Difference between revisions of "Racial segregation" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
 
(20 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
[[Category:Sociology]]
 
[[Category:Sociology]]
 
[[Category:Law]]
 
[[Category:Law]]
 
+
{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}{{copyedited}}
 
[[Image:Rex theatre.jpg|right|thumb|250px|The Rex Theatre for Colored People, Leland, Mississippi, June 1937]]
 
[[Image:Rex theatre.jpg|right|thumb|250px|The Rex Theatre for Colored People, Leland, Mississippi, June 1937]]
  
 +
'''Racial segregation''' is the separation, either by law or by action, of people of different races in all manner of daily activities, such as [[education]], housing, and the use of public facilities. Thus, it is a form of institutional [[racism]]. Racial segregation laws have existed in many countries, notably the [[United States]], [[Nazism|Nazi]] [[Germany]], and [[South Africa]] during the ''[[Apartheid]]'' era. While no longer considered acceptable in most countries, racial segregation still exists in many communities through the individual actions of their members. Nevertheless, as the world advances toward the understanding that all people belong to one human family, such practices have become less prevalent, and an increasing number of communities have broken down the barriers dividing the races.
 +
{{toc}}
 
==Definition==
 
==Definition==
  
'''Racial segregation''' is characterized by separation of people of different [[race]]s in daily life when both are doing equal tasks, such as eating in a restaurant, drinking from a water fountain, using a rest room, attending school, going to the movies, or in the rental or purchase of a home. Segregation may be ''de jure'' ([[Latin language|Latin]], meaning "by law")—mandated by law—or ''de facto'' (also Latin, meaning "in fact"); ''de facto'' segregation may exist even illegally. ''De facto'' segregation can occur when members of different races strongly prefer to associate and do business with members of their own race, though a segregationist regime may be maintained by means ranging from [[racial discrimination]] in hiring and in the rental and sale of housing to [[vigilante]] violence such as [[lynching]]s.
+
'''Racial segregation''' is characterized by separation of people of different races in daily life when both are doing equal tasks, such as eating in a restaurant, drinking from a water fountain, using a restroom, attending school, going to the movies, or in the rental or purchase of a home. Segregation may be ''de jure'' ([[Latin language|Latin]], meaning "by law")—mandated by law—or ''de facto'' (also Latin, meaning "in fact"); ''de facto'' segregation may even exist illegally. ''De facto'' segregation can occur when members of different races strongly prefer to associate and do business with members of their own race, though a segregationist regime may be maintained by means ranging from [[racism|racial discrimination]] in hiring and in the rental and sale of housing, to vigilante violence such as [[lynching]]s.
  
Both [[South Africa]] in the ''[[apartheid]]'' era and the [[United States]]—both during the [[History of slavery in the United States|slavery]] era (through 1865) and after the 1876 end of the [[Reconstruction]] that followed the [[United States Civil War]]—passed laws requiring or permitting separation of the [[race]]s in daily life. In 1896, the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] upheld, in ''[[Plessy v. Ferguson]]'' the right of [[U.S. state]]s and localities to mandate racial segregation. In 1913, President [[Woodrow Wilson]] ordered the segregation of the federal [[Civil Service]][http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=1115]. In 1948, President [[Harry S. Truman]] ordered the [[desegregation]] of the U.S. military; in 1954 the Court, in ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'', largely reversed ''Plessy''; over the next eleven years, a succession of further court decisions and federal laws would completely invalidate ''de jure'' racial segregation and discrimination in the U.S., although ''de facto'' segregation and discrimination have proven more resilient.
+
[[South Africa]] in the ''[[apartheid]]'' era and the [[United States]]&mdash;both during the [[slavery]] era (through 1865) and after the 1876 end of the [[Reconstruction]] that followed the [[American Civil War]]&mdash;passed laws requiring or permitting separation of the races in daily life. In 1896, the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] upheld, in ''Plessy v. Ferguson'' the right of U.S. states and localities to mandate racial segregation. In 1913, President [[Woodrow Wilson]] ordered the segregation of the federal [[Civil Service]].<ref>W.E.B. Du Bois, [http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=1115 Another Open Letter to Woodrow Wilson,] ''Teaching American History.'' Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref> In 1948, President [[Harry S. Truman]] ordered the desegregation of the U.S. military; in 1954, the Court, in ''Brown v. Board of Education,'' largely reversed ''Plessy;'' over the next eleven years, a succession of further court decisions and federal laws would completely invalidate ''de jure'' racial segregation and discrimination in the U.S., although ''de facto'' segregation and discrimination have proven more resilient.
  
''De jure'' segregation in both South Africa and the U.S. came with "[[miscegenation]] laws" (prohibitions against [[interracial marriage]]) and laws against hiring people of the race that is the object of discrimination in any but menial positions. Segregation in hiring practices contributed to [[economic inequality|economic imbalance]] between the races. Segregation, however, often allowed close contact in [[social hierarchy|hierarchical]] situations, such as allowing a person of one race to work as a servant for a member of another race. Segregation can involve [[spatial]] separation of the races, and/or mandatory use of different institutions, such as [[school]]s and hospitals by people of different races.
+
''De jure'' segregation in both South Africa and the U.S. came with "[[miscegenation]] laws" (prohibitions against interracial [[marriage]]) and laws against hiring people of the race that is the object of discrimination in any but menial positions. Segregation in hiring practices contributed to economic imbalances between the races. Segregation, however, often allowed close contact in hierarchical situations, such as allowing a person of one race to work as a servant for a member of another race. Segregation can involve spatial separation of the races, and/or mandatory use of different institutions, such as [[school]]s and [[hospital]]s by people of different races.
  
 
==Overview==
 
==Overview==
Even though many societies throughout history have practiced racial segregation, it was by no means universal, and some multiracial societies such as the [[Roman Empire]] were notable for their rejection of racial segregation. Most modern societies do not officially practice racial segregation, and officially frown upon racial discrimination. However, anxieties about racial, religious and cultural differences still find expression in other forms of political and social controversy, either as an official pretext for culturally accepted discrimination, or as a socially acceptable way to discuss cultural, religious and economic friction that results from racial discrimination. For example, [[immigration]] and religious controversies often mask concerns about the culture or racial composition of the immigrants. Issues of race relations also appear in seemingly race-neutral disputes, over such issues as poverty, healthcare, taxation, religion, enforcement of a particular set of cultural norms, and even fashion.
+
Even though many societies throughout history have practiced racial segregation, it was by no means universal, and some multiracial societies, such as the [[Roman Empire]], were notable for their rejection of such practices. Most modern societies do not officially practice racial segregation, and officially frown upon [[racism|racial discrimination]]. However, anxieties about racial, [[religion|religious]], and [[culture|cultural]] differences still find expression in other forms of political and social controversy, either as an official pretext for culturally accepted discrimination, or as a socially acceptable way to discuss cultural, religious, and economic friction that results from racial discrimination. For example, immigration and religious controversies often mask concerns about the culture or racial composition of the immigrants. Issues of race relations also appear in seemingly race-neutral disputes, over such issues as poverty, healthcare, [[taxation]], religion, enforcement of a particular set of cultural [[norm]]s, and even [[fashion]].
  
