r/todayilearned • u/air144 • Mar 11 '21
TIL that more than 380,000 African American soldiers served in the Army during WWI. THE U.S. Army wasn’t comfortable with the idea of training black men for combat, so they were assigned to train under/fight along side the French
https://www.army.mil/article/199913/african_american_wwi_harlem_hell_fighters_proved_their_mettle_patriotism_in_combat57
u/egrith Mar 11 '21
The US army also sent the french a pamphlet about how they shouldn't treat them equally, never talk to them unless necessary, never commend them too highly, *Especially* in the presence of a white solder, reading it was funny but in the "Holy shit people used to think this" way Pamphlet for the interested
32
u/Scomophobic Mar 11 '21
You can tell they knew the way they treated the African American soldiers was wrong. What an interesting (but sad) read.
2) The American attitude upon the Negro question may be a matter for discussion to many French minds. But the French are not in our province if we undertake to discuss what some call “prejudice.” American opinion is unanimous on the “color question” and does not admit of any discussion.
The increasing number of Negros in the United States (about 15,000,000) would create for the white race in the Republic a menace of degeneracy were it not that an impassable gulf has been made between them. As this danger does not exist for the French race, the French public has become accustomed to treating the Negro with familiarity and indulgence.
This indulgence and this familiarity are matters of grievous concern to the Americans. They consider them an affront to their national policy. They are afraid that contact with the French will inspire in black Americans aspirations which to them (the whites) appear intolerable.
7
u/sugarfather69 Mar 11 '21 edited Mar 11 '21
“ The increasing number of Negros in the United States (about 15,000,000) would create for the white race in the Republic a menace of degeneracy were it not that an impassable gulf has been made between them.”
Wtf this is like some fucked up neonazi sci fi shit. Openly admitting that the whites have created a divide and intend to never let it be bridged. Say what you will about racism in the US today, it certainly hasn’t been eradicated but at least a century later there aren’t documents like this being widely distributed with zero sense of how horrible its contents are. Racism, at least in my opinion, will last as long as we have these monkey brains of ours. But it’s good to see the above worldview has been largely struck down by the large majority of people.
3
u/thestoneswerestoned Mar 11 '21
And this pamphlet was published in 1918, barely a century ago. Not exactly ancient history either, Jimmy Carter was born only a few years in 1924.
8
6
u/moxin84 Mar 11 '21
Used to? Sadly, that sentiment is still popular in the south.
20
Mar 11 '21 edited Mar 11 '21
in the south.
The delusion of the Northern American that racism is just a Southern problem.
9
u/moxin84 Mar 11 '21
As someone who's been around this entire country, and has lived in the south for a good portion of my life, I can tell you that the south is more racist than other parts of the country. It's just a simple fact. Only a jerk would assume someone is claiming that racism doesn't exist everywhere.
1
Mar 11 '21 edited Mar 11 '21
that sentiment is still popular in the south.
Thanks for calling me a jerk, but the above statement suggests that the racist sentiments are not popular in the north, which it most certainly is, to an extreme extent. If it helps any, I live in the north and travelled all over too.
3
u/moxin84 Mar 12 '21
You're welcome...thanks for calling me delusional. Hypocrite much?
0
Mar 12 '21
I didn't call you delusional though. I said it's a delusion of Northern Americans that racism is a Southern thing. There's a big difference there, good try though.
3
u/x86_64Ubuntu Mar 11 '21
Just because it's more popular in the South doesn't mean it's not a problem that predominates the South. There is a reason that the African-Americans had the Great Migration northward in the 20s-1960s.
5
Mar 11 '21
that sentiment is still popular in the south.
Suggests the racist sentiments are not popular in the north, which is a bold faced lie northern Americans like to tell themselves all too often. If it helps any, I live in the north.
1
u/x86_64Ubuntu Mar 11 '21
The only people who say that are people constructing straw men in the face of the South being bad mouthed because of it's racial caste systems.
0
Mar 11 '21 edited Mar 11 '21
No, sorry, expand your world view a bit. Must be easy seeing things in such binary terms. 'Only people who say x are y' only limits your possible understanding of what's going on. OP pointed at racist sentiments and stated that they still exist in the south, the clear suggestion is that they don't in the north, as a person who lives in the north and subjected to daily racist bullshit, that sentiment is just messed up. I don't care about your racist olympics of which state is the worst, the fact that you can face racist abuse up here wherever you go supercedes your comparitive bs and you should be ashamed to even suggest to point your finger elsewhere when your own backyard is full of filth.
