California and Racism Directed at Chinese

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Major General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,945
The suggestion has been made that Californians concerned about Chinese immigration might have considered secession.
Judging from their conduct against Chinese residents in the second half of the nineteenth century, California may well have seceded if the federal government had not passed laws that forced a decline in number of Chinese living in America.
Let's discuss this and share sourced evidence.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
0
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
The suggestion has been made that Californians concerned about Chinese immigration were might have considered secession.

Let's discuss this and share sourced evidence.
I did a quick google and came up empty. I eagerly look forward to sourced evidence.
 

diane

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
20,647
Location
State of Jefferson
At the time of the Civil War, the first wave of Chinese immigrants had just come to California to work at the gold mines or on the Trans-continental Railroad. Before the war, there was strong secessionist efforts led primarily by Pio Pico, the last Californio governor of Alta California, to separate the state at Santa Barbara. There was a hope that if the southern half of the state was not returned to Mexico, at least they could get a better bargain with the Confederacy and some of their extensive ranchos and haciendas restored. (The Californios had a lot in common with the planters of the South after the Mexican War.) The Chinese didn't become a threat until later in the 19th century, which led to the Oriental Exclusion Act of 1892, think it was. After the Civil War, many Southern planters including Forrest, strongly supported Chinese immigration to the South because too many black workers had either left or wanted to be paid correct wages.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,115
Location
SF Bay Area
At the time of the Civil War, the first wave of Chinese immigrants had just come to California to work at the gold mines or on the Trans-continental Railroad. Before the war, there was strong secessionist efforts led primarily by Pio Pico, the last Californio governor of Alta California, to separate the state at Santa Barbara. There was a hope that if the southern half of the state was not returned to Mexico, at least they could get a better bargain with the Confederacy and some of their extensive ranchos and haciendas restored. (The Californios had a lot in common with the planters of the South after the Mexican War.) The Chinese didn't become a threat until later in the 19th century, which led to the Oriental Exclusion Act of 1892, think it was. After the Civil War, many Southern planters including Forrest, strongly supported Chinese immigration to the South because too many black workers had either left or wanted to be paid correct wages.
Thanks for sharing.

California definitely has a fascinating history due to so many shifts in population size overall, shifts in occupations and reasons for the population shifts (people moving in and out), being a coastal State and the influx of both shipping and immigrant communities, history with being part of Mexico etc.

So many shifts and changes, most places in the US are different than they were X years ago, but California has shifted faster and more dramatically than just about anywhere in the US.

For added context here's how California's population grew and in relation to it's percentage of total US population.

Screen Shot 2018-09-21 at 2.14.06 PM.jpg
 

E_just_E

Captain
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
6,171
Location
Center Valley, PA
The suggestion has been made that Californians concerned about Chinese immigration might have considered secession.

Let's discuss this and share sourced evidence.
This bit from Stanford has a nice documented (about 56 references) timeline regarding Chinese immigration to California related to the Central Pacific (and then Union Pacific) railroad building. Nothing about secession.

The closest to "secession" in California was the Pico Act of 1859 that would have dissected the state into California North of the 36th parallel (right about Bakersfield) and have everything south of there go to the Colorado territory.

Few more partition movements both in the 19th and 20th Century, but no secession movements until the 21st; and nothing regarding Chinese immigration
 

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,115
Location
SF Bay Area
Wikipedia has a good summary of a specific and significant part of this, Chinatown in San Francisco

Some excerpts

----
is the oldest Chinatown in North America and the largest Chinese enclave outside Asia. It is the oldest of the four notable Chinatowns in the city.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9] Since its establishment in 1848,
----

----
Chinese Exclusion

The mostly male Chinese immigrants came to the United States with the intent of sending money home to support their families; coupled with the high cost of repaying their loans for travel, they often had to take any work that was available. Fears began to arise among non-Chinese workers that they could be replaced, and resentment towards Chinese immigrants rose.[40] With extensive nationwide unemployment in the wake of the Panic of 1873, racial tensions in the city boiled over into full blown race riots. The two-day San Francisco riot of 1877 raged through Chinatown in July; four were killed and US$100,000 (equivalent to $2,300,000 in 2017) in property damage was done to Chinese-owned businesses. In response to the violence, the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association, also known as the Chinese Six Companies, which evolved out of the labor recruiting organizations for different areas of Guangdong, was created to provide the community with a unified voice. The heads of these companies advocated for the Chinese community to the wider business community as a whole and to the city government.