Racial segregation differs from racial discrimination in a number of ways. Discrimination ranges from individual actions, to socially enforced discriminatory behavior, to legally mandated differences in status between members of different races. Segregation has, typically, harshly reinforced discrimination: if people of different races live in separate neighborhoods, attend different schools, receive different social services, etc., then people of the favored races can be largely insulated from societal neglect of people of other races.
+
Racial segregation differs from racial discrimination in a number of ways. Discrimination ranges from individual actions, to socially enforced discriminatory behavior, to legally mandated differences in status between members of different races. Segregation has, typically, harshly reinforced discrimination: If people of different races live in separate neighborhoods, attend different schools, receive different [[social service]]s, etc., then people of the favored races can be largely insulated from societal neglect of people of other races.
  
==Racial Segregation in Different Countries==
+
==Racial segregation in different countries==
 
+
Throughout recorded time, human societies have created divides along racial lines. Laws limiting the rights to [[property]], [[marriage]], and freedom of those of different races can be found in the history books of practically every [[culture]]. These laws have carried many names, such as [[Jim Crow Law]]s, Nuremberg Laws, and [[Apartheid]], to name a few. Though many of the offenders have removed such laws or at least do not enforce them, many countries have remained segregated.  
Throughout recorded time man has created divides along racial lines. Laws limiting the rights to property, marriage, and freedom of those of different races can be found in the history books of practically every culture. These laws have carried many names such as Jim Crow Laws, Nuremberg Laws, and Apartheid to name a few. Though many of the offenders have removed these laws or at least do not enforce them, many countries are still segregated to this day.
 
  
 
===United States===
 
===United States===
 +
[[Image:1943 Colored Waiting Room Sign.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Sign for "Colored waiting room," Georgia, 1943]]
  
[[Image:1943 Colored Waiting Room Sign.jpg|thumb|200px|Sign for "Colored waiting room", Georgia, 1943]]
+
After the [[Emancipation Proclamation]] abolished [[slavery]] in the Southern United States, racial discrimination became regulated by the so-called [[Jim Crow law]]s, which mandated strict segregation of the races. Though such laws were instituted shortly after fighting ended in many cases, they only became formalized after the end of Republican-enforced Reconstruction in the 1870s and 1880s, during a period known as the "nadir of American race relations." This legalized segregation lasted up to the 1960s, primarily through the deep and extensive power of the southern Democratic Party.
  
After the [[Emancipation Proclamation]] abolished [[History of Slavery in the United States|slavery]] in the [[Southern United States|South]], racial discrimination became regulated by the so-called [[Jim Crow law]]s, which mandated strict segregation of the races. Though such laws were instituted shortly after fighting ended in many cases, they only became formalized after the end of [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]]-enforced [[Reconstruction]] in the [[1870s]] and [[1880s|80s]] during a period known as the [[nadir of American race relations]]. This legalized segregation lasted up to the [[1960s]], primarily through the deep and extensive power of the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]].  
+
While the majority, in 1896, ''Plessy vs. Ferguson'' overtly upheld only "separate but equal" facilities (specifically, [[transportation]] facilities), Justice John Marshall Harlan in his dissenting opinion protested that the decision was an expression of "white supremacy;" he predicted that segregation would "stimulate aggressions … upon the admitted rights of colored citizens," "arouse race hate" and "perpetuate a feeling of distrust between [the] races."<ref>''The Nation,'' [http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040503/fonerkennedy Brown at 50.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref>
  
While the majority in 1896 ''[[Plessy vs. Ferguson|Plessy]]'' overtly upheld only "separate but equal" facilities (specifically, transportation facilities), Justice [[John Marshall Harlan]] in his [[dissenting opinion|dissent]] protested that the decision was an expression of [[white supremacy]]; he predicted that segregation would "stimulate aggressions … upon the admitted rights of colored citizens," "arouse race hate" and "perpetuate a feeling of distrust between [the] races."
+
In the post-Civil War South, Democrats used the race issue to solidify their hold on Southern politics, playing on white resentment of black political power. Democrats were the agents in passing segregation laws, as well as laws disenfranchising blacks (and sometimes poor whites) politically. In 1913, President [[Woodrow Wilson]] ordered the segregation of the federal [[Civil Service]]. White and black people would sometimes be required to eat separately and use separate schools, public toilets, park benches, train and restaurant seating, etc. In some locales, in addition to segregated seating, it could be forbidden for stores or restaurants to serve different races under the same roof.
[http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040503/fonerkennedy]<!-- Eric Foner and Randall Kennedy, "Brown at 50", ''The Nation'', posted April 15, 2004 (May 3, 2004 issue)—>
 
  
In the post-Civil War South, Democrats used the race issue to solidify their hold on Southern politics, playing on [[White (people)#Historic use of the term in the United States|white]] resentment of black political power. Democrats were the agents in passing segregation laws, as well as laws disenfranchising blacks (and sometimes poor whites) politically. In 1913, President [[Woodrow Wilson]] ordered the segregation of the federal [[Civil Service]][http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=1115]. White and [[Black (people)|black people]] would sometimes be required to eat separately and use separate schools, public toilets, park benches, train and restaurant seating, etc. In some locales, in addition to segregated seating, it could be forbidden for stores or restaurants to serve different races under the same roof.  
+
Segregation was also pervasive in housing. State constitutions (for example, that of California) had clauses giving local [[jurisdiction]]s the right to regulate where members of certain races could live. White landowners often included restrictive covenants in deeds through which they prevented blacks or Asians from ever purchasing their property from any subsequent owner. In the 1948 case of ''Shelley v. Kraemer,'' the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] finally ruled that such covenants were unenforceable in a court of law. However, residential segregation patterns had already become established in most American cities, and have often persisted up to the present.
  
Segregation was also pervasive in housing.  State constitutions (for example, that of [[California Constitution|California]]) had clauses giving local jurisdictions the right to regulate where members of certain races could live.  White landowners often included [[restrictive covenant]]s in deeds through which they prevented blacks or [[Asian#'Asian' in other English-speaking countries|Asian]]s from ever purchasing their property from any subsequent owner. In the [[1948]] case of ''[[Shelley v. Kraemer]]'', the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] finally ruled that such covenants were unenforceable in a court of law. However, residential segregation patterns had already become established in most American cities, and have often persisted up to the present (see [[white flight]]).
+
With the migration up north of many black workers at the turn of the twentieth century, and the friction that occurred with white and black workers during this time, segregation was and continues to be a phenomenon in northern cities as well as in the south. Whites generally allocate tenements as housing for poor blacks.<ref>Skidmore, [http://www.skidmore.edu/~dkarp/Social%20Issues/E/history.html History of Residential Segregation.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref>
  
With the [[migration]] up north of many black workers at the turn of the [[twentieth century]], and the friction that occurred with white and black workers during this time, segregation was and continues to be a pheneomen in northeren cities as well as in the south. Whites generally allocate [[tenements]] as housing for poor blacks. [http://www.skidmore.edu/~dkarp/Social%20Issues/E/history.html]
+
"[[Miscegenation]]" laws prohibited people of different races from [[marriage|marrying]]. As one of many examples of such state laws, Utah's marriage law had an anti-miscegenation component that was passed in 1899 and repealed in 1963. It prohibited marriage between a white and anyone considered a Negro, mulatto (half Negro), quadroon (one-quarter Negro), octoroon (one-eighth Negro), [[Mongolia]]n, or member of the [[Malay]] race (presumably a Polynesian or Melanesian). No restrictions were placed on marriages between people that were not "white persons" (Utah Code, 40-1-2, C. L. 17, §2967 as amended by L. 39, C. 50; L. 41, Ch. 35).
  
