text:
Units (band)

Units were an American synthpunk band that was founded in San Francisco in 1978. It was active until 1984. They were one of America's earliest electronic new wave bands, and have been cited (along with The Screamers and Suicide) as pioneers of synthpunk, also retrospectively known as "electropunk". The Units were notable for their use of synthesizers in place of guitars, and multimedia performances featuring multiple projections of satirical, instructional films critical of conformity and consumerism.

History
The Units was one of the most popular bands of the San Francisco punk and performance art scene during the late 1970s and early 1980s, headlining at the Mabuhay Gardens (aka The Fab Mab), The Savoy Tivoli, The Berkeley Square, The Deaf Club, Valencia Tool & Die, Geary Theater and other punk clubs. The Units also opened for such bands as Soft Cell, Gary Numan, Ultravox, XTC, Bow Wow Wow, the Psychedelic Furs, the Police, Iggy Pop, Dead Kennedys, Sparks and toured the United States with Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark.

Notable performance art appearances included "Punk Under Glass", where the Units performed in the windows of the JC Penney building in downtown San Francisco, as part of a two-day art installation, and the Labat / Chapman Fight at Kezar Pavilion, a performance art boxing match between two artists  where the Units played the national anthem.

The Units' DIY, self stamped, 7” EP entitled “Units” was released in 1979. It was followed by another record in early 1980, "Warm Moving Bodies"/"iNight". The Units' first album, Digital Stimulation, was released in 1980, and was the first album released by 415 Records.

In 1982, the Units released a single on UpRoar Records entitled "The Right Man". The song was recorded at the Different Fur recording studio, founded by the electronic music composer Patrick Gleeson. The recording was produced by Michael Cotten, the synthesizer player of The Tubes. The song went to number 18 on Billboard's Dance Chart and stayed on the chart for 13 weeks.

After the success of "The Right Man", the Units signed with Epic/CBS Records and produced a music video for "A Girl Like You" that went into medium rotation on early MTV. They released an EP titled New Way to Move on Epic Records, but typical of a hard-luck recording career, the Units' second album — produced by Bill Nelson for Epic/CBS - remained unissued, until a posthumous release in 2016.

In 1984, after recording the sound and music for the artist Tony Oursler’s film EVOL, Ryser and Webber moved to New York, putting an effective end to the Units.

Visual and multimedia components
The film Unit Training Film#1, produced by Scott Ryser and Rachel Webber, compiled from films the band projected during performances, was shown sans band in movie theaters around the San Francisco Bay Area, including the Roxie Cinema, San Francisco Cinematheque, The Intersection, and the Mill Valley Film Festival.

Critical response
Alternative press publisher V. Vale called the Units "the first San Francisco band to perform using no guitars", The Units were referred to as "Punks playing keyboards" in an article in "The San Francisco Examiner" in 1979, and the Los Angeles music critic  Kickboy Face of the fanzine Slash wrote of a Units performance, "That night, watching the Units pound their machines into submission, I knew that another clichéd concept of mine was biting the dust once and for all.  I also knew that there probably was a future to rock n roll after all, and that future did not necessarily include anything resembling guitars."

Later releases
In 2005, Ryser signed a licensing contract with EMI. Once again, the recordings were not released. In 2007, the record label Golden Goose released a 12" remix of "High Pressure Days" by DJ Garth. In the same year, the Italian record label, Mediane, released Daniele Baldelli – Cosmic - The Original, a double album that included the original and remixed versions of The Units "The Right Man".

In 2009, the Community Library label released a 21-song compilation album by the Units entitled The History of The Units that included a booklet "The Unit Training Manual". In June that year, a 12" single of "High Pressure Days" was released on the German label Relish with remixes alongside the original version.

In February 2010, a 12" EP was released on the UK label Hungry Beat Recordings including Rory Phillips remix of "High Pressure Days". The same month, Phillips's remix of "High Pressure Days" was included on a compilation, Mylo – The Return Of Mylo on the Mixmag label. The CD was also on the cover of Mixmag magazine. Similarly, Rough Trade Records included "High Pressure Days" on their Counter Culture 09 double album.

In April 2011, The Dark Entries music label from San Francisco released Bart - Bay Area Retrograde (Vol. 1), a 12" compilation that included "Mission". An EP was released on the French label Robsoul Recordings, which included two remixes of "High Pressure Days" by Phil Weeks.

In 2011 The Opilec Music label from Italy released The Units - Connections, a triple boxed set of 25 songs written by The Units, that were remixed by over 40 international DJs, producers and bands from 13 different countries, including Electro Italo Disco pioneers Daniele Baldelli, Klein + M.B.O., N.O.I.A. and Alexander Robotnick. It included a download card of extra tracks for a total of 52 remixed songs of The Units.

In 2012, The Opilec Music label from Italy released an EP. with three songs written by The Units and remixed by Todd Terje from Norway and I-Robots from Italy. The same year, The Opilec Music label from Italy released two songs by The Units on the We Are Opilec compilation. Also the Tsugi Sampler label from France released the Ivan Smagghe – A Walk In The Woods With Ivan Smagghe that included a remix of "High Pressure Days" by Todd Terje.

In 2013, The Units are included (two songs performed live) in a film The Seven Deadly Synths, along with six other synthesizer bands including Suicide, Sun Ra, and Our Daughter's Wedding.

In 2015, Futurismo Records from London, re-released the UNITS original album from 1980, "Digital Stimulation" on vinyl and CD, including a live set at Mabuhay Gardens.

In 2016, Futurismo released Animals They Dream About, the band's previously unreleased second album originally recorded in 1982, including a live set from the Kabuki theater in San Francisco in which The Units opened for Bow Wow Wow.

In 2016, FDH records from Philadelphia, PA re-released The Units original debut EP from 1979, the hand stamped 7" four song e.p. entitled "UNITS", including a download of a 1979 live set at the Deaf Club.

In 2019, founding band member Scott Ryser self-released a 12-track album of new and re-worked original material entitled Flying Away, which included a new version of "Cannibals", a song from the band's 1980 debut LP, as well as new recordings of songs the band performed live in the 1980s, but had never made studio recordings of.

In 2020, on the occasion of the 40th Anniversary of the release of the Digital Stimulation album, Scott Ryser worked with California-based recording artist Kit Watson to remix all of the album tracks from the original multi-track recordings. It included previously unreleased instrumental mixes of those songs which originally had vocals, live recordings of two songs performed at Mabuhay Gardens in San Francisco in 1980, and a new extended remix of the title track by Kit Watson.

In 2022, Futurismo once again re-released Digital Stimulation in a newly-designed package which included all of the remastered original album tracks along with a 12-page art booklet containing rare imagery and new liner notes, and a CD of the 2020 remix. It was made available in two vinyl colors as well as a limited edition audio cassette.

Influence and cultural significance
Outsider musician Jandek's first album, Ready for the House, though a solo work, was originally credited to a 'The Units'. Jandek was forced to change the name by The Units, who possessed a trademark on the name, after Scott Ryser from The Units wrote Smith a letter with documentation. All reissues of the album and all subsequent releases have been credited to 'Jandek'.

In September 2013, Los Angeles noise rock band HEALTH covered "High Pressure Days", titled "High Pressure Dave", which was included in the game Grand Theft Auto V and The Music of Grand Theft Auto V album, volume 1 on CD and vinyl.

Songs written by The Units have been covered or remixed by over 50 international DJs, producers and bands from 13 different countries.

Scott Ryser and Rachel Webber's son, Sam, plays or has played in several contemporary punk bands, including Dawn of Humans. Their daughter Nina also plays in several bands, including Palberta.

Members
Primary members were Scott Ryser and Rachel Webber. Other various members that played live shows and toured with The Units included Brad Saunders, Tim Ennis, Ron Lantz, Richard Driskell, Lx Rudis, Seth Miller, Jon Parker, David Allen Jr., Jabari Allen, Marc Henry, James Reynolds, Raymond Froehlich, D.C. Carter and their projectionist, Rick Prelinger.

Discography

 * "High Pressure Days" (7") [1979]
 * "Units" (7") [1979]
 * "Warm Moving Bodies" (7") [1980]
 * Digital Stimulation (LP) [1980, 2015]
 * "The Right Man" (12") [1982]
 * "A Girl Like You" (12") [1983]
 * New Way to Move (12" EP) [1983]
 * Animals They Dream About (LP) [2016 (recorded 1981)]

Videography

 * Unit Training Film 1: Warm Moving Bodies
 * Unit Training Film 2: Cannibals
 * Unit Training Film 3: Cowboy
 * High Pressure Days 1979 - with intro by Dirk Dirksen
 * The Units & Larry Cuba - Warm Moving Bodies with Calculated Movements

Filmography

 * Unit Training Film 1, Warm Moving Bodies (1980), by Scott Ryser
 * In 2011, the University of California, Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive purchased and restored the original Unit Training Film and included it in a program called "Punk, Attitudinal: Film and Video, 1977 to 1987" as part of their series "Radical Light: Alternative Film and Video in the San Francisco Bay Area". The program continues to be shown in major cities throughout the United States.

title: Units (band)


text:
User talk:Fjor

"only ask her wife!" - if you mean your wife, and you are male, this should say his wife. In English, the gender of a possessive pronoun depends on the subject, not the object.

Cheers, Tualha 06:02, Nov 12, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks, Tualha; correction noted (Also I feel bad for the ten year delay :). Fjor (talk) 18:56, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians of Mexico
Hello Fjor this message is a invitation to categorize your userpage in the category: Category:Wikipedians of Mexico or in the adecuate sub-category and erasing your name from the equivalent list since the lists of users are in process of being transformed into categories. Remember: You can categorize your user page in more than one category. example: your actual location and your origin country.

for more info see: User categorisation and Category:Wikipedians by location

Saludos. --Mnts 03:09, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Universidades y Colegios
I would like to invite you to check out the userboxes that I have created in Wikipedia! If your Collge/University is not there feel free to make create one or let me known and I'll make it (User: Lufthmark)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Userboxes/Education/Mexico

Your user page
I found your old user page while checking out some old edits. I have history merged it, so that all edits are in one place. Hope you don't mind. Graham 87 15:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Fjor


text:
Talk:Mixed-sex education

Informal use of Coed
The "informal" use of the term "coed" is actually pejorative. By implicating that only a woman is a coed, it reflects an era where women were not permitted access to higher education and thus an attempt to emphasize this fact.

I do not advocate for the removal of the term in this sense, I just think that the sexist nature should be pointed out. Coed in description of a coeducational residence/program/institution is good. Coed to describe a woman is bad. --Waterspyder 02:17, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I'd just as soon have the sentence about "coed" striken entirely from this article entirely and just leave it to a seperate article. In the US for those born after the massive wave of integration of universities all "coed" means is a female college student of traditional college age. Jon 15:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * But that doesn't answer the question of why the term is used for females only. Why couldn't a male student at a coeducational school be considered just as much of a "co-ed" as a female student?  JackofOz 05:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Male students just aren't considered co-ed in current US speech even if they are attending a formerly all-female school. It's not the wikipedia's job to make value judgements anyway. Jon 17:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

 * That still doesn't answer the question at all. Moreover, does anybody have any idea among whom the use of the term originally developed?
 * Boys at formerly male-only institutions?
 * Girls beginning to attend formerly male-only institutions?
 * Female-only institutions, or people thereat, losing students to these co-educational institutions?
 * Some other group entirely?
 * Moreover, how much use does the term get nowadays? -- Smjg (talk) 11:33, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

 * I have never heard this term used in Canada. I've only heard it on US TV shows and had to learn what it meant. 163.239.218.24 (talk) 01:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I was just looking at this sentence: "Numerous professional organizations require that the gender-neutral term "student" be used instead of "coed" or, when gender is relevant to the context, that the term "female student" be substituted." This completely ignores the possibility that what is relevant is the fact that the person is at a co-educational institution, rather than the person's gender. The section doesn't comment on how the term is actually used in practice, and I furthermore don't think I've ever heard actual use of the term (possibly as a result of not being American). But if the reality is that in practice it means "a female student, as opposed to a male student, at a co-educational institution" rather than "a female student at a co-educational institution, as opposed to one at a female-only institution", then the section needs to address this, rather than ignoring it. Is there anybody out there that has experience of the term's use and can help with this? — Smjg (talk) 18:51, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

 * I am an American, and I have been aware of this term for about four decades. I have never once seen it used to differentiate female students at coeducational vs. single-sex institutions. The possibility never even occurred to me until you mentioned it.
 * I have added a sentence that reflects the results of an evening's search (see below), but I think the hair-splitting is distracting, and I would be happy if someone else removed my addition.
 * An admittedly unscientific but good faith Google Books search for this women's-college-vs.-coed-school use yielded almost nothing until I searched for works that contain both "coeds" and "women's college." A few comparisons of single-sex and coeducation emerged. For example:
 * 1949 LIFE magazine article
 * 1963: "'Increasing numbers of girls--women's college students as well as coeds--'seemed suddenly incapable of any ambition, any vision, any passion, except the pursuit of a wedding ring,' the book says"
 * 2001: "Furman's beauty queens were all Woman's College students (rather than coeds from other colleges) chosen for their physical attractiveness"
 * 2004: "'Co-'. . . theoretically implies that either men or women could be 'coeds.' Yet 'coed' is defined as 'a young woman being educated at the same institution with young men.' She is the 'co-' to the education of men. Ironically, a woman student at a formerly women's college would be a coed at that institution as well."
 * An interesting one is a 1973 quote from the president of Wellesley College, who is careful to specify "women" coeds, recognizing that "coed" ought to mean both men and women but never does:
 * "In announcing Wellesley College's decision to remain a women's college, Pres. Barbara Newell said: "Women coeds receive conflicting signals on the 'feminity' of intellectual vigor and do not take full advantage of college"
 * Without the specific context of comparison, however, the noun usage meaning women (as opposed to men) at coeducational institutions (or even a woman of college age, school having nothing to do with it)--often in contexts of sexuality or physical attractiveness--overwhelms the other. A few samples:
 * 1968: "To many a student the most appealing subject in college is a coed. A coed is usually less interested in what she gets out of college than whom." <--note that whoever wrote this quotation does not consider a coed to be a "student"
 * 2000: "unless it is also used evenhandedly of males and females, coed as a noun will continue to be still another term that defines women as abberations"
 * 2006: "The Sexy Coed is the kind of role both of us love to cast"
 * 1959: "A coed is exotic with mascara on her eye lashes, demureness in a sweater, and 'the future homemaker' with a can opener"
 * 1927: "upperclassmen turned their attention to the coeds. . . . The men would draw circles in chalk on the walk and then grade the girls according to general attractiveness"
 * Google n-gram searches on "coeds" and "the coed" and "many coeds" and similar phrases targeting the noun use show such usage to peak around 1970 and then decline. Changing the spelling to "co-ed" moves the peak to the late 1930s.
 * The noun use turns up a lot in titles of pornographic texts and films, but I leave that research to others. I am highly skeptical that even one such use will care anything about what school, if any, the woman in question supposedly attends. I offer some tame examples:
 * C Is for Coeds
 * The Coed Experiment
 * Now you know just about everything I can tell you about American usage of the term as a noun. I was surprised to find more instances of the coed-institution-vs.-women's-college distinction than I expected (honestly, I expected zero), but what I did find was negligible and seems to have no effect on the waning use and increasing unacceptability of the noun.
 * 2600:8807:5508:E100:9085:496D:183C:72B7 (talk) 05:49, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion
How do we decide what schools should and should not be listed on this page? It seems to me that a comprehensive list would span many, many pages, and there are currently no criteria for what schools appear. I'm seeing schools on there that I have never personally heard of, while other schools that I think should be mentioned are missing. I am tempted to add the dates I can source-cite, but not delist any colleges until a consensus is met. In particular, why is Rose-Hulman listed while Caltech and MIT are not? I feel all three of these should be included. I'm currently writing a paper on the gender disparity in scientific and engineering fields, and I'm finding this list useful in background on the lack of access for women to the basic knowledge needed to conduct scientific research up until the 1960's, and even beyond.

Also, if we define "coeducational from start" and "became coeducational", then the entire list of all higher education universities must be contained in the union of those two sets. Perhaps, instead, "coeducational from start, prior to 1970", and "became coeducational" would be better categorization, since it appears to be a "default" that the majority of colleges founded since 1970 have been coeducational, and thus their creation is no longer worthy of mention in an article about coeducation. --ElizabethFong 19:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Florida State information conflicts across the Wiki
On this page, Florida State is listed as beiing coed since 1882, but on [] it's listed as only being coed since 1947. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.190.99.24 (talk) 00:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The Florida State University article gives a nice background on its coeducational history, but in particular it says: "On May 15, 1947, the Governor of Florida signed an act of the Legislature returning Florida State College for Women to coeducational status and naming it The Florida State University." Based on the information at that article, it was originally a men's college, became coeducational, changed to a women's college when the University of Florida became a men's college, and then reverted back to coeducational.  Based on that, I would say that FSU has been continuously coeducational only since 1947, and this article (Coeducation) should be updated accordingly.  Beginning 00:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

JHU co-ed
JHU Med School did not go co-ed in 1893, but the first woman did become a Doctor that year from the grad school, by earning a PhD in Geology. For the reason that it was not co-ed from the begining, I am shifting JHU into the 'year went co-ed' category, and changing the listing to Grad School. source Desertsky85451 00:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

To hyphenate or not to hyphenate
Maybe this is kind of nitpicky (or is it nit-picky?), but I was wondering why "coeducational" or "coed" is written half the time in this article, and "co-educational" or "co-ed" is written the other half. Is there any sort of consensus, or is this just a reflection of the different preferences by different contributors? Merriam-Webster seems to prefer not hyphenating, but I don't know whether it's that big of a deal to try to go in and enforce one spelling or the other. It just looks weird to see things like "Coeducation in China" followed on the next line by "Co-education in Hong Kong", as if the political distinction also created a hyphenational distinction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OmarGosh (talk • contribs) 17:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Could be another one of those American English vs British English things. Jon 18:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Coeducational Universities in Europe?
I don't feel qualified to add this material myself, because I know very little about it, but I know that women's education was undergoing many changes in Europe in the 19th century as well, one example being Jagiellonian University, in Krakow, Poland, which was awarding degrees to women as early as 1824, and gradually opening its colleges and faculties to women through the turn of the century. It was easier for an Austrian woman in the early 20th Century to get a university education in Krakow than in Vienna. Is there anyone, perhaps among our European contributors, who can add to this article?

