Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)9 Ways FDR's 'New Deal' Purposely Excluded Blacks [View all]
Many people seem to be stuck on FDR nostalgia and try to use it to lure black voters into their camp. I am posting this to explain why we black folks are MOSTLY NOT nostalgic for FDR and why claiming to be an FDR Democrat just gets them the side eye, rather than the utmost adoration that many seem to think they deserve for being so 'progressive'. There are many many many reason why we are not interested in going back to the policies of the past or in revisiting the FDR era and HELPING those 'progressives' bring back those times that were soooooo good for them but sooo shitty for us. FDR was no great liberator of Black/Colored/non-white people.
Segregated Camps in the Civilian Conservation Corps
The CCC was created to employ young single men from ages 18 to 25 on outdoor conservation projects. Enrollees had to be physically fit and come from families that were on relief and to whom they were willing to send most of their pay. During its nine-year existence, the CCC distributed more than $2.4 billion in federal funds to employ more than 2.5 million jobless young men (up to 519,000 were enrolled at any one time) who worked in about 3,000 camps. According to the Texas Almanac, the CCC was of very limited assistance to Black families because of local bigotry and national CCC leaders political concerns. Though CCC rules forbade discrimination based on race, color or creed, the local relief boards often refused to enroll Blacks, particularly in the South. When they were enrolled, Blacks were almost always placed in segregated camps, not only in the South, but all over the country.
The CCC was created to employ young single men from ages 18 to 25 on outdoor conservation projects. Enrollees had to be physically fit and come from families that were on relief and to whom they were willing to send most of their pay. During its nine-year existence, the CCC distributed more than $2.4 billion in federal funds to employ more than 2.5 million jobless young men (up to 519,000 were enrolled at any one time) who worked in about 3,000 camps. According to the Texas Almanac, the CCC was of very limited assistance to Black families because of local bigotry and national CCC leaders political concerns. Though CCC rules forbade discrimination based on race, color or creed, the local relief boards often refused to enroll Blacks, particularly in the South. When they were enrolled, Blacks were almost always placed in segregated camps, not only in the South, but all over the country.
Black-lynching
Roosevelt Refuses to Support Anti-Lynching Bill
The president disappointed Black leaders by failing to support an anti-lynching bill and a bill to abolish the poll tax. Roosevelt feared that conservative Southern Democrats, who had seniority in Congress and controlled many committee chairmanships, would block his bills if he tried to fight them on the race question. In 1938, liberal congressmen attempted to pass federal anti-lynching legislation to halt the most horrific type of anti-Black terrorism. Southern Senators angrily filibustered, and FDR defied Black leaders and his own wife by refusing to throw his support behind the measure.
Roosevelt Refuses to Support Anti-Lynching Bill
The president disappointed Black leaders by failing to support an anti-lynching bill and a bill to abolish the poll tax. Roosevelt feared that conservative Southern Democrats, who had seniority in Congress and controlled many committee chairmanships, would block his bills if he tried to fight them on the race question. In 1938, liberal congressmen attempted to pass federal anti-lynching legislation to halt the most horrific type of anti-Black terrorism. Southern Senators angrily filibustered, and FDR defied Black leaders and his own wife by refusing to throw his support behind the measure.
Roosevelts Programs Widened the Gap Between Blacks and Whites
Ira Katznelson, a political science and history professor at Columbia University, in his book, When Affirmative Action Was White, contends that Roosevelts programs not only discriminated against Blacks, but actually contributed to widening the gap between white and Black Americans judged in terms of educational achievement, quality of jobs and housing, and attainment of higher income. Arguing for the necessity of affirmative action today, Katznelson contends that policymakers and the judiciary previously failed to consider just how unfairly Blacks had been treated by the federal government in the 30 years before the civil rights revolution of the 1960s.
Ira Katznelson, a political science and history professor at Columbia University, in his book, When Affirmative Action Was White, contends that Roosevelts programs not only discriminated against Blacks, but actually contributed to widening the gap between white and Black Americans judged in terms of educational achievement, quality of jobs and housing, and attainment of higher income. Arguing for the necessity of affirmative action today, Katznelson contends that policymakers and the judiciary previously failed to consider just how unfairly Blacks had been treated by the federal government in the 30 years before the civil rights revolution of the 1960s.
http://atlantablackstar.com/2015/02/04/9-ways-franklin-d-roosevelts-new-deal-purposely-excluded-blacks-people/2/
Now, people may get upset at this view of history from the perspective of black people, but it is factual and I will continue giving my side-eyes on the regular. Just because FDR was wonderful for whites during that horrible time in history does not mean that we poc will see him the same. All that bragging about being FDR style Dems seems to be because people either forgot, never knew, do not care, or have re-written history by viewing it through rose colored glasses and want to pick and choose which parts of history get discussed. Time to start discussing the bad too, so we can help our allies discover why we are never ever ever going back. No THANK YOU!