"[[Miscegenation]]" laws prohibited people of different races from marrying. As one of many examples of such state laws, [[Utah]]'s marriage law had an anti-miscegenation component that was passed in [[1899]] and repealed in [[1963]]. It prohibited marriage between a white and anyone considered a Negro, mulatto (half Negro), quadroon (one-quarter Negro), octoroon (one-eighth Negro), [[Mongols|Mongolian]], or member of the Malay race (presumably a Polynesian or Melanesian). No restrictions were placed on marriages between people that were not "white persons." (Utah Code, 40-1-2, C. L. 17, §2967 as amended by L. 39, C. 50; L. 41, Ch. 35.).
+
In [[World War I]], blacks served in the United States Armed Forces in segregated units. Black soldiers were often poorly trained and equipped. The 369th Infantry, however, (formerly 15th New York National Guard) Regiment distinguished themselves, and were known as the "Harlem Hellfighters."<ref>Glenn Watkins, [http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/hhf.htm James Reese Europe and The Harlem Hellfighters Band.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref>
  
In [[World War I]], blacks served in the [[United States Armed Forces]] in segregated units. Black soldiers were often poorly trained and equipped. Still, the 93rd Division, fought alongside the [[French people|French]] <!-- TODO: Figure out what this bit was trying to say (who needed troops, and with their use of [[Algeria]]n, [[Morocco|Moroccan]] —>. The 369th Infantry (formerly 15th New York National Guard) Regiment distinguished themselves, and were known as the "[[Harlem]] Hellfighters". [http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/detached.htm] [http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/hhf.htm]
+
[[World War II]] saw the first black military pilots in the U.S., the [[Tuskegee Airmen]], 99th Fighter Squadron,<ref>Keith Weldon Medley, [http://www.smithsonianmagazine.com/issues/2004/may/interest.htm On Clipped Wings: As America's first black military pilots, Tuskegee airmen faced a battle against racism,] ''Smithsonian Magazine.'' Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref> and also saw the segregated 183rd Engineer Combat Battalion participate in the liberation of Jewish survivors at Buchenwald.<ref>Asa R. Gordon, [http://members.aol.com/asargordon/encountr.htm William A. Scott, III and the Holocaust: The Encounter of African American Liberators and Jewish Survivors at Buchenwald.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref>
  
[[World War II]] saw the first black military pilots in the U.S., the Tuskegee Airmen, 99th Fighter Squadron, [http://www.smithsonianmagazine.com/issues/2004/may/interest.htm], and also saw the segregated 183rd Engineer Combat Battalion participate in the liberation of Jewish survivors at Buchenwald [http://members.aol.com/asargordon/encountr.htm].
+
During [[World War II]], people of [[Japanese people|Japanese]], [[Italian people|Italian]], and [[German people|German]] descent (whether citizens or not) were placed in [[internment camp]]s, on the basis of their race. However, the German Americans were not sent to internment camps to the same extent as the Japanese.  
  
During [[World War II]], people of [[Japanese people|Japanese]], [[Italian people|Italian]], and [[German people|German]] descent (whether citizens or not) were placed in [[internment camp]]s, on the basis of their race. However, the German Americans were not sent to internment camps to the same extent as the Japanese. See [[Japanese American internment]].
+
Pressure to end racial segregation in the government grew among African Americans and progressives after the end of World War II. On January 26, 1948, President [[Harry S. Truman]] signed Executive Order 9981, ending segregation in the United States Armed Forces.  
  
Pressure to end racial segregation in the [[Federal government of the United States|government]] grew among [[African American]]s and progressives after the end of World War II. On [[January 26]], [[1948]] [[President of the United States|President]] [[Harry S. Truman]] signed [[Executive Order 9981]], ending segregation in the United States Armed Forces.  
+
Institutionalized racial segregation was ended as an official practice by the efforts of such American [[Civil Rights Movement]] activists as [[Rosa Parks]] and [[Martin Luther King Jr.]], working during the period from the end of World War II through the passage of the Voting Rights Act and the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]], supported by President [[Lyndon Johnson]]. Many of their efforts were acts of [[civil disobedience]] aimed at violating the racial segregation rules and laws, such as refusing to give up a seat in the black part of the bus to a white person (Rosa Parks), or holding sit-ins at all-white diners.  
  
Institutionalized racial segregation was ended as an official practice by the efforts of such [[American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968)|civil rights]] [[Activism|activists]] as [[Rosa Parks]] and [[Martin Luther King Jr.]], working during the period from the end of World War II through the passage of the [[Voting Rights Act]] and the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]] supported by President [[Lyndon Johnson]]. Many of their efforts were acts of [[civil disobedience]] aimed at violating the racial segregation rules and laws, such as refusing to give up a seat in the black part of the bus to a white person (Rosa Parks), or holding [[sit-in]]s at all-white [[wiktionary:diner|diners]].  
+
Not all racial segregation laws have been repealed in the United States, although Supreme Court rulings have rendered them unenforceable. For instance, the Alabama Constitution still mandates that "Separate schools shall be provided for white and colored children, and no child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the other race."<ref>Alabama State Legislature, [http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeOfAlabama/Constitution/1901/CA-245806.htm SECTION 256.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref> A proposal to repeal this provision was narrowly defeated in 2004. However, in a different arena, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in February 2005, in ''Johnson v. California'' (125 S. Ct. 1141) that the California Department of Corrections' unwritten practice of racially segregating prisoners in its [[prison]] reception centers&mdash;which California claimed was for inmate safety (gangs in California, as throughout the U.S., usually organize on racial lines)&mdash;is to be subject to strict scrutiny, the highest level of constitutional review. Although the high court remanded the case back to the lower courts, it is likely that their decision will have the impact of forcing California to alter its practice of segregating by race in its reception centers.
  
