Jim Crow: Who?, What?, When?, Where? and Why?
Options
playmaker88
Members Posts: 67,905 ✭✭✭✭✭
We all heard of Jim Crow in context of laws and what have you but.. i think its lost on our generation what it truly embodied as far as details go.
Check it out and drop your thoughts
Here is the Origin
Check it out and drop your thoughts
Here is the Origin
The name Jim Crow is often used to describe the segregation laws, rules, and customs which arose after Reconstruction ended in 1877 and continued until the mid-1960s. How did the name become associated with these "Black Codes" which took away many of the rights which had been granted to blacks through the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments?
"Come listen all you galls and boys,
I'm going to sing a little song,
My name is Jim Crow.
Weel about and turn about and do jis so,
Eb'ry time I weel about I jump Jim Crow."
These words are from the song, "Jim Crow," as it appeared in sheet music written by Thomas Dartmouth "Daddy" Rice. Rice, a struggling "actor" (he did short solo skits between play scenes) at the Park Theater in New York, happened upon a black person singing the above song -- some accounts say it was an old black slave who walked with difficulty, others say it was a ragged black stable boy. Whether modeled on an old man or a young boy we will never know, but we know that in 1828 Rice appeared on stage as "Jim Crow" -- an exaggerated, highly stereotypical black character.
Rice, a white man, was one of the first performers to wear blackface makeup -- his skin was darkened with burnt cork. His Jim Crow song-and-dance routine was an astounding success that took him from Louisville to Cincinnati to Pittsburgh to Philadelphia and finally to New York in 1832. He also performed to great acclaim in London and Dublin. By then "Jim Crow" was a stock character in minstrel shows, along with counterparts Jim Dandy and Zip ? . Rice's subsequent blackface characters were Sambos, ? , and Dandies. White audiences were receptive to the portrayals of blacks as singing, dancing, grinning fools.
By 1838, the term "Jim Crow" was being used as a collective racial epithet for blacks, not as offensive as ? , but similar to ? or ? . The popularity of minstrel shows clearly aided the spread of Jim Crow as a racial slur. This use of the term only lasted half a century. By the end of the 19th century, the words Jim Crow were less likely to be used to derisively describe blacks; instead, the phrase Jim Crow was being used to describe laws and customs which oppressed blacks.
The minstrel show was one of the first native forms of American entertainment, and Rice was rightly regarded as the "Father of American minstrelsy." He had many imitators. In 1843, four white men from New York, billed as the Virginia Minstrels, darkened their faces and imitated the singing and dancing of blacks. They used violins, castanets, banjos, bones, and tambourines. Their routine was successful and they were invited to tour the country. In 1845, the Christy Minstrels (for whom Stephen Foster wrote some of his most popular songs) originated many features of the minstrel show, including the seating of the blackface performers in a semicircle on stage, with the tambourine player (Mr. Tambo) at one end, and the bones player (Mr. Bones) at the other; the singing of songs, called Ethiopian melodies, with harmonized choruses; and the humorous banter of jokes between the endmen and the performer in the middle seat (Mr. Interlocutor). These performers were sometimes called Ethiopian Delineators and the shows were popularly referred to as ? Shows.
Rice and his imitators, by their stereotypical depictions of blacks, helped to popularize the belief that blacks were lazy, stupid, inherently less human, and unworthy of integration. During the years that blacks were being victimized by lynch mobs, they were also victimized by the racist caricatures propagated through novels, sheet music, theatrical plays, and minstrel shows. Ironically, years later when blacks replaced white minstrels, the blacks also "blackened" their faces, thereby pretending to be whites pretending to be blacks. They, too, performed the ? Shows which dehumanized blacks and helped establish the desirability of racial segregation.
make-up kit Daddy Rice, the original Jim Crow, became rich and famous because of his skills as a minstrel. However, he lived an extravagant lifestyle, and when he died in New York on September 19, 1860, he was in poverty.