Perhaps the same could also be done for other regions of the world, by those better informed than myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.66.68 (talk) 13:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Name change
Coeducation does not specify in its name that it refers to the mixing of genders within teaching. "Mixed-sex education", it is much more suitable term, since not only is the name also used more commonly, but it is more accurate in its meaning, and also also fits in with the format laid out by the name of the article Single-sex education. Please discuss. An alternative would be "Multi-sex education". Hamletpride (talk) 17:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I think this is Canadian/British vs. U.S. issue. I have never seen "mixed-sex education" used in the U.S. (it sounds a bit racy to my American ears), whereas "coeducational" is very commonly used in the U.S.  In fact, when my search came up with an entry entitled "Mixed-sex education), I did a double-take, before figuring out what this was. 211.225.33.104 (talk) 04:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

The earliest . . . ?
I removed "The oldest originally mixed-sex school still in existence is Tenison's School in Croydon, South London, which was established to provide education for "ten poor boys and ten poor girls" in 1714." Friends School, Saffron Waldon was founded in 1702, although it was in several places during its history: 1702-1786, Friends School & Workhouse, Clerkenwell; 1786-1825 at Islington Road, Islington; 1825-1879 at Croydon; from 1879 at Saffron Walden. Vernon White '''. . . Talk''' 20:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

USA lists
Why do we need the full lists entitled "USA mixed-sex higher education institutes", "Dates USA educational institutions became mixed-sex", and "Canada"? They seem to be unnecessary and too long for an encyclopaedic article. No-one is really going to read through all them, and it makes the article seem very bloated and irrelevant to non-USA readers. Alternatively we could go for a split. -- Cowplopmorris TalkContribs 02:38, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Change of name
I am not sure why this was renamed from coeducation. Coeducation is the more commonly used term on both sides of the pond. Take these searches for example. 'Mixed-sex education' produces 3,510 Ghits here. Compare this with a combination of 'Coeducation' with 151,000 here and 'Co-education' 170,000 here. The difference is stark. TerriersFan (talk) 20:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Advantages and disadvantages of coeducation
Putting in a group of boys and girls at the age of puberty leads to transfer their attention from learning about the competition aspects of the opposite sex, and the immaturity and the significant psychological differences lead to conflict (silly jokes, provocative behavior, competition for a boyfriend or girlfriend ).

The pace of maturation for both sexes, and other treats only at the age of maturity. Seven-years-old girls ahead of boys in terms of physical, but are lagging behind in terms of capacity of concentration, coordination and ability to write.

The harmonization of the methodology of teaching for both sexes in the mixed classroom enforces the need to impose a pattern of behavior across gender group ignoring phisical and psychological  differences between boys and girls, even in such aspects as temperature in the classroom.

It is easier to motivate boys to learn through competition, and the girls by the contact and interaction.

Critics also suggest a better outcome of single-sex schools compared with coeducational schools.

Coeducation supporters respond that most research indicates that although there are minor differences in individual brain structure of male and female, the resulting differences in the perception and processing of information by the boys and girls are much smaller than the individual differences between children of the same sex. As for adults, differences in intellectual performance between the sexes cease to have any meaning.

Conducted in the United Kingdom, where the two concepts together education, research has not shown that boys and girls choose different subjects or have a better performance in science, depending on whether they learn at mixed schools whether to pursue the concept of diversified education. The conclusions of these studies are such that there is a very good school based on both of these concepts, but not because they are for boys only, girls only, or for both sexes. The main factors are the ability of students, the environment, which is derived from and qualified teachers. Authors of this study examined in detail the arguments of supporters of a diversified education and found that the arguments are usually inadequate or selectively presented.

This is the example of research conducted since the early 90. to prove that children from different schools on the grounds of sex are achieving better results than children from mixed schools. On the argument that co-education is the wrong solution, because boys and girls learn in different ways, advocates suggest that many studies have shown that small differences in the perception and processing of information that may be held at the girls' and boys do not affect the way you see the effectiveness science.

In contrast, the argument that, in classes of older disabled disconcentration is associated with the element of dealing with sex, coeducation supporters respond that the intercourse with their own gender, it may lead to tension, which greatly hinder the process of further education. Violence and homosexual behavior appear more frequently in the schools for boys than in mixed schools. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.4.25.174 (talk) 14:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Sex education?
Sex education? Isn't this article supposed to be about men and women (or boys and girls) in same schools? 85.217.15.109 (talk) 10:52, 30 April 2011 (UTC

What about its use on Wikipedia?
I second what 163.239.218.24 said. I had to learn what coed meant, and then I discovered this article lists its use as informal, does that mean that its use should be avoided in Wikipedia? (except of course when it is the topic of discussion or some quotation). I got here because I encountered it being used on the Sara Bareilles article: "...she was a member of the co-ed a cappella group Awaken a Cappella...", and now I don't know if she was a member of an all-girls group or a mixed-sex group. :-S --Dave.haku (talk) 17:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

 * It's true that it is listed in dictionaries as informal (my says "informal" - not "slang"), but it is -- or was -- very common in the U.S., and has no commonly used alternative.  To get a rough  idea of the frequency of its use, look at https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=coeds%2Cco-eds%2Cmixed-sex&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=17&smoothing=0&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Ccoeds%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cco%20-%20eds%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmixed%20-%20sex%3B%2Cc0 .211.225.33.104 (talk) 05:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

China
"The first mixed-sex institution of higher learning in China was the Nanjing Higher Normal School, which was renamed National Central University and Nanjing University. For millennia in China, public schools, especially public higher learning schools, were for men. Generally only schools established by zongzu (宗族, gens) were for both male and female students. Some schools such as Li Zhi's school in Ming Dynasty and Yuan Mei's school in Qing Dynasty enrolled both male and female students." This unclear and even confusing. In any case, how about some dates? Did the NHNS take women hundreds of years ago or starting around 1910? Somebody who knows the facts should set us straight.211.225.33.104 (talk) 05:15, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Mixed-sex education. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060428110902/http://www.ed.gov:80/offices/OERI/PLLI/webreprt.html to http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/PLLI/webreprt.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Mixed-sexed?
Shouldn't it be "mixed-sex" education rather than "Mixed-sexed"?Royalcourtier (talk) 20:27, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Done.Charles (talk) 22:24, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 one external links on Mixed-sex education. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121222003458/http://beatl.barnard.columbia.edu/learn/documents/coeducation.htm to http://beatl.barnard.columbia.edu/learn/documents/coeducation.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20091106111903/http://www.fandm.edu:80/x22560 to http://www.fandm.edu/x22560
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20091105040810/http://www.fandm.edu:80/40yearsofcoed to http://www.fandm.edu/40yearsofcoed
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110520013124/http://www.wickedlocal.com/westford/archive/x2136193253 to http://www.wickedlocal.com/westford/archive/x2136193253
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20061023193654/http://beatl.barnard.columbia.edu:80/learn/documents/coeducation.htm to http://beatl.barnard.columbia.edu/learn/documents/coeducation.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:34, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Mixed-sex education. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060428110902/http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/PLLI/webreprt.html to http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/PLLI/webreprt.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:56, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

List of schools
I would suggest removing the names of specific mixed-education schools in different countries. Perhaps it might be more useful to include the percentage of schools that are co-ed in those countries instead? Scowch (talk) 19:33, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Mixed-sex education. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/PLLI/webreprt.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:34, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Weird US inconsistency?
If a dog school is a school for dogs, a boys school is a school for boys, a girls school is a school for girls... if a coed is a girl- then why isnt a coed school a school for girls? And how does coed refer to non-education... what is the ed for in coed band?

I am from New Zealand and coed always meant boys and girls and only in the context of schools. You had bands (which might be boys and girls), all girl bands, all boy bands, but no coed bands... they aren't a school. 120.21.145.173 (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: University Writing 1020 Communicating Feminism TR1 pm
— Assignment last updated by Jshinnn (talk) 03:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Original Research
There appears to be original research in the Coed as Slang section. Is there a source for the speculation about the motives of usage guides? Just ` Existing 20:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mixed-sex education


text:
Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship

The Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship (FGBCF) or Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship International (FGBCFI) is a predominantly African-American, Charismatic Baptist denomination established by Bishop Paul Sylvester Morton—a Gospel singer and former National Baptist pastor. Founded as a response to traditional black Baptists upholding cessationism, Full Gospel Baptists advocate for the operation of Charismatic Christian spiritual gifts, while also holding to some traditional Baptist doctrine.

Reminiscing early Baptist Christianity's acceptance of the bishopric being synonymous with the pastorate within congregationalist tenets per the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (as Baptists originated in 1609 from the Church of England, which schismed with the Roman Church—both upholding the historic episcopacy), Full Gospel Baptists developed a presbyteral-episcopal polity not found in the historic black Baptist denominations while maintaining congregationalist distinctives.

The FGBCF was reported to have over 10,000 active members in 1993 and 20,000 in 1995; in 1997 it claimed 1 million members and 5,000 churches throughout the United States. As of 2020, they reported having approximately 2 million members; in 2023, Full Gospel Baptists had approximately 10,000 churches. Churches aligned with Full Gospel Baptists may affiliate with other Christian denominations, and aren't required to change their names. Headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, the Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship is led by Bishop Joseph W. Walker III, of Nashville, Tennessee as the Presiding Bishop, who was appointed to succeed Bishop Morton upon his retirement.

History
The Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship was established by Bishop Paul S. Morton, Sr. in 1994 within New Orleans, Louisiana, though it began as a movement within the National Baptist Convention, USA in 1992. From 25,000 to 30,000 attended the first conference of the Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship in 1994.

Exploring the gifts of the Holy Spirit against traditionally cessationist Baptist pastors and laymen within the National Baptist Convention, National Baptist Convention of America, and the Progressive National Baptist Convention, alongside establishing an episcopal Baptist governance, Morton and those affiliated with the fellowship "were lovingly advised to resign their posts with the NBCUSA before they were kicked out." National Baptist leadership feared the movement would develop into a separate denomination, urging members to either remain within the convention or leave; the National Baptist Convention's then-president, Rev. Henry J. Lyons, disapproved of the movement's belief in tongues and divine healing. In 1995, Bishop Morton left the National Baptist Convention, USA following the controversies among traditional black Baptists.

Attracting some of the largest churches by membership from the oldest black Baptist denomination—the NBC USA—New Birth Missionary Baptist Church became a notable affiliate before leaving the fellowship during Bishop Eddie Long's pastoral tenure after multiple controversies surrounding their leadership at New Birth. Eddie Long was consecrated a bishop by Paul Morton in the 1994.

In 2013, Bishop Morton announced his intent to resign as Presiding Bishop of the Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship. He appointed Bishop Joseph W. Walker III in Nashville, Tennessee as successor. Walker, born in Shreveport, Louisiana and serving as one of the founding fathers of the Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship, assumed presiding office in 2015 and Bishop Neil Ellis schismed through establishing the Global United Fellowship after resigning and losing the election to succeed Morton.