Not all racial segregation laws have been repealed in the United States, although Supreme Court rulings have rendered them unenforceable. For instance, the [[Alabama Constitution]] still mandates that ''Separate schools shall be provided for white and colored children, and no child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the other race''. [http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeOfAlabama/Constitution/1901/CA-245806.htm] <!--  Professor H. Garlow has been a critical governmental influence on policies of legal desegregation. Thia may be true, and even useful, but it's uncited, and doesn't belong in the middle of this paragraph.> A proposal to repeal this provision was narrowly defeated in [[2004]]. However, in a different arena, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in February [[2005]] in ''Johnson v. California'' (125 S. Ct. 1141) that the California Department of Corrections' unwritten practice of racially segregating prisoners in its prison reception centers &mdash; which California claimed was for inmate safety (gangs in California, as throughout the U.S., usually organize on racial lines)&mdash; is to be subject to [[strict scrutiny]], the highest level of constitutional review. Although the high court [[remanded]] the case back to the lower courts, it is likely that their decision will have the impact of forcing California to alter its practice of segregating by race in its reception centers.
+
A [[law]] need not stipulate ''de jure'' segregation in order to have the effect of ''de facto'' segregation. For example, the "eagle feather law,"<ref>www.geocities.com, [http://www.geocities.com/eaglefeatherlaw Religious Freedom with Raptors.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref> which governs the possession and [[religion|religious]] use of [[eagle]] feathers, was officially written to protect then dwindling eagle populations while still protecting traditional [[Native American]] [[spiritual]] and religious [[custom]]s, of which the use of eagles are central. The eagle feather law later met charges of promoting racial segregation due to the law’s provision authorizing the possession of eagle feathers to members of only one ethnic group, Native Americans, and forbidding Native Americans from including non-Native Americans in indigenous customs involving eagle feathers&mdash;a common modern practice dating back to the early 1500s.
  
A [[law]] need not stipulate ''de jure'' [[segregation]] in order to have the effect of ''de facto'' segregation. For example, the [[eagle feather law]], which governs the possession and [[religious]] use of [[eagle]] feathers, was officially written to protect then dwindling [[eagle]] populations while still protecting traditional [[Native Americans in the United States|Native American]] [[spiritual]] and [[religious]] customs, of which the use of eagles are central. The [[eagle feather law]] later met charges of promoting racial segregation due to the law’s provision authorizing the possession of eagle feathers to members of only one [[ethnic]] group, Native Americans, and forbidding Native Americans from including non-Native Americans in indigenous customs involving eagle feathers—a common modern practice dating back to the early 1500s.
+
Despite all of the legal changes of the latter half of the twentieth century, however, the United States remained a segregated society, with housing patterns, [[school]] enrollment, [[church]] membership, employment opportunities, and even [[college]] admissions all reflecting significant ''de facto'' segregation. Supporters of [[affirmative action]] argue that the persistence of such disparities reflects either racial discrimination or the persistence of its effects.
  
Despite all of the legal changes of the past half-century, however, the United States remains a segregated society, with housing patterns, school enrollment, church membership, employment opportunities, and even college admissions all reflecting significant ''de facto'' segregation. Supporters of [[affirmative action]] argue that the persistence of such disparities reflects either racial discrimination or the persistence of its effects.
+
===Educational segregation in the United States===
 +
In the ''Brown v. Board'' decision, Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]], writing for a unanimous court, said that  
 +
<blockquote>…in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal… To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone. </blockquote>
  
===Educational Segregation in the United States===
+
The decision implied that the justices were influenced in part by studies by Kenneth B. Clark showing that segregated education had a negative [[psychology|psychological]] effect upon black school children. Clark's work included his "doll study," in which black students in segregated schools were shown both black and white dolls and asked which one they liked better. A majority of black students preferred the white doll, which was believed by Clark to demonstrate lowered black [[self-esteem]] as a result of segregation.
  
In the Brown v. Board decision, Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]], writing for a unanimous court, said that "in the field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal... To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone."  The decision implied that the justices were influenced in part by studies by [[Kenneth B. Clark]] showing that segregated education had a negative psychological effect upon black school children. Clark's work included his "doll study" in which black students in segregated schools were shown both black and white dolls and asked which one they liked better. A majority of black students preferred the white doll, which was believed by Clark to demonstrate lowered black self-esteem as a result of segregation.
+
According to the Civil Rights Project at [[Harvard University]], the actual desegregation of U.S. public schools peaked in 1988; since that time the schools have, in fact, become more segregated. As of 2005, the present proportion of Black students at majority white schools "a level lower than in any year since 1968."<ref>''The Nation,'' [http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051219/kozol Overcoming Apartheid.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref>
 
 
According to the Civil Rights Project at [[Harvard University]], the actual desegregation of U.S. public schools peaked in [[1988]]; since that time the schools have, in fact, become more segregated. As of 2005, the present proportion of Black students at majority white schools "a level lower than in any year since 1968." [http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051219/kozol] <!-- Jonathan Kozol, [http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051219/kozol Overcoming Apartheid]. ''[[The Nation (U.S. periodical)|The Nation]]'', December 19, 2005. p. 26. —>
 
  
 
=== Nazi Germany ===
 
=== Nazi Germany ===
An example of miscegenation laws was the [[Nuremberg Laws]] enacted by the [[Nazis]] in [[Germany]] against the large German [[Jew]]ish community during the [[1930s]]. The laws prohibited marriages between Jews (deemed as ''[[Untermensch]]en'' - "sub-humans") and German "[[Aryan#Racist connotations|Aryan]]s" (deemed the ''[[Herrenrasse]]'' - "master race"). Many interfaith and intermarried couples committed suicide when these laws came into effect.
+
An example of [[miscegenation]] laws were the Nuremberg Laws enacted by the [[Nazism|Nazis]] in [[Germany]] against the large German [[Judaism|Jewish]] community during the 1930s. The laws prohibited [[marriage]]s between Jews (deemed as ''Untermenschen''--"sub-humans") and German "Aryans" (deemed the ''Herrenrasse''--"master race"). Many interfaith and intermarried couples committed [[suicide]] when these laws came into effect.
 
 
Under the [[General Government]] of occupied [[Poland]] in [[1940]], the population was divided into different groups, each with different rights, food rations, allowed strips in the cities, public transportation, and assigned
 
*[[Ukraine|Ukrainians]],
 
*Highlanders ([[Goralenvolk]]) - an attempt to split the Polish nation by using local collaborators
 
*[[Kashubians]] ([[Kaschobenvolk]]) - similar attempt like with Goralenvolk, but less successful
 
*[[Poland|Poles]],
 
*[[Jew]]s (eventually sentenced to extermination as a category).
 
*[[Homosexuals]]
 
 
 
During the [[1930s]] and [[1940s|40s]], Jews in Nazi-controlled states were forced to wear yellow ribbons or stars of David, and were, along with [[Roma people|Romas]] (Gypsies) discriminated against by the racial laws. Jewish doctors and professors were not allowed to treat Aryan (effectively, [[gentile]]) patients or teach Aryan pupils, respectively.
 
The Jews were also not allowed to use any public transportation, besides the ferry, and would only be able to shop from 3-5 in Jewish stores.  After [[Kristallnacht]] ("The Night of Broken Glass"), the Jews were fined 1,000,000 [[German reichsmark|marks]] for damages done by the Nazi troops and [[Schutzstaffel|SS]] members.
 
