The G. I. Bill was Racist...

[5fish]

Yes, the famous WW2 G. I. Bill has racist built into it...

Snip...

So, while white veterans got into college with relative ease, black service members faced limited options and outright denial in their pursuit for educational advancement. This resulted in uneven outcomes of the GI Bill’s impact.

Snip...

Black service members had a different kind of experience. The GI Bill’s race-neutral language had filled the 1 million African American veterans with hope that they, too, could take advantage of federal assistance.

Integrated universities and historically black colleges and universities – commonly known as HBCUs – welcomed black veterans and their federal dollars, which led to the growth of a new black middle class in the immediate postwar years.

Yet, the underfunding of HBCUs limited opportunities for these large numbers of black veterans. Schools like the Tuskegee Institute and Alcorn State lacked government investment in their infrastructure and simply could not accommodate an influx of so many students, whereas well-funded white institutions were more equipped to take in students.

Research has also revealed that a lack of formal secondary education for black soldiers prior to their service inhibited their paths to colleges and universities.

These are just a few...

 

[5fish]

More...

How the GI Bill's Promise Was Denied to a Million Black WWII Veterans

The sweeping bill following World War II promised prosperity to veterans. So why didn’t Black Americans benefit?

www.history.com

snip...

While the GI Bill’s language did not specifically exclude African-American veterans from its benefits, it was structured in a way that ultimately shut doors for the 1.2 million Black veterans who had bravely served their country during World War II, in segregated ranks.

snip...

When lawmakers began drafting the GI Bill in 1944, some Southern Democrats feared that returning Black veterans would use public sympathy for veterans to advocate against Jim Crow laws. To make sure the GI Bill largely benefited white people, the southern Democrats drew on tactics they had previously used to ensure that the New Deal helped as few Black people as possible.

snip... Blur discharge papers

From the start, Black veterans had trouble securing the GI Bill’s benefits. Some could not access benefits because they had not been given an honorable discharge—and a much larger number of Black veterans were discharged dishonorably than their white counterparts.

snip...

In 1947, only 2 of the more than 3,200 VA-guaranteed home loans in 13 Mississippi cities went to Black borrowers. “These impediments were not confined to the South,” notes historian Ira Katznelson. “In New York and the northern New Jersey suburbs, fewer than 100 of the 67,000 mortgages insured by the GI bill supported home purchases by non-whites.”

snip...

In 1947, only 2 of the more than 3,200 VA-guaranteed home loans in 13 Mississippi cities went to Black borrowers. “These impediments were not confined to the South,” notes historian Ira Katznelson. “In New York and the northern New Jersey suburbs, fewer than 100 of the 67,000 mortgages insured by the GI bill supported home purchases by non-whites.”

snip...

The original GI Bill ended in July 1956. By that time, nearly 8 million World War II veterans had received education or training, and 4.3 million home loans worth $33 billion had been handed out. But most Black veterans had been left behind. As employment, college attendance and wealth surged for whites, disparities with their Black counterparts not only continued, but widened. There was, writes Katznelson, “no greater instrument for widening an already huge racial gap in postwar America than the GI Bill.”

 

[5fish]

Here we go Blue Discharge papers...

Blue discharge - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Snip...

A blue discharge (also known as a "blue ticket") was a form of administrative military discharge formerly issued by the United States beginning in 1916. It was neither honorable nor dishonorable. The blue ticket became the discharge of choice for commanders seeking to remove homosexual service members from the ranks. They were also issued disproportionately to African Americans.

Service members holding a blue discharge were subjected to discrimination in civilian life. They were denied the benefits of the G.I. Bill by the Veterans Administration and had difficulty finding work because employers were aware of the negative connotations of a blue discharge. Following intense criticism in the press—especially the black press, because of the high percentage of African Americans who received blue discharges—and in Congress, the blue discharge was discontinued in 1947, replaced by two new classifications: general and undesirable.

