Segregation's Evolution in the Twilight Period

Segregation's Evolution in the Twilight Period

In our class discussion we contextualized the first four chapters of Blair L. M. Kelley's Right to Ride, which walks readers through the history of racially segregated streetcars.  

Historians have been asking about the nature of segregation.  Kelley hones in on the legal nature of segregation in the 19th century and early part of the 20th century.  Often we conceptualize segregation as a southern phenomenon, but Kelley forces us to expand this understanding by opening the book with examples of streetcar segregation in 1850s New York City.  Racial, as well as gender, segregation was a national phenomenon with particular manifestations in various regions.  Yet, there was a twilight period between the end of the Civil War and the "separate but equal" case ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson during which the nation had to answer, "how are we going to organize our society in regards to this race thing?"

In the South, following the Emancipation Proclamation, many questions regarding "the color line" were still unanswered.  While blacks began to push for liberties and equal rights as citizens, Southern whites were experiencing a racialized fear.  The abolition of slavery was the loss of white social control over blacks.  For whites to maintain their position in the social hierarchy, a new system of control need to be devised and implemented.  

To contextualize our discussion on segregation, we first imagined the institutions which were impacted by emancipation during the Reconstruction Era.  The South witnessed a rise in black education, churches, businesses, et cetera.  Former slaves were the foremost proponents of public education.  Booker T. Washington recalls the era, saying, "an entire race learning to read!"  School systems were organized by blacks, by which many HBCUs were founded.  There was a proliferation of black churches.  For example, the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church jumped from 10,000 to 100,000 members across the country during Reconstruction.  Though blacks were still tied to the land to support themselves (farming tobacco and cotton), in many ways, black laborers were earning money for the first time.  Black communities pooled their resources to build these institutions.  Since white bankers would not take their money, or make loans, black banks began to flourish across the South.  Southern black communities grew rapidly, and began wrestling with the concept of "freedom."

Black Americans were experiencing and utilizing a level of autonomy they had not yet seen.  Former slaves were changing their last names from their masters names.  Former slaves had mobility like never before, and they were able to seek decent wages in a variety of places.  Many became formally married.  All of these changes terrified the white South, witnessing a complete transformation of their way of life and social order.  Whites began to think about what social control might replace slavery, to restore the social hierarchy they had been accustomed to.  Segregation seemed to be the alternative method for denying the dignity of blacks.  

Segregation soon became the ingrained in all aspects of life following the Plessy case.  Segregation ordinances popped up across the South, ensuring de jure separation, while the North maintained de facto segregation.  These laws were violent in their nature, robbing a race of humans of their dignity through stigmatization and subordination.  At the crux of many of the segregation laws (such as it being illegal for whites and blacks to play a game of checkers with each other) came from a fear of interracial sex.  This can be seen in the rhetoric surrounding lynchings in newspapers.  In the book I've Got the Light of Freedom the author shows how while the motivation for 45% of lynchings were allegations of rape, 82% of newspaper articles following a lynching refer to sexual assault as a factor.  The need for social control inherent in white supremacy has evolved through history (i.e. slavery, segregation, lynching, prison industrial complex, etc).  

Once our class discussion was contextualized, we spent the remainder of the class period discussing the segregation we had been reading about and the African American Activist tradition in the face of white supremacy.  

First, we debated over whether the mere act of reading by black Americans in the South was an act of activism.  Those that argued reading was a form of activism point to fact that an educated black population in the eyes of white capitalists would negatively affect their profits, by forcing land owners to increase wages to maintain a workforce which suddenly has more occupational options.  Since white capitalists were against the explicit advancement education provided blacks, it was surely dangerous for black Southerners to seek education.  Hence the plantation saying, "Education wrecks a good field hand."  On the other hand, some students cautioned that we should not cheapen the idea of activism, by attributing everything blacks did at that time as a form of activism.  

With this dilemma, we tried to sharpen our definition of activism.  One student talked about how the body in occupation of space was often used as a weapon for activism, by pushing the boundaries on the place deemed unacceptable for black presence by white society.  Communication was a large part of activism back then, and it is still the key of organization today.  Black newspapers were like the social media of the day, where blacks received their news and used editorials to positively influence one another.    We also recognized the collective energy and effort needed for activism, and how those energies come and go like waves throughout history.  