The minstrel shows were popular between 1850 and 1870, but they lost much of their national popularity with the coming of motion pictures and radios. Unfortunately for blacks, the minstrel shows continued in small towns, and caricatured portrayals of blacks found greater expression in motion pictures and radios.
Comments
-
This next post will tell you the what, when, where and whyJim Crow was the name of the racial caste system which operated primarily, but not exclusively in southern and border states, between 1877 and the mid-1960s. Jim Crow was more than a series of rigid anti-black laws. It was a way of life. Under Jim Crow, African Americans were relegated to the status of second class citizens. Jim Crow represented the legitimization of anti-black racism. Many Christian ministers and theologians taught that whites were the Chosen people, blacks were cursed to be servants, and ? supported racial segregation. Craniologists, eugenicists, phrenologists, and Social Darwinists, at every educational level, buttressed the belief that blacks were innately intellectually and culturally inferior to whites. Pro-segregation politicians gave eloquent speeches on the great danger of integration: the mongrelization of the white race. Newspaper and magazine writers routinely referred to blacks as ? , ? , and darkies; and worse, their articles reinforced anti-black stereotypes. Even children's games portrayed blacks as inferior beings (see "From Hostility to Reverence: 100 Years of African-American Imagery in Games"). All major societal institutions reflected and supported the oppression of blacks.
Seated in Rear The Jim Crow system was undergirded by the following beliefs or rationalizations: whites were superior to blacks in all important ways, including but not limited to intelligence, morality, and civilized behavior; sexual relations between blacks and whites would produce a mongrel race which would destroy America; treating blacks as equals would encourage interracial sexual unions; any activity which suggested social equality encouraged interracial sexual relations; if necessary, violence must be used to keep blacks at the bottom of the racial hierarchy. The following Jim Crow etiquette norms show how inclusive and pervasive these norms were:
A black male could not offer his hand (to shake hands) with a white male because it implied being socially equal. Obviously, a black male could not offer his hand or any other part of his body to a white woman, because he risked being accused of ? .
Blacks and whites were not supposed to eat together. If they did eat together, whites were to be served first, and some sort of partition was to be placed between them.
Under no circumstance was a black male to offer to light the cigarette of a white female -- that gesture implied intimacy.
Blacks were not allowed to show public affection toward one another in public, especially kissing, because it offended whites.
Jim Crow etiquette prescribed that blacks were introduced to whites, never whites to blacks. For example: "Mr. Peters (the white person), this is Charlie (the black person), that I spoke to you about."
Whites did not use courtesy titles of respect when referring to blacks, for example, Mr., Mrs., Miss., Sir, or Ma'am. Instead, blacks were called by their first names. Blacks had to use courtesy titles when referring to whites, and were not allowed to call them by their first names.
If a black person rode in a car driven by a white person, the black person sat in the back seat, or the back of a truck.
White motorists had the right-of-way at all intersections.Stetson Kennedy, the author of Jim Crow Guide (1990), offered these simple rules that blacks were supposed to observe in conversing with whites:
Never assert or even intimate that a white person is lying.
Never impute dishonorable intentions to a white person.
Never suggest that a white person is from an inferior class.
Never lay claim to, or overly demonstrate, superior knowledge or intelligence.
Never curse a white person.
Never laugh derisively at a white person.
Never comment upon the appearance of a white female.
restroom sign Jim Crow etiquette operated in conjunction with Jim Crow laws (black codes). When most people think of Jim Crow they think of laws (not the Jim Crow etiquette) which excluded blacks from public transport and facilities, juries, jobs, and neighborhoods. The passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution had granted blacks the same legal protections as whites. However, after 1877, and the election of Republican Rutherford B. Hayes, southern and border states began restricting the liberties of blacks. Unfortunately for blacks, the Supreme Court helped undermine the Constitutional protections of blacks with the infamous Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) case, which legitimized Jim Crow laws and the Jim Crow way of life.
In 1890, Louisiana passed the "Separate Car Law," which purported to aid passenger comfort by creating "equal but separate" cars for blacks and whites. This was a ruse. No public accommodations, including railway travel, provided blacks with equal facilities. The Louisiana law made it illegal for blacks to sit in coach seats reserved for whites, and whites could not sit in seats reserved for blacks. In 1891, a group of blacks decided to test the Jim Crow law. They had Homer A. Plessy, who was seven-eighths white and one-eighth black (therefore, black), sit in the white-only railroad coach. He was arrested. Plessy's lawyer argued that Louisiana did not have the right to label one citizen as white and another black for the purposes of restricting their rights and privileges. In Plessy, the Supreme Court stated that so long as state governments provided legal process and legal freedoms for blacks, equal to those of whites, they could maintain separate institutions to facilitate these rights. The Court, by a 7-2 vote, upheld the Louisiana law, declaring that racial separation did not necessarily mean an abrogation of equality. In practice, Plessy represented the legitimization of two societies: one white, and advantaged; the other, black, disadvantaged and despised.
-
Blacks were denied the right to vote by grandfather clauses (laws that restricted the right to vote to people whose ancestors had voted before the Civil War), poll taxes (fees charged to poor blacks), white primaries (only Democrats could vote, only whites could be Democrats), and literacy tests ("Name all the Vice Presidents and Supreme Court Justices throughout America's history"). Plessy sent this message to southern and border states: Discrimination against blacks is acceptable.
drinking fountains Jim Crow states passed statutes severely regulating social interactions between the races. Jim Crow signs were placed above water fountains, door entrances and exits, and in front of public facilities. There were separate hospitals for blacks and whites, separate prisons, separate public and private schools, separate churches, separate cemeteries, separate public restrooms, and separate public accommodations. In most instances, the black facilities were grossly inferior -- generally, older, less-well-kept. In other cases, there were no black facilities -- no Colored public restroom, no public beach, no place to sit or eat. Plessy gave Jim Crow states a legal way to ignore their constitutional obligations to their black citizens.
ticket Jim Crow laws touched every aspect of everyday life. For example, in 1935, Oklahoma prohibited blacks and whites from boating together. Boating implied social equality. In 1905, Georgia established separate parks for blacks and whites. In 1930, Birmingham, Alabama, made it illegal for blacks and whites to play checkers or dominoes together. Here are some of the typical Jim Crow laws, as compiled by the Martin Luther King, Jr., National Historic Site Interpretive Staff:
Barbers. No colored barber shall serve as a barber (to) white girls or women (Georgia).
Blind Wards. The board of trustees shall...maintain a separate building...on separate ground for the admission, care, instruction, and support of all blind persons of the colored or black race (Louisiana).
Burial. The officer in charge shall not bury, or allow to be buried, any colored persons upon ground set apart or used for the burial of white persons (Georgia).
Buses.All passenger stations in this state operated by any motor transportation company shall have separate waiting rooms or space and separate ticket windows for the white and colored races (Alabama).
Child Custody. It shall be unlawful for any parent, relative, or other white person in this State, having the control or custody of any white child, by right of guardianship, natural or acquired, or otherwise, to dispose of, give or surrender such white child permanently into the custody, control, maintenance, or support, of a ? (South Carolina).
Education.The schools for white children and the schools for ? children shall be conducted separately (Florida).
Libraries. The state librarian is directed to fit up and maintain a separate place for the use of the colored people who may come to the library for the purpose of reading books or periodicals (North Carolina).
Mental Hospitals. The Board of Control shall see that proper and distinct apartments are arranged for said patients, so that in no case shall Negroes and white persons be together (Georgia).
Militia. The white and colored militia shall be separately enrolled, and shall never be compelled to serve in the same organization. No organization of colored troops shall be permitted where white troops are available and where whites are permitted to be organized, colored troops shall be under the command of white officers (North Carolina).
Nurses. No person or corporation shall require any White female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in hospitals, either public or private, in which ? men are placed (Alabama).
Prisons. The warden shall see that the white convicts shall have separate apartments for both eating and sleeping from the ? convicts (Mississippi).
Reform Schools. The children of white and colored races committed to the houses of reform shall be kept entirely separate from each other (Kentucky).
