Black Politics in Transition

Immigration, Suburbanization, and Gentrification

Candis Watts Smith, Christina Greer, Candis Watts Smith, Christina M. Greer, Christina Greer, Candis Watts Smith, Christina M. Greer

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9781138058484
• eBook ISBN: 9781351673525
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Black Politics in Transition considers the impact of three transformative forces—immigration, suburbanization, and gentrification—on Black politics today. Demographic changes resulting from immigration and ethnic blending are dramatically affecting the character and identity of Black populations throughout the US. Black Americans are becoming more ethnically diverse at the same time that they are sharing space with newcomers from near and far. In addition, the movement of Black populations out of the cities to which they migrated a generation ago—a reverse migration to the American South, in some cases, and in other cases a movement from cities to suburbs shifts the locus of Black politics. At the same time, middle class and white populations are returning to cities, displacing low income Blacks and immigrants alike in a renewal of gentrification. All this makes for an important laboratory of discovery among social scientists, including the diverse range of authors represented here. Drawing on a wide array of disciplinary perspectives and methodological strategies, original chapters analyze the geography of opportunity for Black Americans and Black politics in accessible, jargon-free language. Moving beyond the Black–white binary, this book explores the tri-part relationship among Blacks, whites, and Latinos as well. Some of the most important developments in Black politics are happening at state and local levels today, and this book captures that for students, scholars, and citizens engaged in this dynamic milieu.

PART I

All in the Family?

The Political Dynamics of Black Ethnic Immigration and Diversification

1

AFRICAN AMERICAN, BLACK ETHNIC, AND DOMINICAN POLITICAL RELATIONS IN CONTEMPORARY NEW YORK CITY

Sharon D. Wright Austin

This chapter examines the political relationships among native-born African Americans, Dominicans, Haitians, and West Indians in New York City.¹ African Americans have attempted to increase their political representation in New York since the city’s earliest founding. Over the past three decades, a Black ethnic constituency has also emerged.² The growth of new racial and ethnic immigrant populations presents both prospects and challenges for African American political development in New York.

Given the historical ups and downs of the relationship between various groups of Black immigrants and African Americans, what should we expect for “Black” politics in the twenty-first century? The “minority group model” assumes that people of color will develop electoral coalitions and vote for minority candidates who further their interests (Carmichael & Hamilton, 1967; Eisinger, 1976, pp. 17–18; Rich, 1996; Sonenshein, 1993). It is expected that these collaborations will, in turn, result in an increase in overall minority political incorporation.

This chapter argues that African American political figures have had to find ways to develop coalitions with Dominicans, Haitians, and West Indians; yet, these relationships have been more conflictual than collaborative. What’s more, through an examination of an original survey conducted in 2013 with over 700 foreign- and native-born Blacks, this chapter highlights both the prospects for future cross-ethnic coalitions as well as the perceived obstacles that hinder intraracial coalitions from coming to fruition.

Black Political Efforts in New York City

The charter for the city of New York stipulates that a strong mayor–weak city council system will govern the city. As the city’s most influential elected official, the mayor serves for four years in one term with a two-term limit. The unicameral New York City Council consists of 51 members who each represent their districts for four-year terms and are also limited to a maximum of two possible consecutive terms. The city also consists of five boroughs that encompass five counties: Manhattan (New York County), Queens (Queens County), Brooklyn (Kings County), the Bronx (Bronx County), and Staten Island (Richmond County). Each borough has a president who advises the mayor about the needs and issues of their individual borough. Created by a 1901 charter, the borough president is its main representative, but the person has little citywide or countywide political power. A charter reform effort in 1989 awarded more power to the city mayor and council but reduced the borough president’s influence. Since then, the borough president has mainly had an advisory role over development, zoning, and planning affairs (Austin, 2018).

African American Political Evolution

Throughout the city’s history, African Americans have had limited political success in the city’s five boroughs. During the earliest years of Black officeholding, African Americans and West Indians were the city’s largest Black minority groups. All candidates of African descent were classified as “Black” rather than African and Caribbean candidates. However, during the 1980s, a shift occurred when West Indian candidates and constituencies began to distinguish themselves from African Americans. West Indians acknowledged that they possessed interests that often differed from those of African Americans.

Like in many northern cities, machine politics dominated New York City politics for several decades. Many years before Chicago’s infamous Richard J. Daley machine, the Tammany Hall was founded in the 1780s and remained dominant until the 1960s. It controlled patronage and Democratic Party elections in Manhattan while also controlling New York City and state political affairs. White immigrants, mostly Irish, expanded their political influence by working in the machine. However, African Americans and Black ethnics were often the targets of racial prejudice within the machine (Thompson, 2006).

Whereas Richard J. Daley was the face of the Chicago machine, William M. Tweed (or Boss Tweed as he was known) dominated the Tammany machine. Beginning with the mayoral victory of Fernando Wood in 1854, the New York City machine rewarded its Irish Catholic supporters with jobs, naturalization assistance, and neighborhood enhancements, but not other racial/ethnic groups (Rich, 2007). In addition, the Tammany machine cared little about cultivating Black politicians into their fold.

