Print Page | Close Window

USA Northern Race relations pre great migration?

Printed From: WorldHistoria Forum
Forum Name: Americas
Forum Description: The Americas: History from pre-Colombian times to the present
Printed Date: 06 Aug 2020 at 06:49
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 -

Topic: USA Northern Race relations pre great migration?
Posted By: Guests
Subject: USA Northern Race relations pre great migration?
Date Posted: 15 Oct 2018 at 03:28
There was obviously, very very few African Americans in the north before the great migration from the southern states happened. Harvard, educated Historian Thomas Sowell claims in his book, Black Rednecks and White Liberals that the tiny number of blacks who were in the north pre great migration and post slavery, had come to be treated basically just like anyone else. Then he claims that the blacks who came from the southern states ruined this, with their backwards, unlikable and self destructive culture. Thomas Sowell notes that even many blacks who were in the north pre great migration had come to resent the culture these southern had blacks brought, much less the northern whites. The same thing happened out West he claimed. Is there any good evidence of this that anyone can provide? I know it doesn't fit historical narratives but to me this would make a lot of sense. A youtube white nationalist by the name of Alternative Hypothesis, also found the same thing in his research apparently but blamed the genetics of southern blacks instead of just the culture. Thanks in advance for anyone who reply without nastiness.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2018 at 06:24
I have not read the book, but have read others of Sowell's books, he is a careful writer and what you say sounds like a gross simplification.  But there is on Amazon a Summary of Black Rednecks and White Liberals.  However, Sowell usually supports his claims quite carefully with evidence, so I am not sure why you would feel a need to go elsewhere.  The first step would be to expand off of his notes in his book.  Check out his sources, and if need be check out his sources, sources or at least his sources references.  I would avoid the "white nationalist" just as I would avoid a black nationalist.  I see both as function of identity politics which I consider pernicious, just because the left engages in identity politics does not mean that others have to emulate their mistakes.  

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22 Oct 2018 at 02:21
The thing is I only listened to the book in audiobook format, so I haven't seen any of his sources. I'm gonna go ahead and order the hardcopy right now.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 22 Oct 2018 at 12:03
I enjoy audiobooks in the car, but of course, they also leave out the footnotes and bibliographies.

Posted By: caldrail
Date Posted: 28 Oct 2018 at 22:18
The relationship of blacks in American society has been quite variable. Despite our modern attitude toward human trafficking, it is notable that many slaves were perfectly loyal to their owners, others not so. I did some reading about the AWI and encountered interesting info about the position of blacks I did not expect. Some owners sent their slaves to war. Some slaves absconded, in one case stealing arms and ammunition from the estate, either to rove as independent bandits or to join the British side who had promised freedom for them (which was not forthcoming). One enterprising gentleman in the Carolinas thought that blacks, suitably led and armed, would make good soldiers especially if awarded freedom for their service, and made attempts to lobby the state government unsuccessfully for the institution of black regiments. There was a very revealing case however. One black veteran made a deposition in 1846 in order to gain a war pension. He had fought for the rebels but his pension was refused because he had been a runaway slave.
I also note that Lincoln, despite his reputation as a great emancipator, had previously proclaimed that if he could achieve victory without freeing a single slave, he would, and clearly he was not a libertarian but a politician using a cause to assist his war strategy. It was, frankly, exploitation as much as slavery itself, albeit the blacks would have opportunities for freedom - but please note that Lincoln also allowed some marginal states to retain slavery in order to win and keep their loyalty in the war.
After WW1 there seems to have been a renewed suppression of black freedoms. partly because of economic hardship, partly because of improving conditions in the south, but a notable segregation that persisted until the post-WW2 movements for black rights.


Posted By: Windemere
Date Posted: 30 Oct 2018 at 22:53
I think that Lincoln supported the eventual abolition of slavery, but the actual cause of the Civil War was the Southern (Dixie) states'  secession from the Union, which Lincoln was determined to prevent. However, the Southern states were well aware that the overall political trend in the U.S. government favored the gradual abolition of slavery, which was probably the main reason behind the secession declaration. Lincoln's election to the presidency was another reason, as the southern states knew that he favored elimination of slavery. The stated reason by the Confederate (Southern) government for it's secession was to preserve state's rights against domination from the federal government, but the preservation of slavery was part of that.

The freed ex-slaves formed a significant minority population in Dixieland. But the Southern states' governments continued to be dominated by the old white political aristocracy. Due to the high black birthrate, there was a sort of apprehension on the part of the white population, both working-class and upper-class, that they might eventually lose this political supremacy. And there was also an underlying fear of racial intermarriage. And so the "jim-crow laws" were passed to ensure that blacks would remain second-class citizens, and anti-miscegenation laws forbade racial intermarriage. 

The Great Migration, referred to in the posts above, was the largescale migration of southern blacks up to the northern states to obtain industrial jobs, after World War I.  The jim-crow laws didn't exist in the north. which up until then had only a small black population. But the main impetus for the Great Migration was the availability of industrial jobs in the north. Dixieland at that time still had a mainly agricultural economy. Were it not for the Great Migration, blacks would soon have been a numerical majority in Dixieland.

The Civil Rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s eventually put an end to the jim-crow laws, and established official legal racial equality. 

Dis Aliter Visum
"Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 31 Oct 2018 at 11:36
The law, having granted equality to African (Americans) has yet to be completely imposed, and the population still needs to be educated about racial equality.

Of all of the educated western nations, I suggest the the USA would be close to the top of the list of most racist.

Quite frankly, racism is a concept that I don't comprehend.