The state legislature of California passed several measures to restrict the rights of Chinese immigrants, but these were largely superseded by the terms of the Burlingame Treaty of 1868.[40] In 1880, the Burlingame Treaty was renegotiated and the United States ratified the Angell Treaty, which allowed federal restrictions on Chinese immigration and temporarily suspended the immigration of unskilled laborers. Anti-immigrant sentiment became federal law once the United States Government passed the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882: the first immigration restriction law aimed at a single ethnic group. This law, along with other immigration restriction laws such as the Geary Act, greatly reduced the numbers of Chinese allowed into the country and the city, and in theory limited Chinese immigration to single males only. Exceptions were in fact granted to the wives and minor children of wealthy merchants; immigrants would purchase or partner in businesses to declare themselves merchants in order to bring their families to America. Alternatively, prospective immigrants could become "paper sons" by purchasing the identity of Americans whose citizenship had been established by birthright.[41]:38–39 However, the Exclusion Act was credited with reducing the population of the neighborhood to an all-time low in the 1920s.

Many early Chinese immigrants to San Francisco and beyond were processed at Angel Island, in the San Francisco Bay, which is now a state park. Unlike Ellis Island on the east coast where prospective European immigrants might be held for up to a week, Angel Island typically detained Chinese immigrants for months while they were interrogated closely to validate their papers. The detention facility was renovated in 2005 and 2006 under a federal grant.
----
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

diane

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
20,647
Location
State of Jefferson
Edited.
The Pico Act was interesting because the Colorado Territory was SoCal - in fact, the 2018 divisions of California were exactly the Pico Act's divisions. It was approved by the state assembly, and went to Washington but was never voted on there - Lincoln's election threw a wrench in the works! So...once again, it was a done deal but a dramatic historical event derailed it.
 

Harvey Johnson

First Sergeant
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,163
The suggestion has been made that Californians concerned about Chinese immigration might have considered secession.

Let's discuss this and share sourced evidence.
Californians had a couple of complaints that might have led to secession if the federal government had failed to appease them. Washington recognized a potential for Pacific Coast secession no later than the early 1860s as evidenced by the motivations for the Pacific Railroad Acts.*

The state's chief complaint stemmed from racism against Chinese residents by white Californians. That's why California opposed legislation providing racial equality and voting rights for both whites and minorities. For example, California did not ratify the 14th and 15th Amendments until 1959 and 1962 respectively.

Even though Asian residents never totaled more than 10% of the state's population, two-thirds of her lynch victims between 1849 - 1902 were Chinese.** America's biggest lynching happened in Los Angeles in 1873 while Grant was President and nineteen Chinese were victims. One can only shudder to imagine the anti-Chinese terrorism that might have swept the state were Asians abruptly given voting rights, while representing over half the voters as did blacks in the former Confederate states in 1868.***

The federal government appeased California's racism by adopting Acts that led to a decline in the number of Chinese residents, which dropped from 9% of California's population in 1870 to 4% in 1900. First, unlike black immigrants, Chinese were denied citizenship via the 1870 Naturalization Act. Second, the 1875 Page Act sharply restricted the number of Chinese women permitted to enter the country. This prevented Chinese men from having children who would get citizenship and voting as a birthright via the 14th Amendment. At the time, 95% of America's Chinese were male and interracial marriage was rare.

Next came a series of federal Chinese Exclusion Acts designed to reduce the number of Asian residents. The first, in 1882, stopped Chinese immigration for a decade. The 1892 Geary Act extended the exclusion for another decade. In 1904 the exclusion Acts were made permanent.

A second motivation for California secession was the federal adoption of Greenback fiat currency in 1862. During the Civil War California merchants refused to accept Greenbacks at face value. Only specie (gold or silver coins) would be taken at face value. Similarly, California would only accept specie as payment for taxes. The federal government appeased California on this issue as well. Even though California (and Oregon) defied the Legal Tender Act the federal government took no action against their rebellion. After the War the federal government agreed to payoff all war bonds in specie and make all Greenbacks redeemable in specie at face value.

Without federal appeasement, California secession might've been as likely as Southern secession in 1850 absent the Clay compromise of that year.

