• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

If the Civil Rights Act hadn't been passed, when/would the individual Southern states repeal segregation?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 386
  • Start date
Ricardolindo said:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/wi-no-1964-civil-rights-act.324118/post-9504902, white backlash outside of the South only began with housing in 1966. It's hard to see that being included in any strong bill that they wanted to pass.
Click to expand...

David is completely and utterly wrong about this. As others have noted he is a pretty smart guy but you absolutely need to stop citing him all the time. Very often and now in particular he is just spouting straight bullshit. At the very least there was already backlash going on in New York, Massachusetts and California at minimum two years before that.
 
Ricardolindo, to be honest, if you were just citing David T that wouldn't be too bad because he's at least informed on some subjects. But you're often citing random posts from other people on Post-1900 who just happened to comment on a subject, as if they were gospel. This isn't a good foundation to having any kind of handle on things because people on there are often very, very wrong.
 
More to the point, it wouldn't be a better argument if you just cited random posts from this board.

We have opinions, sometimes we argue them well, sometimes they're even correct.

Citing forum posts is not remotely the same as going out and doing actual research. You don't need to go to government archives, or even academic sources; but a well researched piece of journalism is going to be more convincing than What Some Bloke On The Net Told Me.
 
Ricardolindo said:
First, the USA wanted allies among the newly independent African nations. Ending segregation was essential for that.
Second, the Southern segregationists simpy didn't have the national influence or organization of the NRA.
Third, according to https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/wi-no-1964-civil-rights-act.324118/post-9504902, white backlash outside of the South only began with housing in 1966. It's hard to see that being included in any strong bill that they wanted to pass.
Click to expand...
Again, desegregation is not essential to the US gaining allies in Africa. It definitely creates additional hurdles, but again the US's economic and military power provides a major incentive for African states to work with it. Even before desegregation there were a number of African countries that were either willing to work with the US or where the US was able to install a compliant regime. Probably the best example of this is Ethiopia, which was fervently pro-American, and which signed a mutual defense pact in the early 1950s. Also, you're seriously overestimating how much foreign policy concerns convinced politicians to support desegregation. As one historian (Renee Romano of Oberlin College) put it "Mass protest and activism ultimately proved far more important in forcing reluctant legislatures to do away with discriminatory laws than pleading by the State Department."

(Not to put too fine a point on it, but if we're citing things this is the kind of source you should be citing).
 
If your question is 'how late could desegregation be delayed' I think its entirely possible for desegregation to remain a current issue in the present day - just as opposition to LGBT rights are now often cast by the Right as 'freedom of religion', is it so hard to imagine that segregationist laws might be couched in non-racialist terms, espousing 'community rights' or something? just a lot more home owners associations
 
Mumby said:
If your question is 'how late could desegregation be delayed' I think its entirely possible for desegregation to remain a current issue in the present day - just as opposition to LGBT rights are now often cast by the Right as 'freedom of religion', is it so hard to imagine that segregationist laws might be couched in non-racialist terms, espousing 'community rights' or something? just a lot more home owners associations
Click to expand...

This I can certainly see happening. I mean it basically does happen already, but I can definitely see 'municipal independence' as a widescale movement.
 
Here's one detail we have forgotten: If a filibuster succeeded, it would have been very narrowly. It's worth noting that two Senators, Edwin Mechem and Herbert Walters, who opposed the Civil Rights Act were no longer in office after 1964. In addition, if the bill was only a couple of votes short of a filibuster proof majority, it would probably have been slightly weakened, allowing it to pass.
 
Japhy said:
There is no slight weakening of a civil rights bill. It either has the weight of enforcement or it won't. There's no minor action on that. If it passes watered down its as useless as the Eisenhower Era Acts. Full Stop.
Click to expand...

By slight weakening, I meant something like an exemption for local businesses.
 
Japhy said:
...

Are you joking right now?
Click to expand...

No, I meant that if they are really desperate to pass the bill, they may decide to exclude truly local businesses. The bill would still apply to businesses that were also present outside of the South. Maybe I should have used a better term than "slight". However, the bill would still be a huge step forward.
 
Last edited:
Also, remember that I only mentioned that as a possibility. It's also possible that Mechem and Walters, who opposed the bill, being replaced respectively by Montoya and Bass, who supported the bill, would be enough to provide a filibuster proof majority.
 
Yeah, that would functionally be a catastrophic defeat for the civil rights movement. It's a bill that will have required enough political capital and be strong enough on paper that it will severely weaken the ability to get more done at a Federal level for years to come- but it also means that segregation will have the chance to entrench itself even further.

You know how much of the South saw a gutting of public schools in OTL rather than desegregate? Expect that to happen across all of society.

Instead of spending on welfare, for example, 'local' businesses will be contracted to provide charitable aid- to the right people. It'll be a libertarian dream- you'll see privatization of any number of key government services, all run by good ol'boys.
 
Ricardolindo said:
However, the bill would still be a huge step forward.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't think you understand what the Civil Rights Movement was about.

And let's mention again another watered down, toothless act makes it harder to pass an act that can enforce itself. It's like not passing an act at all but actually worse.
 
If that happens, they would be large riots probably making the King Assisination Riots dwarf in comparison, the factions in the CRM that want to work through the Federal Government would be discredited because of this castrated bill, probably leading to several urban insurrections, that probably leads to a 60s PATRIOT ACT to save the country. Oh shit this is during the beginning of Vietnam, if so I don't see the US doing well in the 70s or 80s.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top