Teaching. Any instructor who shall teach in any school, college or institution where members of the white and colored race are received and enrolled as pupils for instruction shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be fined... (Oklahoma).
Wine and Beer. All persons licensed to conduct the business of selling beer or wine...shall serve either white people exclusively or colored people exclusively and shall not sell to the two races within the same room at any time (Georgia).1
The Jim Crow laws and system of etiquette were undergirded by violence, real and threatened. Blacks who violated Jim Crow norms, for example, drinking from the white water fountain or trying to vote, risked their homes, their jobs, even their lives. Whites could physically beat blacks with impunity. Blacks had little legal recourse against these assaults because the Jim Crow criminal justice system was all-white: police, prosecutors, judges, juries, and prison officials. Violence was instrumental for Jim Crow. It was a method of social control. The most extreme forms of Jim Crow violence were lynchings.
Lynchings were public, often sadistic, murders carried out by mobs. Between 1882, when the first reliable data were collected, and 1968, when lynchings had become rare, there were 4,730 known lynchings, including 3,440 black men and women. Most of the victims of Lynch Law were hanged or shot, but some were burned at the stake, castrated, beaten with clubs, or dismembered. In the mid-1800s, whites constituted the majority of victims (and perpetrators); however, by the period of Radical Reconstruction, blacks became the most frequent lynching victims. This is an early indication that lynching was used as an intimidation tool to keep blacks, in this case the newly freed people, "in their places." The great majority of lynchings occurred in southern and border states, where the resentment against blacks ran deepest. According to the social economist Gunnar Myrdal (1994): "The southern states account for nine-tenths of the lynchings. More than two thirds of the remaining one-tenth occurred in the six states which immediately border the South" (pp. 560-561).
Many whites claimed that although lynchings were distasteful, they were necessary supplements to the criminal justice system because blacks were prone to violent crimes, especially the rapes of white women. Arthur ? investigated nearly a century of lynchings and concluded that approximately one-third of all the victims were falsely accused (Myrdal, 1994, p. 561).
Under Jim Crow any and all sexual interactions between black men and white women was illegal, illicit, socially repugnant, and within the Jim Crow definition of ? . Although only 19.2 percent of the lynching victims between 1882 to 1951 were even accused of ? , lynch law was often supported on the popular belief that lynchings were necessary to protect white women from black rapists. Myrdal (1994) refutes this belief in this way: "There is much reason to believe that this figure (19.2) has been inflated by the fact that a mob which makes the accusation of ? is secure from any further investigation; by the broad Southern definition of ? to include all sexual relations between ? men and white women; and by the psychopathic fears of white women in their contacts with ? men" (pp. 561-562). Most blacks were lynched for demanding civil rights, violating Jim Crow etiquette or laws, or in the aftermath of race riots. -
Lynchings were most common in small and middle-sized towns where blacks often were economic competitors to the local whites. These whites resented any economic and political gains made by blacks. Lynchers were seldomly arrested, and if arrested, rarely convicted. ? (1933) estimated that "at least one-half of the lynchings are carried out with police officers participating, and that in nine-tenths of the others the officers either condone or wink at the mob action" (pp. 13-14). Lynching served many purposes: it was cheap entertainment; it served as a rallying, uniting point for whites; it functioned as an ego-massage for low-income, low-status whites; it was a method of defending white ? and helped stop or ? the fledgling social equality movement.
Lynch mobs directed their hatred against one (sometimes several) victims. The victim was an example of what happened to a black man who tried to vote, or who looked at a white woman, or who tried to get a white man's job. Unfortunately for blacks, sometimes the mob was not satisfied to murder a single or several victims. Instead, in the spirit of pogroms, the mobs went into black communities and destroyed additional lives and property. Their immediate goal was to drive out -- through death or expulsion -- all blacks; the larger goal was to maintain, at all costs, white supremacy. These pogrom-like actions are often referred to as riots; however, Gunnar Myrdal (1944) was right when he described these "riots" as "a terrorization or massacre...a mass lynching" (p. 566). Interestingly, these mass lynchings were primarily urban phenomena, whereas the lynching of single victims was primarily a rural phenomena.