Doctrine
Like most Baptist denominations, Full Gospel Baptists uphold believer's baptism by full immersion; soul competency; sola fide; and congregational autonomy. However, in addition to traditional Baptist doctrine, the fellowship also believes in Pentecostal-Charismatic doctrines such as speaking in tongues, laying on of hands, divine healing, and prophecy. Likewise, the Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship places special emphasis on practicing holiness, or Christian sanctification; overall, their theological distinctives tend to merge with the separate Protestant tradition of Wesleyan-Arminian theology.

Full Gospel Baptists ordain and consecrate a significant number of female pastors and bishops as well, although the majority of their clergy is still male. Its women clergy operate an organization called the Daughters of the Promise, or Full Gospel International Women's Fellowship.

Embracing a mixture of congregationalist, presbyterian, and episcopal polity, Full Gospel Baptists as a collective are governed by the Full Gospel Baptist Council of Bishops. The Presiding Bishop is the head clerical and executive leader of the fellowship, exercising authority along with other episcopates to provide administration. Within the Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship, its bishops claim apostolic succession through Bishop Morton's consecrator, the excommunicated Roman Catholic George Augustus Stallings. Relieved of religious duties within the Roman Catholic Church, the concept of "valid but illicit" ordinations guaranteed Stallings episcopacy remaining valid to whoever recognized it as such. Apostolic succession though, according to Roman and Anglican churches however, effects the power and authority to administer the sacraments except for baptism and matrimony; and it pertains to continuity of the universal teaching, preaching, governing, ordination, and grace.

title: Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship


text:
Meiji Constitution

The Constitution of the Empire of Japan (Kyūjitai: 大日本帝國憲法; Shinjitai: 大日本帝国憲法, romanized: ), known informally as the Meiji Constitution (明治憲法, Meiji Kenpō), was the constitution of the Empire of Japan which was proclaimed on February 11, 1889, and remained in force between November 29, 1890, and May 2, 1947. Enacted after the Meiji Restoration in 1868, it provided for a form of mixed constitutional and absolute monarchy, based jointly on the German and British models. In theory, the Emperor of Japan governed the empire with the advice of his ministers; in practice, the Emperor was head of state but the Prime Minister was the actual head of government. Under the Meiji Constitution, the Prime Minister and his Cabinet were not necessarily chosen from the elected members of parliament.

During the American Occupation of Japan the Meiji Constitution was replaced with the "Postwar Constitution" on November 3, 1946; the latter document has been in force since May 3, 1947. In order to maintain legal continuity, the Postwar Constitution was enacted as an amendment to the Meiji Constitution.

Overview
The Meiji Restoration in 1868 provided Japan a form of constitutional monarchy based on the Prusso-German model, in which the Emperor of Japan was an active ruler and wielded considerable political power over foreign policy and diplomacy which was shared with an elected Imperial Diet. The Diet primarily dictated domestic policy matters.

After the Meiji Restoration, which restored direct political power to the emperor for the first time in over a millennium, Japan underwent a period of sweeping political and social reform and westernization aimed at strengthening Japan to the level of the nations of the Western world. The immediate consequence of the Constitution was the opening of the first Parliamentary government in Asia.

The Meiji Constitution established clear limits on the power of the executive branch and the Emperor. It also created an independent judiciary. Civil rights and civil liberties were allowed, though they were freely subject to limitation by law. Free speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion were all limited by laws. The leaders of the government and the political parties were left with the task of interpretation as to whether the Meiji Constitution could be used to justify authoritarian or liberal-democratic rule. It was the struggle between these tendencies that dominated the government of the Empire of Japan. Franchise was limited, with only 1.1% of the population eligible to vote for the Diet. Universal manhood suffrage was not established (under law) until the General Election Law, which gave every male aged 25 and over a voting right, was enacted in 1925.

The Meiji Constitution was used as a model for the 1931 Constitution of Ethiopia by the Ethiopian intellectual Tekle Hawariat Tekle Mariyam. This was one of the reasons why the progressive Ethiopian intelligentsia associated with Tekle Hawariat were known as "Japanizers".

By the surrender in the World War II on September 2, 1945, the Empire of Japan was deprived of sovereignty by the Allies, and the Meiji Constitution was suspended. During the Occupation of Japan, the Meiji Constitution was replaced by a new document, the postwar Constitution of Japan. This document replaced imperial rule with a form of Western-style liberal democracy. To preserve legal continuity, these changes were enacted as a constitutional amendment per Article 73 of the Meiji Constitution. After garnering the required two-thirds majority in both chambers, it received imperial assent on November 3, 1946, and took effect on May 3, 1947.

Background
Prior to the adoption of the Meiji Constitution, Japan had in practice no written constitution. Originally, a Chinese-inspired legal system and constitution known as ritsuryō was enacted in the 6th century (in the late Asuka period and early Nara period); it described a government based on an elaborate and theoretically rational meritocratic bureaucracy, serving under the ultimate authority of the emperor and organised following Chinese models. In theory the last ritsuryō code, the Yōrō Code enacted in 752, was still in force at the time of the Meiji Restoration.

However, in practice the ritsuryō system of government had become largely an empty formality as early as in the middle of the Heian period in the 10th and 11th centuries, a development which was completed by the establishment of the Kamakura Shogunate in 1185. The high positions in the ritsuryō system remained as sinecures, and the emperor was de-powered and set aside as a symbolic figure who "reigned, but did not rule" (on the theory that the living god should not have to defile himself with matters of earthly government).

The Charter Oath was promulgated on 6 April 1868, which outlined the fundamental policies of the government and demanded the establishment of deliberative assemblies, but it did not determine the details. The idea of a written constitution had been a subject of heated debate within and without the government since the beginnings of the Meiji government. The conservative Meiji oligarchy viewed anything resembling democracy or republicanism with suspicion and trepidation, and favored a gradualist approach. The Freedom and People's Rights Movement demanded the immediate establishment of an elected national assembly, and the promulgation of a constitution.

Drafting
On October 21, 1881, Itō Hirobumi was appointed to chair a government bureau to research various forms of constitutional government, and in 1882, Itō led an overseas mission to observe and study various systems first-hand. The United States Constitution was rejected as too liberal. The French and Spanish models were rejected as tending toward despotism. The Reichstag and legal structures of the German Empire, particularly that of Prussia, proved to be of the most interest to the Constitutional Study Mission. Influence was also drawn from the British Westminster system, although it was considered as being unwieldy and granting too much power to Parliament.

He also rejected some notions as unfit for Japan, as they stemmed from European constitutional practice and Christianity. He therefore added references to the kokutai or "national polity" as the justification of the emperor's authority through his divine descent and the unbroken line of emperors, and the unique relationship between subject and sovereign.

The Council of State was replaced in 1885 with a cabinet headed by Itō as Prime Minister. The positions of Chancellor, Minister of the Left, and Minister of the Right, which had existed since the seventh century, were abolished. In their place, the Privy Council was established in 1888 to evaluate the forthcoming constitution, and to advise Emperor Meiji.

The draft committee included Inoue Kowashi, Kaneko Kentarō, Itō Miyoji and Iwakura Tomomi, along with a number of foreign advisors, in particular the German legal scholars Rudolf von Gneist and Lorenz von Stein. The central issue was the balance between sovereignty vested in the person of the Emperor, and an elected representative legislature with powers that would limit or restrict the power of the sovereign. After numerous drafts from 1886 to 1888, the final version was submitted to Emperor Meiji in April 1888. The Meiji Constitution was drafted in secret by the committee, without public debate.

Promulgation
The new constitution was promulgated by Emperor Meiji on February 11, 1889 (the anniversary of the National Foundation Day of Japan in 660 BC), but came into effect on November 29, 1890. The first National Diet of Japan, a new representative assembly, convened on the day the Meiji Constitution came into force. The organizational structure of the Diet reflected both Prussian and British influences, most notably in the inclusion of the House of Representatives as the lower house (existing currently, under the Article 42 of the post-war Japanese Constitution based on bicameralism) and the House of Peers as the upper house, (which resembled the Prussian Herrenhaus and the British House of Lords, now the House of Councillors of Japan under the Article 42 of the post-war Japanese Constitution based on bicameralism), and in the formal Speech from the Throne delivered by the Emperor on Opening Day (existing currently, under the Article 7 of the post-war Japanese Constitution). The second chapter of the constitution, detailing the rights of citizens, bore a resemblance to similar articles in both European and North American constitutions of the day.'''

Structure
The Meiji Constitution consists of 76 articles in seven chapters, together amounting to around 2,500 words. It is also usually reproduced with its Preamble, the Imperial Oath Sworn in the Sanctuary in the Imperial Palace, and the Imperial Rescript on the Promulgation of the Constitution, which together come to nearly another 1,000 words. The seven chapters are:

 * I. The Emperor (1–17)
 * II. Rights and Duties of Subjects (18–32)
 * III. The Imperial Diet (33–54)
 * IV. The Ministers of State and the Privy Council (55–56)
 * V. The Judicature (57–61)
 * VI. Finance (62–72)
 * VII. Supplementary Rules (73–76)

Imperial sovereignty
Unlike its modern successor, the Meiji Constitution was founded on the principle that sovereignty resided in person of the Emperor, by virtue of his divine ancestry "unbroken for ages eternal", rather than in the people. Article 4 states that the "Emperor is the head of the Empire, combining in himself the rights of sovereignty". The Emperor, nominally at least, united within himself all three branches (executive, legislative and judiciary) of government, although legislation (article 5) and the budget (article 64) were subject to the "consent of the Imperial Diet". Laws were issued and justice administered by the courts "in the name of the Emperor".

