U. S. Race and Politics Outside the South 1865-1876.

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,417
Location
Laurinburg NC
#1
Does anyone know how many black Senators and House members were chosen by state legislatures or elected by the people in the whole of the North and West during the same period? :unsure:
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
2,063
#2
There was a very short and narrow march to equality post war. It didn’t take long for White Supremacy to be reaffirmed both North, South, East and West. Look what happened to Catholics, Immigrants, Natives, Asians, Hispanics and the few Blacks outside the South.

I would like to see any proof that Civil Rights were a tenant of Reconstruction? People only want to talk about Blacks in the South. Story ends there. CA was the first State during Reconstruction to throw the Republicans out?
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,733
Location
District of Columbia
#3
Does anyone know how many black Senators and House members were chosen by state legislatures or elected by the people in the whole of the North and West during the same period? :unsure:
I don't know if there were any. Racial prejudice played a huge role. And demographics were a limiting factor:

1) 95% of all African Americans lived below the Mason Dixon line in 1860​
2) Less than 2% of the population above the Mason Dixon Line was of African descent​

Simply put, there weren't a lot of African Americans living in the North. Their small numbers placed a demographic ceiling on their ability to participate, and agitate for power.

- Alan
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,733
Location
District of Columbia
#4
There was a very short and narrow march to equality post war. It didn’t take long for White Supremacy to be reaffirmed both North, South, East and West. Look what happened to Catholics, Immigrants, Natives, Asians, Hispanics and the few Blacks outside the South.

I would like to see any proof that Civil Rights were a tenant of Reconstruction? People only want to talk about Blacks in the South. Story ends there. CA was the first State during Reconstruction to throw the Republicans out?
Actually, we have talked about Civil Rights in the North many times in this forum that I recall.

After the war, Northern Democrats attacked Northern Republicans for wanting to give Negroes the vote. In this earlier post, the following was discussed:
two-platforms-pennsylvania-democrat-1866-v2-jpg.jpg

This is a political campaign poster from 1866. It’s described in Wiki:
“The two platforms” – From a series of racist posters attacking Radical Republican exponents of black suffrage, issued during the 1866 Pennsylvania gubernatorial race. (See “The Constitutional Amendment,” no. 1866-5.) The poster specifically characterizes Democratic candidate Hiester Clymer’s platform as “for the White Man,” represented here by the idealized head of a young man. (Clymer ran on a white-supremacy platform.) In contrast a stereotyped black head represents Clymer’s opponent James White Geary’s platform, “for the Negro.”​
Below the portraits are the words, “Read the platforms. Congress says, The Negro must be allowed to vote, or the states be punished.” Above is an explanation: “Every Radical in Congress Voted for Negro Suffrage. Every Radical in the Pennsylvania Senate Voted for Negro Suffrage. Stevens [Pennsylvania Representative Thaddeus Stevens], Forney [John W. Forney, editor of the ” Philadelphia Press”:], and Cameron [Pennsylvania Republican boss Simon Cameron] are for Negro Suffrage; they are all Candidates for the United States Senate. No Radical Newspaper Opposes Negro Suffrage. “Geary” said in a Speech at Harrisburg, 11th of August, 1866–“There Can Be No Possible Objection to Negro Suffrage.”​
It is key to note that this is poster was produced for a Northern Democrat. Also of note: the state of Pennsylvania had the largest black population of any Northern state. Whites were concerned that giving African Americans the right to vote could impact politics. The passage of the 15th Amendment offered benefits not only to Southern blacks but also to Northern blacks and Asians out West (although court rulings and enforcement policies affected the implementation of voting rights policy).​
So yes, there was conflict in the North between Democrats and Republicans concerning black franchisement. This was to merely a southern phenomenon.

- Alan
 

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
2,063
#5
I don't know if there were any. Racial prejudice played a huge role. And demographics were a limiting factor:

1) 95% of all African Americans lived below the Mason Dixon line in 1860​
2) Less than 2% of the population above the Mason Dixon Line was of African descent​

Simply put, there weren't a lot of African Americans living in the North. Their small numbers placed a demographic ceiling on their ability to participate, and agitate for power.

- Alan
2 percent Black population and march to keep it that way, was a White Supremacists dream. Republicans reaffirmed White in our Immigration Laws. Excluded Asians, because of their tawny color and thoughts that their degradation might result in another Slavery. They were banned until the next Century. Civilizing the upper West lead to the analyzation of Natives which lasted into the next Century. The perky Puritans assaulted the Catholic. Thought they were not fit to be Americans. Had a hatred for them beyond the Slave Holder.