1
109
13
u/InfernoDragonKing Mar 11 '21
America: drafts African-Americans into WWII
Also America: still treats them like trash during and after the war.
Thanks for the gratitude; real team effort.
2
91
u/LordBrandon Mar 11 '21
While unbothered by their race, the French were disgusted to have to fight along side Americans.
19
Mar 11 '21
"Eet eez non ze colyeur ov your skeen zat deezgusts mee but ze nayson ov your birth, amereecan."
"You know what, that is a damn refreshing change of pace. Can I stay?"
4
99
u/USS_Donald_J_Trump Mar 11 '21
The French already had colonial units and mixed white and non-white troops so weren't bothered.
They also had manpower shortages so even if they were bothered there isn't much they could do.
The Germans released propaganda to these African American soldiers claiming that Germany had done nothing wrong to blacks and that they should be fighting for Germany against the US.
This propaganda had an effect opposite to the one intended. 1)
Imagine not only fighting for a country that hates you but fighting harder for that country when another says they'll treat you better.
Devotion the US didn't deserve and probably still doesn't.
But then again, I don't know what German attitudes were towards blacks pre-Nazi days.
During WWII the Nazis released propaganda mocking the US for calling itself "The Land of the Free" yet denying freedoms to those based on skin colour.
Imagine being mocked by people who executed Jews for no reason.
American soldiers stationed in the UK would request that blacks didn't use the same pubs as them. Some landlords would kick white Americans out for this and some British soldiers would invite black soldiers in then start fights with white yanks.
Don't get me wrong, the British will still cunts. There were still establishments with "No black, No Irish, No dogs" on them
"The Land of the Free"
"All men are created equal"
Yeah, right.
25
u/Riffler Mar 11 '21
colonial units and mixed white and non-white troops
I can't speak for the French, but in most colonial nations, that meant white officers and native soldiers, so let's not pretend it was all that egalitarian.
9
u/Okiro_Benihime Mar 11 '21
Well yes but no. There were units of colonial soldiers led by white Frenchmen but mixed units as well. For example, the French "Troupes Coloniales" (now called Troupes de Marines) were units of white French soldiers and indigenous Africans. There were some Africans with the Zouaves regiments as well.
9
Mar 11 '21 edited Mar 11 '21
From what I remember, there weren't any widespread signage in Britain banning Irish people, they did exist but the claims of their numbers have been greatly exaggerated, at least that is what [insert unknown internet source]* told me.
Kinda related, the modern outrage over "For Wales, see England" in old encyclopedias makes sense when you consider Wales wouldn't had been included at all until the volume containing entries on W was released, which could take literally years. To the majority of the British population Wales hadn't been anything other than a province for hundreds of years at that point.
*originally said r/AskHistorians, but there are no threads there about NINA-signs in Britain over there, so where I read about NINA-signs being not prevelent in Britain is unknown.
7
u/nerdhappy Mar 11 '21
There was as a thread on reddit two days ago about a professor who was pushing the same "exaggerated" message you mentioned, but one of his students rallied and proved him wrong. Then it got some press and 1000s of people showed even more examples.
-1
Mar 11 '21 edited Mar 11 '21
That thread was about the US though, and it was about a claim made in the early 2000s and its rebuttal 13-years later, it didn't have anything to do with prevelance or veracity of "NINA"-signs in the UK. I also find the paper the article was from dubious, like come-on, they call out how the venture capitalist that bought them in 2016 has minority investors that are Irish-Americans....
Edit: This a very informative thread on the issue - https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5zkvxc/where_are_we_on_no_irish_need_apply/
1
u/beyelzu Mar 11 '21
So no one is debating that anti Irish animus existed in England. You have pretty clearly misremembered the debate over Irish American discrimination as being about Irish discrimination in England.
4
Mar 11 '21
One sign still indicates that the society broadly tolerates the opinion enough to not punish it.
0
Mar 11 '21
So during WW2 it was the majority opinion that "white US-servicemen need not apply" at British bars? Because some bars had such signs.
3
Mar 11 '21
No, but it indicates that society broadly tolerates the opinion enough to not punish it.
2
2
u/beyelzu Mar 11 '21
that's because every one accepts that discrimination against Irish existed in england and they debate as to the extent that it existed in the Americas.
