WI: FDR ends segregation in the Armed Services after the 1940 election?

Willkie does this after L-L in my "Not By Might, But By Right" (see my AH books in the link at end), since he doesn't need the southerners and also is a bit politically naive. Southerners protest, and partly because of this the Germans are more daring in the sub attacks in 1941. You could get the US fighting Germany first, and you definitely would get the Axis powers thinking the US is a bit more of a pushover because they are divided. You might also get Southerners not wanting to enlist - at least till the Pearl harbor attack. (I do have Willkie calming that somewhat by limiting the number of units which integrate.)

You'll have to read for more specifics.:)
 
Unfortunately I agree with the reasons advanced for why FDR would not have done so. In addition to the political issues the armed forces themselves were opposed to integration claiming that they had enough problems with the massive expansion of the military without adding the issues of racial integration.
FDR did do minor things like a request to the Navy in September 1941 asking that slots be found in addition to mess stewards. Similarly he should be given credit for the Tuskegee Airmen.
The institutional racism of the Army, and to be fair most of society, was such that integration was not considered even during the 1944-1945 manpower crises.
 
Immediately after winning the 1940 election, during the lame duck period, FDR issues an Executive Order similar to Truman's EO 9981, which ends segregation in the Armed Services. So how does this affect the war? What are the political ramifications of this action? And how does this affect the Civil Rights movement?

He probably wouldn't lose in 1944, but this move would certainly piss off many of the more hardline social conservatives, especially the Dixiecrats.....and if Truman stands by FDR, it'd definitely cost him at least much, if not most, of the South, which could put Tom Dewey in the White House.
 
In 1940, neither America nor Franklin Roosevelt was prepared for such a radical step...especially in 1940 when FDR was knee-deep preparing the country and its military for the possibility of war in the face of an isolationist congress and electorate.

Now, 1944 might be a better time to announce the policy (but allow that it would NOT be implemented until the war was won (you certainly wouldn't want to mess with orders of battle and unit cohesion while there is still a war on)
 
You think if a Japan Home Island invasion was seriously on the table (yes, I know he was dead by then but it's only a year after the OP) that de-segregation could be considered, given the meat grinding that would have ensued?
 
You think if a Japan Home Island invasion was seriously on the table (yes, I know he was dead by then but it's only a year after the OP) that de-segregation could be considered, given the meat grinding that would have ensued?

Read my post. The actual implementation of integration would happen after the war, and probably slowly at that. All that FDR would do is announce a plan to implement it after the war was won.

I nice ploy actually, since he almost certainly knows he wont be around much longer anyway.
 
I suppose major league sports would follow the example and desegregate sooner than IOTL by a few years.

Not as long as Kenesaw Mountain Landis, the Commissioner of Major League Baseball (the only one that really mattered at the time), is alive. He would not die until October 1944 and even by the standards of the time his racism was extreme.

My father lived through WW2, the amount of racism he saw by white US troops towards black servicemen was significant.

A US soldier started what was almost a race riot in Cardiff when he hit a black civilian for refusing to step onto the road rather than brush past him on a crowded pavement.

White racists in uniform in the UK quickly discovered to their angry frustration that when they tried to start race riots both the civilian authorities AND populace would quickly rally to the support of American Blacks. After years of war they didn't like the idea of people trying to practice the beliefs of their enemies on British soil. This is why the US authorities had to institute the practice of "White towns" and "Black towns", regarding which US servicemen could go for liberty.

It might well provoke an outright mutiny in the Army, which at that time was heavily influenced if not dominated by older Southern officers to whom such a move would be outrageous.

My memory on these figures could be dated, but IIRC, the US Marines in 1941 were 100% White, and the US Army Officers Corps were 75% Southern White. And the US Navy did not have a single MOS open to Blacks other than Mess Stewards. This wasn't the case in 1900, but Jim Crow had systematically segregated the US military over the next forty years. To the point where the elite all Black US 9th and 10th Cavalry Regiments, in the build up to WWII, rather than being issued tanks were converted into parade units!

OTL, Southern Democrats strongly supported the military buildup of 1941. The draft extension which passed by one vote in August 1941 was supported something like 115-4 by Southern Democrats. But if the military was integrated, that would mean blacks in command over whites sometimes. Many white Southerners would oppose conscription into such an army. If conscription remained in force, there could even be draft resistance. This would not be viewed as treasonous, as the U.S. was not at war.

