American Pogrom: The East St. Louis Race Riot and Black Politics (review)

In his thought-provoking revision of the East St. Louis upheaval of 1917, Charles L. Lumpkins contends that violence was sparked, not by social strain over interracial industrial employment—as interpreted by Elliott M. Rudwick (1964) and Malcolm McLaughlin (2005)—but by white politicians and realtors seeking to suppress black political independence. Hence he embraces Roberta Senechal's thesis for the 1908 Springfield riot (1990) and evaluates the East St. Louis outbreak within the era of industrialization, migration, and war, from 1898 to 1921, when urban blacks sought equality. He defines the rioting as "a pogrom: an assault, condoned by officials, to destroy a community defined by ethnicity, race, or some other identity"; that is, "another example of ethnic cleansing" (xi) as described by James Loewen (2005) and Elliot Jaspin (2007). Indeed, the bloodletting in largely downtown East St. Louis officially claimed thirty-nine black lives (500 rumored), destroyed hundreds of black homes, and chased over 7,000 blacks from the city; in comparison, nine whites lay dead (forty rumored), clearly indicating a one-sided assault.

In expanding on the sources of Rudwick and McLaughlin, Lumpkin instead emphasizes black political activity and community-building that—given the voting potential of oncoming black migrants—threatened white powerbrokers, who promoted racial fear and violence. In its aftermath, black leaders continued their political activism, albeit appearing more accommodating of white society. They understood the lesson of racial compliance, yet never accepted it completely or unconditionally. Thereafter, black efforts paid off, assisted by the Great Depression and World War II. In the wake of the Civil Rights Movement that ended segregation and discrimination, however, the black majority in East St. Louis found itself, like counterparts elsewhere, in control of a municipality weakened by the exodus of whites, economic de-industrialization, and self-serving political bosses of both races. Tragically, this postwar urban crisis upturned fifty years of struggle for racial equality by black residents.

Like other recent studies of racial violence, Lumpkins stresses black political initiative as the reason for white violence and interprets it as a pogrom "or ethnic cleansing" (8). Pogrom is viable, though fuller comparison is needed to support the contention that the East St. Louis Race Riot is the "American equivalent" (77) of pogroms against 19th Century Russia Jews and 20th Century Armenians. However, applying the term ethnic cleansing—which historically connotes widespread extermination—is more problematic, in part because East St. Louis whites avoided invading "predominantly or all-black districts" (125)—where most blacks lived—for fear of being harmed themselves. This suggests more a white desire to keep blacks in their place rather than annihilate them; and why, after the riot, black politicians appeared to tow the color line.

This terminology question notwithstanding, American Pogrom falls within William M. Tuttle, Jr.'s 2004 Mid-America Conference on History call for the reconsideration of all U.S. riots of this era within the context of black insurgency and comparative racism. Lumpkins's book is an important addition for understanding the historical significance of the East St. Louis violence and the evolution of rioting historiography.