Were Southern whites disfranchised during Reconstruction?

suzenatale

Sergeant Major
Joined
May 25, 2013
The Taint seems to only involve the South. It I had of made a post questioning a members Racism, as was done to you. I know what would of become of it. A bunch of Red Script at the very least.
Or are you saying you want to say that a member is racist, but don't feel you can? Just stick to pointing our racism you might find in the movie or in Woodrow Willson or if you mean to say they are not racist say that.
 

19thGeorgia

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
more than one half the white citizens qualified under the law to register were refused the privilege, under one pretext or another, while every negro was immediately accepted....By July 26 the number of blacks registered was 78,230 while the number of whites was only 41,166. Moreover, the negroes had already been organized against the whites in reconstruction clubs, loyal leagues, lodges, and "Companies of the Grand Army". - p 187, History of Reconstruction in Louisiana by John Rose Ficklen​
So 40,000-50,000 disfranchised in LA. The number that served as field grade officers (and above) or politicians - the targeted groups for disfranchisement (as I understand it) - would be less than 1,000.
 

GwilymT

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Location
Pittsburgh
I'm not looking for anything.

I'm only asking if you can explain your comment about "Southern White skin during reconstruction" in more detail.
He saying the reason some southerners were disenfranchised after the rebellion is NOT because they were white but because they had committed insurrection. Criminals today lose their voting rights in some cases.

The reason southern blacks were disenfranchised before the war and after reconstruction is because they were black.

It’s both simple and true.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
He saying the reason some southerners were disenfranchised after the rebellion is NOT because they were white but because they had committed insurrection. Criminals today lose their voting rights in some cases.

The reason southern blacks were disenfranchised before the war and after reconstruction is because they were black.

It’s both simple and true.
Then you could say some blacks were disenfranchised after Reconstruction because Southern white didn't want to go through a second Reconstruction.
 

Philip Leigh

formerly Harvey Johnson
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
No, plain racism suffices for the reason.
If you believe that any state outside the Confederacy was not predominantly racist in the 19th and early 20th century, you may wish to consider the anti-Asian bias in California notwithstanding that the targeted race was never more than 10% of the state's population.

Consider, for example, that the state did not approve the Fifteenth Amendment providing blacks the right to vote until 1962, almost a century after it was ratified. Similarly, California did not approve the Fourteenth Amendment until 1959, also a century late.

California’s Fourteenth-Amendment-approval-delay reveals the state’s most blatant historical racism, which was chiefly against Asians. Blacks represented less than 1% of the state’s population until 1910 and did not exceed 2% until World War II. In contrast, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, Chinese-Americans composed 9% of the state’s population. Californians particularly objected to the Amendment’s provision granting citizenship to anyone born in the USA because they did not want Asians to have a right to vote, which the state would be hard pressed to deny if they were citizens. Notwithstanding that Chinese-Americans never composed more than 10% of the state’s population, Californians successfully lobbied for Federal laws to negate the Amendment’s birthright citizenship as it would apply to such Asians.

First, the language of the 1870 Naturalization Act did not allow Chinese-Americans to become naturalized citizens. It was instead targeted at blacks because they composed the solitary racial minority that would reliably vote Republican. Chinese residents could not become naturalized citizens until 1943.

Second, with few exceptions the 1875 Page Act did not allow Chinese women to immigrate into America. The reason was to prevent American Chinese residents from having children because 95% of them were males who were not allowed to marry whites.

Third, between 1882 and 1904 a series of Chinese Exclusion Acts blocked Chinese immigrants of both sexes.

Fourth, President Theodore Roosevelt’s administration blocked most immigration from Japan. In 1907 it negotiated a “Gentleman’s Agreement” stipulating that Japan would not issue passports to Japanese workers seeking to enter the continental United States.

As a result of the preceding acts and agreements, the percent of California’s population that was Chinese-America dropped from 9% in 1860 to 4% in 1900 and 2% in 1940. Almost none of them could vote until World War II. Californians also often suppressed Chinese-Americans with many acts of violence, particularly in the nineteenth century. They composed two thirds of California’s lynch victims between 1849 and 1902. In fact, America’s single biggest lynching happened in Los Angeles in 1871 when seventeen Chinese-Americans were killed including one woman.