James Weldon Johnson, the famous black writer, labeled 1919 as "The Red Summer." It was red from racial tension; it was red from bloodletting. During the summer of 1919, there were race riots in Chicago, Illinois; Knoxville and Nashville, Tennessee; Charleston, South Carolina; Omaha, Nebraska; and two dozen other cities. W.E.B. DuBois (1986), the black social scientist and civil rights activist, wrote: "During that year seventy-seven Negroes were lynched, of whom one was a woman and eleven were soldiers; of these, fourteen were publicly burned, eleven of them being burned alive. That year there were race riots large and small in twenty-six American cities including thirty-eight killed in a Chicago riot of August; from twenty-five to fifty in Phillips County, Arkansas; and six killed in Washington" (p. 747).
The riots of 1919 were not the first or last "mass lynchings" of blacks, as evidenced by the race riots in Wilmington, North Carolina (1898); Atlanta, Georgia (1906); Springfield, Illinois (1908); East St. Louis, Illinois (1917); Tulsa, Oklahoma (1921); and Detroit, Michigan (1943). Joseph Boskin, author of Urban Racial Violence (1976), claimed that the riots of the 1900s had the following traits:
In each of the race riots, with few exceptions, it was white people that sparked the incident by attacking black people.
In the majority of the riots, some extraordinary social condition prevailed at the time of the riot: prewar social changes, wartime mobility, post-war adjustment, or economic depression.
The majority of the riots occurred during the hot summer months.
Rumor played an extremely important role in causing many riots. Rumors of some criminal activity by blacks against whites perpetuated the actions of the white mobs.
The police force, more than any other institution, was invariably involved as a precipitating cause or perpetuating factor in the riots. In almost every one of the riots, the police sided with the attackers, either by actually participating in, or by failing to quell the attack.
In almost every instance, the fighting occurred within the black community. (pp. 14-15)
Boskin omitted the following: the mass media, especially newspapers often published inflammatory articles about "black criminals" immediately before the riots; blacks were not only killed, but their homes and businesses were looted, and many who did not flee were left homeless; and, the goal of the white rioters, as was true of white lynchers of single victims, was to instill fear and terror into blacks, thereby buttressing white ? . The Jim Crow hierarchy could not work without violence being used against those on the bottom rung. George Fredrickson (1971), a historian, stated it this way: "Lynching represented...a way of using fear and terror to check 'dangerous' tendencies in a black community considered to be ineffectively regimented or supervised. As such it constituted a confession that the regular institutions of a segregated society provided an inadequate measure of day-to-day control" (p. 272).
Many blacks resisted the indignities of Jim Crow, and, far too often, they paid for their bravery with their lives.
http://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/what.htm
Please take the time to read and drop your thoughts -
Man great work.
-
And everyone says slavery was bad. Smfh. Jim Crow was just every bit monstrous as slavery.
-
Putting all that ? into perspective
About 400 years of slavery..
About 100 years of Jim Crow
about 50 years since the voting rights act
Legislation has changed....( and went back)
Hearts and minds haven't changed
-
It hasn't changed since the days of the Tamahu and Egyptians and Nubians. The only thing happened we allowed ourselves to think ignorance is cool.
-
playmaker88 wrote: »Putting all that ? into perspective
About 400 years of slavery..
About 100 years of Jim Crow
about 50 years since the voting rights act
Legislation has changed....( and went back)
Hearts and minds haven't changed
Black people have only a generation or two to establish a foundation for our offspring and its been a struggle.
Whites had since forever to make differences and changes.
I can't believe some people cry over affirmative action. -
The Caucasian has always wanted to suppress the minds and rights people of a darker hue. The laws changed but stayed the same for over 500yrs and even to this day we live in this "new" racial free society as some would have you to believe. Jim Crow was a slap in the face for our brother and sisters but let's just forgive and forget like how our Caucasian counterparts to ease our souls
Fact of the matter is we can play nice with each other but we can never really be equal with each other with laws and mindsets still like this in 2013. What is even worst you have people who will ? themselves out for the "Dream" dream being that all men are considered equal in these United States.
