Is segregation going to come back?

I hope not but the the Turd Hates HATES HATES people of color. He considers them dirty. and nasty ! ! !

Institutional integration will probably last a little while longer due to state laws, but segregation never really ended anyway. I saw an example in the schools when the black students all sat together and did not join the white students on the playground.
My youngest grandson was subjected to “reverse” discrimination in school. He was the only white student left in his class (after all the white kids left) and was bullied so badly he refused to go back to school.

A large percentage of our population is either not-white or of mixed race. Segregation as it used to be would be impractical today. It’s an out-of-date law that’s been removed. I believe this is one of Trump’s initiatives.

People self segregate to some extent still today anyway, but we are more mixed than ever before. I am not sure how much things will change if the laws or lack of laws start letting segregation and discrimination be legal again. Most of America is not going to segregate restaurants, water fountains, and swimming pools, but there will be some people who will if they can get away with it. They will call their business private clubs or something, is what I expect. I don’t think government areas, government public areas, will outwardly segregate.

My impression is most of the Christian Right are very determined to show they are not racist. Many white families have adopted Black children, they insist they are not racist, they accuse the left of over focusing on race. Eventually, the Republicans are going to have to reconcile having White Supremacists in their voting block. I am not calling all Republicans WS, I am saying if the WS really start having a major visible effect that cannot be ignored, then the Republicans who are not racist will have to admit there is a problem and speak up. We will see what happens.

Personally, I do think we need the laws, but I don’t think the country will go back to the days of massive segregation in institutions and commercial businesses without them.

https://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/juan-williams/5146284-trump-dei-attacks-racism/.

Only whites should come to USA per Trump.

It never left. Doesn’t matter how much money you have, go to a super upper middle class area and see how they look at you.

Slum lord Trump wants to make sure he can legally exclude people from his buildings and hotels.
Though I would argue it never completely went away, people could at least sue when they were discriminated against. Now, a restaurant can outright tell you to your face you are not welcome to eat there if they don’t like your race, your faith, your age, your weight, or if you look poor.
So to answer your question. If discrimination is allowed it’s only a matter of time before segregation will come back. I say before the end of the year.

Did it ever really leave?

Being allowed in (to restaurants, bathrooms, shops, schools) is really what the laws protect regarding segregation. Then there are laws or simply policy for affirmative action (basically DEI) and goals for quotas/ratios. Even without laws companies have their own internal evaluations and policies.

Forced desegregation or forced diversity by the government doesn’t get done very much in the US now from what I can tell, and there are varying opinions on whether it is successful in the past.

Singapore had forced diversity in housing practically since it’s creation, and it does seem to have worked well overall.

The way to diversity is the minority pioneers going into the white areas and more minorities following. The more diverse, meaning multiple different ethnicities, nationalities, and even skin color, the more people from any group will be attracted to the area or even workplace. One significantly sized minority group doesn’t accomplish the same thing very quickly.

Separate drinking and bathroom facilities are not coming back if that’s what you’re asking. @JLeslie is correct in thinking that shallow DEI programs quite possibly made some things worse. I have seen actual diversity in the workforce and the results are jaw-droppingly positive. Nobody is bringing back separate drinking fountains, why even include the language anymore? It’s unnecessary. There were laws on the books that prohibited dancing. Nobody is going to outlaw dancing these days, why do we need laws that say it is ok to dance? This looks like left-wing fear-mongering to me, which is a thing just as much as it is on the right.

@Blackwater_Park Since the administration has removed the names of Black, brown and women from the sites that list those soldiers buried at Arlington, I think there is a serious cause for concern. They’ve already dismantled much of the foundation of civil rights in this country in two months. Do I think separate drinking fountains will be re-instituted – not likely but these are certainly scary times for non-whites and women.

The laws are only effective when enforced. Ignoring certain potential patrons of restaurants and places of business, although actually constituting “refusal of service”, is a form of segregation, and may well be ignored by authority.

Just because there might not be “whites only” signs on water coolers does not mean that segregation isn’t being reinvented. There are a hundred ways to fire or refuse to admit anyone that isn’t a white man while skating on the edge of the rules.

It is fantastically naïve to believe that the current “protections” against such things are even working now, let alone that they can’t be re-interpreted to be more exclusive.

