/lit/ - Literature

>>17446047
idk but look at this fucking wikipedia page that she leads to lmao
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_P._Jackson
>Jonathan Peter Jackson (June 23, 1953 – August 7, 1970)[1] was an American revolutionary who died of gunshot wounds suffered during his armed invasion of a California courthouse. At age 17, Jackson stormed the Marin County Courthouse with automatic weapons, kidnapping Superior Court Judge Harold Haley, prosecutor Gary Thomas, and three jurors. Escaping with the hostages, Jackson demanded the Soledad Brothers' immediate release from prison. The Soledad Brothers, a group of African American inmates facing charges for allegedly throwing a white prison guard to his death at San Quentin, included Jackson's elder brother George Jackson. None of the Soledad defendants were at the courthouse on the day of the attack.

'an american revolutionary'

>>17446085
mfw the 'Talk' page for it

Kidnapper vs. Activist
I noted the deletion of most references to Jackson as an "activist," and am prone to agree that the term is an inaccurate descriptor of his actions. However, I feel that the term "kidnapper" alone doesn't encapsulate the politically motivated nature of the Marin County incident, even if it is correct.

I'm not big on "revolutionary" as a term either. Would adding the descriptor "radical" perhaps be appropriate? Or perhaps eventually having a section describing the impact of Marin County as seen by the Black Panthers and modern-day fringe activists (Detailing the idea of it as the "August 7th Rebellion" and all that jazz). Blu3vibe (talk) 19:36, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Also... retitling the page might be a good idea. I'm somewhat n00bish so don't know how to go about that Blu3vibe (talk) 19:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Done I agree with most of what you have written. I think the best way to disambiguate the page is simply to add his middle initial. I have retitled the page as "Jonathan P. Jackson". Location (talk) 20:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Jackson is listed as revolutionary and the source cited is a radical left publication that is extremely slanted toward one viewpoint and seems to condone violence in the cause of "revolution" which is not clearly defined. Jackson murdered several people in cold blood who were trying to help his cause and seriously injured others. None of these people were engaged in a revolution nor were they engaged in any political activity. Revolutionary is an inappropriate term as it connotes fighting for a cause when all Jackson did was murder two inmates who were trying to help him and severely injure others who had nothing to do with the release of the Soledad Brothers. Agree with above about changing "revolutionary" to "radical." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:5980:8FC0:E567:8252:1288:F691 (talk) 00:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Your comment is baseless nonsense. Removing the tag now. Cheers. 2607:FEA8:BFA0:BD0:4C7:A4AA:8695:7B21 (talk) 19:24, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

>>17446047
Doesn't she have one where she complains about the fact that prison guards are less likely to gun down escaping female prisoners?

>>17446047
I never heard of her, but based on the title it seems pretty bad

>>17446777
she was pretty hot, you should peep her work

>>17446133
>editor attacks the idea of Jackson as radical/revolutionary by showing how cruel and shallow his actions were
>other editor simply dismisses them without a counter to anything said
Based.