* William Borneman, Rival Rails, Kindle Loc. 883
** Jean Pfaelzer, Driven Out, 52
*** Merton Coulter, The South During Reconstruction, 133
 
Last edited:

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,115
Location
SF Bay Area
Californians had a couple of complaints that might have led to secession if the federal government had failed to appease them. Washington recognized a potential for Pacific Coast secession no later than the early 1860s as evidenced by the motivations for the Pacific Railroad Acts.*

The state's chief complaint stemmed from racism against Chinese residents by white Californians. That's why California opposed legislation providing racial equality and voting rights for both whites and minorities. For example, California did not ratify the 14th and 15th Amendments until 1959 and 1962 respectively.

Even though Asian residents never totaled more than 10% of the state's population, two-thirds of her lynch victims between 1849 - 1902 were Chinese.** America's biggest lynching happened in Los Angeles in 1873 while Grant was President and nineteen Chinese were victims. One can only shudder to imagine the anti-Chinese terrorism that might have swept the state were Asians abruptly given voting rights, while representing over half the voters as did blacks in the former Confederate states in 1868.***

The federal government appeased California's racism by adopting Acts that led to a decline in the number of Chinese residents, which dropped from 9% of California's population in 1870 to 4% in 1900. First, unlike black immigrants, Chinese were denied citizenship via the 1870 Naturalization Act. Second, the 1875 Page Act sharply restricted the number of Chinese women permitted to enter the country. This prevented Chinese men from having children who would get citizenship and voting as a birthright via the 14th Amendment. At the time 95% of America's Chinese were male, and interracial marriage was rare.

Next came a series of federal Chinese Exclusion Acts designed to reduce the number of Asian residents. The first, in 1882, stopped Chinese immigration for a decade. The 1892 Geary Act extended the exclusion for another decade. In 1904 the exclusion acts were made permanent.

A second motivation for California secession was the federal adoption of Greenback fiat currency in 1862. During the Civil War California merchants refused to accept Greenbacks at face value. Only specie (gold or silver coins) would be taken at face value. Similarly, California would only accept specie as payment for taxes. The federal government appeased California on this issue as well. Even though California (and Oregon) defied the Legal Tender Act the federal government took no action against their rebellion. After the War the federal government agreed to payoff all war bonds in specie and make all Greenbacks redeemable in specie at face value.

Without federal appeasement, California secession might've been as likely as Southern secession in 1850 absent the Clay compromise of that year.

* William Borneman, Rival Rails, Kindle Loc. 883
** Jean Pfaelzer, Driven Out, 52
*** Merton Coulter, The South During Reconstruction, 133
Do you have any ties of these events to actual secession movements? If not remember this is not in the "What If" section, you can just drop the pretense of secession since the topic does account for things beyond that.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Harvey Johnson

First Sergeant
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,163
Do you have any ties of these events to actual secession movements? If not remember this is not in the "What If" section, you can just drop the pretense of secession since the topic does account for things beyond that.
Do you deny there was realistic possibility of Southern secession in 1850 absent the Clay Compromise?

Do you deny that a major motivation for the Transcontinental Railroad was to strengthen California's ties to the Union? I have provided a source saying it was, can you provide one saying it was not?

Do you deny that the the 1870 Naturalization Act, the 1875 Page Act, and the Chinese Exclusion Acts were not adopted in order to appease California's racism? Do you deny that those Acts are historical events?
 
Last edited:

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,115
Location
SF Bay Area
The federal government appeased California's racism by adopting Acts that led to a decline in the number of Chinese residents, which dropped from 9% of California's population in 1870 to 4% in 1900. First, unlike black immigrants, Chinese were denied citizenship via the 1870 Naturalization Act. Second, the 1875 Page Act sharply restricted the number of Chinese women permitted to enter the country. This prevented Chinese men from having children who would get citizenship and voting as a birthright via the 14th Amendment. At the time, 95% of America's Chinese were male and interracial marriage was rare.
You are painting a strong narrative here, please back it up with external sources. I'm not seeing the same narrative you are painting.

"The federal government appeased California's racism by adopting Acts that led to a decline in the number of Chinese residents, which dropped from 9% of California's population in 1870 to 4% in 1900. First, unlike black immigrants, Chinese were denied citizenship via the 1870 Naturalization Act."