Segregation is not coming back. Powerful, rich people don’t give enough of a shit. Others will use fear about it though to corral the rest of us.

I think removing a law, even when not needed anymore, is often a deliberate action by politicians to Dog Whistle to their constituency. If the US is behaving inclusive and not discriminating or segregating, then what is the harm in having the law, the law is just reinforcing the values of society. We have some ridiculous laws still on the books that don’t get removed, because it doesn’t help politicians get elected.

This action seems very deliberate. Deliberate dog whistle, deliberate to freak out Democrats, deliberate as a distraction, deliberate to let the white supremacists have more leeway, deliberate to give corporations more leeway, many possible reasons.

@JLeslie GA

That is what I figured. Was interested in hearing what you all thought. It seemed a bit like an overreaction, but like I said, you never know now.

More context is needed. I have been on committees that review documents like this. When they come up for review, old, unneeded language is always removed. That’s SOP. The political dog whistle here is more likely a dying news outlet making a big deal out of it to drive fear into their audience. I can see the Right wing using it like this, but I just don’t see it in this case.

@Blackwater_Park I agree that happens. I felt that way about a lot of things the media exploited regarding DeSantis in my state, but still there was an overwhelming theme with what he was doing and for whom. I still think it is likely deliberate.

Ummmmm, It never left.

@Forever_Free But there is de jure and de facto segregation.

To me, this is not nothing. It is saying that contractors do not have to show they are not discriminating in hiring practices in order to win government contracts. That’s kind of a big deal.

I agree that it is a huge deal. I also still believe that both still exist. We are seeing more of it come back now.

@snowberry A large percentage of our population is either not-white or of mixed race.

“Mixed-race” by definition is non white. The extreme of this was seen in the laws against miscegenation

It won’t be as open, but I can see some companies hiring only white and while other companies will end up hiring very mixed. If companies want to hire the top 5% in skills, the ones in the former group will have a hard time filling their vacancies.

@Strauss Okay, my daughter is white with very pale skin. Her husband is African with very dark skin. Your link was way too long, but I get the idea that I apparently “broke the law” by describing my granddaughter as mixed. Please tell me what they need to call their children so as to stay in compliance with the law (and you).

I will be certain to let them know, and tell you their response.

When I was a young girl and before that, if you were part Black the US viewed you as Black. Part anything basically wiped out being white, I think they used 1/8th or ¼, I don’t remember that exactly. Polynesian was at the top. Part Poly part Black you were Poly. Other countries used terms like Mestizo, Maroons, Mulatto more often than the US, and if it had been used many years ago, we haven’t used the terms any time recently.

AmerAsian might be one of the few I do hear, otherwise mixed race and biracial seem to be the terms of the day. People can choose not use those terms at all and just say my dad was white and my mom was Black, or just say they are white if they want. Take Meghan Markle; she appears white to me, I never would have guessed her mom is Black.

As far as laws, everyone has the right to self identify however they want, including on the census. No one is checking how light or dark your skin is or doing a genetic analysis. The only time it comes up legally is when you want an entitlement like Native Americans can get free tuition. They have to prove ancestry.

@snowberry Sorry about the link. It was certainly not a reflection of my belief. I was merely pointing out a social reality reflected by certain laws in the US, especially (but not exclusively) in the Southern states.These laws have been changed or nullified, but the attitude remains. This is also known as the “one drop” rule. If a person has “one drop” of non-white blood, then that person is not “white”, according to that way of thinking.

IMHO race is a social structure that carries a lot more weight, socially, legally, politically, than it should.

I don’t have any direct experience with South African racial attitudes but I have a lot of experience with those in the US.

I have been married since 1988 to a beautiful woman who happens to be black. We raised three children to be proud of who they are. I can’t prove it but I have lost jobs because someone didn’t like the idea of a mixed race marriage.

In response to the last part of your post, I certainly meant no offense and I feel terrible that any was taken. As far as I am concerned your daughter and son-in-law should call your granddaughter “beautiful”! And hopefully she will not need to experience everyday racism as it exists in the world today.

@Strauss I just thought it was funny. No offense taken. By the way, our delightful son-in-law is from West Africa. And you are right, our granddaughter is very pretty.

@snowberry I might be biased as a grandparent, but I think grandchildren are beautiful by definition!