PC: Black POTCS
- Thread starter Kaiser Tito
- Start date
-
- Tags
- black president csa
I actually asked about that scenario before? What did you call the new country and what were it relations with it's neighbors (or if you got started on it just send me that)?
We’re reading this differently. That does not mean to any legal scholar that Tourgeé and Phillips were arguing that Plessy was being deprived of his right to be white. Tourgeé and Phillips were arguing that Plessy’s rights were being denied because the Louisiana law mandating segregated railcars treated Black people like property, not that he was being denied his property. Again, the controversy only arose because Plessy self proclaimed that he was colored.They were using the 'racial identity as a form of property' argument as the legal pretext to challenge segregation. Segregation laws deprived Plessy of his 'property', with the consequence of imposing a badge social inferiority upon him.
There's also this paragraph from Justice Brown's opinion:
I’m going to have to read Brown’s opinion in full, but he appears to be using Tourgeé’s argument that the badge of being Black, or the stain of slavery, present in the segregation law could be flipped to say the privileges of being white were “property,” but that’s a tortured point to make.
At any rate, Plessy from my reading was never about Homer Plessy being deprived the right of claiming his European heritage.
South Africa made some compromises. They acknowledged Bantu population tribes, granted a special status to Coloured and Indians and we're not as obsessed about "racial purity". Most of Afrikaners have at least some non-European ancestor and a person would be regarded White as long as it passes for White.
Arguably, society in apartheid South Africa was much less violent, less overtly racist, and not as regressive as the US South, specially in a TL they are independent from the moderate forces from North and where slavery keeps going on indefinitely, probably into the 20th century.
Maybe slavery takes a different pace than what it was like in our timeline. For example slaves are used less in field work and more on office work and sex work and even specialty work in things like sports or technical work.
This also assumes things dont go in some very different direction that isnt just communist revolution or nazi germany.
This also assumes things dont go in some very different direction that isnt just communist revolution or nazi germany.
Admittedly I didn't exactly say that but I assumed the pod would be 1861 when the CSA seceded. Is this sudden shift possible during the 20 years between secession and gradual abolition?
Anytime between 1880 and 1930 is fairly plausible for slavery to be abolished, with the Upper South likely abolishing it first. Of course, expect an apartheid analog but even then, in OTL 1960 not all the Southern states were on the same page regarding the percentage of African Americans being eligible to vote. For instance, the rate was less than 20% in Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina while it was over 50% in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Oklahoma (the latter two weren't CSA states OTL but probably would be if the CSA was victorious). The point is, I would expect the mentality to be on a state level before there's enough support for an amendment to the CSA Constitution allowing for the abolition of slavery, which should be around the Congo Affair, assuming it still happens in 1903-1908.
I think it's possible if the Upper South were to split off from the Deep South and hold its own elections. Not likely in the Deep South though.
I think the biggest input to change the South if it was a country was British pressure. British intervention, however unlikely, is the only way the South could win a Civil War as the material advantage the North had was comically lopsided. If the South wins due to the British, they can always say "I made you. I can unmake you" and push for emancipation 5, 6, or 7 decades later. I don't know if self-interest can possibly override the planters class ' way of thinking, but it is difficult for me to think of any bigger motivation than self-interest and only one party in a timeline with a successful CSA can send a veiled threat like that. So my guess is the earliest the OP's condition could happen could be 7 generations after emancipation (if it happens peacefully at all, which is a big if). More likely, the plantar class would rather see their country be a pile of rubble before admitting they are wrong and that is exactly what will happen.
I believe that the great depression could be the final nail in coffin after years of discontent for plantation rule forcing reforms allowing a member of the black elite to be elected 20 years later. Still would like to know the effects of a late 50's victory since that's a good half century before the Obama was elected otl. Also would reforms to prevent a revolution be any more likely if the north went communist (especially of the permanent revolution kind)?
Last edited:
Here's prepared remarks by Tourgee referencing the brief he filed with the court.
Legal brief (typed manuscript), Plessy v. Ferguson, Argument of A.W. Tourgée, undated
The quoted paragraph from Brown's argument references the plaintiff's [Plessy's] argument in the alternative - which was the Due Process argument based on a claimed racial property right.
If you skip to about 12 minutes into Justice Thomas's lecture at the Supreme Court historic society (link below) and watch for a few minutes, he discusses Plessy's argument about how his racial identity was a property right.
<em>Plessy v. Ferguson</em>
Justice Clarence Thomas spoke to the annual meeting of the Supreme Court Historical Society. In his remarks, he talked about the 1896 [Plessy v. Ferguson] case, in which the court created the notion of "separate but equal" facilities for blacks and whites. Justice Thomas noted that the...
www.c-span.org
It was one of several claims Plessy made, including Equal Protection violation and a 13th amendment violation (the 13th amendment having been construed to not only ban slavery but also 'badges and incidents of slavery' such as racial inferiority).
