Did blacks have to ride in the back of the bus in Europe in the 60's

[Gary4Liberty]

Im just curious how europe treated blacks in the 50s and 60s while in America they were made to ride in the back of the bus and had colored only bathrooms, couldnt eat at a restaurant etc etc. Thats just insane! What about in Europe at the same time period? What kind of discrimination if any took place against blacks? I bring this up because it occurred to me, what if some other country put up a base in alabama to tell america that what they were doing was cruel and inhumane violation of civil liberties. How would america have handled that? We know the answer. But thats just what we do when we go to other countries and try to impose our culture on them. This is a sharp two sided sword and there is a lot of irony in this since slavery is wrong but so is imposing our culture on another culture to stop what we think is evil in their culture. So what side do you take? Non interventionist or fight for civil rights around the globe.

 

[acptulsa]

One--this was not universal all across America back then. Mainly in the South.

Two--what makes you think there were any people of African descent in Europe back then?

 

[kylejack]

One--this was not universal all across America back then. Mainly in the South.

Two--what makes you think there were any people of African descent in Europe back then?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_British#Roman_Britain

 

[Gary4Liberty]

back then? in the 50s and 60s? Black people? You dont think there were ANY? in france? seriouslY? So does anyone know the answer to the question? Any history people in here? Were there signs up anywhere else in the world at that time 50s and 60s that said, Colored only, or no coloreds allowed, separate bathrooms water fountains etc? Is this a southern united states phenommenon or did this happen elsewhere in the world?

 

[otherone]

Folks of Color are less prevalent in Europe (for obvious reasons)....but bigotry is alive and well in Europe.

 

[UK4Paul]

At least here in Britain, no... I don't think we were doing that, i.e. segregating people.

That's why I find America a vastly intriguing and somewhat schizophrenic nation. You have the most amazing Constitution and Bill of Rights right from virtually the founding of the nation... and yet segregation until the 1960's!

 

[Cyberbrain]

I won't comment on modern relations, but in the 50s-60s no, Jim Crow laws were more or less a uniquely southern American thing. Most European nations freed their slaves, took racism out of the laws, etc, a hundred years or so before the South did the same in the US.

I bring this up because it occurred to me, what if some other country put up a base in alabama to tell america that what they were doing was cruel and inhumane violation of civil liberties. How would america have handled that? We know the answer. But thats just what we do when we go to other countries and try to impose our culture on them. This is a sharp two sided sword and there is a lot of irony in this since slavery is wrong but so is imposing our culture on another culture to stop what we think is evil in their culture. So what side do you take? Non interventionist or fight for civil rights around the globe.

I take the side that capitalism is the most successful and freest economic system we have ever tried on a large scale. True free market capitalism puts power in the hands of consumers rather than a government who might want to curve individual liberties and it rewards individuals based on their skills, talents, and knowledge. Everyone gets the opportunity to be socially upwardly mobile. If you push for free market capitalism around the globe you are pushing for liberty and freedom around the world without the use of force.

And besides, interventionism doesn't give anyone more liberty. It's just colonialism-lite.

 

[Kingfisher]

Not just the South. Indiana had Jim Crow laws up to the 50's. Possibly early sixties.

 

[chipvogel]

Found this on UK civil rights

It was not uncommon to see signs in Britain during the 1960s proclaiming, “No blacks, no Irish, no dogs”

 

[GrahamUK]

One--this was not universal all across America back then. Mainly in the South.

Two--what makes you think there were any people of African descent in Europe back then?

Speaking as a citizen of the UK i can tell you that the British Gov't allowed blacks from the caribean and other places to come to the United Kingdom to live, work and vote, they enjoyed ALL the rights and freedoms that any native brit had. Yes, there has always been levels of racsim in different areas and places around the county, this however improved over the years and with the passing of time, some would say race relations still have some way to go but thats another matter.. In answer to your question tho, the answer is NO..

 

[Barrex]

In Croatia and BiH no. We had only 1 black "guy" and he was our priest (during 60s)

 

[xFiFtyOnE]

I don't think discrimination against blacks was that prevalent in Europe for the same reason it wasn't that prevalent in the northern U.S., there wasn't a big enough population of blacks for it. Parts of the south have areas that are 50% black or more. Such a high population of blacks prompted the elites to create laws that would keep a large influx of new voters (blacks) out of the voting booths as they surely wouldn't have the same agendas as them. But before they could create those laws they had to stir up racial tension and division. Before that (this is just a guess, as I wasn't alive in 1800s) I would imagine most whites didn't care much about segregation. Infact it was common to see poor whites working along side blacks and even eating together. Less than 10% of people (black and white, YES free blacks did own slaves!) in the south owned slaves. This 10% was wealthy, owning another person was not cheap. A few were very powerful and influential and had a large pull with elected officials and laws written in the south (can someone say lobbyists?). In the end, the civil war, Jim Crow etc, was all about a few trying to maintain power with manipulation of a majority. Kind of like how things work today...

 

[kylejack]

Europe certainly had racism against blacks (and still does) but there wasn't as much institutional racism from the government and etc, except maybe in Germany.

In Europe, it is the Roma and the Irish Travellers that get the institutional racism (and previously, Jews).

 

[TexanRudeBoy]

In various parts of Europe they have major issues with racism. As "racist" as the deep south is supposed to be they support black athletes who play for their teams. Soccer players in Europe have been known to endure all kinds of racist nonsense from their own fans....today, not fifty years ago. FIFA has had an anti racism campaign going for a while.

 

[GrahamUK]

In various parts of Europe they have major issues with racism. As "racist" as the deep south is supposed to be they support black athletes who play for their teams. Soccer players in Europe have been known to endure all kinds of racist nonsense from their own fans....today, not fifty years ago. FIFA has had an anti racism campaign going for a while.

check this out, you are totally correct of course and there is racism in football in the UK, Spains pretty bad too and in Russia there are many many teams who opperate a policy of only employing white players..

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/6379521/Terrys-racism-trial-exercise-in-hypocrisy