The Study of Racialism

In the thread The Black Anglo Saxon in the "Ethnicity in America" forum,
The desirability of reimplementing forced segregation of African Americans as advocated by extreme Afrocentrist nationalists is an interesting topic that deserves its own thread in this forum.

Self empowerment, self reliance, knowledge of self and responsibility for community were not the sole preserves of Afrocentrics, and the government didn’t counter Afrocentric movements or messages by promoting integration. Integration was promoted by the Civil Rights Movement and most black leaders beginning with the Niagara Movement. It was various state governments that were opposed to measures to end de jure segregation in public facilities.

With regard to Garvey, he went beyond self-empowerment, etc., into the realm of back to Africa fantasy and megalomania. This combined with his mismanagement of the Universal Negro Improvement Association and the vendetta other black leaders had against him did him in.

Seale is not Afrocentric. Moreover, in recent years, he has publicly criticized some of the violence and questionable tactics of the Black Panther Party, which even in its heyday, was more into playing with Marxist revolution than promoting race separatism.

Carmichael was just one in a long-line of saber rattlers who offered nothing more than empty rhetoric while he lived high on the hog in Guinea (as opposed to the U.S. or his native Trinidad).

Frank, on the other thread you and Dragon Horse had talked about the way revolutions were typically launched by the elites and/or upper classes.
It's the black Americans with the most education and the highest incomes who are likeliest to live among, send their children to school with, work with, and marry, whites. So who would lead this return to segregation?

Poor black Americans probably were better off under segregation, in some respects. Certainly the illegitimacy rate was much lower, and crime rates in general were lower. The economy and society as a whole have changed so much that comparisons between then and now are of limited use.

I'm not familiar w/ the black nationalists who call for a return to Jim Crow as such. It's hard for me to believe that any of them would support a white controlled system of black exclusion from major social and economic institutions.

Many black nationalists support territorial black nationalism, the establishment of an sovereign, ethnically based nation state in the South. Ethnic separatism which leads to the pursuit of such a state is common enough in the world. The Irish break away from Britain, Norway breaks away from Sweden, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia break up into their constituent parts. The French Canadians seek to break away from Anglo Canada etc.

Ethnic separatism has also proven to be the cause of so much bloodshed throughout the world. Local peoples have often resented the rule of colonial powers, but these same powers often provided a degree of safety and prosperity that was sorely missed when the nationalists took over, and old ethnic rivalries flared up.

Aside from the minute group of nationalists, there just isn't any support for this kind of ethnic separatism among black Americans. The black intelligentsia has done quite well by the end of segregation. They've traded a certain amount of psychic distress for unprecedented freedom and prosperity.

here was my response:

I also don’t think Marcus Garvey, Stokley Carmichael, and Bobby Seal were bad people per se. Well maybe Seal, but the rest I believe were philosophically incorrect. I also do not believe integration is what hurt the lower end of the black community. I believe it was a combination of pathetically stupid government policies, radicalization of the black civil rights movement by “black power” pseudo-revolutionary wanna be communists/socialist who destroyed the basic foundation of black American culture. I also believe that the lower end lacked a culture that was conducive to educational achievement at a time when education was key to improvement in society as the economy shifted from manufacturing to service jobs which required more education.

I do not believe self segregation would have accomplished anything but make us a “target”. Ask the Jews. Integration is and always has been the best policy if the goal is to become one nation, one-nationality. If the goal is to form a nation within a nation or to be segregated, then leave and go somewhere else. We don't need people like that who are black or white. We don't need "ethnic ghetto" promotion (in the classical sense).

No, I think that advocates of separatism want to make and enforce the rules themselves. But I try to avoid conflating lust for personal power with philosophical stance. For example, it should be clear by now that whenever anyone claims that the "racial" designation of an ambiguous-looking person is obvious by their appearance and should be involuntarily enforced, all they are really saying is that they wish they personally had the ultimate power to decide. But such ambition does not stop us from discussing the ambiguities and subjectivity of "racial" perception.

Similarly, that separatists want personal power cannot invalidate the question, "is forced segregation desirable?" Of course, if the only answer is, "it is desirable if I get to do the forcing, but undesirable if someone else does," then the whole issue dissolves into silliness.

But was this due to segregation itself or changes in public polices and/or changes in the national culture over time.

Largely public policy and cultural change, IMO.