Rules on the succession of the imperial throne and on the Imperial household were left outside the Constitution; instead, a separate Act on the Imperial household (koshitu tenpan) was adopted. This Act was not publicly promulgated, because it was seen as a private Act of the Imperial household rather than a public law.

Separate provisions of the Constitution are contradictory as to whether the Constitution or the Emperor is supreme.

 * Article 3 declares him to be "sacred and inviolable", a formula which was construed by hard-line monarchists to mean that he retained the right to withdraw the constitution, or to ignore its provisions.
 * Article 4 binds the Emperor to exercise his powers "according to the provisions of the present Constitution".
 * Article 11 declares that the Emperor commands the army and navy. The heads of these services interpreted this to mean "The army and navy obey only the Emperor, and do not have to obey the cabinet and diet", which caused political controversy.
 * Article 55, however, confirmed that the Emperor's commands (including Imperial Ordinance, Edicts, Rescripts, etc.) had no legal force within themselves, but required the signature of a "Minister of State". On the other hand, these "Ministers of State" were appointed by (and could be dismissed by), the Emperor alone, and not by the Prime Minister or the Diet.

Rights and duties of subjects

 * Duties: The constitution asserts the duty of Japanese subjects to uphold the constitution (preamble), pay taxes (Article 21) and serve in the armed forces if conscripted (Article 20).
 * Qualified rights: The constitution provides for a number of rights that subjects may enjoy where the law does not provide otherwise. These included the right to:
 * Freedom of movement (Article 22).
 * Not have one's house searched or entered (Article 25).
 * Privacy of correspondence (Article 26).
 * Private property (Article 27).
 * Freedom of speech, assembly and association (Article 29).
 * Less conditional rights
 * Right to "be appointed to civil or military or any other public offices equally" (Article 19).
 * 'Procedural' due process (Article 23).
 * Right to trial before a judge (Article 24).
 * Freedom of religion (Guaranteed by Article 28 "within limits not prejudicial to peace and order, and not antagonistic to their duties as subjects").
 * Right to petition government (Article 30).

Organs of government
The Emperor of Japan had the right to exercise executive authority, and to appoint and dismiss all government officials. The Emperor also had the sole rights to declare war, make peace, conclude treaties, dissolve the lower house of Diet, and issue Imperial ordinances in place of laws when the Diet was not in session. Most importantly, command over the Imperial Japanese Army and Imperial Japanese Navy was directly held by the Emperor, and not the Diet. The Meiji Constitution provided for a cabinet consisting of Ministers of State who answered to the Emperor rather than the Diet, and to the establishment of the Privy Council. Not mentioned in the Constitution were the genrō, an inner circle of advisors to the Emperor, who wielded considerable influence.

Under the Meiji Constitution, a legislature, the Diet, was established with two houses. The Upper House, or House of Peers consisted of members of the Imperial Family, hereditary peerage and members appointed by the Emperor. The Lower House, or House of Representatives was directly elected by all males who paid at least 15 yen in property taxes, effectively limiting the suffrage to 1.1 percent of the population. These qualifications were loosened in 1900 and 1919 with universal adult male suffrage introduced in 1925. The Emperor shared legislative authority with the Diet, and no measure could become law without the agreement of the Emperor and the Diet. On the other hand, the Diet was given the authority to initiate legislation, approve all laws, and approve the budget.

Amendments
Amendments to the constitution were provided for by Article 73. This stipulated that, to become law, a proposed amendment had to be submitted first to the Diet by the Emperor through an imperial order or rescript. To be approved by the Diet, an amendment had to be adopted in both chambers by a two-thirds majority of the total number of members of each (rather than merely two-thirds of the total number of votes cast). Once it had been approved by the Diet, an amendment was then promulgated into law by the Emperor, who had an absolute right of veto. No amendment to the constitution was permitted during the time of a regency. Despite these provisions, no amendments were made to the imperial constitution from the time it was adopted until its demise in 1947. The present constitution is legally reckoned as an amendment to the Meiji Constitution; this was done to preserve legal continuity even though it is a completely new document.

However, according to Article 73 of the Meiji Constitution, the amendment should be authorized by the Emperor. Indeed, the 1947 Constitution was authorized by the Emperor (as was declared in the letter of promulgation), which is in apparent conflict of the 1947 Constitution, according to which that constitution was made and authorized by the nation ("the principle of popular sovereignty"). To dissipate such inconsistencies, some peculiar doctrine of "August Revolution" was proposed by Toshiyoshi Miyazawa of the University of Tokyo, but without much persuasiveness.

title: Meiji Constitution


text:
Wu Sangui

Wu Sangui (8 June 1612 – 2 October 1678), courtesy name Changbai (長白) or Changbo (長伯), was a Chinese military leader who played a key role in the fall of the Ming dynasty and the founding of the Qing dynasty. In Chinese folklore, Wu Sangui is regarded as a disreputable Han Chinese traitor for his surrender to the Manchu invaders, suppression of the Southern Ming resistance and execution of the Yongli Emperor. Wu eventually double-crossed both of his masters, the Ming and the Qing dynasties.

In 1644, Wu was a Ming general in charge of garrisoning Shanhai Pass, the strategic choke point between Manchuria and Beijing. After learning that Li Zicheng's rebel army had conquered Beijing and captured his family, including his father Wu Xiang and concubine Chen Yuanyuan, Wu allowed the Manchu to enter China proper through Shanhai Pass to drive Li from Beijing, where the Manchu then set up the Qing dynasty. For his aid, the Qing rulers awarded him a fiefdom consisting of Yunnan and Guizhou provinces, along with the title "Prince Who Pacifies the West" (平西王).

In 1674, Wu decided to rebel against the Qing. In 1678, Wu declared himself the new Emperor of China and the ruler of Zhou, only to die within months. For a time, his grandson Wu Shifan succeeded him. The revolt was quelled in 1681.

Early years
Wu was born in Suizhong, Liaoxi province, in Northeastern China, to Wu Xiang and Lady Zu. His ancestral home was Gaoyou, Jiangsu. Wu Sangui's father and uncle had fought in many battles. Under their influence, Wu took great interest in war and politics at an early age. He was also a student of artist Dong Qichang. Late Ming dynasty historians left behind records describing Wu Sangui as a valiant and handsome general of medium height, with pale skin, a straight nose, and big ears, with a scar on his nose. He possessed excellent skills in horse-riding and archery.

In 1627, the Chongzhen Emperor decided to reinstate the imperial examination system on his accession to the throne, and Wu became a first-degree military scholar (juren) at the age of fifteen. He and his two brothers joined the army, garrisoning the Daling River and Ningyuan in the army of general Zu Dashou.

In 1630, while gathering information about the enemy, Wu's father, Wu Xiang, was encircled by the Qing troops. Wu Sangui was denied help from his maternal uncle, Zu Dashou, and so decided to rescue his father with a force of about 20 soldiers chosen from his personal retinue. Wu Sangui and his small cavalry force charged into the enemy encirclement, killing the Manchu general and saved Wu Xiang. Both Hong Taiji and Zu were impressed by Wu's valour, and Zu recommended Wu's promotion. Wu Sangui gained the position of guerrilla general when he was no older than 20.

Garrisoning Liaodong
In 1632, the Ming court transferred the Liaodong army to Shandong, to defeat the rebel armies of Kong Youde. Wu, who was 22 years old, served as a guerrilla general and fought side by side with his father, Wu Xiang. Wu rose to the rank of deputy general and was promoted to full general in September of that year. In September 1638, Wu served as a deputy general again.

At the beginning of 1639, as the situation in Liaodong became increasingly tense, the Ming court transferred general Hong Chengchou as the governor-general of Jiliao; Hong appointed Wu as the general in charge of training.

In October 1639, a Qing army of more than 10,000 men, commanded by Duoduo and Haoge, invaded Ningyuan. Jin Guofeng, full general of Ningyuan, immediately led troops to confront the Qing army but was surrounded and killed. Wu took Jin's place as full general of Ningyuan, and became a guardian general of Liaodong.

After Wu served as the full general in Ningyuan, he made the local army the strongest in Liaodong, having 20,000 troops at Ningyuan town. To enhance their combat power, Wu selected 1,000 elite soldiers to form a fearless battalion. The battalion was trained and commanded by Wu himself, making these men his bodyguard who would come at Wu's call at any time. They were the core of his army and laid the foundation for Wu's military achievements.

In March 1640, Hong Taiji appointed Jirgalang and Duoduo as left and right commander, respectively, marching towards the north of Jinzhou. Aiming to besiege Jinzhou, they reestablished Yizhou, garrisoned the troops, opened up wasteland, grew food grain, and forbade any cultivation in the Ningjin area outside Shanhai Pass.

Battle of Xingshan
On 18 May 1640, Wu Sangui met the Qing army in battle at Xingshan. Jirgalang led 1,500 soldiers to accept the surrender of the Mongolian people, but they were spotted by general Liu Zhaoji when passing the Ming army. Liu Zhaoji led 3,000 soldiers against the Qing army. At that time, Wu Sangui was stationed in Songshan and brought a 3,000-strong force the moment he heard the news. From Jinzhou, Zu Dashou sent more than 700 soldiers as a reserve. At first, the Ming army seemed more powerful with superior numbers; but, after the pursuit of Jiamashan, the Qing army was able to surround Wu Sangui.

Wu Sangui was unable to withstand the repeated attacks from both Jirgalang and Duoduo. He fought a bloody battle with the Qing army, but could not break through the siege until Liu Zhaoji came to his rescue. The Ming army casualties were more than 1000, with deputy general Yanglun and Zhou Yanzhou dead, but Wu Sangui's bravery was still praised.

Battle of Songjin
On 25 April 1641, the battle of Songjin began with an attack by the Ming army, Wu Sangui leading and personally killing ten enemies, defeating the Qing cavalry. After the battle, Wu Sangui was regarded as its most outstanding general.