So, I must be missing your Argument?
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,733
Location
District of Columbia
#6
2 percent Black population and march to keep it that way, was a White Supremacists dream. Republicans reaffirmed White in our Immigration Laws. Excluded Asians, because of their tawny color and thoughts that their degradation might result in another Slavery. They were banned until the next Century. Civilizing the upper West lead to the analyzation of Natives which lasted into the next Century. The perky Puritans assaulted the Catholic. Thought they were not fit to be Americans. Had a hatred for them beyond the Slave Holder.

So, I must be missing your Argument?
I replied to your comment

There was a very short and narrow march to equality post war. It didn’t take long for White Supremacy to be reaffirmed both North, South, East and West. Look what happened to Catholics, Immigrants, Natives, Asians, Hispanics and the few Blacks outside the South.
I would like to see any proof that Civil Rights were a tenant of Reconstruction? People only want to talk about Blacks in the South. Story ends there. CA was the first State during Reconstruction to throw the Republicans out?
This makes it seem like nothing was happening regarding Civil Rights for people of color in the North after the War. That is demonstrably false, and I gave the above as an example.

The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments applied to all people, black, white, whatever, in all states. They are prima facie proof of political efforts to achieve equality. These are the result of the efforts of Northern Republicans, and they deserve recognition for their work.

It is true that these amendments did not achieve what we call success in their day. But they laid the framework for the Civil Rights agitation that followed. As Allen C. Guelzo said in his recent book Reconstruction: A Concise History (p11-12):
...reconstruction established, beyond a doubt, the legal a quality of all Americans under the banner of citizenship. Much of that equality was compromised by racial prejudice, vigilante violence, and the twisting of law. But it was not extinguished, and the reconstruction era amendments to the constitution (the 13th, 14th, and 15th) have together formed the last on which injustice, racial prejudice, and inequality have been repeatedly hammered down.​

Your post above might lead a reader to think that there was no progress toward social equality for, well, forever. But there was progress, and the "North" was its primary locus. As Wiki notes,

The last black congressman elected from the South in the 19th century was George Henry White of North Carolina, elected in 1896 and re-elected in 1898. His term expired in 1901, the same year that William McKinley, who was the last president to have fought in the Civil War, died. No blacks served in Congress for the next 28 years, and none represented any Southern state for the next 72 years.​
In 1928, Oscar De Priest won the 1st Congressional District of Illinois (the South Side of Chicago) as a Republican, becoming the first black Congressman of the modern era. DePriest was also the last black Republican elected to the House for 56 years.​
Over time, more African Americans from the North (NY IL, CA, PA, OH, MI) and the Border States (MO, MD, DC) were elected. The following image shows the 13 African Americans in the 92nd Congress (1971-1973). Not a single one was from a former Confederate State, even though the percentage of African Americans in the former CSA states was much higher than in the former Union states. This is prima facie proof of progress in the North, against a back-drop of racial prejudice.

image.png

African Americans in the US Congress, 1971-73; none from a former Confederate State

The work of northern Republicans after Reconstruction laid the foundation by which even an African American could be elected president in my lifetime. What they did served to benefit people of color nationwide. I don't mind giving them credit for their role in this.

- Alan
 

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
2,063
#7
We were talking about Reconstruction. Edited. After hundreds of years of forcing these groups into Slavery and Murdering them for their Lands, The White man saved them and gave them rights. Sounds like more White Supremacy.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,733
Location
District of Columbia
#8
We were talking about Reconstruction. Edited. After hundreds of years of forcing these groups into Slavery and Murdering them for their Lands, The White man saved them and gave them rights. Sounds like more White Supremacy.
In my posts I spoke about things that happened during Reconstruction, and their impact today. I don't have anything more to add.

- Alan
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,417
Location
Laurinburg NC
#9
We were talking about Reconstruction. Edited. After hundreds of years of forcing these groups into Slavery and Murdering them for their Lands, The White man saved them and gave them rights. Sounds like more White Supremacy.
:thumbsup:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
30,341
Location
Long Island, NY
#10
Edited.

Posted as Forum Host: Please use discretion and don't make self-incriminating attacks on a fellow poster. Please!
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top