Other than Whites being forced to salute Black officers, you can bet that this would not happen in WWII, orders be damned. It was one thing for Black officers to be in non-line positions such as physicians, lawyers, and chaplains. But line commands? IIRC, there was a full colonel (Oliver Queen:confused: (1) commander of the US 366th all Black US Infantry) who was forced out specifically because it was feared he could easily make general as a line officer in WWII. They had done the same to another full colonel at the start of WWI. They didn't mind non-line Black officers making brigadier general, but not line commanders.

The mostly Southern White US military officer corps were VERY imaginative in figuring out how to prevent the specter of Black officers commanding White troops.

1) Sorry if that's wrong, its been a LONG time since I've read "The Invisible Soldier".

I think that right after Pearl Harbor, FDR could get away with it. Using the aforementioned "we need every man to fight the war" type of messaging combined with the fervent patriotism in the aftermath of the attack would make anyone hard pressed to oppose it openly.

If FDR did this, he'd be facing Marshall's resignation. When Eisenhower gave the order during the Battle of the Bulge that it was no longer to be a factor for individuals' race to be a determinate factor for a depleted US Army IRR, that explosion that came from Marshall was epic. A man known for his hands off attitude in dealing with Ike countermanded that order, with the comment that "Such an order would have serious sociological concerns for America". So American "sociological policy" was now an issue for concern by the US Army Chief-of-Staff.:mad::rolleyes: Right.

Also, considering the state of the US military's leadership at the start of the war, having a revolt among the senior officer corps might actually be a good thing.

Not if the wrong officers are on the wrong side of the issue. Do you want the US Pacific Fleet under Frank Jack Fletcher's command? Or the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Western Europe to be Fredendahl?

Even if FDR were to issue an executive order desegregating the armed forces in 1940, the war will STILL be fought with an essentially segregated military. In OTL, it took six years (from 1948-1954) for Truman's desegregation order to be put into effect ((the 94th Engineer Battalion, the last remaining ''Negro'' unit in the Army was finally deactivated in November, 1954). Senior officers will drag their feet, Congress will call for hearings, orders issued by the White House will take years to be carried out.

Agreed with all. One of the reasons for Truman's timing OTL was because of the mass retirements taking place in senior leadership of all those officers who would have faced mandatory retirement were it not for the war.

Unfortunately I agree with the reasons advanced for why FDR would not have done so. In addition to the political issues the armed forces themselves were opposed to integration claiming that they had enough problems with the massive expansion of the military without adding the issues of racial integration.
FDR did do minor things like a request to the Navy in September 1941 asking that slots be found in addition to mess stewards. Similarly he should be given credit for the Tuskegee Airmen.
The institutional racism of the Army, and to be fair most of society, was such that integration was not considered even during the 1944-1945 manpower crises.

Only to a point. I agree with those who state that essentially FDR made his deal with the devil regarding Southern racism. The absolutist nature of the protection of Jim Crow DURING WWII is pretty proof positive of that. FDR was no Wilson, but he was no Eleanor either. And he certainly COULD have listened to his wife more. There were just too many instances of White racism being coddled (the Guam race riot being an excellent example) with no executive action. They had no problem whatsoever dropping the hammer when Blacks could be construed in the slightest way as being the guilty party.
 
Well, there is one person who could pressure Roosevelt to desegregate the armed forces. A. Philip Randolph was able to convince Roosevelt into desegregating defense industries with a march on Washington. So desegregating the armed forces isn't completely out of the question.

And besides, there were already integrated units in the military.

Hugh Mulzac, for example, was able to get his way and command an integrated crew because of the demands of the war.
 
Unfortunately I agree with the reasons advanced for why FDR would not have done so. In addition to the political issues the armed forces themselves were opposed to integration claiming that they had enough problems with the massive expansion of the military without adding the issues of racial integration.
FDR did do minor things like a request to the Navy in September 1941 asking that slots be found in addition to mess stewards. Similarly he should be given credit for the Tuskegee Airmen.
The institutional racism of the Army, and to be fair most of society, was such that integration was not considered even during the 1944-1945 manpower crises.