Missing BLACKNESS

I recently went searching through a database of Civil War diaries and letters. It struck me as something important and unusual, for in particular these letters were written because of a death incurred by the disruption of the Civil War. Moreover, I thought I might find the death of an activist or an abolitionist, trying to ultimately demonstrate the widespread havoc and the seriousness of the war, the racial strife that was everywhere and the struggle that still struggled on through times of war and upheaval. Even more, I never thought I would have trouble finding a black voice in this kind of archive, in an archive pertaining to one of the most basic aspects of humanity, death; however, what I found surprised me and challenged my already disconcerting views of whiteness. Essentially, I found nothing. Let me be specific, I went through almost every single letter and diary entry in the entire digital archive, and not a single one was written by or for a black soldier, nurse, or family member during the war. Not a single letter was written by or for black hands. One thing I did find was a singular line, which did nothing to help African Americans, but rather, it upheld many stereotypes and mindsets - "The black women were perfectly destitute, they really had nothing to wear, -- and such unmitigated growling."(1)
Moreover, in the lack of something, I found something else all the more important. For instance, I not only found a discrepancy with the archive itself for not pursuing or not ostensibly pursuing any black voices and lived experiences during the Civil War but also that black voices were suppressed during the Civil War even in death and around it. In particular, even in an archive surrounding death and destruction from the Civil War, black voice were suppressed or ignored, and even more importantly, during the Civil War, their lives were seen as inconsequential and piddling. In and around death, one of the most human and humanizing aspects of life, African Americans were yet again dehumanized and treated as lesser than: not as a human with pains, desires, heartbreaks, and depression but as something unfeeling.

---

[1] Phinney, Mary, Baroness von Olnhausen, 1818-1902, Letter from Mary Phinney, Baroness von Olnhausen, December 25, 1864, in Adventures of an Army Nurse in Two Wars. Munroe, James Phinney ed., Boston, MA: Little, Brown, & Co., 1903, pp. 355. S1010-D049. 

A Black in the Abstract?

While reading Right to Ride for Thursday’s class, I came across a phrase which has been reverberating in my head for a few days.  In chapter one, Kelley quotes an official from the Sixth Avenue streetcar company named T. Bailey Myers.  Myers is defending segregation as natural and mocking Reverend James W.C. Pennington’s honorary degree from the University of Heidelburg when he uses the phrase “a black in the abstract.”  The quote reads “even the metaphysical air of Heidelburg, where he took his degree, is not free from prejudices, if not those of color, and that many in this more practical country, who are willing to recognize a black in the abstract, as a man and a brother, are not quite prepared to carry it into practice in our cars.” [emphasis added]

“…a black in the abstract…”

When I first read the statement, two thoughts immediately came to mind.  First was the interesting link between practicality and segregation in the speaker’s thought process.  Myers frames the enforcement of segregationist policies as practical in contrast to the “metaphysical air” of Heidelburg, an interesting statement that speaks to the (flawed) concept that the American segregation system was natural and therefore superior.  Another interesting takeaway which I garnered was the obvious cognitive dissonance between theoretical acceptance of the other paired with actual rejection of that other, in that one cannot accept another “as a man and a brother” and then not “carry it into practice.”  The act of NOT carrying it into practice demonstrates how little the “man and brother” recognition really meant for all the white folks for whom Myer’s spoke. 

After Thursday’s discussion, a third reflection has come to mind which is more difficult to spell out, but which I think can be succinctly stated as abstraction enables deflection.  Myer’s suggestion that white folks would theoretically be open to renegotiating aspects of New York’s segregated systems was in reality just deflection, a ploy carried out by moving the conversation out of the deeply segregated reality of New York City in 1855 and into the realm of possibility.  It’s a disturbingly clever tactic, I think, and it is unfortunately one that I’m sure played very well to “well meaning” white moderates who anxiously stood on the sidelines and hoped that their “man and brother” abstract vision wouldn’t be widely challenged.

Capitalism is Oppression. Period.

Capitalism was created to oppress. On paper, the economic system originated with the intent to raise the standard of living for all people without a specific focus on the less well-off (like socialism). Rather than create a structure that redistributes wealth directly, capitalism was created around the idea of free market principles, insisting that if good and services can be provided and are desired, fair trades will be made between groups. Though this is a simplified explanation, the ideologies of a capitalistic market hold true: groups will have their stand of living raised regardless of socio-economic status due to supply and demand theory. Additionally, the role of government regulation in this theoretical model of capitalism is minimal, only stepping in for legal parameters. The success of an ideal free market is the theory behind this.

In actuality, however, capitalism serves to create a zero-sum game, separating market “winners” and “losers”. The point must be made that capitalism was never meant for a globalized market. Or rather, capitalism was never intended to fit an economy in which large groups are separated by unsurmountable gaps in quality of life and cultural barriers. Due to colonialism and globalization, capitalism breeds corruption. Without “unreasonable” government control, human rights violations occur daily. Basic human needs are devalued in favor of prioritizing corporations, businesses, and global market trade. The economic system enforced for centuries has been one that not only values some lives over others based on geographic region, socio-economic status, and personal idiosyncrasies (such as race, religion, gender, etc.), but also profits off of those abuses.

