WWI with American race problems transferring onto Western Front

During WWI, in the very racially segregated American Expeditionary Force (AEF), there were many instances behind the lines on the Western Front of racial attacks on African-American soldiers by bigoted whites- including summary executions at the hands of white MPs- and even 1 or 2 cases of French African colonial troops being murdered by racist white Americans. Of course, with the massive racial climate prevalent in America at that time, such racial violence was inevitable- but WI the full force oif such racial problems in the US had transferred across the Atlantic and exploded in the same way among blacks and whites behind the front lines, similar to the race riots which occurred at East St Louis and other places, or the Houston Mutiny, during 1917 ? WI also there'd been more widespread racial attacks by white American troops on French African colonials to the extent of the latter- perhaps abetted by btheir own white officers- actually actively participating in largescale retaliatory assaults on the former ? Could there have actually been race riots in French behind-the-front towns along similar lines as what happened at East St Louis and Houston, and could such disturbances have been serious enough to affect the deployment of the AEF on the battlefield against the Germans ?
 

wormyguy

Banned
Melvin -

It seems like a good half of your posts are about just how racist the US is, and how genocidal and evil the Americans are. It's getting rather tiresome, and IMO is verging on trolling. If you have some sort of a problem with Americans, come right out and say it instead of looking up every example you can find of bigoted Americans and posting it on here. Perhaps it might be due to remind you that Australia is hardly, in either an historical or even recent perspective, a picture of racial harmony, even compared to the US.
 
look, mate, to be perfectly honest, I have no problem with American ppl as a whole- and it was never my intention to target the US as an evil, genocidal empire, for which I apologise if you have indeed developed that perspective. I have alot of American friends from all different backgrounds whom i get along with very well, I enjoy US history and certain aspects of American culture, and would love to get back over to the US east coast sometime to check out all the awesome historical stuff you have over there. Anyways, i've always been interested in American hist from the aspect of race relations, minority groups etc- which is why I end up posting alot on said issues- NOT due to some anti-American agenda.

btw, not to be patronising, but I fully know bout whatever racial problems have occurred over here, too, so I don't need to be lectured bout such things as all of our race problems from 1788 onwards, ok ?
 

MrP

Banned
Melvin -

It seems like a good half of your posts are about just how racist the US is, and how genocidal and evil the Americans are. It's getting rather tiresome, and IMO is verging on trolling. If you have some sort of a problem with Americans, come right out and say it instead of looking up every example you can find of bigoted Americans and posting it on here. Perhaps it might be due to remind you that Australia is hardly, in either an historical or even recent perspective, a picture of racial harmony, even compared to the US.

I can't say I find Melvin's posts as worrisome as you do. Or at all, in fact. Yes, he has an interest in WIs relating to matters racial. But there's no harm in that, nor have I any recollection of him phrasing or exploring them in any sort of deliberately hostile or offensive fashion. I confess I don't tend to find them areas I have a particular interest in - even when they concern WWI as here (although I'm awaiting a book from Amazon on this subject atm), since race relations aren't generally my thing, but they certainly aren't trolling, nor replete with gratuitous accusations that Americans commit acts of infamy as a matter of course.

If you do want to compare Melvin's thoroughly reasonable, calm and thought-provoking posts with those of a chap who has an axe the size of Manhattan to grind, then look through the archives for threads begun by Michael E Johnson. The difference will be apparent in no great length of time.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
Melvin -

It seems like a good half of your posts are about just how racist the US is, and how genocidal and evil the Americans are. It's getting rather tiresome, and IMO is verging on trolling. If you have some sort of a problem with Americans, come right out and say it instead of looking up every example you can find of bigoted Americans and posting it on here. Perhaps it might be due to remind you that Australia is hardly, in either an historical or even recent perspective, a picture of racial harmony, even compared to the US.

I've got to side with MrP on this. I don't really see a problem. Now, if the title of the thread had been "Negroes whup up on whitey on the Western Front," yeah maybe there would've been some words. But I dont see any problems. Actually, I just remember that he's really down with talking about Australia and Vietnam. Not that I've got a problem with that!



Now, to the thread topic at hand: You'd probably have to have the black units posted in the American Army in the first place. A great many of them were stationed with the French Army for the war, mostly because they French wanted US units parceled out peacemeal and the US didn't really want them. Sad, but true.
So if you could find some way to get the black units completely with the white American units, then have them completely with the National Gaurd units from the Deep South, maybe...MAYBE...there'd be some issues. But I doubt it would be something that would disrupt the war effort. Generally, war tends to make it go beneath the surface until the fighting stops. Then we all come home and hope the black people forget what we were fighting for. At least that's how it worked with some Southern whites after the Civil War, WWI, and WWII.
 

wormyguy

Banned
You know, sorry for making an ass of myself. It's fine to be interested in whatever you want - whether it be American race relations or anything else. It did seem to me at the time like it was the argument of an anti-American - they do things like making laundry lists of every single racial incident they can find in American history, with the implied presumption that their own nation has moral superiority in that regard (almost none do, as just about every nation has at least one instance of ethnic democide in its past, often several, and quite violent). But I was being presumptuous, and I was not nearly as tactful as I could have been. I'm very sorry, and hope you aren't offended further.


As for the actual WI, I don't think that it would happen on the front - the black and white units would have been fairly separated, and the soldiers would most likely be focused on the most immediate threat on hand. However, upon returning home, you might have a situation where some black soldiers demand equal compensation to the white soldiers. This might provoke a kind of "first wave" of the civil rights movement, similar to the first wave feminism going on at the time. There might well be riots and fighting in the streets, and it probably would not be looked back on as the proudest day in American history.
 
