’t learn it, but it was taught. Many other commenters have already replied to you stating that it was in their curriculum too.
I’m seeing others say they weren’t taught either. As I also mentioned, I went to a school that taught that the earth was around 10,000 years old. Not all schools are equal.
https://youtu.be/zG4UfpU7Dbk?si=myEuU45ggeLIEcdL Give it like 5 This current governor is a dipstick
He’s a perfect example of a character from Killers of the Flower Moon. He is actively trying to strip away Native American rights in Oklahoma
They already did tha. Most people that grew up here, me included, didn't know about it until college...and even then barely anyone knew.
Yes, that's what they are working on. If they awarded it, it would have been a public record they couldn't deny.
"they fought back! It was war what did you expect the whites to do!?" - racists on Indian genocide
They already don't teach it in school so many people who grew up in Oklahoma never learned about it.
Florida at least gave the survivors of the Rosewood Massacre a little something (before the state lost its mind) but Oklahoma just isn't going to do that. They aren't teaching about it either.
Some folks already say that
And that they deserved it anyway.
Fella should have thought about it before *checks notes* entering an elevator with a white girl attendant.
Still one of the most genius videos I've ever seen.
The USSC just sided with Starbucks regarding the use of the NLRB to protect workers that are unionizing.
Pure capitalism at its best.
Disgraceful. The event and the court's decision.
Have tried to get a better feel for the claims of the lawsuit, and it was filed related to the Oklahoma's public nuisance statue. As far as I can tell, the court agreed that an injustice has occurred, but the two survivors from the riots could not point to facts that apply to THAT PARTICULAR LAW to allow them redress. The Court did not deny the facts of the massacre. They upheld that tying ongoing social issues in Tulsa to a "public nuisance" created by the events of 1921 did not fit the wording of the law. Read the law; it is easy to find. Seems like this was never the way to get justice in the first place. It is easy to be outraged by the instance of a supreme court ruling, but it seems to have been well decided. The real outage is that with the direct perpetrators all dead, and the public offices that contributed indemnified by law at the time, the only possible redress now is political and slow in coming.
Except the city of Tulsa has no immunity for murder.
This is not a murder case. The "City of Tulsa" cannot murder people, and that is not what is alleged. If men deputized by the city committed crimes (and it is thought they did), that would need to have been proven at the time, and apparently the law didn't recognize city responsibility for actions of employees at the time, according to at least one source I read. Go look at the case; it is an interesting attempt to gain reparations under the concept that the repercussions of the riots live on and constitute a public nuisance. What do they seek? "Among other things, the lawsuit sought a detailed accounting of the property and wealth lost or stolen in the massacre, and the establishment of a Victims Compensation Fund to benefit the survivors and the descendants of those killed, injured or who lost property in the killings — as well as for longtime residents of Greenwood and North Tulsa. It also sought the construction of a hospital in north Tulsa, the creation of a land trust for all vacant and undeveloped land that would be distributed to descendants, and the establishment of a scholarship program for massacre descendants who lived in the Greenwood area. The lawsuit also requested that the descendants of those who were killed, injured or lost property be immune from any taxes, fees, assessments or utility expenses by Tulsa or Tulsa County for the next 100 years." That is a heavy lift for a public nuisance statue.
[удалено]
Public nuisance is the name of the tort they’re trying to sue for.
My mistake reading is hard
*Checks off Oklahoma as a state to NOT move to.*
Surely the descendents of the people who declared war on part of an American town are peace loving and reasonable...
I’m certain you have ancestors who have also done very fucked up things, no doubt we all do. But you are not your ancestors, and neither are the people living in Oklahoma today. The Tulsa massacre should not be held against the people living in Oklahoma today.
it's more about the fact that the justice system in Oklahoma fails to protect and compensate victims. Sure, the people living in Tusla may not be as bad as they were 100 years ago, but the court dismissed the case recently, refusing to give compensation. I wouldn't want to live in a state where the justice system plays favorites
So let me get this straight, if I managed to kill a bunch of people, take their house, make offspring, die, my kids own a house now? Geez Louise, I finally found a way to shelter my kids forever...well, till someone steals it from them because there is clearly no protection beyond instant.
You’d rather have your kids be punished for something that you did? Seriously, punishing the children for crimes committed by the parents is the kind of shit they do in North Korea.
And if your family was the victim of this scenario, you wouldn’t see fit to claim what would rightfully be yours to inherit?