The age of Aquarias is almost upon us brotha. Their power and nations are in the same timeframe before Rome was sacked. They are strengthening militaries and laws and police forces, but are weakening themselves in the same fold. The things they cannot see will be their undoing. A nation that spits on the backs of others and use them for footstools have a nasty fall. -
I tell people all the time that our grandparents lives through Jim Crow and our parents did too, all that "get over it" nonsense is ? . They still not over it
-
Ferris.edu is a dope site.
I used some of their pictures (under "Caricatures and Stereotypes") back in 2003 for a presentation on how Blacks are presented in the media. -
playmaker88 wrote: »Putting all that ? into perspective
About 400 years of slavery..
About 100 years of Jim Crow
about 50 years since the voting rights act
Legislation has changed....( and went back)
Hearts and minds haven't changed
that last part is what gets me when you refer back to the whole Paula Deen issue recently. We tend to forget that many of those same white folks that treated us like we were barely human are still alive. Just because laws were passed didn't mean that those folks suddenly changed their way of thinking. The same people that called your mother or father a ? or ? to their face probably still feels that way deep down and lets it slip out from time to time (i.e. Paula Deen). -
Ajackson17 wrote: »And everyone says slavery was bad. Smfh. Jim Crow was just every bit monstrous as slavery.
The only difference between Jim Crow and slavery is slavery involved forced servitude.Black people have only a generation or two to establish a foundation for our offspring and its been a struggle.
Whites had since forever to make differences and changes.
I can't believe some people cry over affirmative action.
The thing is that blacks made more progress in the years following the Civil War, Reconstruction, and up until the Plessey decision, than we have in the years following the modern Civil Rights Movement. During Reconstruction, we had representatives in Congress and on the state level and most importantly, we had an economically vibrant community. The thing is we've had more than enough time to get ourselves in a better position because the FOUNDATION WAS ALREADY LAID. It seems after the Civil Rights Act was passed, ? rushed en masse to go run and be with white folks and we completely and totally forgot about maintaining and supporting our own business. I talked about it in this thread:http://community.allhiphop.com/discussion/493960/the-unintended-consequences-of-integration
What of the game was letting our neighborhoods and schools go to hell and mostly importantly, letting our economic structure disappear after those "good white folks" decided and (were sometimes "dragged kicking and screaming,") into letting us enjoy the rights that were given to us in the Constitution?
One of the weird things about segregation was that (mainly through necessity,) we were forced to have our own businesses, taxi services, grocery and hardware stores, even hotels, but once integration became a reality, it seems that black people lost their entrepreneurial spirit. We went from wanting to own business, to being content with "good jobs with benefits with large private companies and in the public sector and wanting to join "Mr. Charlie'em" as soon as possible. I understand that the riots that took place in America during that era had a lot to do with this, but it seems that if we applied the tenacity and focus that was used to get the Civil Rights Act passed, we could have gotten the funds necessary to rebuild our communities by forcing insurance companies to cash out to the owners of those business.
Also, I want y'all to think about your grandparents for a minute. Why Rex? What's does my Granny and Pa Pa have to do with this? Well, let me personalized this. My grandparents were always "ahead of the curve," so to speak in terms of seeing where the neighborhood was going. When my grandparents saw that the Southside of Richmond was becoming ? up and not a good place to raise children, they moved to what was then an all white subdivision in San Pablo. I guess you can say that my maternal grandparents were the "Jackie Robinson," of the neighborhood.
The thing is, what my grandparents did was replicated all over America in during the 50's, 60's, and 70's by other working and middle class blacks. At the one hand you want your kids to grow up in a positive and safe environment with all of the positives of suburban living, but were our grandparents were in their choice and being selfish by not staying in historically black neighborhoods to maintain a balance. Did they owe it the community to stay in the neighborhood and show youngsters (i.e. our parents,) positive relationships, kids going to schools, people going to work, home ownership and things of that nature?
