It's easy to forget now, but just a few generations ago African-Americans overwhelmingly identified themselves as Republicans. The story of how the Party of Lincoln lost its black support is long and sad, but understanding what happened is critical as the Party looks to improve its standing in the black community.
In the fall of 1895 Atlanta put on one in a series of "International Expositions" designed to highlight its progress in recovering from the war. Racial tensions had been growing since southerners, at the end of Reconstruction, began instituting Jim Crow laws to curtail black civil rights. Those laws were still under challenge at the time. African-Americans were divided over the merits of direct, legal resistance.
The organizers of the Exposition invited prominent black leader Booker T. Washington to give a keynote address. The position he took in that speech was a calculated gamble. He aimed to improve blacks' social position by aggressively pursuing economic progress while de-emphasizing the battle for civil equality. The approach he outlined, The Atlanta Compromise, became the dominant black political ethos for generations. It was a dizzying failure with consequences we are still working to unwind.
Washington had a rival. W.E.B. DuBois was raised in the north and graduated from Harvard. He pressed to make the fight for political equality the community's highest priority and dismissed Washington's emphasis on economic development and Capitalism. DuBois founded the NAACP and became a leading figure in the northern cities. He was enamored with Marxism and even penned a defense of Josef Stalin on Stalin's death. His influence would increase as Washington's version of compromise began to unravel.
Washington's approach suffered from two crucial flaws. First he thought that institutional southern racism would weaken as the black community began to realize its economic potential. Secondly, he failed to appreciate that capitalism cannot work its magic without government protection of basic property rights. In the face of these tragic misunderstandings, blacks labored away for decades building remarkably successful businesses, professions, and civic institutions, only to watch them crushed over and over again by discriminatory laws and outright violence. There was no hope for economic progress without the most basic civil rights.
A wave of race riots in the teens and '20s were particularly devastating. Only a fraction of the incidents were documented at the time, usually in the form of a brief, euphemistic reference in a local paper to "troubles." But postcards (that's right, postcards), stories, and victim accounts painted a clearer picture. Two of the most notorious riots occurred in Rosewood, Florida and Tulsa, Oklahoma. Prosperous black communities were in many cases wiped off the map, destroying generations of hard-won gains. When the Depression came, the brief flowering of the separate black communities was effectively dead.
By the '50s, as America was bracing finally to confront its racist legacy, the gritty capitalism Washington had promoted was seen by blacks as a discredited failure at best, an "Uncle Tom" sell-out at worst. As Dr. King's effort's bore fruit and African-Americans began at last to have genuine economic freedom finally open to them, there was little enthusiasm to exploit it. Blacks who had led the successful fight for equal protection focused their continuing efforts less on free enterprise than on government social programs and poverty relief. At the moment when Booker T. Washington's dream of individualism and enterprise held the most potential promise it was eclipsed by a very different vision.
This emphasis created an opening for Democrats which they successfully exploited. The drift of blacks away from the Republican Party was capped by a cynical effort to recruit disgruntled racist Democrats in the south.
What does this mean for Republicans? In spite of the failures of the Great Society era and with little help from Republicans, there is a vibrant, secure black middle class emerging for the first time in America. The growth of black prosperity will be a key to the country's future, but it depends heavily on leaving behind a vision of government dependence with deep, well-justified roots.
We need to recognize this history to understand its impact on our future. Until a generation ago, accumulating capital across generations, so critical to climbing the ladder in America, was a complete fantasy for African-Americans in the south. They could reasonably expect that whatever wasn't spent or hidden would be taken from them. This reality has left the black community with a starting point in terms of wealth, capital, and connections far behind whites or even other minorities.
In addition it would serve Republicans well to understand the difference between traditional black and white understandings of government power. For whites who look to European history as their guide, government is a necessary evil to be treated with great care. Its growth should be managed in order to prevent it becoming an interest to itself; capable of crushing personal liberty and economic freedom.
Blacks' experience with government power is almost a polar opposite of whites'. When central government has been weak, they have suffered. This suffering is not merely relative, but has left them vulnerable to random acts of violence, humiliation, and looting. They have good reason to see government power as protection and to be suspicious of white efforts to weaken it.
