You have not been recognized as a subscriber to JAH online. About 490 words from this article are provided below; about 12179 words remain.
 
If you are a individual member of the Organization of American Historians, you may:
• login here if you have already registered for online access.
• Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time.

If you are not a member of the Organization of American Historians, you can:
• Join the OAH and receive many member benefits including print and electronic issues of the Journal of American History.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two-hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of the Journal of American History (86.1-present). Note: the Research Pass does not provide access to JSTOR's holdings of the Journal of American History.

Instititutions can:
•  Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.
David Montgomery | Racism, Immigrants, and Political Reform | The Journal of American History, 87.4 | The History Cooperative
87.4  
Journals link Search link Partners link Information link
March, 2001
Previous
Table of Contents
Next
The Journal of American History

Table of contents
List journal issues
Home
Get a printer-friendly version of this page
 

 


Racism, Immigrants, and Political Reform



David Montgomery




The theme of the ninety-third annual convention of the Organization of American Historians (OAH) was "The United States and the Wider World." Both that theme and the way the OAH's public protest against racism shaped the St. Louis convention prompt us to reconsider the overarching narrative within which United States history is ordinarily presented. This essay argues that it is misleading to present our country's history as the progressive fulfillment of democratic ideals, and it emphasizes the significance of the global context, especially of slavery and immigration, for the development of the country's economic, political, and intellectual life. The question of how and within what limits collective human action has shaped history informs all aspects of this discussion. 1



The OAH, St. Louis, and the Adam's Mark


Scarcely three months before the OAH convention was scheduled to open at the Adam's Mark Hotel, members of the OAH learned that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the United States Department of Justice, and the state of Florida had filed suit against the hotel chain for discrimination against and special surveillance of African American patrons in Daytona Beach. We also learned that an appeals court had previously found that testimony concerning employment discrimination at the St. Louis hotel, in the court's words, "supported a finding of outrageous conduct and an award of punitive damages."1 2
     The executive board's decision to move all official convention business out of the hotel was based on the principle that the OAH could not fulfill its mission of encouraging the open exchange of the varied points of view and theoretical orientations found among its members if it met under circumstances that made any members feel unwelcome or unwilling to participate because of racial discrimination. The enthusiastic support of historians in St. Louis, the city's Board of Aldermen, and the administration of St. Louis University made it possible to hold a very successful convention at other locations within the city under these difficult circumstances. Moreover, the combined impact of these efforts helped make history: During the week before the convention the Adam's Mark management agreed to a consent decree providing for non-discriminatory policies to be monitored by Project Equality of Kansas City, Missouri, and for payment of monetary relief totaling $8 million.2 3
     The Mississippi Valley Historical Association, precursor of the OAH, addressed this question half a century ago. When New Orleans was designated the site for its 1952 convention, segregation was still unequivocally the law in that city. African American members, few as they then were, could attend sessions at convention hotels, but they could not sleep, dine, or socialize there. President Merle Curti informed the executive committee a year in advance of the scheduled meeting that he refused to deliver his scheduled presidential address in such a setting. He proposed to move the forthcoming convention to Chicago. . . .


There are about 12179 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.