I think that people tend to trend OTL demographic context too much into independent CSA. With the Southern elite being in political charge of the confederal government rather than just in charge of local state governments, they don’t need to enforce the same kind of social control to stay in charge. I expect that CSA will see greater European immigration than OTL South, pretty much every somewhat stable country in the Americas saw large scale European immigration. Next I expect we will see the survival of a mixed racial “caste”, instead of mixed race and Black being put into the same category.
I don’t expect slavery to be abolished before after 1900 but it won’t survive to modern time, as it’s simply too embarrassing to keep around. People need to remember CSA are not USA with its political dominance of North America and global importance, it will be a importer of culture not a exporter. So slavery will be seen as a increasing embarrassing for CSA, but also a growing economic and foreign policy problem. A major reason for the end of Segregation in OTL which Americans don’t talk about was that Segregation was a embarrassment for USA on the global scene and weakened them in the Cold War. CSA will have same problem with slavery, it will be a easy tool for other countries to use against CSA.
I don’t expect slavery to be abolished before after 1900 but it won’t survive to modern time, as it’s simply too embarrassing to keep around. People need to remember CSA are not USA with its political dominance of North America and global importance, it will be a importer of culture not a exporter. So slavery will be seen as a increasing embarrassing for CSA, but also a growing economic and foreign policy problem. A major reason for the end of Segregation in OTL which Americans don’t talk about was that Segregation was a embarrassment for USA on the global scene and weakened them in the Cold War. CSA will have same problem with slavery, it will be a easy tool for other countries to use against CSA.
This adds additional context. I guess the denial property claim, that the Louisiana law ignored Plessy’s actual skin color because he claimed he was of African descent, was aimed at challenging the one-drop rule. Thomas mentions this in his remarks.The quoted paragraph from Brown's argument references the plaintiff's [Plessy's] argument in the alternative - which was the Due Process argument based on a claimed racial property right.
If you skip to about 12 minutes into Justice Thomas's lecture at the Supreme Court historic society (link below) and watch for a few minutes, he discusses Plessy's argument about how his racial identity was a property right.
<em>Plessy v. Ferguson</em>
Justice Clarence Thomas spoke to the annual meeting of the Supreme Court Historical Society. In his remarks, he talked about the 1896 [Plessy v. Ferguson] case, in which the court created the notion of "separate but equal" facilities for blacks and whites. Justice Thomas noted that the...
It was one of several claims Plessy made, including Equal Protection violation and a 13th amendment violation (the 13th amendment having been construed to not only ban slavery but also 'badges and incidents of slavery' such as racial inferiority).
An interesting tidbit that I didn’t know about before.
dcharleos
Donor
Here's prepared remarks by Tourgee referencing the brief he filed with the court.
Legal brief (typed manuscript), Plessy v. Ferguson, Argument of A.W. Tourgée, undated
cdm16694.contentdm.oclc.org
Thanks!
He moved South with his family as part of the new government's immigration program, which provided economic and in some cases political opportunities to skilled African-Americans in the North looking for better prospects in a more racially-accepting society. Although both DuBois and Miller were both from the North, part of that series of laws was loosening the citizenship requirement for public office, particularly the presidency.
I haven't really put that much thought into this TL to be honest. It was just one of those spur of the moment "Oh, I like this idea, I'm going to write it down and see what happens". So I haven't really written much about it other than the president's list and a couple of other minor details, but then again, my current main TL, A House Divided Against Itself, started in the same way, so it might eventually get more fleshed out.
N7Buck
Banned
African-Americans were already the majority in some states, and were projected to become the majority in many others, and that is without counting people with small amounts of African ancestry.
You gotta use the historical models folks.
Segregation was internationally shameful in the postwar period, had been rightly seen as so for decades, and wasn't even that essential to the Southern economy. (It was important to it, but not its basis.) Even then, it took direct, sustained intervention by the federal government in support of an active civil rights movement led by full US citizens to break it.
Slavery is going to continue until at least it's no longer of financial importance. Segregation is going to continue longer than that. "But it's fundamentally irrational" is going to get you beaten and chased across the Ohio by thugs who may or may not be working for the state.
Segregation was internationally shameful in the postwar period, had been rightly seen as so for decades, and wasn't even that essential to the Southern economy. (It was important to it, but not its basis.) Even then, it took direct, sustained intervention by the federal government in support of an active civil rights movement led by full US citizens to break it.
Slavery is going to continue until at least it's no longer of financial importance. Segregation is going to continue longer than that. "But it's fundamentally irrational" is going to get you beaten and chased across the Ohio by thugs who may or may not be working for the state.
Would the CSA be more willing to reform if the North (and maybe Mexico for good measure) went communist?