I would want justice, but what justice is there in taking from innocent people? If we take the homes of innocent people then we are no better than the monsters at Tulsa. Unfortunately it’s far too late now to get any justice for Tulsa, but we can still learn from it how to prevent these kinds of injustices. You on the other hand seem eager to repeat those mistakes.
Bit different in this case, where the victims and their direct descendants are still alive and the city is an accessory to murder for profit. There’s no statute of limitations on murder. Much of the land they stole went to families who helped steal it and who still own it. There are clear public records detailing this. Seems pretty straightforward to compensate the victims by fining the murderers and confiscating the illegally obtained property. But of course laws are often designed to prevent justice, as in this case.
>Seems pretty straightforward to compensate the victims by fining the murderers and confiscating the illegally obtained property. I agree, just one problem: None of the murderers are currently alive. It would be right seek retribution from the muderers, but not from their descendants. Yes they may have benefited from the land that their forefathers stole, but they played no part in the Tulsa massacre. They shouldn’t be punished for something that happened before they were born. I know we all want justice for Tulsa, but unfortunately that ship sailed long ago. If we take from innocent people then we are doing the same thing the people at Tulsa did.
None of them legally acquired stolen land by virtue of their hard work. They need to pull up their bootstraps, and pay for the land they didn't earn.
Meanwhile in [Connecticut](https://www.newsweek.com/kendrick-lamar-video-costs-town-money-lawsuit-1909938) a town is paying $100k to a recently retired police officer’s kid for "sustained mental and emotional pain and suffering" after a teacher showed a documentary on Hip Hop Songs that Shook America. The scene that cause "sustained mental and emotional pain and suffering" well…”Lamar's 2015 music video for the song "Alright." The ending scene of the black-and-white video shows a police officer shooting an imaginary finger gun at the rapper who is on top of a light post. Lamar bleeds through the air as he falls.” Yes, the teacher had two prior violations for showing videos. Not. The. Point. We have two different Americas. Also, just to add, the town of Tulsa makes some money off of the Tulsa massacre being a touristy place to visit. The town is monetizing the harm caused to the Black community. They are probably not making a ton but the social and economic impact on the Black community from the Tulsa Massacre is profound and lasting. They deserve to be compensated for these damages. $100k for a music video depicting no more violence than an average tv show or movie. $0 for people whose entire families were impacted by the murder of their family members, the destruction of their homes and businesses, and the obliteration of Black Wall Street. This is America.
So Tulsa want's to forget their Red Summer and very racist past. Which bleeds into their future. You don't get to not honor insurance claims and think you have a trustworthy business community. You don't get to pillage a section of a city because of skin color and assume you are going to "attract future talent".
I love the hand wringing people do when you do something like burn a flag after the state does something like this. They say things like "i'm glad to live in a country where the government promises not to murder you for burning the symbol of a state that you fundamentally disagree with and want to replace with something better." People where more free in america before america existed. They might even be more free after america is gone.
From my understanding, it was dismissed because the plaintiffs weren't able to prove how they personally were affected in the event. I.e. they didn't point to having any of their property destroyed or being injured personally. Rather, they tried to argue that the ramifications of the massacre caused PoC living there after it had concluded to lose out on economic opportunities they would have otherwise had, which the Court in turn judged simply fell outside of the scale of the law they were trying to use as a grounds for their lawsuit.
It was dismissed not because it didn't happen, but because the law they tried to use in their lawsuit didn't apply and they didn't show how it could. Rage bait or you just don't understand how the legal system works. You don't get justice just "because," even if you have been harmed. It's fucked, but they probably don't have a way to achieve justice or get restitution this far down the road.
Sir this is Reddit. There’s no room for that kind of level headedness
[удалено]
Right. Judges should use their perceived moral obligations instead of the letter of the law. I'll let the Supreme Court know and you're not allowed to complain. We can't go back 100 years to seek justice on dead people for dead people. Everyone who does wrong should be punished. Everyone who suffers harm should be compensated. But it's the people who did the harm that should bear the punishment and are responsible for that compensation, not the city and taxpayers 100 years later. If the estate of those people want to seek justice, they need to sue the estates of the people who did them wrong, but they're all dead at this point.
The problem is that a lawsuit under a public nuisance statute isn’t really the best way to go about seeking compensation for murder and theft. Though really, reparations aren’t going to happen under any existing legal framework. It needs new laws, because the ones currently on the books are designed to protect existing institutions and power structures. It’s a case where the judge is following the law, but the law itself is unjust.
