AH Challenge: Most American blacks to Liberia

One of the most complex questions in US history has been the status of freed blacks: in a society that eventually rejected slavery but had major issues accepting a racial minority as equals.

The funny thing is, the US sponsored a potential solution very early with the colonization of Liberia - an interesting parallel to the MUCH later back to Africa movement of, among others, Marcus Garvey.

What would it take to have a more extensive early colonization of Liberia, followed by further radical expansion after whatever form eventual abolition might take?

I'm perfectly aware that American Colonization Society/Liberian treatment of natives was not a landmark case of acceptance and equality, and that the Americo-Liberian percentage of the Liberian population is currently quite small.

A scenario such as I envision would certainly see, territorially, a much larger Liberia. A side benefit to the US is a much larger stake in 19th Cent. Africa without violating anti-colonial principles, and Liberia will be a much more interesting example to other black Africans - perhaps an interesting relationship with Ethiopia might arise.

So, what does it take to get most or, at least, far more American blacks to a much larger Liberia? An earlier abolition, or a Confederate victory? Defeat of or by the UK? Creative solutions welcome.
 
Hmm... say the USA somehow loses the Civil War, or perhaps there is simply a different sort of Civil War and the President isn't Lincoln, but some other jumped-up racist, just not a pro-slaver. Could kickstart some sort of proto-fascism in kicking the undesirables out. Maybe.

Essentially, I could see that, say after the Civil War lots of southern blacks go north, enough small businesses or just whites in general start bitching about the cheaper labor moving in. Some politicians, hoping to appease their constituents, start pushing to 'remove and return' the blacks to their homelands. I dunno, just a thought.

Think of the modern bitch-fest about immigrants stealing American jobs and you'll get the general idea. How this might be implemented back in the 1800s, I'm not so sure. American history isn't my strong point.
 
Hmm... say the USA somehow loses the Civil War, or perhaps there is simply a different sort of Civil War and the President isn't Lincoln, but some other jumped-up racist, just not a pro-slaver. Could kickstart some sort of proto-fascism in kicking the undesirables out. Maybe.

Essentially, I could see that, say after the Civil War lots of southern blacks go north, enough small businesses or just whites in general start bitching about the cheaper labor moving in. Some politicians, hoping to appease their constituents, start pushing to 'remove and return' the blacks to their homelands. I dunno, just a thought.

Think of the modern bitch-fest about immigrants stealing American jobs and you'll get the general idea. How this might be implemented back in the 1800s, I'm not so sure. American history isn't my strong point.


Yeah, that makes a good amount of sense - President Racist Union General X doesn't want to deal with free blacks in NY, New England, and the Border States, so off to Liberia they go - plus it gains them an interesting strategic position in Africa.

The other way that seemed likely to me is almost the exact opposite - pretty quick defeat of the CSA, followed by a very reconcilliatory (to the white Southern elite) Reconstruction.
 
The problem would be sending them all there when they don't want to go.

Heck, sending millions there in the first place would either be a long term project or something that would require a lot of Nazi-like (as in ridiculously inefficient and short sighted) decisions.

I'm not sure this can be done by the US of the time - even with General Racist McRacist as president.
 
Could it be politically framed in economic/political terms? Before the advent of modern medicine, a white settler colony in most of Subsaharan Africa (outside the southern cone) was inconceivable; but a black settler colony would survive the malaria. Since Liberia was pretty loyal to the US well into the 20th century - heck, it was a de facto dependency - the US effectively creates a powerful strategic anchor in Africa, which might foster plantations of rubber, cocoa, etc. From the (racist, sure) US perspective, you've taken a difficult internal problem and turned it into a major foreign asset.

Is this plausible?
 
Well, again: The blacks don't want to go.

That's the problem that has to be resolved. If you could get black interest in settling - somehow - you could get this to some extent without any more work than any other settler colony. But even then, most American blacks? I doubt it.
 
Could it be politically framed in economic/political terms? Before the advent of modern medicine, a white settler colony in most of Subsaharan Africa (outside the southern cone) was inconceivable; but a black settler colony would survive the malaria. Since Liberia was pretty loyal to the US well into the 20th century - heck, it was a de facto dependency - the US effectively creates a powerful strategic anchor in Africa, which might foster plantations of rubber, cocoa, etc. From the (racist, sure) US perspective, you've taken a difficult internal problem and turned it into a major foreign asset.

Is this plausible?

Only this was not the case, as they found out. The ACS did not expect the high mortality rates among blacks, thinking they possessed some natural resistance to the problems of the tropics.

They didn't.
 
Only this was not the case, as they found out. The ACS did not expect the high mortality rates among blacks, thinking they possessed some natural resistance to the problems of the tropics.

They didn't.

I admit I'm hardly the expert here. But, aren't sufferers of sickle-cell anemia immune to malaria? Thus, at the least, a far higher survival rate than whites would experience.

Well, again: The blacks don't want to go.

That's the problem that has to be resolved. If you could get black interest in settling - somehow - you could get this to some extent without any more work than any other settler colony. But even then, most American blacks? I doubt it.

That's another thought: an earlier back to Africa movement? Combined with an unpalatable climate at home?
 
I admit I'm hardly the expert here. But, aren't sufferers of sickle-cell anemia immune to malaria? Thus, at the least, a far higher survival rate than whites would experience.
You would think, wouldn't you? While you are correct on sickle cell and malaria, their mortality rates were so appalling that it didn't really matter if they were "better" than whites at it. They were still very ill-suited for it.

With a larger scale, this will only get worse.
 
You would think, wouldn't you? While you are correct on sickle cell and malaria, their mortality rates were so appalling that it didn't really matter if they were "better" than whites at it. They were still very ill-suited for it.

With a larger scale, this will only get worse.

Hmm. There's always the possibility of a different, less tropical, location for Liberia: Namibia, say, or East Africa. Either from the start or as a reaction to the unfortunate early experience.
 
I just thought of a crazy idea...
Americans deporting african americans to West Australia :eek:
You'd have to take them all the way across the country (or around South America) and then truck them to Australia as well. Plus I think Australia was pretty locked down at that point.

How about this: Free homesteads for Freedmen in the fabulous new paradise of Alaska! (note: homesteads may in fact not be paradisaical)
 
Not possible for logistical reasons unless you are looking for a small (in overall numbers) increase over a long time frame through a stronger pro-colonization Back to Africa movement. Even with that you are looking at a miniscule impact on black population in America althouh perhaps significant impact on the target lands. Overall, too many people, too few ships, and no way for anyone to afford the costs.
 
Indeed American black colonists did tend to fare better than whites attempting to live in the same areas. Which is to say instead of all of them dying, merely the vast majority did.

The place was a horrid deathtrap. Relocating is better, but the only "safe places" are already occupied or desert.

More American blacks to Liberia? Easy. Most American blacks to Liberia? Let me put it this way: If someone wanted to kill them that badly, they could just do it at home and save on expenses.
 
Top