Snip... https://mvets.law.gmu.edu/2019/05/1...lives-of-wwii-era-veterans-for-over-75-years/

Ultimately, a disproportionate number of Blue discharges were given to homosexual and African-American servicemembers.[7] Regarding the latter, African-American soldiers constituted a mere 6.5 percent of the Army, yet received 22.2 percent of the Blue discharges issued from 1941 to 1945.[8] Consequently, nearly a quarter of African-American soldiers who fought in World War II were separated without benefits simply because of the color of the paper that their discharge was printed on and largely because of the color of their skin.

 

[rittmeister]

i didn't know any of that but it was to be expected considering your country's racial* devide - then and now


----
* i'm using the word in an american way, biologically it makes no sense whatsoever

 

[Jim Klag]

The title of this thread is totally erroneous. The Bill itself was not racist in any way, but those administering it were.

 

[rittmeister]

The title of this thread is totally erroneous. The Bill itself was not racist in any way, but those administering it were.

don't you think it was worded the way it was to more easily facilitade the usual daily racism?

 

[Jim Klag]

don't you think it was worded the way it was to more easily facilitade the usual daily racism?

I have no idea. I'm not sure how you would write racism into a bill. Anything's possible, I guess.

 

[rittmeister]

I have no idea. I'm not sue how you would write racism into a bill. Anything's possible, I guess.

nah - to chose the wording in a way that makes it easy for the racists

 

[5fish]

The title of this thread is totally erroneous.

Maybe not here is something from wiki... and Jim Crow...

G.I. Bill - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Although the G.I. Bill did not specifically advocate discrimination, it was interpreted differently for black veterans than for white veterans. Historian Ira Katznelson argued that "the law was deliberately designed to accommodate Jim Crow".[27] Because the programs were directed by local, white officials, many veterans did not benefit. In the New York and northern New Jersey suburbs about 67,000 mortgages were insured by the G.I. Bill, but fewer than 100 were taken out by non-white veterans.[9][28]

By 1946, only one-fifth of the 100,000 black veterans who had applied for educational benefits had registered in a college.[29] Furthermore, historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) came under increased pressure, as rising enrollments and strained resources forced them to turn away an estimated 20,000 veterans. HBCUs were already the poorest colleges and HBCU resources were stretched even thinner when black veterans' demands required a shift in the curriculum away from the traditional "preach and teach" course of study offered by most HBCUs.[30] Banks and mortgage agencies frequently refused loans to black veterans, making the G.I. Bill even less effective for them.[30]
Black soldiers who returned from the war generally found their lives materially unchanged.

snip... this tells the story...

However, these gains were limited almost exclusively to Northern states, and the educational and economic gap between white and black nationally widened under the effects of the G.I. Bill.[6] With 79 percent of the black population living in southern states, educational gains were limited to a small part of black America.[4]

 

[5fish]

You know the G I Bill makes another case for reparations along with Jim Crow, Slavery, Pension for Color Troop, Lynching, and so on...

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/06/15/black-reparations-and-the-racial-wealth-gap/

In the 20th century, Black wealth denial was associated to a large degree with racist policies vis-à-vis home ownership, which led to reduced rates of Black homeownership and lower rates of appreciation for those homes purchased. The situation was exacerbated in the late 1940s when the GI Bill was introduced in a manner that overwhelmingly benefited White veterans. Ira Katznelson reported in his book, When Affirmative Action Was White, in Mississippi, only two returning Black veterans received home buying benefits from the GI Bill.

Therefore, as we argue in From Here to Equality, erasure of the racial wealth disparity must be a core objective of reparations for Black American descendants of U.S. slavery. We estimate, at minimum, this will require $10 to $12 trillion in federal expenditures. Attaining long-denied full citizenship has a critical material dimension. That dimension will be achieved by closing the immense gap in Black and White wealth

 

[Jim Klag]

Maybe not here is something from wiki... and Jim Crow...