In June 1641, Hong Chengchou and Wu Sangui returned to Songshan and garrisoned the northwest area. Prince Zheng Jirgalang attacked several times towards Songshan and Xinshan but was defeated repeatedly, the Ming army succeeding in surrounding the Qing army four times. Though the Qing army finally broke through the encirclement, their casualties were very high. Due to Wu Sangui's bravery, the Ming army remained on the offensive, but it also paid a heavy price.

On 20 August 1641, the Ming army attacked the Qing camp. The battle lasted the whole day, and the result was too close to call. However, Prince Ajige unexpectedly captured the Ming army's provisions in Bijia Mountain, significantly undermining their ability to fight. The battle continued on 21 August, and was unfavourable to the Ming army. After this defeat Datong full general Wang Pu lost the will to fight. Before Hong Chengchou issued orders, Wang fled with his troops, which completely disrupted the original breakthrough plan. More surprisingly, Wu Sangui also fled in the chaos, escaping on Wang's heel. At such a life-or-death moment, Wu revealed selfishness.

The Ming army attempted to withdraw, pursued by the Qing. In a matter of a few days, more than 53,000 people and 7,400 horses of the Ming army were killed. They had no way to flee and no will to fight. Only 30,000 survived after fleeing back to Ningyuan.

Wu Sangui survived not only by following Wang Pu, but by having a good retreat plan. When Hong Chengchou ordered the breakthrough, Wu Sangui went back to his camp and immediately discussed tactics with his generals. They decided to give up the small path and flee on the main road. As expected, the Qing army had only cut off the small path, while no more than 400 soldiers held the main road under Hong Taiji. Seeing Wu Sangui's fierce charge, Hong Taiji restrained his army from pursuing. Hong thought highly of Wu, and considered gaining his favor as the key to conquering the dynasty.

The breakthrough at Songshan resulted in the deaths of 52,000 members of the Ming elite army, which greatly wounded the Ming dynasty. Wu and Wang Pu could not escape the fate of being punished for fleeing and avoiding combat and were sentenced to death.

Promotion after the defeat
A few days later, Wu, who had fled to Ningyuan, received the imperial decree of the Chongzhen emperor. Surprisingly, Wu was promoted above all the full generals. This implied that Wu would not be punished, which was beyond the comprehension of many government officials. Even more surprising was the fact that, months later, when someone in the court called for an investigation to determine responsibility for the Songshan defeat, only Wang Pu was arrested while Wu continued to serve as a governor general of Liaodong, garrisoned in Ningyuan. This caused an outcry in the Ming court.

In May 1642, the result of the Ming court's re-examination was the death penalty for Wang Pu, and demotion of three levels in rank for Wu. Wu continued to serve as full general in Ningyuan and was in charge of the training of the Liaodong army.

Surrender to the Qing dynasty
By February 1642, the Ming dynasty had lost four of the eight vital cities beyond Shanhai Pass to the Manchu army. Ningyuan, where Wu was stationed, became Beijing's last defence against the Manchu army. Hong Taiji repeatedly attempted to persuade Wu to surrender, to no avail. Wu did not side with the Qing dynasty until after the defensive capability of the Ming dynasty had been greatly weakened with its political apparatus destroyed by the rebel armies of Li Zicheng's Shun dynasty.

In early 1644, Li Zicheng, the head of a peasant rebel army, launched his force from Xi'an for his final offensive northeast toward Beijing. The Chongzhen Emperor decided to abandon Ningyuan and called upon Wu to defend Beijing against the rebels. Wu Sangui received the title Pingxi Bo as he moved to face the peasant army.

At the time of Beijing's fall to Li Zicheng, on 25 April 1644, Wu and his 40,000-man army—the most significant Ming fighting force in northern China—were on the way to Beijing to come to the Chongzhen Emperor's aid but then received word of the emperor's suicide. So they garrisoned Shanhai Pass, the eastern terminus of the main Great Wall instead. Wu and his men were then caught between the rebels within the Great Wall and the Manchus without.

After the collapse of the Ming dynasty, Wu and his army became a vital military force in deciding the fate of China. Both Dorgon and Li Zicheng tried to gain Wu's support. Li took a number of measures to secure Wu's surrender, granting silver, gold, a dukedom, and most crucially by capturing Wu's father, Wu Xiang, and concubine, Chen Yuanyuan, ordering the former to write a letter to persuade Wu to pledge allegiance to Li.

Wu, however, was enraged by Li's capture of his family and the looting of Beijing. He killed Li's envoy, wrote back to his father, scolding him for his disloyalty, and sent several generals to pretend to pledge allegiance to Li. Aware that his force alone was insufficient to fight Li's main army, Wu wrote to the Manchu prince-regent Dorgon for military support, under the condition of restricting the dominance of the Manchus to northern China and the Ming to south. Dorgon replied that the Manchus would help Wu, but Wu would have to submit to the Qing. Wu did not accept at first.

Li Zicheng sent two armies to attack the pass, but Wu's battle-hardened troops defeated them easily on 5 and 10 May, 1644. In order to secure his position, Li was determined to destroy Wu's army. On 18, May, he personally led 60,000 troops out of Beijing to attack Wu. and defeated Wu on 21 May. The next day, Wu wrote to Dorgon for help. Dorgon took the opportunity to force Wu to surrender, and Wu had little choice but to accept.

On 22 May, 1644, Wu opened the gates of the Great Wall of China at Shanhai Pass to let the Qing forces into China proper, forming an alliance with the Manchus. Wu ordered his soldiers to wear white cloths attached to their armour, to distinguish them from Li's forces. Together, Wu's army and the Qing forces defeated Li's main army in the Battle of Shanhai Pass on 27 May, 1644. Li retreated to Beijing and took revenge on Wu by executing thirty-eight members of the Wu household, including Wu's father, whose head was displayed on the city wall.

On 3 June, Li held his coronation ceremony in Beijing and fled the next day. The Manchus marched into the Chinese capital unopposed shortly afterward and enthroned the young Shunzhi Emperor in the Forbidden City.

Suppressing the rebellion in Shaanxi

Wu Sangui pledged allegiance to the Qing dynasty and received the title of Pingxi Wang. However, he remained fearful that the Qing dynasty held him in suspicion.

In October 1644, Wu received orders to suppress the rebel peasant army. At that time, Li Zicheng still held Shaanxi, Hubei, Henan, among others, and was gathering his troops to rise again. Wu, together with Shang Kexi, led his soldiers to Shaanxi under Ajige, the General of Jingyuan appointed by Dorgon. From October to the following August, when he returned to Beijing, Wu fought the peasant army and achieved great success.

In June 1645, Wu Sangui captured Yulin and Yan'an in Shaanxi province. At the same time Li Zicheng was killed by a village head in Tongshan county, Hubei province.

In 1645, the Qing court rewarded Wu Sangui with the title of Qin Wang and ordered him to garrison Jinzhou. The high-sounding title was belied by transferring Wu to Jinzhou, which had lost its position as a militarily important town and become an insignificant rear area. Moreover, along with a large number of Manchu and Han people migrating into central China, it had become sparsely populated and desolate. Hence, Wu felt perplexed and upset.

On 19 August 1645, before Wu returned to Liaodong from Beijing, he submitted his request to the Qing court to renounce his title as Qin Wang. After giving up his title, he began to make efforts to consolidate his strength by demanding troops, territory, compensation, and reward for the generals under his command, which were all granted by the imperial court.

In July 1646, when Wu was summoned by the emperor, the Qing court granted him a total of 10 horses and 20,000 pieces of silver as an extra reward. Wu wasn't pleased, however, since he had been set aside since his return to Jinzhou, while the army of Kong Youde, Geng Jingzhong, and Shang Kexi had been fighting against the Southern Ming regime in Hunan and Guangxi since 1646.

Suppressing the rebellion in Sichuan
In 1648, the rebellion against the Qing dynasty reached its climax. Jiang Xiang, the full general of Datong, waged an insurgency in Shanxi province, while, in the south, in Nanchang and Guangzhou, Jin Shenghuan and Li Chenghong also rebelled, which dramatically changed the military situation.

The rebellion from the surrendered Han generals greatly shocked the Qing dynasty rulers. They came to realize the significant role of these generals to the control of central China, as well as the importance of the strategy of "using Han to rule Han" (以汉制汉). In this situation, Wu thrived again.

At the beginning of 1648, the Qing court ordered Wu to move his family west and garrison Hanzhong with Chief General (Du Tong) of the Eight Banners Moergen and Li Weihan. In less than a year, Wu suppressed the rebellion in most regions of Shaanxi and reversed the situation in the northwest. After four years of struggle, Wu brought peace to Shaanxi and his political star rose in the Qing court.

In 1652, the rebel Daxi army became the main force rebelling against the Qing. The situation was made difficult by the deaths of the Qing generals Kong Youde and Ni Kan, when the rebels Li Dingguo and Liu Wenxiu's troops marched into Sichuan province. The Qing court then summoned Wu to suppress the Daxi army in Sichuan. However, Wu was being closely watched by general Li Guohan, a trusted advisor to the imperial court. Wu wasn't able to free himself from surveillance until a few years later, when Li died. Hence, Wu enhanced his military strength rapidly by gaining a large number of enemy surrenders.

Garrisoning Yunnan
In 1660, the Qing army split into three parts to march into Yunnan province and eliminated the Southern Ming regime, thus achieving the preliminary unification of China. Nevertheless, the imperial court still faced a number of serious military and political threats. The Yongli Emperor of the Southern Ming and Li Dingguo of the Daxi army retreated to Burma, and they maintained influence in Yunnan. It was inconvenient for the Eight Banners soldiers to garrison Yunnan's border area, which was far away from the capital. As a result, the imperial court approved the proposal by Hong Chengchou to withdraw those soldiers, and give Wu command of the border area. Thus, Wu not only commanded a large army but also controlled vast territory.