Prior to the above occurrences Californians had long discriminated against Chinese-Americans with restrictive conduct codes similar to the so-called black codes that some Southern states attempted, but failed, to implement after Appomattox. In order to discourage non-white gold prospectors, for example, California imposed a steep monthly Foreign Miners Tax on Chinese-Americans. For almost 100 years after 1850 the state had laws on the books banning inter-racial marriage.
 
Last edited:

lurid

First Sergeant
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
If you believe that any state outside the Confederacy was not predominantly racist in the 19th and early 20th century, you may wish to consider the anti-Asian bias in California notwithstanding that the targeted race was never more than 10% of the state's population.

Consider, for example, that the state did not approve the Fifteenth Amendment providing blacks the right to vote until 1962, almost a century after it was ratified. Similarly, California did not approve the Fourteenth Amendment until 1959, also a century late.

California’s Fourteenth-Amendment-approval-delay reveals the state’s most blatant historical racism, which was chiefly against Asians. Blacks represented less than 1% of the state’s population until 1910 and did not exceed 2% until World War II. In contrast, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, Chinese-Americans composed 9% of the state’s population. Californians particularly objected to the Amendment’s provision granting citizenship to anyone born in the USA because they did not want Asians to have a right to vote, which the state would be hard pressed to deny if they were citizens. Notwithstanding that Chinese-Americans never composed more than 10% of the state’s population, Californians successfully lobbied for Federal laws to negate the Amendment’s birthright citizenship as it would apply to such Asians.

First, the language of the 1870 Naturalization Act did not allow Chinese-Americans to become naturalized citizens. It was instead targeted at blacks because they composed the solitary racial minority that would reliably vote Republican. Chinese residents could not become naturalized citizens until 1943.

Second, with few exceptions the 1875 Page Act did not allow Chinese women to immigrate into America. The reason was to prevent American Chinese residents from having children because 95% of them were males who were not allowed to marry whites.

Third, between 1882 and 1904 a series of Chinese Exclusion Acts blocked Chinese immigrants of both sexes.

Fourth, President Theodore Roosevelt’s administration blocked most immigration from Japan. In 1907 it negotiated a “Gentleman’s Agreement” stipulating that Japan would not issue passports to Japanese workers seeking to enter the continental United States.

As a result of the preceding acts and agreements, the percent of California’s population that was Chinese-America dropped from 9% in 1860 to 4% in 1900 and 2% in 1940. Almost none of them could vote until World War II. Californians also often suppressed Chinese-Americans with many acts of violence, particularly in the nineteenth century. They composed two thirds of California’s lynch victims between 1849 and 1902. In fact, America’s single biggest lynching happened in Los Angeles in 1871 when seventeen Chinese-Americans were killed including one woman.

Prior to the above occurrences Californians had long discriminated against Chinese-Americans with restrictive conduct codes similar to the so-called black codes that some Southern states attempted, but failed, to implement after Appomattox. In order to discourage non-white gold prospectors, for example, California imposed a steep monthly Foreign Miners Tax on Chinese-Americans. For almost 100 years after 1850 the state had laws on the books banning inter-racial marriage.


The Californian racism/oppressions is mild compared to the south's cruel racism. The Chinese population here in America in 1850 was 4,000 and it went up to 36,000 by 1860, so it could not have been that bad for the Chinese if they kept migrating to California. I never heard of people migrating to place where they knowingly and willingly were going to be oppressed. The south had 4 million slaves in 1860. How many blacks knowingly and willingly migrated to the south to be enslaved? None. Evidently migrating to California for the Chinese was better than living in China considering their migration here to the US increased by 200% in 10 years. What was the percentages of blacks who migrated to the south from 1850-1860?
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
No, plain racism suffices for the reason.
Certainly true for the US American Indians, Blacks, Chinese, Filipinos, Hawaiians. The reason included many during the19th century.

“The same popular pressures that forced political parties to embrace the doctrine of white supremacy demanded and sanctioned the social and economic repression of the Negro population. Racial segregation or exclusion thus haunted the northern Negro in his attempts to use public conveyances, to attend schools, or to sit in theaters, churches, and lecture halls. But even the more subtle forms of twentieth-century racial discrimination had their antecedents in the anti-Bellum North: residential restrictions, exclusion from resorts and certain restaurants, confinement to menial employments, and restricted cemeteries. The justification for such discrimination in the North differed little from that used to defend slavery in the South: Negroes, it was held, constituted a depraved and inferior race which must be kept in its proper place in a white man's society.”
Leon Litwack's North Of Slavery, Preface, p. viii.