In the US (and many Western countries), capitalism has bled into every aspect of our lives, creating a culture of capitalism that would be impossible to remove without dismantling the entire system of which we all currently rely. By allowing this system of warped capitalism to continue to abuse human beings through corrupt labor practices, subversive policies, and social coercion, we are accepting the oppression experienced by all who encounter us. That may sound extreme, but the treatment of foreign and domestic people cannot be denied. In areas aside from the US and Westernized areas, colonization continues to impact human interactions and contribute a root cause to global poverty, pandemics, and environmental issues. In the US, individuals are defined by their labor, refined to fit their assigned role, and isolated through false individualism and combinations of hegemonic control (such as misogyny, racism, heteronormality etc.).

The biggest obstacle I see activism, especially Black activism, facing is the indisputable fact that the very system suggests that their existence is inherently an anachronism if it does not serve the hegemonic cause. The fact that many Black movements center around playing into the system of control in order to gain rights is often more successful than other methods. This should not be the case. If our society did not label people by their labor, slavery would not have existed in the capacity in which it did. Slavery has evolved into the modern oppression that we see today, with Black people still thought of as blue-collar.

In saying that Black movements should not have to pander to the White majority, I do not mean to suggest that these movements should not exist. I think that all too often we are caught up in criticism rather than recognition of the struggles people undergo throughout movements. As such, I simply mean to suggest that the root issue is that justice has not and will not be attained through capitalism.

Washington v. Du Bois

It’s interesting that in Right to Ride the author sheds so much light upon this divide between Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. Du Bois’ position on education and its place in activism even though the book mainly surrounds the advances of more regional activists and organizers. For instance, Kelley posits, “Booker T. Washington [was] an educator who compromised on the question of black citizenship and maintained public silence in the face of white supremacist atrocities” (Page 3). Even more, Kelley goes on to describe in later chapters how Washington ruined J. Barber’s career and political aspirations by using his influence to destroy Barber's public image and trust (Page 196). Further, as the leader of the Tuskegee Institute, Washington was the proponent of black education throughout the United States during his life and even after it, pushing it towards a more accommodationist black education system rather than a substantive one for social change. Thus, Washington pushed for black education in light of the growing market and need for employment; in other words, Washington advocated for a more technical education, placating those White Architects of Black Education pursuing cheaper employment and competition in the workplace. Conversely, Kelley paints Du Bois in a completely different light, repeatedly calling him the agitator. She states, “As the foremost scholar of race, Du Bois remained vigilant in his efforts to dedicate his work as a historian, sociologist, and author to trace historical and contemporary contours of African American life and to delineate ‘the problem of the color line’” (Page 8). Even more, Du Bois constantly fights for equal rights within the educational realm instead of placating white power and influence. Ultimately, I wanted to outline this divide because I have recently seen it reappear over and over again in the context of African American activism, especially in regards to fledgling organizations budding through the surface during the late 1800s. As such, this division countermands various activists and their dreams of racial equality; Washingtonians and the influence of Washington himself go against contemporary and historical activism, giving accommodationist, white supremacy some kind of validation and tool to use against those that strive for racial equality and social justice.

Elite Black Leadership

            Looking through the Colored Conventions website, I was surprised by some of their resolutions on “racial migrations," especially in contrast with Walker’s beliefs and ideas. For example, Walker cites Richard Allen stating, “This land which we have watered with our tears and our blood, is our mother country, and we are well satisfied to stay where wisdom and the gospel is free.”[1] Alternatively however, the minutes from the 1832 National Convention of Free People of Colour resolved –

That in the opinion of this committee, the plan suggested by the first General Convention, of purchasing land or lands in Upper Canada, for the avowed object of forming a settlement in that province, for such colored persons as may choose to emigrate there, still merits and deserves our united support and exertions, and further, that the appearances of the times, in this our native land, demands immediate action on that subject. Adopted.[2]

Even more revealing, this resolution was the first one proposed and passed during this session of the National Convention. Even though David Walker and his contemporary allies in racial justice seem to agree that the United States of America is their mother country, which should not be abandoned, there seems to be an interesting divide in the opinions of the time. Even more curious, Walker and the convention both make adamant remarks against the American Colonization Society trying to accomplish their Back to Africa movement and colony in Liberia. What seems divisive nevertheless, may be each individual’s attachments and connections to the country as a whole. While Walker seems to have this nationalistic type of connection to the Untied States and its black population (free and slave), other free people of color seem to have stronger allegiances towards color and family. While Walker continues to explicate why violence is needed in American society with the aims of changing it from within and providing a future wherein black slaves are freed and equality is a basic concept of American life, other free people of color contrarily believed in saving their own people first rather than the name of a country that holds no meaning but horror and pain. Finally, I think this will become an ever-divisive issue in the evolution of African American Activism such that each individual and organization’s nationalism and the connection to the land and name of the United States of America will continuously be challenged and repositioned.

---

[1] David Walker, David Walker’s Appeal (New York, Hill and Wang, 1965), 58.

[2] Minutes and Proceedings of the Second Annual Convention for the Improvement of the Free People of Color in these United States, June 4-13, 1832, Colored Conventions, University of Delaware Library, Newark.