 
 
  
 +
During the 1930s and 1940s, Jews in Nazi-controlled states were forced to wear yellow ribbons or [[Star of David]], and were, along with [[Roma people|Romas]] (Gypsies) discriminated against by the racial laws. Jewish doctors and professors were not allowed to treat Aryan (effectively, [[gentile]]) patients or teach Aryan pupils, respectively.
 +
The Jews were also not allowed to use any public transportation, besides the ferry, and would only be able to shop from 3-5 in Jewish stores. After ''Kristallnacht'' ("[[The Night of Broken Glass]]"), the Jews were fined 1,000,000 German marks for damages done by the Nazi troops and SS members.
  
 
===South Africa===
 
===South Africa===
 
+
[[Image:DurbanSign1989.jpg|thumb|right|200px|"Petty apartheid": Sign on Durban beach in English, Afrikaans and Zulu]]
[[Apartheid]] was a system which existed in [[South Africa]] for over forty years, although the term itself had a history going back to the [[1910s]]. It was formalized in the years following the victory of the [[National Party (South Africa)|National Party]] in the all-white national election of [[1948]], increased in dominancy under the rule of Prime Minister [[Hendrik Frensch Verwoerd]] and remained law until [[1990]]. Examples of apartheid policy introduced are the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, [[1951]], which made it illegal for marriage between races. Apartheid was abolished following a rapid change in public perception of racial segregation throughout the [[world]], and an economic [[boycott]] against South Africa which had crippled and threatened to destroy its economy.
+
[[Apartheid]] was a system which existed in [[South Africa]] for over forty years, although the term itself had a history going back to the 1910s. It was formalized in the years following the victory of the National Party in the all-white national election of 1948, increased in dominance under the rule of Prime Minister [[Hendrik Frensch Verwoerd]] and remained law until 1990. Examples of apartheid policy introduced are the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1951, which made it illegal for [[marriage]] between races. Apartheid was abolished following a rapid change in public perception of racial segregation throughout the world, and an economic [[boycott]] against South Africa which had crippled and threatened to destroy its economy.
  
 
=== Rhodesia ===
 
=== Rhodesia ===
 +
The British [[colony]] of [[Rhodesia]] (now [[Zimbabwe]]), under [[Ian Smith]], leader of the white minority government, declared unilateral independence in 1965. For the next 15 years, Rhodesia operated under white minority rule, until international sanctions forced Smith to hold multiracial elections, after a brief period of British rule in 1979.
  
The British [[colony]] of [[Rhodesia]] (now [[Zimbabwe]]), under [[Ian Smith]], leader of the white minority government, declared unilateral independence in 1965.  For the next 15 years, Rhodesia operated under white minority rule until international sanctions forced Smith to hold multiracial elections, after a brief period of British rule in 1979.
+
Laws enforcing segregation had been around before 1965, although many institutions simply ignored them. One highly publicized legal battle occurred in 1960, involving the opening of a new theater that was to be open to all races. This incident was nicknamed "The Battle of the Toilets."
 
 
Laws enforcing segregation had been around before 1965, although many institutions simply ignored them. One highly publicised legal battle occurred in [[1960]] involving the opening of a new [[Reps Theatre|Theatre]] that was to be open to all races, this incident was nicknamed [[Reps Theatre|"The Battle of the Toilets"]].
 
  
 
=== Australia ===
 
=== Australia ===
From Australian federation up to the 1970s, what became known as the "White Australia Policy" officially discriminated against those who were not white and prevented them from immigrating to Australia, by deliberately making their immigration tests too hard to pass. The history of this form of racial discrimination is described in a government fact sheet [http://www.immi.gov.au/facts/08abolition.htm]. The various government laws and acts that made up the Policy were amended or replaced over a course of twenty or so years, from the mid-fifties to the mid-seventies. See [[White Australia Policy]].  
+
From [[Australia]]n federation up to the 1970s, what became known as the "White Australia Policy" officially discriminated against those who were not white and prevented them from immigrating to Australia, by deliberately making their immigration tests too hard to pass. The various government laws and acts that made up the Policy were amended or replaced over a course of twenty or so years, from the mid-fifties to the mid-seventies.  
  
In the past, it was policy for [[Indigenous Australians|Aborigines]] to be taken to live on missions, the intention being for them to be "out of the way" for the expanding territory of the white settlers. In the early-to-mid 20th Century the official policy regarding half-Aboriginal children was one of ''assimilation'': they would be brought up on the missions to become part of white society and made to marry only white people, the intention being to "breed out" the Aboriginal traits by the third generation or so. Around the 1960s, the official policy regarding all indigenous Australians was changed to one of ''integration'': being able to live either in Western society, on missions or in traditional society.
+
In the past, it was policy for [[Indigenous Australians|Aborigines]] to be taken to live on missions, the intention being for them to be "out of the way" for the expanding territory of the white settlers. In the early-to-mid twentieth century the official policy regarding half-Aboriginal children was one of "assimilation:" They would be brought up on the missions to become part of white society and made to marry only white people, the intention being to "breed out" the Aboriginal traits by the third generation or so. Around the 1960s, the official policy regarding all indigenous Australians was changed to one of "integration:" Being able to live either in Western society, on missions or in traditional society.  
  
Despite the official stance being integration, a large percentage of indigenous Australians live away from the urban areas in comparatively poor socio-economic conditions, leaving them somewhat segregated from the rest of Australian society. A number of commentators and civil rights groups have characterised the situation as apartheid [http://www.unswpress.com.au/isbn/0868407194.htm][http://www.zmag.org/content/Race/pilger0127.cfm][http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/24/054.html] - in fact, Australia's government policies are viewed by some as the original impetus for the apartheid system in South Africa. [http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/24/177.html][http://www.jcu.edu.au/aff/history/articles/limb.htm][http://www.convictcreations.com/history/federation.htm]
+
Despite the official stance being integration, a large percentage of indigenous Australians continued to live away from the urban areas in comparatively poor socio-economic conditions, leaving them somewhat segregated from the rest of Australian society. A number of commentators and civil rights groups have characterized the situation as "apartheid."<ref>UNSW Press, [http://www.unswpress.com.au/isbn/0868407194.htm Disability in Australia: Exposing a social apartheid.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref> In fact, Australia's government policies are viewed by some as the original impetus for the apartheid system in South Africa.<ref>www.hartford-hwp.com, [http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/24/177.html World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.] Retrieved May 9, 2008.</ref>
  
===Fiji===
+
=== Malaysia ===
[[Fiji coups of 1987|Two military coups]] in [[Fiji]] in 1987 removed from power a government that was led by an [[Fijian people|ethnic Fijian]], but was supported principally by the [[Indo-Fijian]] (ethnic Indian) electorate, which then made up approximately half of the population.  A new constitution was promulgated in [[1990]], establishing Fiji as a republic, with the offices of [[List of Presidents of Fiji|President]], [[List of Prime Ministers of Fiji|Prime Minister]], two-thirds of the [[Senate (Fiji)|Senate]], and a clear majority of the [[House of Representatives (Fiji)|House of Representatives]] reserved for ethnic Fijians, despite the fact that ethnic Fijians then comprised less than half the population.  Ethnic Fijian ownership of the land (which was worked principally by Indo-Fijians) was also entrenched in the constitution.
+
[[Malaysia]] has an article in its constitution which distinctly segregates the [[Malay people|Malay]]s and other indigenous peoples of Malaysia from the non-Malays, or ''bumiputra,'' under the social contract giving them special rights and privileges. This includes government-sponsored discounts and requiring even the private sector of the economy to preferentially treat ''bumiputra'' with economic privileges, and penalizing companies who do not have a certain quota of ''bumiputra'' in their employment. Furthermore, any discussion of abolishing the article is prohibited with the justification that it is [[sedition|seditious]]. This form of state-sponsored racial segregation has been likened to [[South Africa]]n ''[[apartheid]]''. Supporters of the policy maintain that this is [[affirmative action]] for the ''bumiputra'' who had suffered during the colonial era of the history of Malaysia, using the concept of the ''Ketuanan Melayu'' that Malaysia belongs to the Malays.
  