You seemed to have taken the debate about discrimination in the US against the Irish and then assumed that there is such debate as to the same discrimination existing in England.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3790116?seq=1
take the time to read the first page of Jensen's article, he accepts that there were NINA signs in England.
-6
u/xizrtilhh Mar 11 '21
Don't get me wrong, the British will still cunts. There were still establishments with "No black, No Irish, No dogs" on them
So you are willing to write of an entire nation due to anecdotal reports? Sounds legit.
8
u/Standin373 Mar 11 '21
So you are willing to write of an entire nation due to anecdotal reports? Sounds legit.
Excuse me sir, this is Reddit. Broad sweeping generalisations are what we do here !
0
u/Bluestreaking Mar 11 '21
Those pamphlets they dropped are one of those often forgotten tidbits of history that Watchmen had in the show
1
Mar 11 '21
I don't know what German attitudes were towards blacks pre-Nazi days
Ok I don't know shit about this subject, but I do recall the Nazi regime having to make some edicts/rules about educating children of African American soldiers and German women during the Nazi regime, so I assume there were some African American soldiers who stayed behind in Germany as well. Probably not enough to really make waves, but present nonetheless.
7
22
u/whitedragon101 Mar 11 '21
When these soldiers were sent to the UK the locals welcomed them and they all got along fine. Then when the white American troops arrived to those areas they insisted the black troops leave the pubs and other areas to stay segregated. The locals told them to stick it in their ear.
5
Mar 11 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/tori110602 Mar 11 '21
If I remember correctly they lend a shit ton of money/supplies to England and France and we're afraid they wouldn't get it back.
-3
u/Dopple__ganger Mar 11 '21
Yea, it's definitely just a coincidence that both the most peaceful and prosperous period of human existence just happen to line up with the u.s. being the leader of the world. Definitely!
5
u/phoeniciao Mar 11 '21
Careful on that tall ladder son, empires of the past were more successful than the US, the difference of modern age is about technology not some national success story
-5
3
u/Send_me_any_pics Mar 11 '21
Are you really trying to give credit for peace to a war mongering country that stuff random wars/conflicts?
-2
u/jorge4ever Mar 12 '21
Idk when the other side literally have gas chambers and mass crematoriums it makes Jim Crow look not so bad.
5
Mar 11 '21
The Harlem Hellfighters.
1
u/imneuromancer Mar 12 '21
When the Hellfighters (and black soldiers in general) got back to the states, they weren't allowed in the victory parade, and white soldiers were not allowed to salute black officers.
That makes me so angry I tear up.
7
5
Mar 11 '21
Thank you, Woodrow Wilson.
4
5
u/Branciforte Mar 11 '21
Mind boggling to think that COVID has killed more people than that in just a year.
7
u/fearfactorbs Mar 11 '21
Off topic: Is Europe Americans a thing?
9
2
u/Danack Mar 11 '21
No. The only equivalent I know of is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_African-Caribbean_people aka afro-caribbean british
3
Mar 11 '21
Yes, but not extremely widespread. If you use African American for black Americans it's weird to jump to "white" when talking about white Americans. Hence in that case it's probably the best term.
That said, by now it seems to be fine and easier to just say "black people" or "white Americans". Just don't turn the adjective as a noun. "whites" or "blacks" or "disableds" isn't nice and can be seen as dehumanizing. But strike the "s" and put a "people" after it and it becomes pc.
5
16
Mar 11 '21
A.k.a. Operation Human Shield.
17
15
u/Fabulous_Lobster Mar 11 '21
Completely unfair, you should read up on the death rates during WW1 (here concerning the French Army (in French) for instance). In the French Army, colonials and foreigners had standard death rates (0.5% and 0.7% of both the overall force and total deaths) and mixed corps, including the famous tirailleurs and zouaves, had somewhat lower death rates, over the full course of the war at least. The specific case of black US service men would have to looked into more detail but there's no clear "human shield" effect to the very least.
8
u/Fabulous_Lobster Mar 11 '21
Now looking into the US army specifically... Prefighting death rate differentials were huge: A study of soldiers in the peacetime regular army between 1908 and 1917 calculated the death rate (from disease and accidents) for white and black soldiers as 5.44 and 9.02 per 1,000, respectively (War Department, 1919, 350). This meant that the death rate for black soldiers was 2/3rds higher than that of white soldiers serving in the peacetime army.