 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
The Californian racism/oppressions is mild compared to the south's cruel racism. The Chinese population here in America in 1850 was 4,000 and it went up to 36,000 by 1860, so it could not have been that bad for the Chinese if they kept migrating to California. I never heard of people migrating to place where they knowingly and willingly were going to be oppressed. The south had 4 million slaves in 1860. How many blacks knowingly and willingly migrated to the south to be enslaved? None. Evidently migrating to California for the Chinese was better than living in China considering their migration here to the US increased by 200% in 10 years. What was the percentages of blacks who migrated to the south from 1850-1860?
You don't think racial attitudes would have been any different in California or anywhere else outside the South had there been 4 million blacks or any other racial minority free or enslaved living there?


“The same popular pressures that forced political parties to embrace the doctrine of white supremacy demanded and sanctioned the social and economic repression of the Negro population. Racial segregation or exclusion thus haunted the northern Negro in his attempts to use public conveyances, to attend schools, or to sit in theaters, churches, and lecture halls. But even the more subtle forms of twentieth-century racial discrimination had their antecedents in the anti-Bellum North: residential restrictions, exclusion from resorts and certain restaurants, confinement to menial employments, and restricted cemeteries. The justification for such discrimination in the North differed little from that used to defend slavery in the South: Negroes, it was held, constituted a depraved and inferior race which must be kept in its proper place in a white man's society.”

Leon Litwack's North Of Slavery, Preface, p. viii.
 

uaskme

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
The Californian racism/oppressions is mild compared to the south's cruel racism. The Chinese population here in America in 1850 was 4,000 and it went up to 36,000 by 1860, so it could not have been that bad for the Chinese if they kept migrating to California. I never heard of people migrating to place where they knowingly and willingly were going to be oppressed. The south had 4 million slaves in 1860. How many blacks knowingly and willingly migrated to the south to be enslaved? None. Evidently migrating to California for the Chinese was better than living in China considering their migration here to the US increased by 200% in 10 years. What was the percentages of blacks who migrated to the south from 1850-1860?
Here is a little intel on Chinese Racism. CA ran most of their Blacks off. Native Americans were being exterminated. Some don’t consider that to be Racism? And most people think there was no Racism in CA?

http://10424860.weebly.com/dennis-kearney-and-the-anti-coolie-clubs.html

Coolie Clubs mirrored the KKK, actually much worse. Federal Government participated in the Indian Wars until 1920s. Federal Government was the most effective Klan this Nation has ever had. Can’t blame it on Robert E Lee.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
It seems we must point to ANY example of racism in order to justify our ancestor's racism.

And why should white Southerners who participated in an armed rebellion against their nation, NOT be penalized in some manner, like being unable to exercise voting which they tried to deny an entire nation in 1860?
 

GwilymT

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Location
Pittsburgh
If you believe that any state outside the Confederacy was not predominantly racist in the 19th and early 20th century, you may wish to consider the anti-Asian bias in California notwithstanding that the targeted race was never more than 10% of the state's population.

Consider, for example, that the state did not approve the Fifteenth Amendment providing blacks the right to vote until 1962, almost a century after it was ratified. Similarly, California did not approve the Fourteenth Amendment until 1959, also a century late.

California’s Fourteenth-Amendment-approval-delay reveals the state’s most blatant historical racism, which was chiefly against Asians. Blacks represented less than 1% of the state’s population until 1910 and did not exceed 2% until World War II. In contrast, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, Chinese-Americans composed 9% of the state’s population. Californians particularly objected to the Amendment’s provision granting citizenship to anyone born in the USA because they did not want Asians to have a right to vote, which the state would be hard pressed to deny if they were citizens. Notwithstanding that Chinese-Americans never composed more than 10% of the state’s population, Californians successfully lobbied for Federal laws to negate the Amendment’s birthright citizenship as it would apply to such Asians.

First, the language of the 1870 Naturalization Act did not allow Chinese-Americans to become naturalized citizens. It was instead targeted at blacks because they composed the solitary racial minority that would reliably vote Republican. Chinese residents could not become naturalized citizens until 1943.

