Read on Twitter
This speech coulda been lifted straight from the debates 120 years ago on American overseas imperialism.
The segregationists in the South decried annexing the Philippines, Puerto Rico, etc. because it would make the United States less white. https://twitter.com/DavidBegnaud/status/1276285370527694848
The segregationists in the South decried annexing the Philippines, Puerto Rico, etc. because it would make the United States less white. https://twitter.com/DavidBegnaud/status/1276285370527694848
The segregationists in the South had just got done dismantling the remnants of Reconstruction era laws and subjugating black people once more. They weren't thrilled about the prospect of new territories filled with non-white people that could one day be states.
Gotta remember the American experience with territories at that time (c. 1900).
Every piece of territory taken by the United States was taken with the expectation that one day they'd be a state... except Alaska. But it was considered so sparsely populated it wasn't a threat.
Every piece of territory taken by the United States was taken with the expectation that one day they'd be a state... except Alaska. But it was considered so sparsely populated it wasn't a threat.
Oh there's also New Mexico which was a quasi-exception. It's population was heavily Mexican and Native, but since it was contiguous with the other states it'd get to be "white enough" for statehood eventually.
Took around 65 years (1848-1912) but it happened.
Took around 65 years (1848-1912) but it happened.
Anyways, taking Hawaii, the Philippines, Cuba, Samoa, Puerto Rico, and Guam were altogether different.
Highly populated areas, with large non-white populations, and no real expectation they'd ever be majority-white.
Highly populated areas, with large non-white populations, and no real expectation they'd ever be majority-white.
That doesn't fit with 100+ year precedent of territories being acquired, populated with whites and then admitted to the Union.
So the Southern delegations in Congress led the charge against annexation. Nip the potential of any non-white states by blocking non-white territories,
So the Southern delegations in Congress led the charge against annexation. Nip the potential of any non-white states by blocking non-white territories,
Well, commercial and imperial interests prevailed, but the rest of the U.S. wasn't keen on having majority non-white states either. And some people did have genuine concerns over imperialism eroding democratic rule at home.
The solution to this conundrum? The Insular Cases that created a new territorial model.
America can take territories and not prepare them for statehood at all. In fact, the people in these territories weren't automatically granted basic constitutional rights.
Why? Racism.
America can take territories and not prepare them for statehood at all. In fact, the people in these territories weren't automatically granted basic constitutional rights.
Why? Racism.
Literally, the Insular Cases are crappy legal reasoning that just boils down to racism. The brown people don't have basic rights and Congress can legislate about them however they please.
Now Congress had a lot of leeway on territorial governments before (remember the whole fight over slavery), but previous territories had the basic expectation of self-rule and democracy.
Again remember the whole slavery thing and the whole popular sovereignty jazz.
Again remember the whole slavery thing and the whole popular sovereignty jazz.
Anyways, the Insular Cases scrapped all those norms.
Cuba was quickly set free, but was basically a US puppet state. The Philippines were subjugated after a brutal war and eeeeeventually put on a road to independence in the 1930s.
Cuba was quickly set free, but was basically a US puppet state. The Philippines were subjugated after a brutal war and eeeeeventually put on a road to independence in the 1930s.
Hawaii got white enough and Alaska populous enough to "warrant" statehood but they came in a package deal.
As for Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico plus the Marianas and Virgin Islands?
Despotic territorial rule with no real hope for statehood or equal rights except Puerto Rico, maybe.
As for Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico plus the Marianas and Virgin Islands?
Despotic territorial rule with no real hope for statehood or equal rights except Puerto Rico, maybe.
And of course the District of Columbia gets shafted by proxy in this because white people aren't a majority, so it's easier to justify the deprivation of voting rights in Congress.
Anyways, America answering the Negro Question with "separate but equal" and then answering the questions about overseas imperialism with the Insular Cases are two sides of the same racist coin.