I'm not well versed on the subject and there seems to be a lot of conflicting accounts of what led to the destruction of "black wall street".
Was all of it because of the girl in the elevator and the alleged assault, or was it jealousy for the perceived prosperity the blacks were enjoying in spite of segregation?
also, did the blacks make it worse by fighting back?
Niggers simply wanted to fuck up the surrounding areas economy
a basic rundown would be nice OP
>>1134875
It was white people who started it.
>>1132539
They defended themselves when planes were used to bomb them out. The TT around the nation would have done the same, it luckily was a mobilizer for the TT/BVs to completely unify politically with the black masses
Also you seem like you want answers because this is your homework
>>1132539
Should've fought back harder, Hicks only understand being hit.
>>1132539
>Within five years after the massacre, surviving residents who chose to remain in Tulsa rebuilt much of the district. They accomplished this despite the opposition of many white Tulsa political and business leaders and punitive rezoning laws enacted to prevent reconstruction. It resumed being a vital black community until segregation was overturned by the Federal Government during the 1950s and 1960s. Desegregation encouraged blacks to live and shop elsewhere in the city, causing Greenwood to lose much of its original vitality.
What does this mean?
>>1136603
Being restricted forced them to make the best of what they had, but what they had wasn't always the best even at its most maintained and prosperous. The potential for greener pastures was far more enticing than maintaining something that, while it had become something prestigious and respectable, wasn't somewhere they actually wanted to be. It's a testament to their ability to build a community, nothing else.
>>1136603
Black professionals left for suburbs like other professionals and industry, they created upper class communities and left poorer people in the decaying inner cities with no industry left because after WWII black labour wasn't as important.
Of course some black upper classes remained in the cities but the money didn't circulate in the same way, black businesses couldn't compete and schools were shut down and the black kids sent to white schools.
Integration did not occur really, it was a near complete destruction of black autonomy and the incorporation into white establishments and power structures.
>black men in suits
Thanks to egalitarianism you will never see this again
Back when blacks had to prove they self worth rather than being told they are equals despite never having proven it
>>1136655
and those men in suits still got beat, rejected and reviled.
Having to prove your self worth to every single white guy in a song and dance to prove that you are a bitch to social mores that restricted you is mentally draining especially when it is never enough.
Not deporting the blacks to Liberia was a mistake.
>>1136681
Never would have worked because the pilot project for the colonization failed hard.
Also majority of blacks wanted to stay and starting another conflict after your last one immediately after is a pretty bad idea. Also losing a large amount of your population and labour isn't a good idea.
>>1136702
>large amount
Around 12% in the 1870s.
>>1136709
12% is a large percentage of the population.
>>1136715
"No."
>>1136724
So, do you not consider New York City to comprise a large percentage of the population?
>>1136738
No.
>>1136738
*including the metropolitan area
>>1136742
So, then, you would say that, were every individual in New York City to leave, right now, the economic impact would not be particularly great upon the United States, yes?
>>1136724
In this context, yes it is. Losing 12% of your population in a short time is a big deal for any nation.
>>1136676
They can go back to where they are from if they don't like it
>>1136754
For the U.S., not really. We're talking about a group of uneducated people who wouldn't do much for the country after emancipation. Another one hundred years of disenfranchising these people and we can see that keeping them wasn't the best idea.
>>1136847
Who brought then across the ocean and sent them to plantations in the US? No one forced Europeans and white Americans to buy Africans.
>>1136709
Yeah when they comprise a huge amount of your population in the South it's massive.
Remember that Blacks weren't spread out all over the U.S.
>>1136873
They provided cheap as fuck labour with the inability to stand up for themselves or face punishment and no rights so super easy to exploit.
>>1136985
Jewish slave traders
>>1136847
kys
>>1137085
Supported by the Portuguese and Dutch crown and only relevant for the early slaving period.
The royal houses of Europe chose this and so did the presidents
>>1136847
They were literally born in the US and niggers have been here longer than the United States has