Early civil rights discord can be rationalized for the period in question, but it would probably take some kind of "trigger" event, most likely after the end of WWI. Tensions from the battlefield would not erupt until the troops returned to the US.

We need to look at the events and sentiments of this period. A Red Scare had prompted states to pass sedition laws, some most harshly enforced in Montana.

William Simmons founded the Fraternal Order of the Ku Klux Klan in 1915, using the name that had been in remission since the Klan Act of 1871 authorized federal force against vigilantes who used it as they terrorized ex slaves.

The KKK at the time was a fraternal order of protestant white men, and it had the support of President Woodrow Wilson. It amassed millions of members, many more concerned with competition from Catholic and Jewish immigrants from Italy, Poland, Russia and Ireland, not just African-Americans. It was also anti-communist. A sharp membership drop after 1925 would leave the Klan in control of more radical leaders who would maintain the sinister reputation that would follow the name through its bankruptcy in 1944 and the less organized period that followed.

The twenties were important for modernization, as it the spread of electricity, indoor plumbing, autos, radio and cinema would make it nearly impossible to argue the segregationist doctrine of "separate but equal." Blacks were not the only victims, as the burgeoning cinema industry saw many performers changing their names so it would be less obvious they were Jewish.

The twenties were a prosperous period. Can we create a scenario that arouses awareness for civil rights?
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Melvin -

It seems like a good half of your posts are about just how racist the US is, and how genocidal and evil the Americans are. It's getting rather tiresome, and IMO is verging on trolling. If you have some sort of a problem with Americans, come right out and say it instead of looking up every example you can find of bigoted Americans and posting it on here. Perhaps it might be due to remind you that Australia is hardly, in either an historical or even recent perspective, a picture of racial harmony, even compared to the US.

Enough flaming, really unnecessary to go after Melvin that way. Post reported.
 
The period in question is one in which segregation and discrimination by race, religion, national origin and gender are prevalent in society and supported by law.

As an American, I am not offended by the notion that an ethnically diverse population also has a high potential for discord over the subject.

There is no reason we can not discuss the notion that conflicts introduced in an earlier period (1917-1932) might not force earlier resolution that will benefit future generations sooner than OTL.
 

Dure

Banned
@wormyguy

Melvin -

It seems like a good half of your posts are about just how racist the US is, and how genocidal and evil the Americans are.

Is it your assertion that the USA is not racist and that Americans have been, if not are, genocidal or do you simply think that mentioning this on this board is in bad taste and you want Melvin Loh to stop? Because if it is the former you are on completely indefensible ground.
 
It feels redundant to defend Melvin but he deservs it. He might not post every day but he tend to post good questions when he does, ones that sadly gets little attention. And no, he don't strike me as anti-American or troll. Just somebody interested in AH.
 

wormyguy

Banned
Look: I'll repeat myself by saying that I'm very sorry for my previous post. It was completely out of line, and, to be honest, if it were someone else's and I were looking at it now, I might seriously consider reporting it. I'll admit that I have a bit of a nationalistic streak, and one of my pet peeves is anti-Americanism. I fell into the same trap that many do for many countries (try writing a newspaper editorial about the mistreatment of Palestinians, and you will be treated to a torrent of letters accusing you of being an anti-Semite who wants to destroy Israel), and assumed, based on a pattern of posting about American racial issues in the past week or so, that he was making some sort of a subtle dig at Americans. I was wrong to assume this, and even were it true it would not justify an angry and confrontational response. Since he seemed to be posting about quite a few disparate and somewhat obscure incidents in the history of American race relations, I made the incorrect assumption he was just going to Wikipedia or something and looking for as many bad things that Americans had done as possible. This was also unfair, and I would instead like to applaud him for deciding to take a scholarly interest in a comparatively obscure area - American race relations - which could certainly use quite a bit of intellectual discourse in order to establish a definitive history of the complex map of racial relations within the context of the American state. It's an often-ignored part of history (or at least often ignored outside of its flashier bits - the Civil War and the civil rights movement), and it's something that should be addressed and discussed.
 
During WWI, in the very racially segregated American Expeditionary Force (AEF), there were many instances behind the lines on the Western Front of racial attacks on African-American soldiers by bigoted whites- including summary executions at the hands of white MPs- and even 1 or 2 cases of French African colonial troops being murdered by racist white Americans. Of course, with the massive racial climate prevalent in America at that time, such racial violence was inevitable- but WI the full force oif such racial problems in the US had transferred across the Atlantic and exploded in the same way among blacks and whites behind the front lines, similar to the race riots which occurred at East St Louis and other places, or the Houston Mutiny, during 1917 ? WI also there'd been more widespread racial attacks by white American troops on French African colonials to the extent of the latter- perhaps abetted by btheir own white officers- actually actively participating in largescale retaliatory assaults on the former ? Could there have actually been race riots in French behind-the-front towns along similar lines as what happened at East St Louis and Houston, and could such disturbances have been serious enough to affect the deployment of the AEF on the battlefield against the Germans ?

I think the French would put any riots down with Gun fire .
Rember the most decorated US unit in France Was a Black NG uint From New York . The French were happy with the US Black Regs that served in there Army .

And yes they could of been bad enough that the French might of Told the US White troops off .
Some thing Few people Rember is the Navy was desegrated up until Willson ordered it Segrageted .
 
Top