One presidential candidate recently speculated that he was so good at “the art of the deal” that he might have negotiated a deal that would have prevented the civil war.

Such arrogant boasting overlooks an essential historical fact:  in the first century of the United States, there were a number of “deals” that prevented a civil war. But these were only “deals” among people of European ancestry.

People of African ancestry were never included in the negotiation of these “deals”. Indeed, the kidnapping and enslavement of people of African ancestry was the price paid for preventing a civil war between people of European ancestry! (see my blogs “‘Deals’ About Slavery and Racism: The Constitution (1787)” and “‘Deals’ About Slavery and Racism: Lincoln in 1861”.)

Furthermore, in my book Visions of America (first published in 2004), I describe how this pattern of whites compromising with whites by agreeing to persecute blacks surfaced again after the Presidential Election of 1876.

As I wrote in 2004:

1876 marked the 100th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Ironically, . . . 1876 . . . marked a disastrous setback for African-Americans in their struggle for equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

During the first decade after the Civil War, the Federal Government and the Union Army ran the political machine in the South.

Compared to the end of most civil wars, the South was treated gently. Not even the South’s leading general, Robert E. Lee, nor the Confederacy’s President, Jefferson Davis, were executed.

Lincoln’s vision of reconciliation based on malice toward none and charity for all was largely carried out. [At that time, the word “charity” meant “love”. See how “charity” was used in the King James Version of the Bible, such as in 1 Corinthians 13:1-13.]

Nevertheless, the South groaned beneath the agony of economic collapse and political castration.

Most white southerners lost the right to vote because they had rebelled against the United States. But former slaves could vote.

Therefore, “the last became first and the first became last.”

This reversal of roles could only continue as long as the North was willing to spend huge sums of money to help the former slaves and was willing to risk another civil war by deploying the Union Army in the South.

The Presidential Election of 1876 marked the end of such intervention by the North in the Southern states.

Although the Election of 1876 was amazingly close, any fair count of the votes would have elected the Democratic candidate for President, Samuel J. Tilden.

However, the Republican Party still controlled several key Southern states. Through corrupt practices, the Republicans tampered with the vote count to elect their candidate, Rutherford B. Hayes.

The nation deadlocked, unable to decide which man was truly the next President of the United States.

There was even a chance that a new civil war could break out. However, the bloodletting of the Civil War was so fresh in people’s minds that the Republicans and Democrats found a way of compromising instead of fighting.

We have seen that, prior to the Civil War, whites had compromised several times to preserve the Union at the expense of black people who were left to suffer in slavery.

The Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850 were the most famous of these compromises. [See my blogs: “‘Deals’ About Slavery and Racism: The Constitution (1787)” and “‘Deals’ About Slavery and Racism: Lincoln in 1861”.]

The essence of the compromise after the Election of 1876 was that, in exchange for the Republican candidate becoming the next President, the Union Army would be withdrawn from all Southern states and the North would stop interfering with the “internal affairs” of the South.

Once again, the big losers were African-Americans, who were essentially re-enslaved.

Economically, they were tied to their former masters by debts and customs.

Segregation of the races was enforced by the terrorism of the Ku Klux Klan.

How could this happen? Why did the North turn its back on African-Americans?

The North’s abandonment and betrayal of the freed slaves is much easier to understand if you remember that the North did not begin the Civil War to free the slaves. The North began the Civil War to save the Union after the rebels dared to fire upon the Star-Spangled Banner at Fort Sumter.

It was only as a last resort to help win the ensuing civil war that Lincoln mustered the personal courage and the political strength to free the South’s slaves.

Furthermore, virtually no white believed in racial equality. Although many northern whites thought that slavery was wrong, this did not change their ingrained racist certainty that whites were superior to blacks.

Writing in 1855, [the abolitionist and former slave] Frederick Douglass noted the “American prejudice against color” and described how he “found this prejudice very strong and annoying” when he traveled in New England.

Indeed, Douglass found that “[t]he abolitionists themselves were not entirely free from [such racial prejudice, although he] could see that they were nobly struggling against it.” . . . .

Abraham Lincoln was not an abolitionist and he shared the racist preconceptions of his [time] about blacks being inferior to whites.

When pressed for a solution about what to do about the freed slaves, he deluded himself with fantastic schemes about sending the blacks back to Africa.

White fantasies about sending the blacks back to Africa betrayed the same old white habit of not seeing the problems of racism, not hearing the problems of racism, and not understanding the problems of racism.

THINGS TO THINK ABOUT

Are people today not seeing the problems of racism, not hearing the problems of racism, and not understanding the problems of racism? How? Why?

How should education overcome these problems?

Are white people today making deals with other white people that hurt black people? How? Why?

How should political parties and governments overcome these problems?

Are white politicians today making deals (such as gerrymandering based on race) with other white politicians in ways that hurt black people? How? Why?

How should laws (such as the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, the Voting Rights Act, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions) overcome these problems?

READ MORE

For related ideas, please read my blogs “Deals About Slavery and Racism: The Constitution”, “Deals About Slavery and Racism: Lincoln in 1861”, “How Do We Build a Civilization That Is Good—That Is Very Good?”, “Racism Is America Gone Astray”, “The 500-Year Marathon To Overcome Racism”, and “Nationalism Is Patriotism Gone Astray”.

For applicable endnotes, please see my book “Visions of America”, including materials found in Before the Mayflower: A History of Black America, by Lerone Bennett, Jr. (1993).