In 1661, the green-flag army under Wu numbered 60,000, while Shang Kexi and Geng Jimao had only 7,500 ad 7,000 soldiers in their armies. Wu planned to permanently garrison and was preparing to make the border area his own. However, Yunnan was not stable at that time, for newly surrendered soldiers had not been fully assimilated into the Qing force. Moreover, the Daxi army had been building in Yunnan over decades and shared a close relationship with various minority nationalities. Many Tusi leaders refused to accept the rule of Wu, which led to a series of rebellions. The existence of the Yongli Emperor of the Southern Ming dynasty and Li Dingguo's army was regarded as a great threat to Wu. Therefore, Wu was actively preparing for their elimination to consolidate his rule. He exaggerated the rebellion's threat, spread rumors and submitted his proposal to the court, urging the invasion of Burma, which, after a time, the imperial court approved.

In June 1662, Wu sent army into Burma, captured and killed the Yongli Emperor, while Li Dingguo died of illness. In the next few years, Wu led his army from the northwest to the southwest border and enabled the Qing dynasty's dominance in that part of the country.

Revolt against the Qing

After he defeated the remnant Ming forces in southwestern China, Wu was rewarded by the Qing imperial court with the title of Pingxi Wang (平西王; translated as "Prince Who Pacifies the West" or "King Who Pacifies the West") with a fief in Yunnan. It had been extremely rare for someone outside of the imperial clan, especially a non-Manchu, to be granted the title of Wang. Those who were not members of the imperial clan and awarded the title were called Yixing Wang ( literally meaning "kings with other family names") or known as "vassal kings". These vassal kings usually came to a bad end, mainly because they were not trusted by the emperors.

At the end of 1662, Guizhou province came under the jurisdiction of Wu. Meanwhile, Wu's son, Wu Yingxiong (Wu Shifan's father), married Princess Jianning, the 14th daughter of Hong Taiji and Kangxi's aunt.

The Qing imperial court did not trust Wu, but he was still able to rule Yunnan with little or no interference. This was because the Manchus, an ethnic minority, needed time after their prolonged conquest to figure out how to impose the rule of a dynasty of a tiny minority on the vast Han-Chinese society. As a semi-independent ruler in the distant southwest, Wu was seen as an asset to the Qing court. For much of his rule, he received massive annual subsidies from the central government. This money, as well as the long period of stability, was spent by Wu in building his army, in preparation for an eventual clash with the Qing dynasty.

Wu in Yunnan, along with Shang Kexi in Guangdong and Geng Jingzhong in Fujian—the three great Han military allies of the Manchus, who had pursued the rebels and the Southern Ming pretenders—became a financial burden on the central government. Their virtually autonomous control of large areas threatened the stability of the Qing dynasty. The Kangxi Emperor decided to make Wu and two other princes who had been rewarded with large fiefs in southern and western China move from their lands to resettle in Manchuria. In 1673, Shang Kexi requested permission to retire and return to his homeland in the north, and the Kangxi Emperor granted the request at once. Forced into an awkward situation, Wu and Geng Jingzhong requested the same shortly afterwards. The Kangxi Emperor granted their requests and decided to dissolve the three vassal states, overriding all objections.

Driven by the threat to their interests, the three revolted and thus began the eight-year-long civil war known as the Revolt of the Three Feudatories. Before the rebellion, Wu sent a confidant to Beijing to retrieve Wu Yingxiong, his son and the young emperor's uncle-in-law; but his son disagreed. The confidant only brought back Wu Shipan, Wu Yingxiong's son by a concubine. On 28 December 1673, Wu killed Zhu Guozhi, the governor of Yunnan, and rebelled "against the alien and rebuilding Ming dynasty". On 7 January 1674, 62-year-old Wu led troops from Yunnan on the northern expedition and took the whole territory of Guizhou province without any loss. Wu Yingxiong and his sons with Princess Jianning was executed by the Kangxi Emperor soon after his father's rebellion. Shortly afterwards, Wu founded his own Zhou dynasty. By April 1674, Wu Sangui's army had quickly occupied Hunan, Hubei, Sichuan, and Guangxi. In the next 2 years, Geng Jingzhong, Wang Fuchen, and Shang Zhixin successively rose in rebellion, and Wu's rebellion had expanded into the Revolt of the Three Feudatories. By April 1676, the rebel force possessed 11 provinces (Yunnan, Guizhou, Sichuan, Shaanxi, Gansu, Hunan, Guangdong, Guangxi, Fujian, Zhejiang, and Jiangxi). For a moment, the situation seemed to favor Wu.

Unexpectedly, Wu halted his march and stayed south of Yangzi river for three months because of a shortage of troops and financial resources, which gave the Kangxi emperor a chance to assemble his forces. Wang Fuchen, Geng Jingzhong, and Shang Zhixin surrendered one after another under the attack of Qing forces.

In 1678, Wu Sangui went a step further and declared himself the emperor of the "Great Zhou", with the era name of Zhaowu (昭武). He established his capital at Hengzhou (present-day Hengyang, Hunan). When he died in October 1678, his grandson, Wu Shifan, took over command of his forces and continued the struggle. The remnants of Wu's armies were defeated soon after, in December 1681, and Wu Shifan committed suicide. Wu's son-in-law was sent to Beijing with Wu Shifan's head. The Kangxi Emperor sent parts of Wu's corpse to various provinces of China.

Family
Brothers:
 * Wu Sanfeng (吳三鳳)
 * Wu Sanfu (吳三輔)
 * Wu Sanmei (吳三枚)

Consorts and Issue:
 * Empress Zhang, of the Zhang clan (皇后 張氏, 1615 – 1699)
 * Wu Yingxiong, Emperor Xiaogong (孝恭皇帝 吳應熊), first son
 * Concubine Chen, of the Chen clan (妾陳氏), personal name Yuanyuan (圓圓)
 * Unknown:
 * 6 daughters
 * Adopted son: Wu Yingqi

In culture
Wu Sangui has often been regarded as a traitor and an opportunist, due to his betrayals of both the Ming and Qing dynasties. In Chinese culture, Wu's name is synonymous with betrayal (similar to the use of "Benedict Arnold" in the United States). However, more sympathetic characterizations are sometimes voiced, and Wu's story with his concubine, Chen Yuanyuan, who is sometimes compared to Helen of Troy, remains one of the classic love stories in China. Wu Sangui's son, Wu Yingxiong, husband of Princess Jianning, sometimes also features in dramas and stories.

Wu Sangui appears as an antagonist in the popular wuxia novel The Deer and the Cauldron by Jin Yong.

Wu and Chen's love story has often been romanticized, as in Taiwanese TV drama Chen Yuanyuan (1989) and TVB drama Perish in the Name of Love (2003). In Hong Kong TV series The Rise and Fall of Qing Dynasty (1987), Wu's military career and his love story with Chen are portrayed in a dramatic yet neutral way. In Taiwanese historical romance Princess Huai Yu (2000), Wu Sangui appears as an antagonist but his son, Wu Yingxiong, features prominently as the best friend of the Kangxi Emperor and love interest of Princess Jianning.

Wu is portrayed in a more balanced light in serious historical dramas. In CCTV series The Affaire in the Swing Age (2005), which covers his early life and military career, he is shown as being forced into making the fateful decisions that have made him infamous. In the CCTV series Kangxi Dynasty (2001), which covers his late career, he is depicted in a neutral way as a force in the power play with the Manchu overlords; his son, Wu Yingxiong, is presented as torn between loyalty to the royalty and filial piety to his family.

title: Wu Sangui


text:
American Nazi Party

The American Nazi Party (ANP) is an American far-right and neo-Nazi political party founded by George Lincoln Rockwell and headquartered in Arlington, Virginia. The organization was originally named the World Union of Free Enterprise National Socialists (WUFENS), a name to denote opposition to state ownership of property, the same year—it was renamed the American Nazi Party in order to attract 'maximum media attention'. Since the late 1960s, a number of small groups have used the name "American Nazi Party" with most being independent of each other and disbanding before the 21st century. The party is based largely upon the ideals and policies of Adolf Hitler's Nazi Party in Germany during the Nazi era, and embraced its uniforms and iconography.

Shortly after Rockwell's murder in 1967, the organization appointed Rockwell's second in command, Deputy Commander Matt Koehl as the new leader. The American Nazi Party, now under Koehl's command, was subject to ideological disagreements between members in the 1970s and 1980s. "In 1982, Martin Kerr, a leader at the Franklin Road headquarters, announced that the organization was changing its name to the New Order and moving to the Midwest", effective January 1, 1983. Due to recruitment issues along with financial and legal trouble, Koehl was forced to relocate the group's headquarters from the DC area, eventually finding his way to scattered locations in Wisconsin and Michigan. After Koehl's death in 2014, a long-time member and officer of the New Order, Martin Kerr assumed leadership and maintains the New Order website and organization.

A former member of the original American Nazi Party, Rocky Suhayda, founded his own organization using the American Nazi Party name and has been active since at least 2008. Suhayda claims Rockwell as its founder despite no direct legal or financial link between it and Rockwell's legacy organization. The one connection between the original American Nazi Party and Rocky Suhayda's group besides ideology is that they sell reprints of Rockwell's 1960s-era magazine The Stormtrooper on their website.

Headquarters
The WUFENS headquarters was located in a residence on Williamsburg Boulevard in Arlington, but was moved as the ANP headquarters to a house at 928 North Randolph Street (now a hotel and office building site). Rockwell and some party members also established a "Stormtrooper Barracks" in an old mansion owned by the widow of Willis Kern in the Dominion Hills section of Arlington at what is now the Upton Hill Regional Park. After Rockwell's murder, the headquarters was moved again to one side of a duplex brick and concrete storefront at 2507 North Franklin Road which featured a swastika prominently mounted above the front door. This site was visible from busy Wilson Boulevard. Today, the Franklin Road address is often misidentified as Rockwell's headquarters when in fact it was the successor organization's last physical address in Arlington (now a coffeehouse).