Fragging would be used a lot more as would friendly fire.
 
Not as long as Kenesaw Mountain Landis, the Commissioner of Major League Baseball (the only one that really mattered at the time), is alive. He would not die until October 1944 and even by the standards of the time his racism was extreme.
No, it wasn't. He was a racist by today's standard's, yes, but what kept baseball from being integrated was the owners' misgivings, not Landis's.
 
No, it wasn't. He was a racist by today's standard's, (1) yes, but what kept baseball from being integrated was the owners' misgivings, not Landis's.

*begins rant*

1) Landis was mildly racist at the time he was appointed in 1919. But that was an extremely racist era even by the standards of American history. By the standards of the post-1940 era, and facing the issues and decisions he did as baseball commissioner, he was VERY racist. Particularly if you factor out the regions of the country where Major League Baseball had no teams at the time. Hell, the usual excuse given was that you couldn't integrate because Whites couldn't be trusted in a place where a Black Man waved a wooden stick at a White Man:rolleyes: So Baltimore and St. Louis were continually invoked as racist icons to excuse keeping MLB all White (even though Philly and Boston were worse:rolleyes:).



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



I'll meet you halfway and say that you are right certainly about MOST of the owners, but AIUI there was a history of the owners as a group taking ownership AWAY from team owners when they tried to integrate their teams on their own.

I don't honestly remember the team, but just around 1942 one team lost its owner (2) when they tried to sign Satchel Paige, Josh Gibson, and a handful of other Negro League all stars. LANDIS killed that, with the speed of light in a vacuum, not an army of owners.

Landis came to power in the midst of the Chicago Black Sox scandal, with a lifetime appointment and absolute power. (3) No commissioner would ever again enjoy such power, for the obvious example of what Landis did with it. YES, he cleaned up the Chicago mess.

But he also did his utmost to insure that Major League Baseball remained lily white to the day he died. With baseball's precious labor law exemption, the owners wanted nothing to do with rocking the boat regarding letting Landis have his way in almost all things. I cannot imagine his allowing Jackie Robinson to be signed, anymore than the countless other Negro League signings attempted during Landis' absolutist reign.:(

2) I really can't remember the exact team where this happened, except that it was a perennial loser. The Indians and Athletics come to mind.:confused: Probably the Indians, since they were the first American League team to integrate, signing Satchel Paige.

3) The circumstances of the power Landis enjoyed were such that it put him in a bubble, not unlike a US Supreme Court Justice. If such people don't feel like explaining themselves, then they simply don't have too.

"The Negroes have their own league. Let them play in their own league. NEXT QUESTION!":mad:-Kennesaw Mountain Landis, in a press conference with sports reporters

"There is not now, and has never been, any barrier to Negroes playing professional baseball! NEXT QUESTION!":mad:-Ditto:rolleyes:

Owners had misgivings. For Landis, and a handful of owners (oh, hi Tom Yawkey!), it was Holy Writ. Christ, just look at the time line between Landis' death and the signing of Jackie Robinson. To claim that was "coincidence" would IMO be highly disingenuous to say the least.:(:p Happy Chandler, the new commissioner, back Branch Rickey's signing of Robinson to the hilt.

It also speaks well of US racial progress that by 1959 Baseball Commissioner Ford Frick told Tom Yawkey (4), the owner of the only remaining all-White baseball team (The Boston Red Sox), that if he didn't integrate his team before the September call-ups (IOW, integrate before the 1950s were over) Yawkey would be stripped of his team. The USSR had been enjoying for years the propaganda of declaring that Boston, the "so-called birthplace of American liberty", was still a bastion for racism in "America's Game".:mad:

4) Yawkey was a Southerner, and a devout racist. I only learned this myself in the last ten years.

So Yawkey called up their first Black player just a few days before Frick's deadline. Pumpsie Green. A career minor leaguer, not a name that comes to mind when you think of Cooperstown.:rolleyes: And so the Red Sox would continue for decades onward to be the slog-footed NEAR all White team, based on big lumber, high strikeouts, no speed, and some pitching. It took Yawkey's death, his wife's death, and the ownership group Yawkey created selling the team to John Henry (I love the irony of that name!:D) before the Red Sox would go on to win three World Series in nine years, after a drought of eight-six years.:cool:

*end rant*
 
Top