From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever.(Chief Joseph)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 02 Nov 2018 at 05:42
I think that there are people who have a vested interest in making it look like America is racist.  If America is racist or sexist or classist, or whateverist, then big Federal spending programs are justified in order to compensate for the differences, which will be stocked by a large bureaucracy of enlightened workers capable of discerning the cause of any action in the heart of their subjects, that they might not like.
I am from the suburbs, and most whites from the suburbs don't really have encounters with blacks, having one or two of them at their schools.  But, when whites get to college they are told that there is a tremendous prejudice against blacks, and because of that in admissions, in state employment, there must be preferences for blacks.  Well, the whites didn't see them as inferior before, but now they are told that the blacks need all these advantages to make up for their disadvantages, disadvantages that whites don't see.  Well it is not very far to say that all these advantages that minorities suddenly must have are examples of reverse discrimination, and that these supposed disadvantages turn into view of minorities as inferior.  The effort to protect minorities and give them special status, actually backfires and becomes an argument for them being inferior, in the eyes of those who loose out of the deal.  
One person who in quite sharply argues that affirmative action does not help, is Thomas Sowell.  But Sowell is talking about around the world, not just the United States.  In fact, there was affirmative action in nazi Germany, too many Jews going to the universities, not enough red-blooded aryans.  To many Tamils getting ahead in Sri Lanka, not enough indigenous Malays, too many ethic Chinese.  And you know, there never will be a time when black politicians and the democratic party will say, "well, we have had enough Affirmative action, and it has worked/or is not going to work, therefore we must stop it."  no, the media will go on and on forever saying it is working, but never finished.  For the media, no news is good news, and therefore there is alway a crisis, to be manufactured.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 02 Nov 2018 at 16:04

I'm sure that what you say is correct. It's no secret that The Great Shaitan is vilified in some areas of the world. But I'm not one of them.

As I wrote previously, I simply don't understand the whole concept of racism, or for that matter religious or sexual persecution. Having said that, in my own country, when I was young, I was warned about mixing with Catholics! And in those days, the only foreigners that I came into contact were Polish migrant children who had fled Europe with their families following the second World War.

As I pertains to African Americans, once again I must fall back on my only experience being of news broadcasts and print media. I'm old enough to remember the segregation of Blacks and Whites back in the 1950's, but I would have thought that the situation would have changed by now.

The fact that governments make financial allocations to appease minorities is a fact of life, but, and I'm asking here, are African Americans a minority the USA?

From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever.(Chief Joseph)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2018 at 05:09
Numerically, yes, but blacks are quite well organized politically, organized on the left that is, if you are black and on the right you are a pariah.  Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, and Shelby Steele are on the right, and you can guess what they are automatically called, "Uncle Toms" or house slaves, or some variant thereof.

You might look up intersectionality.  If you are black, you are "oppressed," if you are a woman, you are "oppressed," if you are a lesbian, you are "oppressed."  But if you are a black woman lesbian, you've got a triple score!  Grievance culture gives you more authority, more power, to do what?  Get back at the (supposed) oppressor, usually the white, male, heterosexual capitalist running dog.  If you are white, heterosexual, capitalist, you cannot "legitimately" talk about many things, because you are automatically dismissed as patriarchal or capitalist, and therefore you are obviously bias.  If you talk about drugs in the black community, it is automatically assumed that you are taking a shot at the black community.  If you talk about drugs, and you don't talk about the black community, then it is assumed that you are abandoning them to the scourge.  Damned if you do, damned if you don't.  On the other hand, if you are a minority or better yet, a triple or quadruple minority, even if you don't know anything, your words, and you self-righteous indignation carries great weight.  For example it is automatically assumed that the police are prejudiced and outright vicious, and that the investigations are rigged.

I have broadcast TV, and on there, there is a black movie channel (not BET, but another one), and they have just matter of course references to the police as prejudiced.  It is a plot gimmick, this is how the police are, "everyone" knows it, no evidence is necessary.  Now as a white guy, I look at the police as authorities, authorities with guns no less, and they should be treated with respect and caution.  Policeman wants me to do something, I'll probably do it. or at least I'll know how to politely decline. 

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2018 at 11:34
Franciscosan wrote ,

Not to make light of a very serious matter, but what you've written reminds me of a stupid government here in Australia some years ago. A financial grant was made to a groups of handicapped lesbians to learn how to surf. Now come on!!!

But as you and I communicate more and more, I'm coming to see that in fact we both see many , things in the same light.

While racism exists in Australia, it's far more low key but, 
Quote  If you are black, you are "oppressed," if you are a woman, you are "oppressed," if you are a LBGT, you are "oppressed."  But if you are a black woman lesbian, you've got a triple score! 
add a handicap and it becomes a quadruple score.

The PC community in Australia is both loud and active, people can no longer speak of minorities without someone taking them to task, BUT, if a minority person speaks ill of a white, in racist terms-SO WHAT WHITEY?

From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever.(Chief Joseph)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 07 Nov 2018 at 08:15
You know, originally it was GLBT, but lesbians are more oppressed than gay men and so got put to the head of the acronym.  LGBTQ.  Gay men are still men, and therefore got demoted.  Such a demotion has real consequences, Stonewall(??), the oldest gay organization in the states is now headed by a lesbian, and I have heard that patriarchy is a big issue, but AIDS not so much.

Actually, I think surfing handicapped lesbians is a good idea.  Think about it, there probably isn't a more politically apathetic group than surfers, or maybe that is just a stereotype.  But if you could subsidize grievance culture in some harmless way, it might be worthwhile.  Especially if it honestly get them excited in something involving skill and excellence, making their life worthwhile, separate from them complaining about the "patriarchy."

The Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson visited your great country, you might check him it on Youtube.  Great guy, making a difference for many young men in getting their lives together, and a thorn in the side of identity politics. 

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 27 Dec 2018 at 15:11

Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 -
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. -