264 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

During the civil rights era of the '50s up to the mid-'60s can we agree that they were part of . . .
brush
Jul 2016
#240
The dixiecrats still wielded a lot of power. People finally decided to stand up to the racism
brush
Jul 2016
#76
But today's world view of FDR blends his positive approach to banking and depression repair
floriduck
Jul 2016
#102
In case you're a Democrat, please don't respond to any of my posts as I will not respond.
floriduck
Jul 2016
#219
Wow: the PTB must be really scared for them to smear FDR's policies like this.
Betty Karlson
Jul 2016
#10
mass incarceration, lower life expectancy, voting rights abridged, poverty, ...
Betty Karlson
Jul 2016
#13
Lynchings, Jim Crow, beatings, segregation, miscegenation laws, race riots, chain gangs...
bravenak
Jul 2016
#15
They amount to: I like being slapped in the face because no-one is kicking me in the teeth
Betty Karlson
Jul 2016
#25
Cause somehow intimating there was no mass incarcerations etc under FDR is totally logical!?
uponit7771
Jul 2016
#35
No: but when the status quo includes de facto debtors' prisons, the good parts of history
Betty Karlson
Jul 2016
#50
Nah, they make perfect sense to those who have empathy and a sense of introspection
uponit7771
Jul 2016
#34
Didn't Blacks have mass incarcerations, lower life expectancy, etc under FDR?
AllTooEasy
Jul 2016
#27
This message is STILL not getting through to you guys. No one is saying that we shouldn't
Squinch
Jul 2016
#61
What is sad is that even now, as we make the platform and plans for the future, we have to
Squinch
Jul 2016
#132
There is no other explanation. And to do that, to see this from someone else's eyes, doesn't
Squinch
Jul 2016
#134
That day happened for me in the eighties. Felt like the earth had opened up under me and there
Squinch
Jul 2016
#138
I was always Independent, and politics was only part of it. I had a lot of bad information in
Squinch
Jul 2016
#141
You either didn't look or never cared about Sen. Sanders' racial justice platform.
KeepItReal
Jul 2016
#135
I'm not rehashing the primary, so all I will say is that, no, it was long after hers had been
Squinch
Jul 2016
#137
"the likely presidential candidate". Your post ain't about the actual campaign.
KeepItReal
Jul 2016
#164
It absolutely is. Hillary will stand up for our right against Trump, and she started back in 2014
bravenak
Jul 2016
#165
This isn't the powers that be, this is Bravenak. And stating the truth is not smearing FDR's
Squinch
Jul 2016
#58
The OP is saying the New Deal had glaring and large problems. It is saying that nostalgia
Squinch
Jul 2016
#194
And the OP is wrong to do so: the TIME of the New Deal had glaring problems.
Betty Karlson
Jul 2016
#197
And the present TIME has glaring problems, hence the desire from people of color and women to put
Squinch
Jul 2016
#199
That spin is repulsively disingenuous. I object to vilification of economic reform - and somehow
Betty Karlson
Jul 2016
#218
Oh, for fuck's sake. You are shadow boxing! It doesn't matter what I say, or what anyone else
Squinch
Jul 2016
#220
I must admit my first reaction to this post was "OK, now it's time to begin distancing Clinton
Gene Debs
Jul 2016
#143
OTOH, Eleanor Roosevelt stood up to the racist policy of the Daughters of the
No Vested Interest
Jul 2016
#14
Appeals for racial equality were STILL absurd to most people in the decades that followed.
AllTooEasy
Jul 2016
#166
There is a lot of truth in your post, though perhaps not in the way you intended.
