Black History

COMMENTARY: Origin of Black Politics in America

CHICAGO CRUSADER — Since the end of the Civil War in 1865 electoral politics has played a dominant role in the African American Community

Published

6 years ago

January 26, 2019

crusader

By Conrad Worrill

Since the end of the Civil War in 1865, when African Americans were granted the right to vote, through the 15th Amendment in 1868, electoral politics has played a dominant role in the African American Community. African Americans have been participating in electoral politics for 154 years.

With the North winning the Civil War and chattel slavery being abolished, under the Emancipation Proclamation, and as we were given the right to vote, through the 15th Amendment, many Black leaders began to feel that maybe conditions would change in America. Therefore, most leaders started urging Black people to join the Republican Party, the Party of Lincoln.

This period in history from 1863 to 1876 is called “Reconstruction” and the first time Black people began to participate vigorously in electoral politics.

During the late 1860s and early 1870s, many African Americans were elected to Congress and an African American Senator, Hiram Revels, was elected from Mississippi. The Political Abolition Party and the Equal Rights Party ran Frederick Douglass for Vice President of the United States in 1856 and 1872.

Many Black colleges were established during this period through the land grant act that called for public education at the college level. Because of these responses on the part of the government many African American leaders felt that Black people’s situation could be resolved in America through governmental intervention and effective voting.

The presidential election of 1876 brought into focus the real agendas of the white ruled Republican and Democratic Parties. Rutherford B. Hayes was the Republican candidate who was supposed to be representing the vital interests of the North and Samuel Tilden was the Democratic candidate alleging to represent the real interests of the South.

In a very close election, the South actually won the popular vote; however, during the Electoral College proceedings, neither candidate received a majority of electoral votes. The Southern representatives made it clear that their interests did not include winning the presidency of the United States, but reclaiming full autonomy for the South. Through much wrangling, a decision was made by those present that later became known as the “Great Compromise.”

The Compromise of 1876 resulted in the Republican Hayes being announced the winner of the presidential election and both sides received what they basically wanted in the first place. Obviously neither side was interested in the liberation of Black people. The emerging northern industrialists wanted entry and new markets into the South and the southern plantation owners wanted their land back.

The net result for African Americans was the repealing of some of the voting rights laws that immediately began to wipe out Black elected officials and made it virtually impossible for Black people to vote in the South again until the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1964.

Through all of this, Black leaders, and those African Americans who voted, remained loyal to the Republican Party even though their voting rights had been sold down the drain.

As pointed out, after Reconstruction, many Black people still remained loyal to the Republican Party and tried to fight for change within it just as some Black people are still fighting for changes in the Democratic Party today. This loyalty lasted until the 1930s when African Americans began to switch their allegiance to the Democratic Party and the so-called “New Deal Era” of the Roosevelt Administration. Essentially, since the 1930s to the present, African Americans have voted for Democratic Party candidates in large measure.

There have been a small group of African Americans who have historically called for a Black Political Party in response to the domination of the white ruled Republican and Democratic Parties. In fact, in 1972 in Gary, Indiana 10,000 Black people participated in the National Black Political Convention in which the call for the development of a Black Independent Political Party was a prominent discussion at this meeting. However, the allegiance of Black elected officials to the Democratic Party prevented any real movement toward the development of a Black Political Party or independent Black Political Organization. Instead, a strategy of the third force inside the Democratic Party was developed.

In Chicago, for example, since the death of the late Mayor Harold Washington, African American leaders have been divided over strategy and tactics to continue the movement for Black political empowerment. This trend can be observed around the country.

There is no question that we need our own political party, or at best, our own political organization. But this must occur in a manner that truly represents the best interests of the African American Community.

Dr. Conrad Worrill, Professor Emeritus, Carruthers Center for Inner City Studies (CCICS). New office location is at 1809 E. 71st Street, Chicago, Illinois 60649, 773-592-2598. Email: c-worrill@neiu.edu Website: www.drconradworrill.com.

This article originally appeared in the Chicago Crusader.

crusader

Posts by crusader

Up Next

“Big Sister” Barbara Lee’s Advice for the New Women of Color in Congress

Don't Miss

COMMENTARY: Could Trump allegations lead to a constitutional crisis?

crusader

1 Comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of March 28 – April 1, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of March 28 – April 1, 2025

Published

3 days ago

March 28, 2025

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Report Offers Policies, Ideas to Improve the Workplace Experiences of Black Women in California

The “Invisible Labor, Visible Struggles: The Intersection of Race, Gender, and Workplace Equity for Black Women in California” report by the California Black Women’s Collective Empowerment Institute (CBWCEI), unveiled the findings of a December 2024 survey of 452 employed Black women across the Golden State. Three-fifths of the participants said they experienced racism or discrimination last year and 57% of the unfair treatment was related to incidents at work.

Published

1 week ago

March 24, 2025

Oakland Post

Shutterstock

By McKenzie Jackson, California Black Media

Backed by data, a report released last month details the numerous hurdles Black women in the Golden State must overcome to effectively contribute and succeed in the workplace.

