Following the color line : $b An account of Negro citizenship in the American democracy
History
Following the color line : $b An account of Negro citizenship in the American democracy
African Americans; United States -- Race relations
To show the dwindling process, take the single country of Tallapoosa in
Alabama. The last census shows 4,203 whites and 2,036 blacks of voting
age, 6,259 in all. After the adoption of the new constitution
disfranchising the Negro in 1901, the total registration was 4,008. Last
fall, although the important question of prohibition had arisen and an
especial effort was made to get voters out, an investigation showed there
were only 1,700 qualified voters in the country.
This astonishing condition is due primarily to the fact that there is no
vital party division on new issues in the South; but it is also due to the
franchise tests, which, having been made severe to keep the Negro out,
operate also to disfranchise hundreds of thousands of poor and ignorant
white men. I spent much time talking with white workingmen, both in the
cities and in the country. I asked them why so many workingmen and farmers
did not vote. Here is one comprehensive reply of a labour leader:
"What's the use? We have to pay two dollars a year poll-tax, and pay it
nearly a year before election. And why vote? There are no real issues at
stake. An election is merely a personal quarrel in the clique of men who
control the Democratic party. Why should we pay two dollars a year and go
to the bother of satisfying the personal ambition of some man we are not
interested in?"
_A White Oligarchy_
So the white vote is dwindling; the political power is being gathered into
the hands of fewer and fewer men. And there is actually springing up a
large class of non-voting white men not unlike the powerless "poor whites"
of ante-bellum times. The white politicians, indeed, in some places do not
encourage the poorer white men to qualify, for the fewer voters, the more
certain their control.
Of course the chief fights in Mississippi and elsewhere are not at the
elections, but in the Democratic (white) primaries; but this fact only
accentuates the point I wish to make: the limitation of political
independence of action. Such conditions are deeply concerning the
thoughtful men of the South; but while they think, few dare to brave
political extinction by speaking out. One would think that the Republican
party, which ostensibly stands for the opposition in the South, would cry
out about conditions. But it does not. The fact is, the Republican party,
as now constituted in the South, is even a more restricted white oligarchy
than the Democratic party. In nearly all parts of the South, indeed, it is
a close corporation which controls or seeks to control all the federal
offices. Speak out? Of course not. It, too, is attempting to eliminate the
Negro (in some places it calls itself "lily white"), and it works not
inharmoniously with the Democratic politicians. For the Republican machine
in the South really has no quarrel with the Democratic machine; it takes
the federal offices which the Democrats cannot get, and the Democrats take
local offices which the Republicans know they cannot get.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account