But it wasn't always the KKK putting stuff out to make it look like they weren't anti-Black. And remember this was the second KKK, so research carefully--
Marcus Garvey visited Head Dragon (I don't remember his correct title but if you need to you can look it up) Simmons in Atlanta, and then wrote that he trusted the KKK more than the NAACP, because with the Klan you at least knew where you stood.
If you'll pardon a pun: things weren't always black and white. What about the Free Black slave owners who outfitted regiments of whites in the War of the Yankee Aggression?
Still Alive,
Thank you for your thoughtful message.
I understand that things weren't always "black and white." I do believe in checking sources and analysis of sources carefully. I taught the history of race in the U.S. for a long time.
Garvey did visit the Grand Dragon of the second KKK (to the great consternation of W.E.B. Dubois, A. Phillip Randolph and other "leaders of the race.")
But it was less an affinity with white supremacy than an affinity for the idea of racial seperatism which Garvey saw as imperative to black progress given the almost complete social, economic and cultural subjugation of blacks after the failure of Reconstruction and the descent of race relations into what historians call "the Nadir."
Moreover, other black leaders believed that Garvey's West Indian background (which ironically made him more radially "pro-black') also inhibited his understanding of the vicious and violent nature of white supremacy.
If the KKK argued that lynchings (in which literally thousands of whites would take excursion trains, picnic baskets and their children to watch the hanging, burning and dismemberment of black men, women and children) were "necessitated" by "atavistic black man raping white women" and would be lessened by racial seperation, Garvey was inclined to agree with the seperation part even while proclaiming that the rape part was a lie.
Moreover, Garvey had personal animus with other black leaders (particularly DuBois) over their failure to address "colorism" within black communities. Fair skin was literally connected to educational and economic advantage. Garvey (for all his faults) was the first dark-skinned, natural hair "Black and Proud" nationalistic leader. And the first to call upper classed, fairer skinned blacks to task for attitudes and practices which left the "darker hue" at a disadvantage.
Yes, I do know about black slaveholders (as I posted upthread) who did not identify with other blacks (particularly the enslaved) and were usually the sons of wealthy white landowners who acted as benefactors. (This was particularly true where there were groups of "high-society, free colored" as in New Orleans and Charleston.
Having said all that, I do greatly appreciate you bringing those examples into discussion.
I believe it was used as a basis for the depictions on slaves' POV for everything. James Watkins wrote and incredibly detailed (and opinionated--not without good cause) book about his life and trials. He was witness to the Underground Railroad, Slave Hunters, corruption, loosing syblings to auction and the Abolitionists. You might say that he'd seen it all. He grew up around the time of Nat Turner's rebellion (which was seen at the time as an excuse not to treat Negroes as men), which only lasted about a week in all, but became infamous because these slaves had infiltrated the homes of whites and slew them in their sleep. The slaves thereafter were suspiscious for thier color--being related to barbarism and animal activities such as the chaotic slaughters of a few members of Nat Turner's rebellion--and they knew what was thought of them. Interestingly, if you read James Watkins's account, they were kept away from religion--except what their masters used to make them malleable. (One slave owner WAS a preacher.)
Inarticulate Babbler,
May I suggest a strong (but basic) text to give you more context?
To Make Our World Anew: A History of African Americans to 1880
You may also find more "meat" for the bones of your story in the WPA interviews with ex-slaves. Three I'd recommend are John Blassingame's
Slave Testimony, Charles Perdue's (et. al)
Weevils in the Wheat and Charles Davis' and Henry Louis Gates'
The Slave's Narratives which discusses the WPA interviews, other prominent slave narratives and avoiding pitfalls in using them. Or barring getting these books to peruse (which is still my preference) you can see some interviews here:
WPA Ex-Slave Narratives Library of Congress
Finally, Willie Lee Rose's
A Documentary History of Slavery in North America (which includes ex-slave interviews, excerpts from other narratives, bills of sale, examples of slave codes, examples of bill of sale, excerpts from slaveholder journals, etc) might give you a broader understanding of the economic dimensions of the system.
Oh! Can't beleive I almost forgot to tell you about Walter Johnson's very fine work,
Soul by Soul: Life Inside the Antebellum Slave Market.
Good luck with your exciting project.