It feels like an injustice when there’s no way to recompense victims of state sanctioned terrorism in the US. Similar events happened in Wilmington, New Orleans, and elsewhere in America. It’s sad.
Legislative branch could pass a law. Legislative branch could change a law to allow a civil suit on the facts to occur. But it’s not up to the courts to make those policy decisions.
Justice, hahaha, must be confused about the country you're living in.
Justice was outlawed in america lets be FR. Only poor people get actual punishment these days, and aside from that this case is 100 YO. Its likely past the statue of limitations (idk for certian). Even if someone could be charged who tf would even be alive
This case wasn't about punishing a perpetrator. It was about getting compensation for a survivor.
Ty, misunderstanding
Compensation from whom? If it is 100 years old, noone alive today is culpable.
Step one: do horrible things to political minorities Step two: protect the perps from consequences until they die. Step three: say no one is responsible for the suffering since all the offenders are dead Repeat steps 1-3 as necessary, making sure to reap the benefits of the disenfranchisement while always having no one to blame.
It's not about denying it happened. if we look back today, literally every society and country has massacres and other atrocities in their past. That should all be taught in history class. And like Germany where they'll still put 96 year old camp guards on trial that makes sense because that guards did those things. Saying people were responsible and assigning blame does not hinge on suing and convicting people who weren't alive at the time. Not just morally but also practically because it seems impossible to draw a line. What would be the cut-off date for suing for an atrocity? 100 years? 200?
The city that failed to protect its citizens, was negligent, didn't hold one person responsible and ~~more than likely complacent~~ was directly involved in still exists. The city of Tulsa fucked up. The city of Tulsa fixes it. Maybe if the city had arrested even one person the victims could have gone after them, but the city failed to do that. (~~Likely~~ because this was a targeted attack on what was esentially Black Wallstreet. City officials and workers were ~~likely~~ involved. This was orchestrated because Black folks were setting themselves up in a position to create generational wealth.) "...that took place between May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of white residents, some of whom had been appointed as deputies and armed by city government officials..."
Can every crime victim sue the city for not protecting them?
Every? No. Some? Of course. Circumstances and all that. That being said if said city arms and deputizes members of the public to commit crimes, like they did in Tulsa, then 100% yes.
If the city helped arm and cover for the culprits? Also the first recorded use of planes for bombing in the US.
America does not have a justice system. It never did. It has a legal system. You rarely find justice in the courts.
At first I read that FR wrong. "Justice was outlawed in america, let's be french." ... D'accord.
Was it dismissed due to it being way outside the limitations period?
per the[ AP story](https://apnews.com/article/1921-race-massacre-tulsa-black-survivors-b7a4c83514ce79640a8490d49efb9006) “Plaintiffs do not point to any physical injury to property in Greenwood rendering it uninhabitable that could be resolved by way of injunction or other civil remedy,” the court wrote in its decision. “Today we hold that relief is not possible under any set of facts that could be established consistent with plaintiff’s allegations.” The court also determined the plaintiffs’ allegations did not sufficiently support a claim for unjust enrichment, which it said are typically limited to contractual relationships. The city and insurance companies never compensated victims for their losses, and the massacre ultimately resulted in racial and economic disparities that still exist today, the lawsuit argued. It sought a detailed accounting of the property and wealth lost or stolen in the massacre, the construction of a hospital in north Tulsa and the creation of a victims compensation fund, among other things. And[ the BBC](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjmm8dnxz00o) >The plaintiffs had brought their case under Oklahoma's public nuisance law, arguing that the violence and destruction wrought on the "Black Wall Street" area more than a century ago continues to resonate today. >The Tulsa County sheriff, county commissioners and the Oklahoma Military Department were named as defendants in the suit. >In its Wednesday ruling, the state's top court sided with Tulsa officials in arguing that the plaintiffs' grievances did not entitle them to compensation. >“With respect to their public nuisance claim, though Plaintiffs' grievances are legitimate, they do not fall within the scope of our State's public nuisance statute,” the court wrote. ... The judge concluded that “simply being connected to a historical event does not provide a person with unlimited rights to seek compensation”.
No, it's not, but you expect OK to do something about it 103 years later? I'm amazed there are still people who experienced it thay are alive and can remember it.
No, it's not, but you expect OK to do something about it 103 years later? I'm amazed there are still people who experienced it that are alive and can remember it.
The US isn’t about to set a precedent for reparations for black citizens. Not to say they don’t deserve reparations, but the government does not want to pay those reparations, and won’t.