The earliest African American elected officials had several things in common. They worked in predominantly Black middle-class political clubs that received some financial support from white progressives. This support allowed them to win office in predominantly Black areas (primarily in Harlem), but not citywide (Rich, 2007). In addition, they were disadvantaged by the separation of Black neighborhoods in the five boroughs and the absence of “cross-borough coalitions” (Rich, 2007; Thompson, 2006).

Despite their lack of electoral victories in the current local political scene, some of the first Black elected officials were of West Indian descent. These candidates ran as Black rather than Caribbean candidates, represented issues of pressing concern to Black voters, and often deliberately downplayed their Caribbean ancestry (Foner, 1998). Many did so because West Indians were at the bottom of the city’s racial totem pole. They endured bigotry from all races of people in New York including native-born African Americans, Puerto Ricans, and other “non-whites of Caribbean ancestry” (Bryce-LaPorte, 1979).

Despite the widespread bigotry, beginning in the mid-1930s, West Indians were represented in local political offices. In 1935, Herbert Bruce, a native of Barbados, won the election as a Tammany district leader (Kasinitz, 1992). This victory made him the first Black man to reach a position of prominence during the Tammany era, though some in the African American community viewed the political victory of a West Indian with suspicion. Bruce, as a result, had to reassure the African American community that he was committed to Black interests generally rather than to Caribbean interests (Kasinitz, 1992).

Bertram Baker, a naturalized citizen from the Caribbean island of Nevis, became the first Black member of the New York State Assembly from Brooklyn in 1948. In 1966, Baker became the first Black assemblyman to hold a leadership position as majority whip (Waggoner, 1985). Thus, West Indians revealed both their political interests and savvy in winning elections in local and state politics. By the beginning of the 1950s, most of the highest-ranking Democratic district representatives (four out of five), as well as the only Black district leader in Brooklyn (Baker), were of West Indian descent.

In 1953, Hulan Jack, a naturalized citizen from St. Lucia, was elected as the first Black borough president of Manhattan. Jack was one of the few Black politicians with an active career during Tammany Hall when he represented Harlem from 1941 to 1953 (Biondi, 2003). Although the borough position carried little influence at the time, it was a symbolic political victory for African Americans locally (Rich, 2007).

In 1964, J. Raymond Jones became the first African American chairman of the New York City County Democratic Party during the last years of the Tammany Hall political machine. Although Tammany Hall had lost its appeal to voters, Jones’ position was still significant. He was described as “the quintessential go-along-to-get-along politician” (Rich, 2007, p. 27).

For many years, Harlem was the epicenter of Black political power in New York City. The most powerful African American politicians in the city were, first, Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., a civil rights activist and the pastor of Harlem’s Abyssinian Baptist Church and US Representative (D.-NY) from 1944 to 1970; second, Charles B. Rangel succeeded Powell in the House of Representatives in 1970 and represented his congressional district until 2016. Despite their national influence, their citywide political influence was limited.

For much of the city’s history, Black New Yorkers could only win elections in Brooklyn or Harlem. Shirley Chisholm became Brooklyn’s most prominent African American political figure after winning election to Congress in 1968. She represented the 12th congressional district for seven terms and was later the first Black candidate to seriously compete for a major party nomination for the presidency in 1972.

Besides Powell and later Rangel, Harlem’s “Gang of Four”³ consisted of politically influential African American and Black ethnic men in Harlem. David Dinkins was deputy mayor, Manhattan borough president, and later mayor of New York City. Basil Paterson served in the state senate, as deputy mayor, and New York secretary of state. Paterson was born in Harlem but was of Jamaican and Carriacouan descent. He and Shirley Chisholm, whose parents were born in the British Guiana and Barbados respectively, were two of New York City’s first elected West Indian legislators. As the only Black ethnic member of the Gang of Four and the first Black secretary of state from 1979 to 1982, Paterson represented Black interests with no distinction between African American and Black ethnic interests. In 1966, Charles Rangel began his political career as a state representative before winning election to Congress in 1970. Finally, Percy Sutton was a state representative in 1965 and 1966 and the Manhattan borough president in 1966 (Salazar, 2014).

