Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Barlowmaker
Let's look at some of our own history, specifically the Southern and Border States between 1890 and 1930, when thousands of blacks (and some others) were lynched, in some cases with a level of brutality and mutilation that matched what happened in Fallujah. (There were also race motivated lynchings in non-Southern states like Indiana, Arizona, and Delaware. It was not exclusively a Southern problem.) For instance, in at least one case, the victim was skinned alive and several rednecks later tanned the skins to make razor strops. These lynchings sometimes did put a swift end to the lives of criminals, but too often killed blacks who violated the unwritten sexual and cultural codes of the South or who were wrongly accused of violating those codes. In many cases, the lynchings were sanctioned by local officials and local elites. Some lynchings were public affairs, with picnickers and commemorative postcards. In one case (Tulsa in 1921), white violence degenerated into an anti-black pogrom, with much of the African American section of that city burned to the ground and several hundred people, mostly black, killed. The police and the state militia took no action until the violence had played out.

That the lynching party was relatively small and the witnesses in many cases were few does not eliminate the complicity of local officials and elites. Jail guards went off duty before the lynchers came, or did not put up a fight. State and local officials usually did not investigate the lynching and seldom prosecuted the lynchers.

There was an ideology that motivated the Southern (and other) lynchers: white supremacy combined with a redirection of Southern anger toward their failed secession attempt onto the African-Americans. The white supremacist beliefs derived from a form of Darwinism that applied the biologist's evolutionary principles to racial differences. This ideology, in a more virulent form, motivated the German Nazis. Until the 1920s, most Americans, even those who thought lynchings were horrible, believed that whites, especially Nordic whites, were the superior race.

Had Theodore Roosevelt or Calvin Coolidge sent Federal troops into the South to stop lynchings and protect black civil rights, they would have provoked a second civil war. In Coolidge's time, with the Ku Klux Klan having several million members in the Northeast, Midwest and West, as well as the South, the civil war would have had combat zones from Maine to California. Catholics, Jews, blacks, Indians, union members, and white liberals (both old style liberals like H.L. Mencken and Robert Taft and socialistic modern liberals) would have been arrayed against a probable majority of white Protestants. With tanks, machine guns, and warplanes, such a civil war would have made the 1861-65 troubles look like a barroom brawl.

The end of lynching and equal rights for African Americans had to await several decades as public opinion, even in the South, was swayed to oppose at least the crudest manifestations of white supremacy. After the 1920s, theories of the genetic superiority of Europeans were largely debunked by science. Southern politicians and businessmen recognized that the virulent racism of prior decades hurt the region's economy, keeping investment out. Losing millions of blacks to Northern cities diminished the South's labor pool and created a voting bloc in the Northern industrial states that pushed Northern politicians for Federal action against segregation. The horrors of Nazi Germany, the ultimate race based regime, disenchanted many from racist views. From the late 1920s through the 1950s, the number of lynchings declined dramatically. Those that occurred mostly took place in small towns, not in Dallas or Atlanta, and usually happened under cover of darkness.

By the 1950s, the South had changed sufficiently so that when Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson sent Federal troops and lawmen into the region to end school desegregation and arrest white supremacists, there was no general uprising as there likely would have been at the height of the lynching era. Orval Faubus, Ross Barnett, and George Wallace blustered and proclaimed their support of segregation, but they did not order their respective states' National Guards to resist the Federal authorities. Neither did they call for armed uprisings in Little Rock or Birmingham. (There was one small insurgency at Oxford, Mississippi, where several thousand segregationists, led by retired Army General Edwin Walker, fought a force of Federal marshals attempting to desegregate Ole Miss. However, regular Army units soon routed the Rebel wannabes.)

Times changed, but it took over 30 years to do so.

I have used this discussion of American history to lead into consideration of the issues of a police-type response vs. a military response to the outrages at Fallujah, Iraq. This particular part of Iraq is a stronghold of anti-American sentiment. Do we really have the luxury of many years to win the hearts and minds of those Iraqis motivated by either Baathist or Muslim extremist ideology to abandon those beliefs? It appears that half-hearted measures, like sending Federal marshals into the South in 1924, would be futile. The only solution is a massive exercise in force to make the Iraqi elite and masses realize, as did the Germans post V-E Day, that resistance is signing one's death warrant.

In the immediate days after World War II, Nazi diehards, called werewolves, tried an underground resistance. The werewolves, when captured, were shot on the spot by Americans, Britons, and Russians alike. Resistance soon ended. Those Germans who were pro-Nazi, but not as fanatic as the werewolves, soon learned their lesson.

There is no substitute for victory.

674 posted on 04/05/2004 4:50:24 PM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 645 | View Replies ]


To: Wallace T.
I think Iraq is going to work because the vested interest of all parties to share the resources, protection and investment the new Iraq will garner trumps any benefit of religious or ethnic purity.

Iraq has long been a secular state. Any movement to impose Sharia, through legislative initiative, will fail. Any movement to impose it through revolution will also fail.

Why would the Kurds, protected and involved through a Constitution, choose to declare an independent state? A state with no economy, resources or national security? Why would Basra residents forego the commerce Iraq provides when they are free to worship as they wish? Would Fallujahians demand that women shield themselves in burkahs and veils throughout Iraq, if they are permitted to do so as a choice?

It's a win win for all involved.

Regarding the lynchings, TR should have sent the Marshals down to arrest and imprison those involved in conspiracy to kidnap and murder. If Southerners wanted to fight a Second Civil War to assert their right to deprive Black Americans of their Constitutional rights, that's a fight worth having and winning. He shirked his obligation.

I can't believe that Southern states and citizens would seceed if Roosevelt summoned Federal power to ensure Black Americans were not kidnapped, judged, sentenced and hung as a States rights prerogative.

I know this ... the South would have lost, and they would not get their states and citizen rights back. This time, you'd see a map with Charlotte, Leesurrenders; Atlanta, SouthLincoln; Charleston, St. Sherman; Birmingham, Carpetbaggia; Biloxi, Abolitionia; Knoxville, Federalisti; Roanoke, New Appomatix; Little Rock, Integrationa; Shreveport, Yankeeville.

I can't get behind an insurrection founded on the principle that Black folk can be seized, accused, judged, sentenced and hung from a tree till dead. Guaranteed, 30 minutes or less.
679 posted on 04/05/2004 7:00:39 PM PDT by Barlowmaker (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson