剥夺:民权时代对非裔美国农民的歧视

D. Reid
{"title":"剥夺:民权时代对非裔美国农民的歧视","authors":"D. Reid","doi":"10.5860/choice.50-6932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dispossession: Discrimination against African American Farmers in the Age of Civil Rights. By Pete Daniel. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2013. Pp. xv, 332. Preface, illustrations, notes, ac- knowledgments, index. $34.95.)Pete Daniel makes his argument clear at the beginning of this book: \"civil rights laws . . . only intensified the USDA's bureaucratic resolve to resist the concept of equal rights. . . . The staff perfected passive nullifica- tion, that is, pledging their support even as they purposefully undermined equal opportunity laws\" (p. 1). The book covers more than the bureaucratic resolve of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), however, because USDA officials seem to play only a supporting role in the history that Daniel narrates. Instead, Dispossession shows how individuals at the local level harassed voters at county committee elections constituted to carry out USDA policy. Public employees of segregated extension offices, paid partially with federal appropriations funneled through state coffers but supplemented with local business and county-level public funding, worked at the county level to involve some farmers while ignoring oth- ers. Individuals dedicated to retaining white control worked the hardest in the parts of the South where black farmers constituted the majority of the population. Daniel recognizes their leverage, explaining that \"power- ful farmers and pliant bureaucrats operated the machinery that disbursed federal funds and information\" (p. 11). He acknowledges the influence of agribusiness interests as well. Thus. Dispossession indicates that these three-white capitalist farmers, agribusiness, and bureaucrats-rather than the USDA alone, conspired against black farmers.Dispossession shows how the New Deal heralded a new era in U.S. agricultural policy. It accelerated land consolidation by capitalist farmers, predominately white. This resulted, as Daniel explains, from a coopera- tive effort that involved farmers, agricultural processors, and other corpo- rate interests (agribusiness) along with diverse public entities (agrigov- emment). They united in their commitment \"to replace labor-intensive with capital-intensive farming operations\" (p. 12). Daniel indicates that \"federal agricultural policy and laborsaving science and technology be- came weapons that ruthlessly eliminated sharecroppers, tenants, and small farmers\" (p. 12). The narrative includes numerous examples of the diverse, direct, and often aggressive ways that many interests, rather than a monolithic bureaucracy, negated the power that once accompanied land- ownership. The triumvirate also ignored or stalled while responding to black farmer's requests. African Americans with ties to the land faced all these roadblocks as they pursued goals as American as purchasing tractor tires, securing a loan to put their crop in the ground, receiving a legal share of their crop, or casting a vote.Daniel does not focus on any one state or delve deeply into any one crop culture. Instead his narrative includes examples from across the South (as well as brief mention of non-southern states like Illinois and Kansas). …","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"72 1","pages":"288"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"82","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dispossession: Discrimination against African American Farmers in the Age of Civil Rights\",\"authors\":\"D. Reid\",\"doi\":\"10.5860/choice.50-6932\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dispossession: Discrimination against African American Farmers in the Age of Civil Rights. By Pete Daniel. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2013. Pp. xv, 332. Preface, illustrations, notes, ac- knowledgments, index. $34.95.)Pete Daniel makes his argument clear at the beginning of this book: \\\"civil rights laws . . . only intensified the USDA's bureaucratic resolve to resist the concept of equal rights. . . . The staff perfected passive nullifica- tion, that is, pledging their support even as they purposefully undermined equal opportunity laws\\\" (p. 1). The book covers more than the bureaucratic resolve of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), however, because USDA officials seem to play only a supporting role in the history that Daniel narrates. Instead, Dispossession shows how individuals at the local level harassed voters at county committee elections constituted to carry out USDA policy. Public employees of segregated extension offices, paid partially with federal appropriations funneled through state coffers but supplemented with local business and county-level public funding, worked at the county level to involve some farmers while ignoring oth- ers. Individuals dedicated to retaining white control worked the hardest in the parts of the South where black farmers constituted the majority of the population. Daniel recognizes their leverage, explaining that \\\"power- ful farmers and pliant bureaucrats operated the machinery that disbursed federal funds and information\\\" (p. 11). He acknowledges the influence of agribusiness interests as well. Thus. Dispossession indicates that these three-white capitalist farmers, agribusiness, and bureaucrats-rather than the USDA alone, conspired against black farmers.Dispossession shows how the New Deal heralded a new era in U.S. agricultural policy. It accelerated land consolidation by capitalist farmers, predominately white. This resulted, as Daniel explains, from a coopera- tive effort that involved farmers, agricultural processors, and other corpo- rate interests (agribusiness) along with diverse public entities (agrigov- emment). They united in their commitment \\\"to replace labor-intensive with capital-intensive farming operations\\\" (p. 12). Daniel indicates that \\\"federal agricultural policy and laborsaving science and technology be- came weapons that ruthlessly eliminated sharecroppers, tenants, and small farmers\\\" (p. 12). The narrative includes numerous examples of the diverse, direct, and often aggressive ways that many interests, rather than a monolithic bureaucracy, negated the power that once accompanied land- ownership. The triumvirate also ignored or stalled while responding to black farmer's requests. African Americans with ties to the land faced all these roadblocks as they pursued goals as American as purchasing tractor tires, securing a loan to put their crop in the ground, receiving a legal share of their crop, or casting a vote.Daniel does not focus on any one state or delve deeply into any one crop culture. Instead his narrative includes examples from across the South (as well as brief mention of non-southern states like Illinois and Kansas). …\",\"PeriodicalId\":51953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"288\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"82\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.50-6932\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.50-6932","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 82

摘要

剥夺:民权时代对非裔美国农民的歧视。皮特·丹尼尔著。教堂山:北卡罗来纳大学出版社,2013。第15页,332页。前言,插图,注释,交流知识,索引。34.95美元)。皮特·丹尼尔在本书的开头就清楚地阐述了他的观点:“民权法……只是强化了美国农业部抵制平等权利概念的官僚决心. . . .工作人员完善了被动的无效,也就是说,即使他们有意破坏平等机会法,也承诺他们的支持”(第1页)。然而,这本书涵盖的不仅仅是美国农业部(USDA)的官僚决心,因为USDA官员在丹尼尔叙述的历史中似乎只扮演了一个辅助角色。相反,《剥夺》展示了地方一级的个人如何在执行美国农业部政策的县委选举中骚扰选民。实行种族隔离的推广办公室的公职人员部分由联邦拨款支付,但由地方企业和县一级的公共资金补充,他们在县一级工作,让一些农民参与进来,而忽略了其他人。在黑人农民占人口大多数的南方地区,致力于保持白人控制的人工作得最为努力。丹尼尔认识到他们的影响力,解释说“有权势的农民和顺从的官僚操纵着支付联邦资金和信息的机器”(第11页)。他也承认农业综合企业利益的影响。因此。剥夺土地表明这三个白人资本主义农民、农业综合企业和官僚——而不仅仅是美国农业部——合谋反对黑人农民。强占表明,新政如何预示着美国农业政策的新时代。它加速了以白人为主的资本主义农民的土地整合。正如丹尼尔所解释的那样,这是农民、农业加工者和其他利益集团(农业综合企业)以及各种公共实体(农业管理)共同努力的结果。他们一致承诺“以资本密集型的农业经营取代劳动密集型”(第12页)。丹尼尔指出,“联邦农业政策和节省劳动力的科学技术是无情地消灭佃农、租客和小农的武器”(第12页)。书中列举了许多不同的、直接的、经常是激进的方式,许多利益集团,而不是单一的官僚机构,否定了曾经伴随土地所有权而来的权力。对于黑人农民的要求,三头同盟也不理睬或拖延。与土地有联系的非裔美国人在追求像美国人一样的目标时面临着所有这些障碍,比如购买拖拉机轮胎,获得贷款以种植庄稼,获得合法份额的庄稼,或者投票。丹尼尔没有专注于任何一个州,也没有深入研究任何一种作物文化。相反,他的叙述包括了来自南方各地的例子(也简要提到了伊利诺伊州和堪萨斯州等非南方州)。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dispossession: Discrimination against African American Farmers in the Age of Civil Rights
Dispossession: Discrimination against African American Farmers in the Age of Civil Rights. By Pete Daniel. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2013. Pp. xv, 332. Preface, illustrations, notes, ac- knowledgments, index. $34.95.)Pete Daniel makes his argument clear at the beginning of this book: "civil rights laws . . . only intensified the USDA's bureaucratic resolve to resist the concept of equal rights. . . . The staff perfected passive nullifica- tion, that is, pledging their support even as they purposefully undermined equal opportunity laws" (p. 1). The book covers more than the bureaucratic resolve of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), however, because USDA officials seem to play only a supporting role in the history that Daniel narrates. Instead, Dispossession shows how individuals at the local level harassed voters at county committee elections constituted to carry out USDA policy. Public employees of segregated extension offices, paid partially with federal appropriations funneled through state coffers but supplemented with local business and county-level public funding, worked at the county level to involve some farmers while ignoring oth- ers. Individuals dedicated to retaining white control worked the hardest in the parts of the South where black farmers constituted the majority of the population. Daniel recognizes their leverage, explaining that "power- ful farmers and pliant bureaucrats operated the machinery that disbursed federal funds and information" (p. 11). He acknowledges the influence of agribusiness interests as well. Thus. Dispossession indicates that these three-white capitalist farmers, agribusiness, and bureaucrats-rather than the USDA alone, conspired against black farmers.Dispossession shows how the New Deal heralded a new era in U.S. agricultural policy. It accelerated land consolidation by capitalist farmers, predominately white. This resulted, as Daniel explains, from a coopera- tive effort that involved farmers, agricultural processors, and other corpo- rate interests (agribusiness) along with diverse public entities (agrigov- emment). They united in their commitment "to replace labor-intensive with capital-intensive farming operations" (p. 12). Daniel indicates that "federal agricultural policy and laborsaving science and technology be- came weapons that ruthlessly eliminated sharecroppers, tenants, and small farmers" (p. 12). The narrative includes numerous examples of the diverse, direct, and often aggressive ways that many interests, rather than a monolithic bureaucracy, negated the power that once accompanied land- ownership. The triumvirate also ignored or stalled while responding to black farmer's requests. African Americans with ties to the land faced all these roadblocks as they pursued goals as American as purchasing tractor tires, securing a loan to put their crop in the ground, receiving a legal share of their crop, or casting a vote.Daniel does not focus on any one state or delve deeply into any one crop culture. Instead his narrative includes examples from across the South (as well as brief mention of non-southern states like Illinois and Kansas). …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Cotton Plantation South since the Civil War “Dedicated People” Little Rock Central High School’s Teachers during the Integration Crisis of 1957–1958 Prosperity and Peril: Arkansas in the New South, 1880–1900 “Between the Hawk & Buzzard”:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1