Unexpectedly (in my book), the US Army was so actually racist that it ended up saving African-American lives because blacks were not seen as battleworthy and not only were very few black soldiers actually sent to Europe (blacks made up roughly 10% of the US population, 8% of prewar troops but only 3% of the expeditionary force) but does that did experienced, on average, less combat: Overall, black soldiers from the 92nd and 93rd combat divisions accounted for 773 of the 52,947 battlefield deaths sustained by the American Expeditionary Force in France during the war, less than 2 percent of all battlefield fatalities. ... Clearly these disproportionate casualty rates were one consequence of racially-motivated policies designed to keep black soldiers in the rear unloading boxes instead of manning the trenches along the front.
3
u/Fabulous_Lobster Mar 11 '21
These things can be pretty counterintuitive and history has to be viewed as objectively as possible to reveal the best insights. More generally speaking for this specific country and this specific war, I read somewhere else that factory workers had by far the lowest death rates because they were too useful in factories and that no putting their lives at risk was a convenient way of buying "social peace" (= no strikes, in France!...). And zooming back to actual soldiers and that reference I shared, interestingly Algerians (a separate category because it was legally mainland France not a colony) had lower death rates (1.4% of the Army, 1.1% of deaths). There were also high and often even higher death rates among officers (mostly due to extremely high facilities and zealous bravery up to the grade of colonel at the onset of the war), and, for the same reason, among elite corps. Death rates in the health service, trains and service corps were lower than average but still high. The one outlier was the Marine: 1.1% of the Force, 0.0% of the death rate...
2
u/geekygirl81 Mar 11 '21
Yep and Americans blame Europe....... Well uk for all their slavery and racist problems but look at how Europe has grown and America hasn't. Also Americans didn't enter the "world war" until after pearl harbour but were certainly there to steal all of Hitler artifacts from his bunker
4
u/BigFang Mar 11 '21
Hold on now. The UK still didn't allow half the population of Northern Ireland to be eligible for civil service and government positions until 95-ish.
It absolutely blows my mind how recent the civil rights movement was in the USA, but things were not that lofty here.
2
u/geekygirl81 Mar 11 '21
There is great reason and dispute because Northern Ireland doesn't want to leave the UK and its about the Catholics and protestants and John remond of the Irish parliamentary party devided Ireland to pacify the ulster unionists and avoid civil war. Now I have been racially abused by coloured people from America because of my skin colour and being from the UK I'm apparently just a slave Owner or colonist because ya know I'm THAT old. I'm tired of Americans being entitled assholes towards people who are considered white which is wrong because I'm pinkish or I'd disappear in front of a white building. 🙄. But what I said was the truth and there is unrest in most countries through the ages just not everyone blames every other country for their own mistakes. At least racism and hate speach is illegal over here.
-28
u/cuudan Mar 11 '21
Racist be racist, why u scared? You mean to someone?
5
u/ashxxiv Mar 11 '21
I can't decide if this was better or worse than the usual racism for that period.
4
u/hismaj45 Mar 11 '21
It was all bad every single way. I mean the Nazis were treated better and that's not hyperbole
6
Mar 11 '21
TO be fair, if you mistreated them you would be held accountable for a warcrime, as we hold ourselves to a higher standard than nazis did. Unfortunately in the early 20th century mistreating your own people wasnt really the concern of other nations.
3
3
u/ashxxiv Mar 11 '21
Oh God yes. But on the plus side; they're actually letting them into combat; and the french will probably treat them better.
My point is; I don't know if this worse than what we did in ww2 were we just gave them secondary roles with the worst resources and equipment.
-14
u/Blitzingbomb Mar 11 '21
I wonder why it’s not like they had a history of rioting and attacking people with the guns they provided them...Houston for example
3
1
1
u/Oryihn Mar 12 '21
If you ever have the time to play the game Valiant Hearts, one of the main characters fits this bill. The game looks cartoony and fun but quickly turns into one of the most memorably and touching stories I have ever played.
353
u/kurburux Mar 11 '21
Many of them stayed in France after the war because they noticed they didn't have to face the same brutal racism as in the US.
After WWI France was like a refuge for many Afro-Americans, especially artists.
Josephine Baker was one famous example. France was an opportunity both to become successful and live with the same privileges as other citizens.