I don't see a scenario where black nationalists would be able to force everyone with visible African ancestry into their polity. If there were a revival of old school Jim Crow, white Americans would be doing the forcing. For black Americans, this would be little different from being conquered by a foreign power.

In the nation state scenario, only those black Americans who wanted to join the new state would do so, at least initially. Black Americans who remained in the "white" part of America might be forced to flee for their own safety in the long run. This often happens in the wake of territorial partitioning, where the remaining minority members are ethnically cleansed. On the other hand, nothing like this has happened in the former Czechoslovokia, for example.

As a practical matter, segregation never truly ended for many black Americans. Working class black communities are still the most ethnically segregated in the US, outmarriage rates are still the lowest, and numberous metropolitan areas have been under exclusively black control since the '60s.

How would Wash DC be different if it lost its white minority population? Poorer, less organized? The worst neighborhoods are still almost entirely black. The black intelligentsia would simply take the place of the white intelligentsia.

Since white Americans at this point are not the primary cause of the problems in those communities, driving white Americans out isn't going to be a solution.

But you ignore the other half. People who "looked Black" but who found themselves within the Black nationalist regime as it plunged into economic oblivion would be trapped as brutally as East Germans were trapped by the Soviets.

I think if the whites left DC...so would most of the black intelligentsia...they would just move to Maryland or Virginia...especially Maryland.

Whites leaving DC would be sick, because they would take their capital with them, DC would be a ghost town after the government offices closed and crime would run rampant. Right now the cops have a unofficial "containment" policy just for that reason. NW DC is relatively safe at all hours on purpose. If wealthy whites (and others) get scared and move away DC will lose a major tax base. NW is a net positive for DC...SE is a net negative drain on resources...that is reality so a white man getting killed in Columbia Heights is a big deal, 5 black people can get killed in SE and it will barely be on the news more than one day...that is the reality, everyone is not equal when you get down to the dollars and cents.

Well, "black looking" citizens of the new state wouldn't necessarily be trapped. If it was Marxist totalitarian, like Cuba, then yes. But Canada and Mexico are separate nations from the US and their citizens aren't exactly trapped. If the economy of the new state tanked, its citizens would have the same problems that any resident of an impoverished state has. They're citizens of a poor country, and they may or may not be able to emigrate to a wealthy one. It wouldn't be their "blackness" that holds them there, it would be the refusal of other countries to accept them.

The key facts about black separatism are, IMO,

1) It's never enjoyed much support by black Americans. Almost no one wants it, or has ever wanted it.

2) You can't use black separatism to fix the problems of black Americans. Those problems have to already be fixed before you can seriously propose a black American nation state.

I used DC as an example of a city that's been under black American political control for 4 decades, a kind of black nation state in microcosm. I could point to Atlanta, Detroit, New Orleans, Birmingham and smaller cities for the same reason. Are these cities better governed for having been under black control for decades? Do black Americans fare better or worse in black governed Detroit than they do in white governed Minneapolis?

The DC public schools have been under black control for decades? Do they do even a minimal job of educating black children? According to Colbert King, the WaPo columnist I read religiously, the answer is , Definitely not.


All of this is roundabout way of saying that segregation, separatism, etc. wouldn't be good for black Americans.

The short answer is black cities governed by black leftists usually end up having serious social problems.

Atlanta is only good because the mayors have sought to bring in business and it has attracted a strong black middle and upperclass, however they still have outrageous crime and poverty.

Some would argue that is already happening. Many middle class black folks are moving or have moved to Maryland. A few venture into my neck of the woods, Virginia, but there are no large black middle and upper class areas out here, so many stay away. It's also a little cheaper in Maryland.

I live in VA...Fairfax...not too bad out here. I think there are less Middle Class people in DC because once they get married they want to buy a home and it is too expensive in good areas of DC to live so they move out to Maryland or VA...

Still a lot of rich folks live in DC...especially in the vacinity East and North of Georgetown.

I work in Fairfax, but live near Ft Belvoir/Mount Vernon/Hybla Valley.

Even here, it is starting to get too expensive. Just wait until those 22,000 base closure jobs hit Ft Belvoir by 2011. Housing costs will go through the roof as every available square inch gets covered by McMansions and overpriced, too-small, cookie-cutter townhouses. Everytime a piece of ground is cleared up around here - small, two bedroom townhouses starting in the "low 400,000s" get built. Affordable housing here, especially single family homes, are moving further and further south.