World-wide condemnation of the 1990 constitution, and a [[Brain Drain|brain-drain]] of many Indo-Fijian professionals and business owners, caused the Fijian government to revise the [[Constitution of Fiji|constitution]] in 1997.  Amendments deleted most of the discriminatory provisions, and subsequent elections in 1999 brought a new government to power, with [[Mahendra Chaudhry]] as the country's first Indo-Fijian Prime Minister.
+
==Conclusion==
 +
Racial segregation has been practiced in many [[civilization]]s throughout human history. Human beings have a desire to name and classify. Perhaps this is done in an attempt to better understand the world better, as in the natural world of physical objects and living creatures. However, in the social world of relationships among different people, such classifications are more likely to lead to [[stereotype|stereotyping]] and discriminatory, controlling, or even violent behavior toward those classified as different from oneself.
  
[[Fiji coup of 2000|Another coup followed in 2000]], with [[George Speight]], supported by sympathetic officers in the Army and police force, seizing power, with the aim of ending Indo-Fijian influence in politics. Democracy, and the moderate 1997 constitution, were eventually restored, however.
+
In this era of increasingly [[globalization|globalized]] society, humanity can now recognize the error of its ways and strive to break down the walls people have built between one another. Removing all such barriers and cultivating understanding among different races is a major step to becoming one global community.
  
Current prime minister [[Laisenia Qarase]] has refused to adhere to the Constitution by not including members of the largely Indo-Fijian [[Fiji Labour Party]] in the government.
+
==References==
 +
<references/>
  
 +
==References==
 +
*Dobratz, Betty A. and Stephanie L. Shanks-Meile. 2001. ''White Power, White Pride!: The White Separatist Movement in the United States''. Johns Hopkins University Press.
 +
*Stokes, DaShanne. [http://www.geocities.com/eaglefeatherlaw/stokes.article.html "Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom."] In ''Religious Freedom with Raptors''. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  
=== Arab world ===
 
 
After municipal elections in [[Bahrain]] in 2002 brought [[Islamist]] opposition party [[Al Wefaq|Al Wefaq Islamic Action]] to power in the capital [[Manama]], its newly installed mayor, [[Murthader Bader]] called for the introduction of racial segregation with the removal from the city of all non-Bahraini South Asian inhabitants and for the creation of a new township to house them.
 
 
Mr Bader told the English language [http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/1yr_arc_Articles.asp?Article=87912&Sn=BNEW&IssueID=27131| Gulf Daily News] "It would cost a lot and we would have to find an area to accept them," he said. "A big question is where to build any new accommodation."
 
 
The government rejected the proposals.
 
 
 
=== Malaysia ===
 
Malaysia has an [[Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia|article in its constitution]] which distinctly segregates the [[Malay people|Malay]]s and other indigeneous peoples of Malaysia from the non-Malays, or [[bumiputra]] under the [[social contract (Malaysia)|social contract]], giving them special rights and privileges. This includes government-sponsored discounts and requiring even the [[private sector]] of the economy to preferentially treat bumiputras with economic privileges and penalising companies who do not have a certain quota of bumiputra in employment. Furthermore, any discussion of abolishing the article is prohibited with the justification that it is [[sedition|seditious]]. This form of state-sponsored racial segregation is claimed as apartheid to opponents of the article. Supporters of the policy maintain that this is [[affirmative action]] for the bumiputra who had suffered during the colonial era of the [[history of Malaysia]], using the concept of the [[Ketuanan Melayu]] that Malaysia belongs to the Malays.
 
 
==References==
 
*Dobratz, Betty A. and Shanks-Meile, Stephanie L, ''White Power, White Pride!: The White Separatist Movement in the United States'', Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001, 384 pages, ISBN 0801865379.
 
  
* Stokes, DaShanne. (In Press) [http://www.geocities.com/eaglefeatherlaw/stokes.article.html ''Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom'']
 
  
==External links==
 
*[http://www.remembersegregation.org A site dedicated to the life of MLK]
 
* [http://www.skidmore.edu/~dkarp/Social%20Issues/E/history.html A study of segregation]
 
*[http://www.crusader.net/resources/election.html A white separatist FAQ]
 
* [http://www.ericdigests.org/2003-2/race.html Constitutional Law and Race-Conscious Policies in K-12 Education]
 
* [http://www.geocities.com/eaglefeatherlaw Religious Freedom with Raptors] - details racism and segregation in Native American religious freedom.
 
* [http://www.alwefaq.org/ Website of Bahraini Islamists Al-Wefaq] (in Arabic)
 
  
 
{{Credit1|Racial_segregation|63966863|}}
 
{{Credit1|Racial_segregation|63966863|}}

Latest revision as of 22:42, 7 December 2022


The Rex Theatre for Colored People, Leland, Mississippi, June 1937

Racial segregation is the separation, either by law or by action, of people of different races in all manner of daily activities, such as education, housing, and the use of public facilities. Thus, it is a form of institutional racism. Racial segregation laws have existed in many countries, notably the United States, Nazi Germany, and South Africa during the Apartheid era. While no longer considered acceptable in most countries, racial segregation still exists in many communities through the individual actions of their members. Nevertheless, as the world advances toward the understanding that all people belong to one human family, such practices have become less prevalent, and an increasing number of communities have broken down the barriers dividing the races.

Definition

Racial segregation is characterized by separation of people of different races in daily life when both are doing equal tasks, such as eating in a restaurant, drinking from a water fountain, using a restroom, attending school, going to the movies, or in the rental or purchase of a home. Segregation may be de jure (Latin, meaning "by law")—mandated by law—or de facto (also Latin, meaning "in fact"); de facto segregation may even exist illegally. De facto segregation can occur when members of different races strongly prefer to associate and do business with members of their own race, though a segregationist regime may be maintained by means ranging from racial discrimination in hiring and in the rental and sale of housing, to vigilante violence such as lynchings.

South Africa in the apartheid era and the United States—both during the slavery era (through 1865) and after the 1876 end of the Reconstruction that followed the American Civil War—passed laws requiring or permitting separation of the races in daily life. In 1896, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld, in Plessy v. Ferguson the right of U.S. states and localities to mandate racial segregation. In 1913, President Woodrow Wilson ordered the segregation of the federal Civil Service.[1] In 1948, President Harry S. Truman ordered the desegregation of the U.S. military; in 1954, the Court, in Brown v. Board of Education, largely reversed Plessy; over the next eleven years, a succession of further court decisions and federal laws would completely invalidate de jure racial segregation and discrimination in the U.S., although de facto segregation and discrimination have proven more resilient.