-
national status is everything
if you proclaim a nationality then black brown yellow color people laws don't pertain to you, and never did. only people that think the world is divided into colors and that the united nations recognize nations as colors, are directly affected by Christian Black Codes aka Jim Crow laws -
The thread is interesting but :
Who sells druggs in our streets? US
Who is busting guns in our streets besides police? US
Who is pertaining that destructive single parenthood system? US
Who is pertaining that ' i m gona rise by myself i dont need nobody' ? US
Who prefers to buy expensive sneakers instead of healthy food? US
?
We are the ultimate state of the Jim crow programm.
We must look outside but also inside us if we want some true change. -
You missed the point of the thread
-
playmaker88 wrote: »You missed the point of the thread
Who is the new lynch mobb? US bruh and we are pretty good at it.
Who is killing other ? because they have entered another territory? US
Wo sell drugs to our community bruh?
We are keeping ourselves in check bruh look closely the white supremasist gave us the tools now we are cooking. -
Now put into perspective how majority of Africans haven't had independence for more than 50years...the Black/African people shall rise again, our leaders are intellectually inept but the generation to come will get us there. I ain't even worried at all....
-
DreadlockRasta wrote: »Now put into perspective how majority of Africans haven't had independence for more than 50years...the Black/African people shall rise again, our leaders are intellectually inept but the generation to come will get us there. I ain't even worried at all....
If you were born 60 years ago you would have said the same ? ..
its inherent in the ? to have these notions.. it seems.. -
playmaker88 wrote: »DreadlockRasta wrote: »Now put into perspective how majority of Africans haven't had independence for more than 50years...the Black/African people shall rise again, our leaders are intellectually inept but the generation to come will get us there. I ain't even worried at all....
If you were born 60 years ago you would have said the same ? ..
its inherent in the ? to have these notions.. it seems..
your thread is excellent big bruh respect
but now we are in 2013 and as i stated in my previous posts we are jim crowing hard. what are your solutions?
come to my thread about the new black behavior and lets talk about it
peace -
playmaker88 wrote: »DreadlockRasta wrote: »Now put into perspective how majority of Africans haven't had independence for more than 50years...the Black/African people shall rise again, our leaders are intellectually inept but the generation to come will get us there. I ain't even worried at all....
If you were born 60 years ago you would have said the same ? ..
its inherent in the ? to have these notions.. it seems..
It may be but i speak from the African pov, every single leader on the continent is inept!
-
DreadlockRasta wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »DreadlockRasta wrote: »Now put into perspective how majority of Africans haven't had independence for more than 50years...the Black/African people shall rise again, our leaders are intellectually inept but the generation to come will get us there. I ain't even worried at all....
If you were born 60 years ago you would have said the same ? ..
its inherent in the ? to have these notions.. it seems..
It may be but i speak from the African pov, every single leader on the continent is greedy and corrupt!
^^ fixed that for you.
That many African nations have only been freed from colonial rule set the tone for every leader after. The state of politics in Africa is one of a perpetual power grab and that power, once attained, must be held at all costs. Just look at Kenya and Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe's militias ran rampant to intimidate people to keep them from voting for the opposition. If they found that you DID vote for the opposition, you ran the risk of being killed or maimed.
That type of ? is rampant on the continent. Those in power will stay there no matter the cost. -
Ajackson17 wrote: »And everyone says slavery was bad. Smfh. Jim Crow was just every bit monstrous as slavery.
This times 100. It's crazy how many white people actually think ? was all good for blacks after slavery.
What's crazy about all of it is that the Jim Crow ? came after Reconstruction. That's important because it shows that this country actually went backwards with racial relations. After Slavery Black people actually had more rights. They put all this Jim Crow ? into effect to shut down any progress black people were making. But yet you still got whites out there asking how black people have gone so long with building anything significant. Crazy.
On a side note, that info just makes black people on here calling other black people "? " look that much stupider. How you going insult people of your race the same exact way that racists do? That's just dumb.