The experience of 1976 mayoral candidate Percy Sutton demonstrates the challenges for Black candidates in citywide elections. Besides being a member of the Gang of Four, Sutton was a former National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) president, civil rights activist, and high-profile attorney for clients such as Malcolm X. He needed to assemble a multiracial coalition of Blacks, whites, and Puerto Ricans in order to be elected, but votes from these groups split among white liberal candidates Mario Cuomo, Ed Koch, and Bella Abzug and Puerto Rican candidate Herman Badillo (Rich, 2007). Some individuals in Black, white, and Latinx communities believed that 1976 was not an opportune time for a Black or Latinx candidate to run for mayor because of a fiscal crisis that left the city on the verge of bankruptcy. In the Democratic primary, Sutton received 14% of the vote and Badillo 11%. Mario Cuomo and Ed Koch competed in the year’s runoff election that Koch eventually won (Rich, 2007). Sutton was also disadvantaged by a low turnout among Black voters. He received less than 50% of the Black vote and practically no white votes (Thompson, 2006). For a brief time during his mayoral campaign, Sutton used right-wing rhetoric that alienated the Black electorate, and some Black citizens interpreted his anti-crime rhetoric as insulting and condescending toward people of color. For example, he accused “criminals” of driving away tourists, but failed to address the underlying causes of crime during a time of high unemployment rates and a citywide fiscal crisis (Sandbrook, 2011). The research of Charles Green and Basil Wilson (1989) indicates other possible reasons for the diminished enthusiasm among Blacks for Sutton’s campaign: “Sutton chose to run for mayor when the white backlash movement was at its zenith and initially chose not to base his campaign in the Black community.” Percy Sutton also received less radio, newspaper, and television coverage than Cuomo and Koch because of his perception as a less serious contender (Rich, 2007). He financed his campaign with $400,000 of his own money but received few other campaign funds. He also had few supporters outside of the Manhattan borough. A Black mayor would not wage a successful mayoral campaign until the 1989 David Dinkins victory.

Dinkins, a former New York State Assemblyman and Manhattan borough president, won the city’s mayoral election because of a successful mayoral campaign and a number of events that worked in his favor. First, Dinkins motivated voters to support him out of a sense of racial solidarity and the belief that his administration would benefit all groups. In addition, Dinkins benefited from his image as a “healer” who promoted the idea of diversity as a “beautiful mosaic.” After several racially charged incidents occurred in New York City during the 1980s, he portrayed himself as the candidate who could alleviate the city’s racial divide. African Americans and Black ethnics supported him because the victims of racial attacks were of both African American and Caribbean descent. Thus, African Americans and Black ethnics did not perceive his campaign in “us against them” terms.

The Dinkins campaign also secured the backing of a multiracial coalition of voters because of his name recognition. Additionally, the 1984 and 1988 Jesse Jackson presidential bids had motivated African Americans and Black ethnics to register to vote nationwide and develop multiracial coalitions (Foner, 1998; Rich, 2007). African Americans, voters of Caribbean descent, white progressives, and to a lesser extent Latinos, united to support both the Jackson and Dinkins campaigns.

In the 1989 Democratic primary, David Dinkins eventually defeated Ed Koch by a margin of 51% to 42%. He received approximately 29% of the white vote, 94% of the Black vote, and 26% of the Jewish vote (Rich, 2007). African Americans and Black ethnics were the most cohesive bloc of voters to support him in the election (Rogers, 2004; Zephir, 1996). From the early 1990s to the 2013 election of Bill DeBlasio, Republican fiscal conservatives won mayoral elections, even though New York City was a heavily Democratic city during the 1980s and remained a boastful 6-to-1 Democratic Party registrants for the next two decades. As a result, Dinkins was assured of victory in the general election after winning the primary (Rich, 2007).

In the general election, Dinkins defeated Rudolph Giuliani, an Italian American former US Attorney General, in the general election by only 47,000 votes (Thompson, 2006). On election night, Dinkins received 28% of the white vote, 70% of the Latinx vote, and 90% of the African American/Black ethnic vote (Carsey, 2001). Thus in 1989, African American, Black ethnics, and other voters in New York City finally elected an African American mayor despite being disadvantaged by machine rule, intraracial conflicts, and the competitive political nature of the city’s borough residents.

Dinkins served for only one term as mayor, however. In 1993, Giuliani defeated him by a narrow margin of approximately 2%. Giuliani benefited from the support he received from white ethnic wards in Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island and from perceptions that the city’s crime rate was out of control. In addition, the turnout rate among the members of Dinkins’ coalition was a disappointment.

During Dinkins’ mayoral term, African American and Black ethnic citizens failed to substantially increase their political standing. Few Black officeholders won elections. Although Mayor Dinkins appointed minorities and women to key positions in his administration, the overall economic standing of poor and working-class people of color did not improve significantly. Because of the city’s severe recession during his term and the opposition he encountered from local politicians, Dinkins could only do so much for them (Mollenkopf, 2003; Rich, 2007).

The members of the Dinkins electoral coalition hoped that the presence of an African American mayor would lead them on the path to full political incorporation (a concept that Andrea Benjamin elaborates upon in this volume). This entails the election and reelection of a minority mayor for several terms, victories for other minority candidates, and “governmental responsiveness”—a dominant role in a ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Dedication
• Contributors
• Introduction: Black Flight
• PART I All in the Family?: The Political Dynamics of Black Ethnic Immigration and Diversification
• PART II Black (In)Visibility: New Insights on Majority– Minority Cities
• PART III Keeping Up with the Joneses: The Politics of Black Suburbanites
• PART IV There Goes the Neighborhood: The Complexities of Racialized Neighborhood Change
• Index