I think they'd likely be categorized as a mixed race middle caste similar to the Pardos in Brazil or Creoles in French Louisiana.WI they decided that those with white paternity were to be deemed as white and thus emancipated. Like the Arab who practiced a policy by which those with Arab Paternity are deemed as Arab not as Zanj?
Is this even possible?
If happens you will end with a society not disssimilar to Brazil or LatinAmerica in general, with colorism and not much racism but a lot of Classism. Now if this is possibld I don't belive so, there is something in the English pattern colonialism, be USA, Australia, India, Canada or South Africa, that increment, and even create, the racist elements in the society they dominate. There is a reason you see that the more racist societies in the cololonial world come from english speaking coloniesWI they decided that those with white paternity were to be deemed as white and thus emancipated. Like the Arab who practiced a policy by which those with Arab Paternity are deemed as Arab not as Zanj?
Is this even possible?
1. The one drop rule defined as white racial purity did not exist in the antebellum southWI they decided that those with white paternity were to be deemed as white and thus emancipated. Like the Arab who practiced a policy by which those with Arab Paternity are deemed as Arab not as Zanj?
Is this even possible?
If happens you will end with a society not disssimilar to Brazil or LatinAmerica in general, with colorism and not much racism but a lot of Classism. Now if this is possibld I don't belive so, there is something in the English pattern colonialism, be USA, Australia, India, Canada or South Africa, that increment, and even create, the racist elements in the society they dominate. There is a reason you see that the more racist societies in the cololonial world come from english speaking colonies
I think they'd likely be categorized as a mixed race middle caste similar to the Pardos in Brazil or Creoles in French Louisiana.
Colorism in multiracial Latin American societies is racism in that blackness and proximity to blackness is perceived as a negative at its basis.
Creoles are not the mixed race population term prior to the very recent era or perhaps after 1897 (Jim Crow laws become formalized). They were referred to as Mulatto/a/x and its French-Castilian equivalent. Meanwhile, the general European populace born in the state were referred to as Creole, similar to the Spanish imperial conception of Criollo (Louisiana racial policy is derived from the Spanish systematic). Today in the study of Louisiana and in the school system therein, the students are taught using the terms, Creole and Creole of Color, in reference to respecting the recent innovation in terminology among many of the African diaspora in how they term themselves, but recognizing too that in history, the term generally referred to the European ancestry (non Irish, Cajun, Sicilian and sometimes German, these were the European groups typically 'othered' by the racial viewpoints in 19th century Louisiana, especially prior to 1870) borne and raised in Louisiana or the Caribbean. African populaces were referred to as the N word (except in French, you may look this term up) or simply as Black (and its other language equivalents in Louisiana).
"The name was invented by the Negroes... They use it to mean a Negro born in the Indies, and they devised it to distiguish those who come from this side and were born in Guinea from those born in the New World....
The Spanish copied them by introducing this word to describe those born in the New World, and in this way both Spaniards and Guinea Negroes are called criollo if they were born in the New World"
To the question, 'one drop' becoming not the standard begs a different question. Such as, what is the new standard for Creole or white? Does it become 25% or would it be 15%? This is important. I doubt that it could be made to be 50% as an accepted ratio for becoming white, it would require several tls to diminish the notions of white supremacy en vogue and change the nature of the wider Spanish colonial structure. However, it could be that the new custom becomes 20% and below is considered White, while 25%, the so-called 'castizo' becomes a class that is accepted for marriage and non-slave sexual relation and thus creates more so-called white people. While the Mulatto and wholly-African remain in their position but are more visually and legally stratified so as to depict the new nature of race relations in the Southern US.
If the law is made as it now stands respectable families in Aiken, Barnwell, Colleton, and Orangeburg will be denied the right to intermarry among people with whom they are now associated and identified.
At least one hundred families would be affected to my knowledge.
They have sent good soldiers to the Confederate Army, and are now landowners and taxpayers. Those men served creditably, and it would be unjust and disgraceful to embarrass them in this way.
It is a scientific fact that there is not one full-blooded Caucasian on the floor of this convention.
Every member has in him a certain mixture of ... colored blood. The pure-blooded white has needed and received a certain infusion of darker blood to give him readiness and purpose.
It would be a cruel injustice and the source of endless litigation, of scandal, horror, feud, and bloodshed to undertake to annul or forbid marriage for a remote, perhaps obsolete trace of Negro blood.
The doors would be open to scandal, malice, and greed; to statements on the witness stand that the father or grandfather or grandmother had said that A or B had Negro blood in their veins.
Any man who is half a man would be ready to blow up half the world with dynamite to prevent or avenge attacks upon the honor of his mother in the legitimacy or purity of the blood of his father
@Revachah I was completely unaware of the Creole topic.
However, regarding the second topic, are you claiming that an ancestry of some kind has no bearing what-so-ever? My position was not that there was a strict code by which ‘white le was defined. Only that there was thresholds by which even the proximities you speak of may be illachieved. Do you not agree with this?
If happens you will end with a society not disssimilar to Brazil or LatinAmerica in general, with colorism and not much racism but a lot of Classism. Now if this is possibld I don't belive so, there is something in the English pattern colonialism, be USA, Australia, India, Canada or South Africa, that increment, and even create, the racist elements in the society they dominate. There is a reason you see that the more racist societies in the cololonial world come from english speaking colonies
One drop rule literally did not exist. Between 1910 and 1927 only 10 states adopted ODR policies. The social reality vs the working laws before the 20th century laws differed.
Legal and or social whiteness was attained in a myriad of ways and the frameworks were not rooted in equations.
You are avoiding my questions and genuine interest. Forget my questions on this topic.
I'm not avoiding anything, clarify your questions.
Im stating your views of racial history are anachronistic and not factually based so your views of a potential ATL is much more stringent than it was historically.
Then there would be an incentive to not convert the slaves, which would go against the "make disciples of all nations" mission of Christianity.Might one apply the same criteria but substituting Christianity in the USA? To carry it across fully there would have to be a religious ruling that enslaving Christians was forbidden.