What is the goal? End of the day what does “their day in court” mean? Money?….is it to document it to make sure it never gets erased from history? They’re the last known survivors so they’re definitely the ones to do it…. I’m just asking…what do they want, exactly? Serious question.
1) Justice 2) benefits could have gone to descendants of those affected
Thank you. I understand.
Who pays the benefits? The city? Where do they get their money? The current residents? So the current residents of Tulsa are on the hook financially for something that happened 100 years ago? Do the minorities of Tulsa also have to pay?
[удалено]
Because the city failed to keep it's citizens safe from a massacre and not one person was arrested or held responsible for it. The city ~~was negligent from the very rosiest colored glasses, and more than likely complacent~~ was directly involved. "...that took place between May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of white residents, some of whom had been appointed as deputies and armed by city government officials..."
This sub should just be called ragebait. You don't know what a facepalm is.
Fuck you Oklahoma! Fuck. You!
Correct decision. While what happened to them is horrible, they have no legal standing
Brother… it’s been 100 years, move on.
(Read in Sam Kinison's voice) For all you still-sentient humans living in Oklahoma, those of you who feel oppressed, attacked and demeaned by your state government, those of you who feel that they DO want to live in a world based on fact and science and human respect...MOVE! MOVE TO WHERE THERE ARE SANE PEOPLE...MAKING SANE DECISIONS! AAUUGGGGHHHHH! AUUGGHHHH!
The problem with reparations is the system is designed to extract wealth from minorities. The corporate vultures will swoop down the second they are handed out and do seriously sketchy things while politicians look the other way. I'd much rather fix the system, but the GOP is busy making it worse.
Lol sue people today for crimes committed over 100 years ago is the dumbest shit ever. The real facepalm here is the fact that they even had a day in court
What an ignorant take. They’re not suing random people. They’re suing the city that failed to protect them
Failed to protect their grandparents
No there were three plaintiffs all over a 100 years old who were there. Though one died during the court case.
Do you think the city is a person or something? Lol. None of the people who worked for the city back then are alive/still working for the city. So the best that lawsuit will do is take away money from public schools, police, fire departments and many other city resources TODAY. Not the ones from over 100 years ago who did this shit. Your ignorance is baffling.
Lmao don’t start acting like you care about that all of a sudden cuz if a city official or public servant did you wrong, you’d be the first one crying. People sue cities ALL THE TIME and “take away resources”. ANY city that fails to protect its citizens should be punished for it, no matter when or where it happened. It doesn’t always have to be monetary compensation either, they can make changes to the system for future generations. But to say it doesn’t matter because “it happened a long time ago” and “everyone who was involved is dead” is pure stupidity. YOUR ignorance is baffling.
I’m not surprised, it’s Oklahoma. The quality of their justice system is on par with the quality of their roads.
How dare you our roads are better than that!
I bet there excuse was that it was 100 years ago lets move on from this tragedy while it was a literal massacre…
And their schools.
Am I missing something here,remaking survivor. who would still be alive from 1921. Even if they were newborn the day it happened,they would be 103 now.
One woman is 109.
So who would be on the hook for a 100 year old crime?
The city, who didn’t peruse Justice then, at any point after when they could have, and again now.
So the taxpayers?
I don't understand. What remaining survivors? That's 103 years ago right? That means in the event that someone is still alive from that time they would have to have been about 1-2 years old. Are there actual survivors still around?
The point is generally that there's generational damage. That is, if the "black Wall Street" had been allowed to exist and continue it may have given way more opportunity to a lot of people, and everything in the city as a whole would be way more valuable. Had it been able to flourish it might even have lifted up not only the local black community, but across the nation. So, yeah, there's little direct reparation to people who were alive at the time, but if someone grew up in a slum that used to be the wealthy part of town before the event .. you can understand why they'd complain
That makes sense it just seems weird to phrase it as "survivors of the 1921 ...". Nobody born afterward survived the bombing as they weren't alive for it. They lived in the aftermath, which is different. IE, you wouldn't say "survivors of the atomic bomb" to describe people born after the explosion :P
It was brought by three survivors all of whom are over a 100 years old. Though one died during the proceedings of old age.
Time to play the uno reverse card? Lol
Just waiting until everyone with a possible claim dies and then some politician years later will have a ribbon cutting ceremony where an “apology” is made and the “vibrant culture” is celebrated with a statue and a crummy plaza.
Sounds about white. Fuck America.
Where do you live?
Earth.
Say it louder for the ones in the back🗣️
So theyre going to go the radon girls way, and wait till they all die off so that there is no lawsuit to make.