The “Invisible Labor, Visible Struggles: The Intersection of Race, Gender, and Workplace Equity for Black Women in California” report by the California Black Women’s Collective Empowerment Institute (CBWCEI), unveiled the findings of a December 2024 survey of 452 employed Black women across the Golden State. Three-fifths of the participants said they experienced racism or discrimination last year and 57% of the unfair treatment was related to incidents at work.

CBWCEI President and CEO Kellie Todd Griffin said Black women have been the backbone of communities, industries, and movements but are still overlooked, underpaid, and undervalued at work.

“The data is clear,” she explained. “Systemic racism and sexism are not just historical injustices. They are active forces shaping the workplace experiences of Black women today. This report is a call to action. it demands intentional polices, corporate accountability, and systemic changes.”

The 16-page study, conducted by the public opinion research and strategic consulting firm EVITARUS, showcases the lived workplace experiences of Black women, many who say they are stuck in the crosshairs of discrimination based on gender and race which hinders their work opportunities, advancements, and aspirations, according to the report’s authors, Todd Griffin and CBWCEI researcher Dr. Sharon Uche.

“We wanted to look at how Black women are experiencing the workplace where there are systematic barriers,” Todd Griffin told the media during a press conference co-hosted by Ethnic Media Services and California Black Media. “This report is focused on the invisible labor struggles of Black women throughout California.”

The aspects of the workplace most important to Black women, according to those surveyed, are salary or wage, benefits, and job security.

However, only 21% of the survey’s respondents felt they had strong chances for career advancement into the executive or senior leadership ranks in California’s job market; 49% felt passed over, excluded from, or marginalized at work; and 48% felt their accomplishments at work were undervalued. Thirty-eight percent said they had been thought of as the stereotypical “angry Black woman” at work, and 42% said workplace racism or discrimination effected their physical or mental health.

“These sentiments play a factor in contributing to a workplace that is unsafe and not equitable for Black women in California,” the report reads.

Most Black women said providing for their families and personal fulfillment motivated them to show up to work daily, while 38% said they were dissatisfied in their current job with salary, supervisors, and work environment being the top sources of their discontent.

When asked if they agree or disagree with a statement about their workplace 58% of Black women said they feel supported at work, while 52% said their contributions are acknowledged. Forty-nine percent said they felt empowered.

Uche said Black women are paid $54,000 annually on average — including Black single mothers, who averaged $50,000 — while White men earn an average of $90,000 each year.

“More than half of Black families in California are led by single Black women,” said Uche, who added that the pay gap between Black women and White men isn’t forecasted to close until 2121.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Alameda County

Trump Order Slashes Federal Agencies Supporting Minority Business and Neighborhood Development

The latest executive order targeted several federal agencies, including the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) and the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, ordering that their programs and staff be reduced “to the minimum presence and function required by law.” The executive order targeted more agencies that Trump “has determined are unnecessary,” the order stated.

Published

1 week ago

March 24, 2025

Oakland Post

iStock.

By Brandon Patterson

On March 14, President Trump signed an executive order slashing the operations of two federal agencies supporting growth in minority business and neighborhoods as he continued his attacks on programs supporting people of color and on the size of the federal bureaucracy.

The MBDA’s mission is to “promote the growth and global competitiveness” of minority business enterprises, or MBEs. In 2023, according to its website, the agency helped MBEs access $1.5 billion in capital and facilitated nearly $3.8 billion in contracts awarded to minority business enterprises. It also helped MBEs create or sustain more than 19,000 jobs nationwide. Similarly, the CDFI Fund supports economic growth in under-invested communities by providing funding and technical assistance to local CDFIs, including banks, loan funds, and credit unions, that support community development projects in cities across the country. In 2023, the fund supported more than 1,400 local CDFIs across the country, including more than 80 in California — among the highest number for any state in the country.

The MBDA has local satellite business centers operated by organizations that support minority clients with services such as business consulting, contract bid preparation, loan packaging, and accessing capital funding. The San Francisco Bay Area business center is San Jose, operated by San Francisco-based organization Asian, Inc. Meanwhile, local Oakland CDFIs supported by the federal CDFI fund since 2021 include Habitat Community Capital, TMC Community Capital, Gateway Bank Federal Savings Bank, Beneficial State Bancorp, Inc., and Main Street Launch.

“It is clear that the hollowing out of the CDFI Fund and MBDA is not being ordered because those programs have failed in their mission,” the CEO of Small Business Majority John Arensmeyer, a national organization that advocates for small businesses, said in a statement on Saturday. “Instead, it is yet another case of President Trump using DEI as a club to eviscerate programs that seek to level our economic playing field.”

Congresswoman Lateefah Simon also slammed the decision in a statement to the Oakland Post. “As a member of the House Small Business Committee who represents multiple CDFIs in CA-12, I believe Trump’s gutting of operations at the Minority Business Development Agency and at the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund is a direct attack on small businesses, communities of color and other underserved communities,” Rep. Simon said. “Both the MBDA and the CDFI Fund were created with bipartisan support to help historically underserved communities and small businesses — and both programs have helped to dramatically change the material realities of people and bolster entrepreneurship in the U.S. There is no logic to this decision. The point is discrimination and cruelty.”