AH Challenge: No African-American 20th century 'Great Migration' north and west
Jul 21, 2022 0:17:21 GMT
American hist likes this
Post by raharris1973 on Jul 21, 2022 0:17:21 GMT
The challenge is to have no African-American 20th century 'Great Migration' north and west. Your PoD can be 20th century, or late 19th century, but it must be post *1868*.
This would leave the African-American population overwhelmingly concentrated in the southern United States through the 20th century, instead of something more like the bare majority being concentrated there.
Some potential ideas -
-Discussed a few times previously - immigration restrictions against southern and eastern Europeans never kicked in, and this reduces the "pull factor" of northern job opportunities and labor recruiters since immigrants fill labor demand
-somewhat related and parallel to above, no US participation in either world war leading to less northeastern, midwestern, western demand for southern labor to relocate, possibly no WWI means no Red Scare means no or slow or less immigration restriction
-Newer idea - stronger economic "anchor" in the south: accelerated development of southern manufacturing and service employment, via earlier invention and deployment of air conditioning technology?
-Newer idea - stronger economic "anchor" in the south: accelerated development of southern manufacturing and service employment, industry moves harder and faster and more aggressively south from the 1920s through the 1960s, especially from the Wagner Act on to seek out the non-unionized southern labor force (black and white) and punish the unionizing northern workforce and legal regime. Now they did not do so super abruptly in OTL, so maybe we need some facilitating factors to be in place beforehand. Perhaps southern state governments and national governments in the decades from the 1880s-1930s could have more generously improved transportation, water, electrical and other infrastructures over time in the south so it wasn't so abysmally behind that the midwest and northeast were ahead even with unionization?
-Kill the "pull factors" in the north, hard and nasty - somehow replicate the full Jim Crow suite, 100% in northern states, with the end of Reconstruction, and keep it going at the same intensity and duration as the south.
Now, in any of these scenarios, would any southern states which had black majorities in the reconstruction period, like South Carolina, Mississippi, or Louisiana, retain those majorities through the 20th century? Or would the effect of immigration and economic "anchors" in the south or reduced "pull factors" in the south also maintain or increase white population in all southern states enough to outnumber blacks in every state?
Assuming some states in the south remain African-American majority, and Civil Rights enfranchisement/Voting Rights Acts occur on schedule, would this notably increase the representational weight and bargaining power of African-Americans politically from the 1970s onward?
Would Civil Rights on OTL's schedule be a good or bad assumption?
Pro- Broad trends in the world, anti-colonial developments in the world, television, steady increases in education and expectations
Anti- Smaller represented African-American communities in the north to electorally pressure northern politicians , support media institutions, and to resource the Civil Rights movement, even more white massive resistance to African-American voting rights in states where it means the end of white majority votership
More integral and cohesive African-American extended family, inter-generational and community life with less extra-regional migration? Does the possible added social capital make up for potential lost income and potential lost educational opportunities?
Based on statistical observations of trends, the pre-existing non-southern African-American communities may on balance benefit from a lack of a Great migration. On the one hand, newcomers from the south won't be a source of patrons for their businesses. On the other, new arrivals won't push their wage scales down, and convergence over time with white labor rates over generations, and social mixing, may be faster, depending on how conditions in the north are altered.
This would leave the African-American population overwhelmingly concentrated in the southern United States through the 20th century, instead of something more like the bare majority being concentrated there.
Some potential ideas -
-Discussed a few times previously - immigration restrictions against southern and eastern Europeans never kicked in, and this reduces the "pull factor" of northern job opportunities and labor recruiters since immigrants fill labor demand
-somewhat related and parallel to above, no US participation in either world war leading to less northeastern, midwestern, western demand for southern labor to relocate, possibly no WWI means no Red Scare means no or slow or less immigration restriction
-Newer idea - stronger economic "anchor" in the south: accelerated development of southern manufacturing and service employment, via earlier invention and deployment of air conditioning technology?
-Newer idea - stronger economic "anchor" in the south: accelerated development of southern manufacturing and service employment, industry moves harder and faster and more aggressively south from the 1920s through the 1960s, especially from the Wagner Act on to seek out the non-unionized southern labor force (black and white) and punish the unionizing northern workforce and legal regime. Now they did not do so super abruptly in OTL, so maybe we need some facilitating factors to be in place beforehand. Perhaps southern state governments and national governments in the decades from the 1880s-1930s could have more generously improved transportation, water, electrical and other infrastructures over time in the south so it wasn't so abysmally behind that the midwest and northeast were ahead even with unionization?
-Kill the "pull factors" in the north, hard and nasty - somehow replicate the full Jim Crow suite, 100% in northern states, with the end of Reconstruction, and keep it going at the same intensity and duration as the south.
Now, in any of these scenarios, would any southern states which had black majorities in the reconstruction period, like South Carolina, Mississippi, or Louisiana, retain those majorities through the 20th century? Or would the effect of immigration and economic "anchors" in the south or reduced "pull factors" in the south also maintain or increase white population in all southern states enough to outnumber blacks in every state?
Assuming some states in the south remain African-American majority, and Civil Rights enfranchisement/Voting Rights Acts occur on schedule, would this notably increase the representational weight and bargaining power of African-Americans politically from the 1970s onward?
Would Civil Rights on OTL's schedule be a good or bad assumption?
Pro- Broad trends in the world, anti-colonial developments in the world, television, steady increases in education and expectations
Anti- Smaller represented African-American communities in the north to electorally pressure northern politicians , support media institutions, and to resource the Civil Rights movement, even more white massive resistance to African-American voting rights in states where it means the end of white majority votership
More integral and cohesive African-American extended family, inter-generational and community life with less extra-regional migration? Does the possible added social capital make up for potential lost income and potential lost educational opportunities?
Based on statistical observations of trends, the pre-existing non-southern African-American communities may on balance benefit from a lack of a Great migration. On the one hand, newcomers from the south won't be a source of patrons for their businesses. On the other, new arrivals won't push their wage scales down, and convergence over time with white labor rates over generations, and social mixing, may be faster, depending on how conditions in the north are altered.