From what I'm seeing Asian descended people already had challenges naturalizing. The 1870 naturalization act extended naturalization to many Blacks it just did nothing to aid Asians, not make it worse. It didn't do that until 1882.

https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2002/summer/immigration-law-1.html
----
The fourteenth amendment declared all persons born within the United States to be U.S. citizens and worked to bestow citizenship on freedmen. Congress went further by amending naturalization requirements in 1870 and extending naturalization eligibility to "aliens being free white persons, and to aliens of African nativity and to persons of African descent."3 The 1870 revision of §2169, U.S. Revised Statutes, laid the foundation for future confusion over racial eligibility to citizenship. The rule did not state that white persons and black persons may naturalize, nor did it limit naturalization to those of European or African nativity or descent. Rather, the 1870 rule appeared to apply a color test— white persons and those with African origins (i.e., black)— but did so by reference to geography. After extending naturalization to blacks (as Africans) in 1870, Congress banned the naturalization of Chinese in 1882. The Chinese Exclusion Act of that year, which is primarily an immigration law, included a section directing that "hereafter no State court or court of the United States shall admit Chinese to citizenship; and all laws in conflict with this act are hereby repealed."4 The 1882 law clearly directed the courts not to naturalize any Chinese, but it did not explain whether "Chinese" indicated race or nationality.
----

http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articles/pages/6061/Citizenship-and-Race.html
----
NATURALIZATION ACT OF 1870
Now that the children of former slaves were automatically granted citizenship status in the United States, an important question remained unanswered: What about their parents and other immigrants? Following the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment (1865), which abolished slavery, the Fourteenth Amendment conferred citizenship on the formerly enslaved. Congress passed the Naturalization Act of 1870; while the 1870 Act ushered in a right for blacks to naturalize, overall the Act held only limited promise of equality in the United States; it provided only for the naturalization of whites and persons of “African descent” and continued to exclude Asians and Native Americans from citizenship. Moreover, the law became symbolic for blacks as their claims to legal citizenship were seemingly trumped by social and political subordination and physical backlash.

In 1882, Congress addressed Asian citizenship directly in the Chinese Exclusion Act. The anti-Asian legislation is considered one of the most significant laws restricting immigration into the United States on the basis of race. Chinese workers were the targets of significant racial animus from working class whites in Western states. Despite the fact that the Chinese comprised less than 1 percent of the U.S. population, Congress intervened to assuage racial fears that Asians were “stealing” jobs from white Americans.

The Exclusion Act, which was renewed in 1892 and in 1902, sought to restrict Chinese immigration and naturalization. The Act formed the basis for other race-based exclusion measures, including successful efforts to deny naturalization to Hindus, Japanese, Middle Easterners, and East Indians. Chinese persons, including Chinese Americans, were ineligible to apply for citizenship until 1943, when the Exclusion Act was effectively nullified.


Read more: Citizenship and Race - NATURALIZATION ACT OF 1870, WHITENESS AND RACIAL PREREQUISITE CASES, SECOND-CLASS - Rights, United, Blacks, and Americans - JRank Articles http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articles/pages/6061/Citizenship-and-Race.html#ixzz5S3lND0fb
----
 

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,115
Location
SF Bay Area
Do you deny there was realistic possibility of Southern secession in 1850 absent the Clay Compromise?

Do you deny that a major motivation for the Transcontinental Railroad was to strengthen California's ties to the Union? I have provided a source that it was, can you provide one saying it was not?

Do you deny that the the 1870 Naturalization Act, the 1875 Page Act, and the Chinese Exclusion Acts were not adopted in order to appease California's racism?
Again, this is not the "What If" forum. I'm challenging you to source actual ties to the things you are bringing up to actual secession sentiments.

Otherwise they are simply anti-Asian/Chinese things, not secession related things. Like I said you can just drop the pretense of secession and focus on everything else. I was clear with what I challenged.

As to
"Do you deny that the the 1870 Naturalization Act, the 1875 Page Act, and the Chinese Exclusion Acts were not adopted in order to appease California's racism?"

I respond to that above. You need to backup your characterization of the 1870 act which I find other sources providing a very different narrative than yours. As to the Chinese Exclusion acts, yes California certainly was part of the "West" that was interested in fighting again Chinese immigrations/immigration. Keeping in mind I have a chart up there. In 1880 California was only 1.72% of the US population. I'm not sure how that compares to the rest of the West of the time and if other areas had a similar motivation in such things.

Basically you should be digging out the full truth, were all of these things motivated for California alone, 1.72% of the population, or was CA just part of the greater push against Chinese immigrants, if so how big of a piece, how broad was it etc. Understanding the full scope of it at the time is pretty important to getting a real understanding of it.

