Absolutely -- in fact not only were the populist less intolerant than their opponents but also were one of the rare post-Reconstruction multi-racial movements (Hofstadter didn't realize their were black populists). It's the crushing of populism that empowered Jim Crow.
There's an argument that Van Woodward overestimated it because (for understandable reason) he wanted a model of bi-racial Southern co-operation. But when you consider how bad post-Reconstruction America (north and south!) was, what the populist tried to do was remarkable.
-
-
Three and a half times there were attempts at "plain folk" coalitions of white and black : Reconstruction, the Populists of the 1890's, (half) the southwestern socialists, 1910-20, and the New Deal. Only the New Deal had some durability
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I mean, yeah—historiography has a recurrent decompensation/overcompensation dynamic to it. So the underscoring of Populist anti-racism was an essential reframing of class driven academic contempt. narrative. And similarly, the Knights had such moments. It’s how you weight them.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.