BzaDem
Jul 2016
#40
A good response to another one of these left wing revisionsist threads cutting down progressive
Monk06
Jul 2016
#180
I guess it's indicative of just how far Conservatives/GOP/Reagan have, successfully moved ...
nikto
Jul 2016
#250
This leap you are all making is interesting. Bravenak is pointing out a flaw that must be
Squinch
Jul 2016
#64
Yeah, if only the Democratic Party can get rid of those old, dead ideas from the 30s thru the 70s
nikto
Jul 2016
#259
W. Wilson, The AF of L, and Business Unions killed off the Progressives by the 20s.
jtuck004
Jul 2016
#24
Some great points. FDR did much, more than any other president in many ways, but there is much he
pampango
Jul 2016
#73
So because progressive politics against inequality were racist in the past
My Good Babushka
Jul 2016
#55
I don't know what that means. BS and his followers insisted throughout the primary that
Squinch
Jul 2016
#72
Why is it asking too much to apply affirmative action to any new deal type legislation?
bravenak
Jul 2016
#97
No. Increasing minimum wage, universal healthcare and expanding college in NO WAY address
Squinch
Jul 2016
#128
I don't think many people even know what Americas "economic programs" are in America.
Sunlei
Jul 2016
#126
No interest whatsoever in rehashing this. The point is that the language needs to be explicitly
Squinch
Jul 2016
#228
What I mean is that affirmative action must be the foundation of any new deals or we wont
bravenak
Jul 2016
#96
What is it in YOUR thinking that prevents you from seeing that it is possible to pursue all the
Squinch
Jul 2016
#129
I know. They actually read a whole bunch of stuff I did not say instead of what I say.
bravenak
Jul 2016
#122
I just wanted people to know why trying to use FDR to pull in minorities is failing
bravenak
Jul 2016
#152
FDR was the man who delivered the Democrats out of 70 years of post Civil War minority status
Midwestern Democrat
Jul 2016
#139
I have been apologizing for my forefathers all my life when it comes to POC
William769
Jul 2016
#144
I Was excluded from the original SS. I thank Johnson for fixing that up for me.
bravenak
Jul 2016
#148
Thanks. I hadn't realized bravenak had reached such an advanced age.
DisgustipatedinCA
Jul 2016
#215
Nobody who cites FDR as an example today is defending his appeasement of segregationists, though.
Ken Burch
Jul 2016
#153
You are saying there is no chance that any progressive programs enacted today would exclude people
Squinch
Jul 2016
#195
They are fighting this like we're asking them to give us their right arm. I truly don't get it.
Squinch
Jul 2016
#204
It isn't a problem for me, and I honesly have no idea why you think it would be.
Ken Burch
Jul 2016
#224
It is the entire purpose of this thread. POC and womed are saying, again, that they want the
Squinch
Jul 2016
#226
And I fully support this. So would all Sanders supporters, AFAIK. You're right to ask for this.
Ken Burch
Jul 2016
#229
Read the thread. This, for some reason, is very difficult for some to accept. And was been very
Squinch
Jul 2016
#230
I'm sure that elderly AAs appreciate your attack on a major portion of their retirement incomes.
eridani
Jul 2016
#155
You are written into Social Security now, which would not have happened unless it existed.
eridani
Jul 2016
#160
There was a major correction when agricultural and household labor were covered by Social Security.
eridani
Jul 2016
#170
I never said mass incarceration was his failt. We have been holding blacks in incarceration
bravenak
Jul 2016
#171
Are you going to stop voting to protest the racism that established women's suffrage?
eridani
Jul 2016
#238
Why are people fighting so hard against the idea of explicitly including people of color and women
Squinch
Jul 2016
#196
Can't swim in a pool, can't drive a nice car, can't get a mortgage and this is 2016.
Rex
Jul 2016
#169
Yes. He addressed class imbalances. The point is that going forward we need to always explicitly
Squinch
Jul 2016
#221
I'm still comfused as to why they are fighting the idea of legislating fairness into
bravenak
Jul 2016
#212
Things are better now...but NOT because New Deal economic policies are gone.
Ken Burch
Jul 2016
#232
Then why are people on this thread so opposed to writing affirmative action in?
bravenak
Jul 2016
#233
I think it's anger that you're still attacking a guy whose presidential campaign is basically over.
Ken Burch
Jul 2016
#239
FWIW, I think you're right to expect/demand that economic justice programs be discrimination-free
aikoaiko
Jul 2016
#190
Right? What is so hard about this? What you have outlined is all that is being proposed here.
Squinch
Jul 2016
#198
I think is why many of us who supported Bernie had trouble getting support from African-Americans.
Odin2005
Jul 2016
#191
I can't wait for the follow-up: How the Constitution excluded Black peoples
Bad Thoughts
Jul 2016
#200
FDR also took the most important integration steps taken by the federal government since
merrily
Jul 2016
#257
Um, which part of history are you falsely claiming I don't want to believe and why do I supposedly
merrily
Jul 2016
#261
If we're going to be 100% truthful the only 2 Presidents in the 20th Century who actually did
craigmatic
Jul 2016
#262