De jure segregation in both South Africa and the U.S. came with "miscegenation laws" (prohibitions against interracial marriage) and laws against hiring people of the race that is the object of discrimination in any but menial positions. Segregation in hiring practices contributed to economic imbalances between the races. Segregation, however, often allowed close contact in hierarchical situations, such as allowing a person of one race to work as a servant for a member of another race. Segregation can involve spatial separation of the races, and/or mandatory use of different institutions, such as schools and hospitals by people of different races.

Overview

Even though many societies throughout history have practiced racial segregation, it was by no means universal, and some multiracial societies, such as the Roman Empire, were notable for their rejection of such practices. Most modern societies do not officially practice racial segregation, and officially frown upon racial discrimination. However, anxieties about racial, religious, and cultural differences still find expression in other forms of political and social controversy, either as an official pretext for culturally accepted discrimination, or as a socially acceptable way to discuss cultural, religious, and economic friction that results from racial discrimination. For example, immigration and religious controversies often mask concerns about the culture or racial composition of the immigrants. Issues of race relations also appear in seemingly race-neutral disputes, over such issues as poverty, healthcare, taxation, religion, enforcement of a particular set of cultural norms, and even fashion.

Racial segregation differs from racial discrimination in a number of ways. Discrimination ranges from individual actions, to socially enforced discriminatory behavior, to legally mandated differences in status between members of different races. Segregation has, typically, harshly reinforced discrimination: If people of different races live in separate neighborhoods, attend different schools, receive different social services, etc., then people of the favored races can be largely insulated from societal neglect of people of other races.

Racial segregation in different countries

Throughout recorded time, human societies have created divides along racial lines. Laws limiting the rights to property, marriage, and freedom of those of different races can be found in the history books of practically every culture. These laws have carried many names, such as Jim Crow Laws, Nuremberg Laws, and Apartheid, to name a few. Though many of the offenders have removed such laws or at least do not enforce them, many countries have remained segregated.

United States

Sign for "Colored waiting room," Georgia, 1943

After the Emancipation Proclamation abolished slavery in the Southern United States, racial discrimination became regulated by the so-called Jim Crow laws, which mandated strict segregation of the races. Though such laws were instituted shortly after fighting ended in many cases, they only became formalized after the end of Republican-enforced Reconstruction in the 1870s and 1880s, during a period known as the "nadir of American race relations." This legalized segregation lasted up to the 1960s, primarily through the deep and extensive power of the southern Democratic Party.

While the majority, in 1896, Plessy vs. Ferguson overtly upheld only "separate but equal" facilities (specifically, transportation facilities), Justice John Marshall Harlan in his dissenting opinion protested that the decision was an expression of "white supremacy;" he predicted that segregation would "stimulate aggressions … upon the admitted rights of colored citizens," "arouse race hate" and "perpetuate a feeling of distrust between [the] races."[2]

In the post-Civil War South, Democrats used the race issue to solidify their hold on Southern politics, playing on white resentment of black political power. Democrats were the agents in passing segregation laws, as well as laws disenfranchising blacks (and sometimes poor whites) politically. In 1913, President Woodrow Wilson ordered the segregation of the federal Civil Service. White and black people would sometimes be required to eat separately and use separate schools, public toilets, park benches, train and restaurant seating, etc. In some locales, in addition to segregated seating, it could be forbidden for stores or restaurants to serve different races under the same roof.

Segregation was also pervasive in housing. State constitutions (for example, that of California) had clauses giving local jurisdictions the right to regulate where members of certain races could live. White landowners often included restrictive covenants in deeds through which they prevented blacks or Asians from ever purchasing their property from any subsequent owner. In the 1948 case of Shelley v. Kraemer, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled that such covenants were unenforceable in a court of law. However, residential segregation patterns had already become established in most American cities, and have often persisted up to the present.

With the migration up north of many black workers at the turn of the twentieth century, and the friction that occurred with white and black workers during this time, segregation was and continues to be a phenomenon in northern cities as well as in the south. Whites generally allocate tenements as housing for poor blacks.[3]

"Miscegenation" laws prohibited people of different races from marrying. As one of many examples of such state laws, Utah's marriage law had an anti-miscegenation component that was passed in 1899 and repealed in 1963. It prohibited marriage between a white and anyone considered a Negro, mulatto (half Negro), quadroon (one-quarter Negro), octoroon (one-eighth Negro), Mongolian, or member of the Malay race (presumably a Polynesian or Melanesian). No restrictions were placed on marriages between people that were not "white persons" (Utah Code, 40-1-2, C. L. 17, §2967 as amended by L. 39, C. 50; L. 41, Ch. 35).

In World War I, blacks served in the United States Armed Forces in segregated units. Black soldiers were often poorly trained and equipped. The 369th Infantry, however, (formerly 15th New York National Guard) Regiment distinguished themselves, and were known as the "Harlem Hellfighters."[4]

World War II saw the first black military pilots in the U.S., the Tuskegee Airmen, 99th Fighter Squadron,[5] and also saw the segregated 183rd Engineer Combat Battalion participate in the liberation of Jewish survivors at Buchenwald.[6]

During World War II, people of Japanese, Italian, and German descent (whether citizens or not) were placed in internment camps, on the basis of their race. However, the German Americans were not sent to internment camps to the same extent as the Japanese.

Pressure to end racial segregation in the government grew among African Americans and progressives after the end of World War II. On January 26, 1948, President Harry S. Truman signed Executive Order 9981, ending segregation in the United States Armed Forces.

Institutionalized racial segregation was ended as an official practice by the efforts of such American Civil Rights Movement activists as Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr., working during the period from the end of World War II through the passage of the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, supported by President Lyndon Johnson. Many of their efforts were acts of civil disobedience aimed at violating the racial segregation rules and laws, such as refusing to give up a seat in the black part of the bus to a white person (Rosa Parks), or holding sit-ins at all-white diners.

Not all racial segregation laws have been repealed in the United States, although Supreme Court rulings have rendered them unenforceable. For instance, the Alabama Constitution still mandates that "Separate schools shall be provided for white and colored children, and no child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the other race."[7] A proposal to repeal this provision was narrowly defeated in 2004. However, in a different arena, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in February 2005, in Johnson v. California (125 S. Ct. 1141) that the California Department of Corrections' unwritten practice of racially segregating prisoners in its prison reception centers—which California claimed was for inmate safety (gangs in California, as throughout the U.S., usually organize on racial lines)—is to be subject to strict scrutiny, the highest level of constitutional review. Although the high court remanded the case back to the lower courts, it is likely that their decision will have the impact of forcing California to alter its practice of segregating by race in its reception centers.