G.I. Bill - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Although the G.I. Bill did not specifically advocate discrimination, it was interpreted differently for black veterans than for white veterans. Historian Ira Katznelson argued that "the law was deliberately designed to accommodate Jim Crow".[27] Because the programs were directed by local, white officials, many veterans did not benefit. In the New York and northern New Jersey suburbs about 67,000 mortgages were insured by the G.I. Bill, but fewer than 100 were taken out by non-white veterans.[9][28]

By 1946, only one-fifth of the 100,000 black veterans who had applied for educational benefits had registered in a college.[29] Furthermore, historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) came under increased pressure, as rising enrollments and strained resources forced them to turn away an estimated 20,000 veterans. HBCUs were already the poorest colleges and HBCU resources were stretched even thinner when black veterans' demands required a shift in the curriculum away from the traditional "preach and teach" course of study offered by most HBCUs.[30] Banks and mortgage agencies frequently refused loans to black veterans, making the G.I. Bill even less effective for them.[30]
Black soldiers who returned from the war generally found their lives materially unchanged.

snip... this tells the story...

However, these gains were limited almost exclusively to Northern states, and the educational and economic gap between white and black nationally widened under the effects of the G.I. Bill.[6] With 79 percent of the black population living in southern states, educational gains were limited to a small part of black America.[4]

Is it a coincidence that the racist issues of which the article speaks occurred in the southern states where racism and Jim Crow were dominant? Black people made educational gains in the northern states thanks to the GI Bill but not in the southern states. The bill was not inherently racist, but the application of it in the south most definitely was.

 

[5fish]

Is it a coincidence that the racist issues

The sponsor was racist so the G I Bill was designed to be racist...

John Elliott Rankin (March 29, 1882 – November 26, 1960) was a Democratic politician from Mississippi who served sixteen terms in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1921 to 1953.

He was the main House sponsor of the GI Bill. Rankin insisted that its administration be decentralized, which led to continued discrimination against black veterans in the South and their virtual exclusion from one of the most important postwar programs to build social capital among United States residents. In the South, black veterans were excluded from loans, training and employment assistance.[2] The historically black colleges were underfunded and could accept only about half the men who wanted to enroll.[

Rankin chaired the Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation (Seventy-second through Seventy-ninth Congresses[13]) and the Committee on Veterans' Affairs (Eighty-first and Eighty-second Congresses.[14]). In the first role he was the main House sponsor of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, known as the G.I. Bill of Rights. Edward Humes says it was Rankin "who served as the primary force behind the version of the bill that actually got passed into law."[15] He insisted on a provision that the federal program would be administered in a decentralized manner by the states. This ensured that southern states could continue to practice discrimination against black veterans. According to historian Gavin Wright, "In a comprehensive econometric analysis, Sarah Turner and John Bound find that although the GI Bill had substantial positive benefits for black and white veterans outside the South, "those from the South made no significant gains in educational attainment."[2]

snip...

Mississippi Senator John Rankin, one of segregation’s foremost defenders, is particularly worried by Title II of the Bill (any veteran “shall be eligible for and entitled to such course of education or training as he may elect, and at any approved educational or training institution at which he chooses to enroll”), explaining that “a definite line should be drawn in the schooling on the matter of race segregation.” This restricts opportunity hugely for blacks in the South, where they are 25% of the population, but white schools outnumber black schools more than 5-1 in 1947 (545 white, 102 black). In Mississippi, mor

The G I Bill was design with southern states in mind. This article argues Roosevelt wanted a race neutral bill... but he knew what Rankin was doing with the G I Bill...

As a case in point, President Roosevelt’s race-neutral G.I. Bill, which went into effect in 1944, had state-controlled pushbacks that kept many black veterans from reaping its full benefits.

Snip...

“lack veterans and their families were denied their fair share of the multigenerational, enriching impact of home ownership and economic security that the G.I. Bill conferred on a majority of white veterans, their children, and their grandchildren.

snip...

Black institutions also took advantage of black veterans. “Programs for black veterans—some of them owned and operated by African Americans—appeared to have been among the most abusive, preying on those veterans most in need of help.”