Btw maybe CA was in fact the primary push for these National events, though that needs to be established not assumed.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Harvey Johnson

First Sergeant
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,163
You are painting a strong narrative here, please back it up with external sources. I'm not seeing the same narrative you are painting.
Sources were provided.
"The federal government appeased California's racism by adopting Acts that led to a decline in the number of Chinese residents, which dropped from 9% of California's population in 1870 to 4% in 1900. First, unlike black immigrants, Chinese were denied citizenship via the 1870 Naturalization Act."
From what I'm seeing Asian descended people already had challenges naturalizing.
So? Prior to the 1870 Naturalization Act black residents had the same challenges. The federal government chose to remove those challenges for blacks (aliens of African origins), but not Chinese or other "non-whites." California's rejection of the 14th and 15th Amendments disclose the obvious explanation.
The 1870 naturalization act extended naturalization to many Blacks it just did nothing to aid Asians, not make it worse. It didn't do that until 1882.

https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2002/summer/immigration-law-1.html
Although Chinese were not specially banned from naturalization until the 1882 Exclusion Act they could not qualify under the terms of the 1870 Naturalization Act as your source notes below:
. . . while the 1870 Act ushered in a right for blacks to naturalize, overall the Act held only limited promise of equality in the United States; it provided only for the naturalization of whites and persons of “African descent” and continued to exclude Asians and Native Americans from citizenship.
Moreover, at a time when 95% of America's Chinese residents were male, the 1875 Page Act generally prevented them from having children who could get citizenship as a birthright via the 14th Amendment. The Act almost totally blocked Chinese women from becoming residents during a period of only rare interracial marriage.
NATURALIZATION ACT OF 1870
Now that the children of former slaves were automatically granted citizenship status in the United States, an important question remained unanswered: What about their parents and other immigrants? Following the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment (1865), which abolished slavery, the Fourteenth Amendment conferred citizenship on the formerly enslaved. Congress passed the Naturalization Act of 1870; Moreover, the law became symbolic for blacks as their claims to legal citizenship were seemingly trumped by social and political subordination and physical backlash.

In 1882, Congress addressed Asian citizenship directly in the Chinese Exclusion Act. The anti-Asian legislation is considered one of the most significant laws restricting immigration into the United States on the basis of race. Chinese workers were the targets of significant racial animus from working class whites in Western states. Despite the fact that the Chinese comprised less than 1 percent of the U.S. population, Congress intervened to assuage racial fears that Asians were “stealing” jobs from white Americans.

The Exclusion Act, which was renewed in 1892 and in 1902, sought to restrict Chinese immigration and naturalization. The Act formed the basis for other race-based exclusion measures, including successful efforts to deny naturalization to Hindus, Japanese, Middle Easterners, and East Indians. Chinese persons, including Chinese Americans, were ineligible to apply for citizenship until 1943, when the Exclusion Act was effectively nullified.


Read more: Citizenship and Race - NATURALIZATION ACT OF 1870, WHITENESS AND RACIAL PREREQUISITE CASES, SECOND-CLASS - Rights, United, Blacks, and Americans - JRank Articles http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articles/pages/6061/Citizenship-and-Race.html#ixzz5S3lND0fb
----
 

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,115
Location
SF Bay Area
Sources were provided.
I saw no sources for what I said were issues. Obviously my words were meant to be taken together lol.

So? Prior to the 1870 Naturalization Act black residents had the same challenges. The federal government chose to remove those challenges for blacks (aliens of African origins), but not Chinese or other "non-whites." California's rejection of the 14th and 15th Amendments disclose the obvious explanation.
You mischaracterized the 1870 Naturalization Act, I clarified how, offered you to provide sources backing it up. Are you admitting you did or saying you didn't? What do you mean "So?", either you mischaracterized it or not.

Although Chinese were not specially banned from naturalization until the 1882 Exclusion Act they could not qualify under the terms of the 1870 Naturalization Act as your source notes below:
Again you mischaracterized it, that's all I'm pointing out. Either you agree and can correct it or you can disagree.


Moreover, at a time when 95% of America's Chinese residents were male, the 1875 Page Act generally prevented them from having children who could get citizenship as a birthright via the 14th Amendment. The Act almost totally blocked Chinese women from becoming residents during a period of only rare interracial marriage.
I'm not challenging that.
 

Harvey Johnson

First Sergeant
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,163
Again, this is not the "What If" forum. I'm challenging you to source actual ties to the things you are bringing up to actual secession sentiments.
I am asking you to clarify whether, or not, you are denying the the following Acts pertinent to California's linkage to the Union were historical facts.