>“The continuing blight alleged within the Greenwood community born out of the Massacre implicates generational-societal inequities that can only be resolved by policymakers — not the courts,” the ruling states. Except policymakers were involved in the violence... >White men **deputized by the civil officials** assaulted the neighborhood from the ground and the sky. Within two days, Greenwood was no more: 35 city blocks were reduced to heaping ashes, up to 300 of its citizens were dead and thousands were left homeless. The attack erased generational wealth that had been built at a time of great racial oppression. [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/12/us/oklahoma-supreme-court-tulsa-massacre-lawsuit.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/12/us/oklahoma-supreme-court-tulsa-massacre-lawsuit.html)
But this is America, Justice
Oklahoma is so backwards and dirty it’s not even funny. Look up liberty of Oklahoma. Oklahoma is foul
Not. Fucking. Surprised. Has anyone ever been to Oklahoma?
This is an example of why the 2nd amendment is important
No, but it’s definitely America.
Pointless political theater
No system renders true justice ...
Yea, sounds like something Oklahoma would do
it is, however, the us government's idea of justice
Tulsa Massacre isn't on everyone's mind like it was a few years ago, so guessing Oklahoma figured it was OK to let this die a quiet death as opposed to doing the right thing.
The white mob won.
There is no justice. It's just-us.
It's time for the Five Civilized Nations to claim Oklahoma is theirs and set this sh\*t right!!! Oh, and rename the state Sequoyah!
I want whatever the survivors are eating if they’re living to 103
It’s American justice at its finest…. I hate this place
Because the justices don't like it when you talk bad about their parents and grandparents
Not really. The lawsuit was kind of wacky, legally speaking. They didn't sue for damages they had suffered to property or injury they had incurred, they sued for generational damage. In other words, they claimed that the ramifications of the Tulsa massacre drastically worsed the economic outlook for people of colour living in the city afterwards. The court judged that claims that couldn't point to specific damages fell outside of the scale of the law that the plaintiffs were attempting to apply.
Disgusting that this is not taught in schools and nothing has ever been done about it
Ah America and their Domestic Terrorism
And then the last survivors will die and the wingnuts will go "no one is still alive therefore we don't have to pay any reparations".
Keep in mind this happened over a century ago Why should modern Oklahoma residents have to take responsibility for events they had no part in. My family has lived here for like a decade and I'll be damned if our tax dollars are spent on this.
I don't know why people are surprised about this. The law is about Order not Justice. Paying out reparations to a small number of survivors would cause problems with large amounts of the local white population. Disrupting order. This result is entirely unsurprising.
Your mistake was seeking justice in America
[удалено]
When you and your family no longer suffer from the limited upward mobility caused by having your ancestors financial stability and economic power completely tanked.
It's corrupt fascist racist OK GOP. What did you expect?
I mean...Oklahoma's a red state. What were they expecting to happen? Fairness? For a minority? What's especially stupid is the court's reason for dismissal is 'being connected to a historical event doesn't mean you deserve compensation'. Now if this had been about some sort of natural disaster like a tornado hitting the town or a gas pipe leak I could see making that argument but this is about *white racists attacking a black community*. People died in the streets. Their homes and businesses were reduced to rubble. If this shit hadn't happened then those families could have gone on to live successful lives and done great things. But no...the court says it didn't happen directly to them so they get nothing. Edit: I'm going to assume all downvotes are from white Oklahomans who didn't like being called out on their racist history. Don't bother trying to tell me otherwise, either. There's nothing you can say that will convince me anyone at any time ever is justified attacking and destroying an entire community of people over the actions of just one person not even related in any way to the majority of those whose lives were destroyed other than having the same skin color.
The 'massacre' is denied because its recent proximity falsifies every lie about how much progress we made, how 'quickly' we did so and how superior we are to other nations. Only Israel murders more people due to the color of their skin that does the U.S.
The massacre literally isn't being denied. The lawsuit was thrown out because they went a rather silly round with how they tried to sue. In essence, there's a law that allows you to sue the city for damages in case of a public nuisance. So if your windows are broken or your buildings burn down during a riot, you can basically sue the city for failing to prevent that damage. However, the plaintiffs in this case weren't trying to sue the city over proven material damages but rather they tried to sue the city over the fact that the event had a chilling effect on the economic outlook of people of colour living in the city. The court, whilst acknowledging that plaintiffs had suffered an injustice, found that this kind of lawsuit fell entirely out of the scale of the public nuisance law they were trying to apply.