What is it like in Fairfax?

I live close to Alexandria near 95/395, not too far from Huntington station.

It is pretty much as you describe...there are not many places going for under 350K...

Ah, Huntington. I spent 1995 - 2005 riding the yellow line, transferring at King Street to ride to D.C., before finally finding work on this side of the Potomac. I'm only 27 miles from home, but it is a rare day I can make the commute in under an hour on the FC Parkway.

495 out this way is a parking lot until about 7:00 pm.

haha I make the same commute...yellow to blue line into DC...usually changing at King Street on the way to work and on the way back I change at Pentagon...

I don't mind the commute, just wish the housing prices near the station were reasonable.

Quick answer to this. No! The black middle class has grown since then. And contrary to popular belief so have black businesses. Check out Black Enterprises lists that come out each year, may or june I believe.

While there were communities such as Tulsa and a few others that thrived most didnt. If black businesses were sufficient to cater to the needs of blacks there would have been no need for the boycotts. If fail to see how segregating the black poor from the larger opportunities available in the mainstream laborforce will help them. As folks have said its the transformation of the job market (look for the coming crisis of the WHITE blue collar class as our industrial base continues to collapse and only low paying service jobs are avialable for most). Also wrong sided public policy which provided the wrong incentives.

I agree with caribj and Dragon.
IMO, NO! Segregation or separatism is bad and bad for everyone. I believe in integration. It was a time that had come in the 60's ,but like movements, it took time and the right person. Dr. Martin Luther King,Jr. was that person. I do not believe in self-segregation or Blacks constantly separating themselves as a different society and needing different things or special consideration. I think that is an insult. I think it is a hinderance.

Today, many Blacks have self-segregated themselves and I think it is a real diservice to themselves. The Travis Smily-Jesse Jackson-Al Sharpton -Congressional Black Cacus always are calling for how this or that, like Hurricane Katrina, has effected Blacks. Tax,health care, crime (which they NEVER want to address), welfare system ( which they NEVER want to address) employment, voting rights, are all universal for ALL Americans. When you look at things, it is one nation and everyone has a chance in this country to reach the highest goals they can. You have a chance . Yes, there is racism. Sexism. Neoptism. That will always be. And? So?
Racism is big business and the Jackson/Sharpton camp keep acting as this is 1960 which is for their egos and bank accounts. They do not help the people they say they help. They hurt way more than help.
Integration was about having a chance for all to reach the highest goals they could, to be considered in the mainstream, to be recognized as Americans and to be here and counted for.
As far Odocoileus's point about major Black cities with all Black govt. ,school systems, I agree with you that many have done a poor job, but I place the blame on Blacks being beholden to the Jesse/Al/Farakan/Black Caucus loyalty and Blacks with this idea of sticking together no matter what that Black represents or does instead of who is right for the job in elections. Good example-NewOrleans-Jesse and Al had bused many Blacks in from Atlanta, B.R., and Houston, for a march and to make sure people voted for Nagin. Enough Whites voted for Nagin and that pushed him to a win over (White) Landrieu. Result-crime is rampant. Residents of the projects want them to be reopen and now and by any means necessary. Nothing is getting done to move N.O. forward. N.O. is totally another story. Sharpton and Jackson were headed to N.O. this week (per Sharpton's interview on CNN this past Sunday). Why? There is really no reason for them to be there.

Very good points, G-Man. I would also state more explicitly that there is an important difference between segregation--forced or voluntary--and promoting strategies of self-empowerment and community. One must also distinguish between Afrocentrism/Afrocentric movements and Afrocentricity -- an academic concept Molefi Asante has tried to develop over the past three decades with varying degrees of success and failure.

Although we don't often associate Booker T. Washington with promoting segregation and pan Africanism, he was in fact inspiration for Marcus Garvey's movement. I think Booker T. Washington is the better model for where blackamericans need to focus their energies. I'm not sure what goals (i.e. social, political, economic) blackamericans should have as a collective, but I'm certain it should NOT be segregation or separation.

I must say, though, it is rather sad that blacksamericans cannot even leverage enough 'capital' to control the manufacturing and distribution of so-called 'black hair' products. Practically every store of this type is either owned and operated by Koreans or the products themselves are supplied by Kopreans. Booker T. is probably turning over in his grave.