Second, with few exceptions the 1875 Page Act did not allow Chinese women to immigrate into America. The reason was to prevent American Chinese residents from having children because 95% of them were males who were not allowed to marry whites.

Third, between 1882 and 1904 a series of Chinese Exclusion Acts blocked Chinese immigrants of both sexes.

Fourth, President Theodore Roosevelt’s administration blocked most immigration from Japan. In 1907 it negotiated a “Gentleman’s Agreement” stipulating that Japan would not issue passports to Japanese workers seeking to enter the continental United States.

As a result of the preceding acts and agreements, the percent of California’s population that was Chinese-America dropped from 9% in 1860 to 4% in 1900 and 2% in 1940. Almost none of them could vote until World War II. Californians also often suppressed Chinese-Americans with many acts of violence, particularly in the nineteenth century. They composed two thirds of California’s lynch victims between 1849 and 1902. In fact, America’s single biggest lynching happened in Los Angeles in 1871 when seventeen Chinese-Americans were killed including one woman.

Prior to the above occurrences Californians had long discriminated against Chinese-Americans with restrictive conduct codes similar to the so-called black codes that some Southern states attempted, but failed, to implement after Appomattox. In order to discourage non-white gold prospectors, for example, California imposed a steep monthly Foreign Miners Tax on Chinese-Americans. For almost 100 years after 1850 the state had laws on the books banning inter-racial marriage.
I don’t think anyone would believe that this wasn’t a primarily racist country in the nineteenth century, however this thread is about the southern states that rebelled. I’m not sure what California or the shameful treatment of Asian immigrants has to do question at hand.

To answer the OP, were white southerners disenfranchised during reconstruction? No, people who participated in or supported the failed rebellion were disenfranchised until they could again qualify.
 
Last edited:

uaskme

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
It seems we must point to ANY example of racism in order to justify our ancestor's racism.

And why should white Southerners who participated in an armed rebellion against their nation, NOT be penalized in some manner, like being unable to exercise voting which they tried to deny an entire nation in 1860?
Well, if you study it, not waiting for that, Confederates, Whites, even some who wore a Blue uniform were disenfranchised because they would of voted for the Democrat. Republicans didn’t fight a War against the South just to lose War gains in an election. In TN, you didn’t get a ballot unless you pledged to vote for Lincoln or the Radcal Republican way. Yankees controlled the ballot boxes, essentially Republicans did. So elections were fixed. By Puppet Governments.

Hope you aren’t silly enough to think Blacks would of been given the right to vote if Republicans didn’t think they could manipulate them to vote R?

I’m not trying to justify my Ancestors Racism. I have studied it and embraced it. However, I has also studied the Negrophobic Yankee, who had a 99% Lilly White Society. What Northerners did to the few Blacks they had as well as to Native Americans, Hispanics and Asians Is indicative to what they would of done to a large Black population if they had had one. Aint purty. Bigotry toward Jews and Catholics was dismal also.
 

GwilymT

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Location
Pittsburgh
Well, if you study it, not waiting for that, Confederates, Whites, even some who wore a Blue uniform were disenfranchised because they would of voted for the Democrat. Republicans didn’t fight a War against the South just to lose War gains in an election. In TN, you didn’t get a ballot unless you pledged to vote for Lincoln or the Radcal Republican way. Yankees controlled the ballot boxes, essentially Republicans did. So elections were fixed. By Puppet Governments.

Hope you aren’t silly enough to think Blacks would of been given the right to vote if Republicans didn’t think they could manipulate them to vote R?

I’m not trying to justify my Ancestors Racism. I have studied it and embraced it. However, I has also studied the Negrophobic Yankee, who had a 99% Lilly White Society. What Northerners did to the few Blacks they had as well as to Native Americans, Hispanics and Asians Is indicative to what they would of done to a large Black population if they had had one. Aint purty. Bigotry toward Jews and Catholics was dismal also.
You are sort of correct. The North didn’t fight a war and win only to put the secessionists back into places of power. They, rightly so, had to sit in the penalty box for a bit. That they were further enraged that African Americans were allowed to run for office and vote is a tell for what their real concerns were the whole time.
 
Top