Name change and party reform
Under Rockwell, the party embraced Nazi uniforms and iconography.

After several years of living in impoverished conditions, Rockwell began to experience some financial success with paid speaking engagements at universities where he was invited to express his controversial views as exercises in free speech. This prompted him to end the rancorous "Phase One" party tactics and begin "Phase Two", a plan to recast the group as a legitimate political party by toning down the verbal and written attacks against non-whites, replacing the party rallying cry of "Sieg Heil!" with "White Power!", limiting public display of the swastika, and entering candidates in local elections.

The years 1965 and 1967 were possibly the height of Rockwell's profile. He was interviewed by Playboy magazine, an event that stirred controversy within the ranks. At the time Rockwell had about 500 followers. In 1966 or 1967, Rockwell renamed the ANP the National Socialist White People's Party (NSWPP), a move that alienated some hard-line members. The new name was a "conscious imitation" of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Rockwell wanted a more "ecumenical" approach and felt that the swastika banner was impeding organizational growth. Rockwell was killed on August 25, 1967, before he could implement party reforms. Matt Koehl, a purist Neo-Nazi, succeeded Rockwell as the new leader and this ended the American Nazi Party. Thereafter, the members engaged in internecine disputes, and they were either expelled by Koehl or they resigned. After the murder of Rockwell, the party dissipated and ad hoc organizations usurped the American Nazi Party logo. Those included James Burford in Chicago and John Bishop in Iowa.

In 1962, ANP member Roy James was sentenced to 30 days in jail and fined $25 for punching Martin Luther King Jr., after pleading guilty to charge of assault and battery and disorderly conduct. King had not wanted to press charges, but Birmingham Judge Charles H. Brown insisted on trying James, calling the incident an "uncalled for, unprovoked assault."

Murder of Rockwell
An assassination attempt was made on Rockwell on June 28, 1967. As Rockwell returned from shopping, he drove into the long driveway of the "Stormtrooper Barracks" located in Arlington's Dominion Hills subdivision and found it blocked by a fallen tree and brush. Rockwell assumed that it was another prank by local teens. As a party member cleared the obstruction, two shots were fired at Rockwell from behind one of the swastika-embossed brick driveway pillars. One of the shots ricocheted off the car, right next to his head. Leaping from the car, Rockwell pursued the gunman. On June 30, Rockwell petitioned the Arlington County Circuit Court for a gun permit; no action was ever taken on his request.

On August 25, 1967, as Rockwell left the Econowash laundromat at the Dominion Hills Shopping Center, a former follower named John Patler shot Rockwell from the roof of the building. Patler fired two bullets into Rockwell's car through the windshield. One missed, the other hit his chest and ruptured his heart. His car rolled backward to a stop and Rockwell staggered out of the front passenger side door of the car, stood briefly while pointing upward at the strip mall's rooftop where the shots had come from and then collapsed on the pavement. He was pronounced dead at the scene.

Koehl's succession and ideological divisions
Rockwell's second in command, Deputy Commander Matt Koehl, a staunch Hitlerist, assumed the leadership role after a council agreed that he should retain command. Koehl continued some of Rockwell's restructuring of the group by dropping the use of negative verbal and written attacks against racial minorities. Koehl also began emphasizing the positive aspects of Nazism and the glories of a future all-white society. Koehl retained the swastika-festooned party literature and the pseudo-Nazi uniforms of the party's "Storm Troopers" which were modeled on those worn by the Nazi Party's Sturmabteilung. In 1968, Koehl moved the party to a new headquarters on 2507 North Franklin Road, clearly visible from Arlington's main thoroughfare, Wilson Boulevard. He also established a printing press, a "Lincoln Rockwell Book Store", and member living quarters on property nearby.

The party began to experience ideological divisions among its followers as it entered the 1970s. In 1970, member Frank Collin, who was himself secretly the son of a Jewish father, broke away from the group and founded the National Socialist Party of America in Chicago, which became famous for its attempt to march through Skokie, Illinois, which was home to many Holocaust survivors. This led to the United States Supreme Court case, National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie. Other dissatisfied members of the NSWPP chose to support William Luther Pierce, and formed the National Alliance in 1974.

Further membership erosion occurred as Koehl, drawing heavily upon the teachings of Hitlerian mystic Savitri Devi, began to suggest that Nazism was more akin to a religious movement than a political one. He espoused the belief that Adolf Hitler was the gift of an inscrutable divine providence who had been sent to rescue the white race from decadence and gradual extinction which had been caused by a declining birth rate and miscegenation. Hitler's death in 1945 was viewed as a type of martyrdom; a voluntary, Christ-like self-sacrifice, that looked forward to a spiritual resurrection of Nazism at a later date when the Aryan race would need it the most. These esoteric beliefs led to disputes with the World Union of National Socialists, which Rockwell had founded and whose leader, Danish neo-Nazi Povl Riis-Knudsen, had been appointed by Koehl. Undaunted, Koehl continued to recast the party as a new religion in formation. Public rallies were gradually phased out in favor of low-key gatherings which were held in private venues. On Labor Day 1979, in a highly unpopular move for some members, Koehl disbanded the party's paramilitary "Storm Troopers."

On November 3, 1979, some members of the NSWPP and a Ku Klux Klan group attacked a Communist Workers' Party protest march in Greensboro, North Carolina. The group of neo-Nazis and Klansmen shot and killed five marchers. Forty Klansmen and neo-Nazis were involved in the shootings with sixteen Klansmen and neo-Nazis being arrested. The six strongest cases were brought to trial first, but the two criminal trials resulted in the acquittal of the defendants by all-white juries. However, in a 1985 civil lawsuit, the survivors won a $350,000 judgment against the city, the Klansmen, and the neo-Nazis after they were all found guilty of violating the civil rights of the demonstrators. The shootings became known as the "Greensboro Massacre."

In 1982 the Internal Revenue Service took action to foreclose on the group's headquarters in Arlington, Virginia. Koehl ceased printing the organization's White Power newspaper, sold its Arlington, Virginia, real estate holdings, and dispersed the group's various operations to scattered locations in Wisconsin and Michigan. A secluded 88 acre rural property called "Nordland" was purchased in New Berlin, Wisconsin, to serve as living quarters and to host annual meetings and ceremonial events.

New Order
The Koehl organization changed its name to New Order on January 1, 1983, on the grounds that the people in the area "are not people looking to join revolutionary organizations", saying that it was moving to an area in the Midwest which it would not reveal for security reasons. The name change reflected the group's Nazi mysticism and it was still known by that name in 2010.

The organization briefly attracted the media's attention in October 1983, when it held a private meeting at Yorktown High School in Arlington, Virginia. A non-uniformed gathering of members was held indoors while the police kept a crowd of counter-protesters at bay outside. This event marked the last publicized appearance of Koehl and the New Order in Arlington. From that point forward the only outward sign that the group was still operational was the annual appearance of the swastika and Betsy Ross American Revolutionary War flags flying from the party's nondescript headquarters building on North Franklin Road every April 20 (Hitler's birthday).

Today the New Order operates quietly far from the public spotlight, eschewing the confrontational public rallies that were once a hallmark of its previous incarnations. It maintains a web page and a Milwaukee, Wisconsin, post office box providing information and template material promoting Nazism. It has no members but rather "registered supporters" who pledge to mail in donations on a monthly basis. Financing is also obtained through sales of books and other merchandise under an affiliate business, NS Publications of Wyandotte, Michigan. The NS Bulletin, a newsletter, is sent to supporters on a quarterly basis. The group holds occasional ceremonial gatherings at undisclosed private locations such as an annual observance of Hitler's birthday each April 20.

New Order's Chief of Staff, Martin Kerr, claims that the group is no longer a white supremacist group and focuses on advocating "in favor of [white] people, not against other races or ethnicities...we consider the white people of the world to be a gigantic family of racial brothers and sisters, united by ties of common ancestry and common heritage. Being for our own family does not mean that we hate other families." The SPLC still classifies them as neo-Nazis and as a "hate group."

Namesake organizations
Since the late 1960s, there have been a number of small groups that have used the name "American Nazi Party."
 * Perhaps the first was led by James Warner and Allen Vincent and it consisted of members of the California branch of the NSWPP. This group announced its existence on January 1, 1968. In 1982 James Burford formed another "American Nazi Party" from disaffected branches of the National Socialist Party of America. This Chicago-based group remained in existence until at least 1994.
 * A small American Nazi Party operated from Davenport, Iowa, led by John Robert Bishop until 1985.
 * The name "American Nazi Party" has also been adopted by a group run by Rocky J. Suhayda, a member of Rockwell's original ANP in 1967. Although Suhayda's ANP states that Rockwell was its founder, there is no direct legal or financial link between it and Rockwell's legacy organization now called the New Order. Headquartered in Westland, Michigan, Suhayda's ANP website sells nostalgic reprints of Rockwell's 1960s-era magazine The Stormtrooper. 2008 Neo-Nazi presidential candidate John Taylor Bowles was a member. Suhayda holds semi-private yearly meetings at his home and a national convention in California. His followers do not wear uniforms, except for the SA, or Security Arm, and they eschew public demonstrations, frequently criticizing the rival organization the National Socialist Movement for "outing" its members with excessive media exposure.

Notable former members

 * David Duke was a member before he went on to establish the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan organization
 * Frank Collin, founder of the National Socialist Party of America
 * Harold Covington, author
 * James Mason, former convict, author, and former associate of cult leader Charles Manson
 * Joseph Tommasi, founder of the National Socialist Liberation Front
 * Kurt Saxon, author of The Poor Man's James Bond
 * William Luther Pierce, founder of the National Alliance
 * Arthur J. Jones, Republican candidate for Illinois's 3rd congressional district in the November 2018 midterm elections

title: American Nazi Party