A healthy Republican Party, with its crazy-dial turned down from the redline, could have a lot to offer African-Americans. But realizing the potential for black involvement in the Party will require us to better understand and honestly confront our own history. The GOP cannot hope to remain relevant if it devolves into a white religious club. Expanding our appeal is a moral and political imperative that can succeed if we have the will.
I've always believed that if you get people to talk to each other long enough and without rancor, eventually they start to hear each other. They still may not agree, but they can at least understand. Unfortunately, at least as far as politics are concerned, we seem to be moving further from that point of common understanding with each succeeding political cycle. I wish I could find a way to be less cynical, but I'm finding it increasingly difficult to see how we get where we need to be from where we currently are.
Huge assumption.
The fact that many, if not most, of our politicians don't understand the language, let alone history, is a larger problem.
It's a bit offensive to pretend that blacks and whites have polar opposite views of government for the reasons cited. Conservative Republicans have demonized minorities for decades to pander for votes. Their economic policies favor a small elite and the only way the GOP obtained a majority was by using wedge issues. Democrats include. Republicans exclude. There's no mystery.
At the time Minnesota had a 2.5 percent unemployment rate, and many working poor came to the Minneapolis area seeking jobs. Unfortunately, once they got there discovered that most of the new jobs were in the outer suburbs and that the public transportation system was almost nonexistent. In addition, the cost of living was high. The city of Minneapolis had a vacancy rate of less than two percent, which drove up housing prices and Minnesota's brutal winters could drive heating costs up to more than $500 per month (especially in cheaper, under-insulated houses).
So some of the people who came seeking a fresh start ended up, instead of seeking government assistance.
In response, "Minnesota Nice" disappeared and there was a backlash against the "gang members from Chicago" who traveled to Minnesota to take advantage of "Minnesota's generous welfare benefits". Policies like CODEFOR allowing legalized harassment of African-Americans were passed.
http://www.citypages.com/1998-04-01/news/code-for-safe-streets/
Apparently, it's easy to be tolerant and progressive if you live in a monochromatic society.
How true.
Look no further than the comments Gingrich and Santorum made regarding black Americans. Utterly close minded and clueless to what goes on. They are only two examples of seperatism in the GOP and they could care less about the "black vote" Just as long as they can get the majority of Independents to go their way with the Republican candidate of choice.
I must have missed something.
Mr. Ladd, have you not been reading the papers since the GOP campaign began? From calling black folks "brainwashed", to suggesting, in lilly-white Iowa and New Hampshire, that black folks need to demand a paycheck (from GOVERNMENT no less) instead of food stamps, if this is the GOP looking to improve it's standing with blacks...please stop!
And I haven't even brought up Carl Paladino, Rush Limbaugh, EVERYONE ON FOX NEWS, Michele Bachmann or Allen West, who called black leaders "overseers of the plantation", or any number of Republicans who do nothing but call THIS President a socialist, communist, fascist (who hates white people), all the while declaring more of an interest in a black President's failure, than in a country's success.
You want to improve your standing in the black community, try not blaming it for everything wrong with America. Try telling white folks in Iowa and New Hampshire that THEY are the problem (and see how they like it). And here's a really novel suggestion, how about black representatives...who actually represent the majority of black folks.
Did you not see those TP signs at their protests upon Obama's election? How many bigots can your party continue to support while you blissfully think it's making ANY effort to improve your relationship with the black community?
FAIL, Mr. Ladd.
How do you think your party gets votes, by actually believing in a functioning government?
Blacks vote for the most progressive party. You guys aren't it. The Republican's were over 100 years ago. Now they are Rush Limbaugh's loofa sponge.
I would like to shrink the Republican party so small that it can be drowned in a bath tub.
Please continue to alienate latinos and black Americans. Since they will make up the majority of the country in 50 years it will be an end to your rule.
Don't fret though, you can always throw them off the voting rolls with voter suppression campaigns. It is the Right's way after all.
I would like to shrink the Republican party so small that it can be drowned in a bath tub.
Fanned and faved.
Besides their heads exploding at the thought of having to appeal to minority voters (seriously, when was the last time Gingrich or Bachmann or Romney or Paul HAD to seek non-white votes), when left to their own devices, it's rather clear the GOP wants nothing to do with minority voters.