A law need not stipulate de jure segregation in order to have the effect of de facto segregation. For example, the "eagle feather law,"[8] which governs the possession and religious use of eagle feathers, was officially written to protect then dwindling eagle populations while still protecting traditional Native American spiritual and religious customs, of which the use of eagles are central. The eagle feather law later met charges of promoting racial segregation due to the law’s provision authorizing the possession of eagle feathers to members of only one ethnic group, Native Americans, and forbidding Native Americans from including non-Native Americans in indigenous customs involving eagle feathers—a common modern practice dating back to the early 1500s.

Despite all of the legal changes of the latter half of the twentieth century, however, the United States remained a segregated society, with housing patterns, school enrollment, church membership, employment opportunities, and even college admissions all reflecting significant de facto segregation. Supporters of affirmative action argue that the persistence of such disparities reflects either racial discrimination or the persistence of its effects.

Educational segregation in the United States

In the Brown v. Board decision, Chief Justice Earl Warren, writing for a unanimous court, said that

…in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal… To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone.

The decision implied that the justices were influenced in part by studies by Kenneth B. Clark showing that segregated education had a negative psychological effect upon black school children. Clark's work included his "doll study," in which black students in segregated schools were shown both black and white dolls and asked which one they liked better. A majority of black students preferred the white doll, which was believed by Clark to demonstrate lowered black self-esteem as a result of segregation.

According to the Civil Rights Project at Harvard University, the actual desegregation of U.S. public schools peaked in 1988; since that time the schools have, in fact, become more segregated. As of 2005, the present proportion of Black students at majority white schools "a level lower than in any year since 1968."[9]

Nazi Germany

An example of miscegenation laws were the Nuremberg Laws enacted by the Nazis in Germany against the large German Jewish community during the 1930s. The laws prohibited marriages between Jews (deemed as Untermenschen—"sub-humans") and German "Aryans" (deemed the Herrenrasse—"master race"). Many interfaith and intermarried couples committed suicide when these laws came into effect.

During the 1930s and 1940s, Jews in Nazi-controlled states were forced to wear yellow ribbons or Star of David, and were, along with Romas (Gypsies) discriminated against by the racial laws. Jewish doctors and professors were not allowed to treat Aryan (effectively, gentile) patients or teach Aryan pupils, respectively. The Jews were also not allowed to use any public transportation, besides the ferry, and would only be able to shop from 3-5 in Jewish stores. After Kristallnacht ("The Night of Broken Glass"), the Jews were fined 1,000,000 German marks for damages done by the Nazi troops and SS members.

South Africa

"Petty apartheid": Sign on Durban beach in English, Afrikaans and Zulu

Apartheid was a system which existed in South Africa for over forty years, although the term itself had a history going back to the 1910s. It was formalized in the years following the victory of the National Party in the all-white national election of 1948, increased in dominance under the rule of Prime Minister Hendrik Frensch Verwoerd and remained law until 1990. Examples of apartheid policy introduced are the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1951, which made it illegal for marriage between races. Apartheid was abolished following a rapid change in public perception of racial segregation throughout the world, and an economic boycott against South Africa which had crippled and threatened to destroy its economy.

Rhodesia

The British colony of Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), under Ian Smith, leader of the white minority government, declared unilateral independence in 1965. For the next 15 years, Rhodesia operated under white minority rule, until international sanctions forced Smith to hold multiracial elections, after a brief period of British rule in 1979.

Laws enforcing segregation had been around before 1965, although many institutions simply ignored them. One highly publicized legal battle occurred in 1960, involving the opening of a new theater that was to be open to all races. This incident was nicknamed "The Battle of the Toilets."

Australia

From Australian federation up to the 1970s, what became known as the "White Australia Policy" officially discriminated against those who were not white and prevented them from immigrating to Australia, by deliberately making their immigration tests too hard to pass. The various government laws and acts that made up the Policy were amended or replaced over a course of twenty or so years, from the mid-fifties to the mid-seventies.

In the past, it was policy for Aborigines to be taken to live on missions, the intention being for them to be "out of the way" for the expanding territory of the white settlers. In the early-to-mid twentieth century the official policy regarding half-Aboriginal children was one of "assimilation:" They would be brought up on the missions to become part of white society and made to marry only white people, the intention being to "breed out" the Aboriginal traits by the third generation or so. Around the 1960s, the official policy regarding all indigenous Australians was changed to one of "integration:" Being able to live either in Western society, on missions or in traditional society.

Despite the official stance being integration, a large percentage of indigenous Australians continued to live away from the urban areas in comparatively poor socio-economic conditions, leaving them somewhat segregated from the rest of Australian society. A number of commentators and civil rights groups have characterized the situation as "apartheid."[10] In fact, Australia's government policies are viewed by some as the original impetus for the apartheid system in South Africa.[11]

Malaysia

Malaysia has an article in its constitution which distinctly segregates the Malays and other indigenous peoples of Malaysia from the non-Malays, or bumiputra, under the social contract giving them special rights and privileges. This includes government-sponsored discounts and requiring even the private sector of the economy to preferentially treat bumiputra with economic privileges, and penalizing companies who do not have a certain quota of bumiputra in their employment. Furthermore, any discussion of abolishing the article is prohibited with the justification that it is seditious. This form of state-sponsored racial segregation has been likened to South African apartheid. Supporters of the policy maintain that this is affirmative action for the bumiputra who had suffered during the colonial era of the history of Malaysia, using the concept of the Ketuanan Melayu that Malaysia belongs to the Malays.

Conclusion

Racial segregation has been practiced in many civilizations throughout human history. Human beings have a desire to name and classify. Perhaps this is done in an attempt to better understand the world better, as in the natural world of physical objects and living creatures. However, in the social world of relationships among different people, such classifications are more likely to lead to stereotyping and discriminatory, controlling, or even violent behavior toward those classified as different from oneself.

In this era of increasingly globalized society, humanity can now recognize the error of its ways and strive to break down the walls people have built between one another. Removing all such barriers and cultivating understanding among different races is a major step to becoming one global community.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  1. W.E.B. Du Bois, Another Open Letter to Woodrow Wilson, Teaching American History. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  2. The Nation, Brown at 50. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  3. Skidmore, History of Residential Segregation. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  4. Glenn Watkins, James Reese Europe and The Harlem Hellfighters Band. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  5. Keith Weldon Medley, On Clipped Wings: As America's first black military pilots, Tuskegee airmen faced a battle against racism, Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  6. Asa R. Gordon, William A. Scott, III and the Holocaust: The Encounter of African American Liberators and Jewish Survivors at Buchenwald. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  7. Alabama State Legislature, SECTION 256. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  8. www.geocities.com, Religious Freedom with Raptors. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  9. The Nation, Overcoming Apartheid. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  10. UNSW Press, Disability in Australia: Exposing a social apartheid. Retrieved May 9, 2008.
  11. www.hartford-hwp.com, World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. Retrieved May 9, 2008.

References

  • Dobratz, Betty A. and Stephanie L. Shanks-Meile. 2001. White Power, White Pride!: The White Separatist Movement in the United States. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Stokes, DaShanne. "Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom." In Religious Freedom with Raptors. Retrieved May 9, 2008.


Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.