The Pacific Railroad Acts
The Legal Tender Act (A federal law that California ignored with impunity.)
The Fourteenth Amendment, which California rejected until 1959.
The Fifteenth Amendment, which California rejected until 1962.
The 1869 Public Credit Act
The 1870 Naturalization Act
The 1875 Specie Redemption Act
The 1875 Page Act
The Chinese Exclusion Acts

And I am asking whether, or not, you deny that anti-Chinese racism was prevalent in California during the nineteenth century and an important political issue in the the time.

If you deny them, you are denying realities . . . not what ifs.
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,115
Location
SF Bay Area
And I am asking you to clarify whether, or not, you are denying the the following Acts pertinent to California's linkage to the Union were historical facts.

The Pacific Railroad Acts
The Legal Tender Act (A federal law that California ignored with impunity.)
The Fourteenth Amendment, which California rejected until 1959.
The Fifteenth Amendment, which California rejected until 1962.
The 1870 Naturalization Act
The 1875 Page Act
The Chinese Exclusion Acts

And I am asking whether, or not, you deny that anti-Chinese racism was prevalent in California during the nineteenth century and an important political issue in the the time.

If you deny them, you are denying realities.
No and nothing I said suggested that. This might be the most defensive response I've ever gotten. I literally quoted how you characterized a specific act, the 1870 Naturalization Act, your specific wording implies something that seemed inaccurate

First, unlike black immigrants, Chinese were denied citizenship via the 1870 Naturalization Act.
It did not in fact deny it, it simply did not grant them naturalization which they already didn't have.

That's it. Somehow you are suggesting I am denying all of these I said nothing about lol. What are you arguing for and about. It makes no sense.

See, my views on racism in the whole nation don't require me to put being accurate and facing the hard truths at odds, I can in fact do both. California was highly racist against Asians, as was much of the West. Additionally places like New York have a lot of historical racism against the Chinese and other Asians. I still want to be accurate in how these things are presented. Maybe you just don't get that.
 

Harvey Johnson

First Sergeant
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,163
No and nothing I said suggested that.
Your opinion is noted.
I literally quoted how you characterized a specific act, the 1870 Naturalization Act, your specific wording implies something that seemed inaccurate. It did not in fact deny it, it simply did not grant them naturalization which they already didn't have.
You misinterpreted it, but I won't argue the point. Instead you may note that one of your sources contradicts you.
NATURALIZATION ACT OF 1870
. . . while the 1870 Act ushered in a right for blacks to naturalize, overall the Act held only limited promise of equality in the United States; it provided only for the naturalization of whites and persons of “African descent” and continued to exclude Asians and Native Americans from citizenship.
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

ForeverFree

Major
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,857
Location
District of Columbia
Do you have any ties of these events to actual secession movements? If not remember this is not in the "What If" section, you can just drop the pretense of secession since the topic does account for things beyond that.
I have the same question.

If California was in fact considering secession, that's history which can be discussed.

But if the argument is that IF this or that WOULD HAVE happened, then California MIGHT HAVE seceded, that sounds like pure speculation.

I am asking you to clarify whether, or not, you are denying the the following Acts pertinent to California's linkage to the Union were historical facts.

The Pacific Railroad Acts
The Legal Tender Act (A federal law that California ignored with impunity.)
The Fourteenth Amendment, which California rejected until 1959.
The Fifteenth Amendment, which California rejected until 1962.
The 1869 Public Credit Act
The 1870 Naturalization Act
The 1875 Specie Redemption Act
The 1875 Page Act
The Chinese Exclusion Acts

And I am asking whether, or not, you deny that anti-Chinese racism was prevalent in California during the nineteenth century and an important political issue in the the time.

If you deny them, you are denying realities . . . not what ifs.
Racism against African Americans was prevalent in the free sates against, but that did not cause the free states to secede from the Union. That is, it is not true that all racism led to secession.

In the Confederate States, enslaved people were 39% of the population; slaves had the most value of any class of assets; and slave labor was vital to the farm economy of the seceding states. A threat to slavery was clearly an existential threat to the states that seceded.

You correctly mention that there was racism against Chinese. But how were the Chinese such an existential threat to whites that CA needed to secede?

And also, who were the ring-leaders who were threatening secession, how many of them were there, and how influential were they?

Again, there is no doubt as to the prejudice against the Chinese. I am trying to get a handle on this secession thing.

- Alan
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top