New Afrika State: What if black nationalism created a black majority 51st US state?

This is a scenario that is not meant to be entirely realistic. It is also not meant to portray MLK as anything other than a strong and great man. This scenario takes place in a world where Dr. King’s beliefs were not as strong as they were in our world. He is, in this scenario, less able to stick to his morals and his methods. The point of divergence is in in the 1950s, when MLK is still popular but right from the early days of his involvement in the civil rights movement, he faces scares that he cannot shake off. Simply put, he is not the same man he was, and seeing attempting assassinations and murders of black people cause him to lose faith in his methods.

The 1950s
-MLK-

Martin Luther King would begin his involvement in the civil rights movement during the bus boycotts of 1955. Rosa Parks would narrowly escape an assassination attempt during the boycotts and this would put stress on King from the beginning.

All the way through his peaceful civil rights activist days he would constantly see failure after failure.

When multiple black people attempted to attend a desegregated high school in Arkansas, Governor Orval Faubus sent in two hundred and fifty state troopers to keep the peace by refusing to let the black students into the school. Plans were made by the NAACP to have the students skip the first day of the school term and instead all organise and go together on the second day. One student did not receive word of this plan and turned up alone on the first day. She would be harassed and abused by a white mob and would be killed after getting pushed over and trampled. The school would stay segregated as the other black students refused to try and enter the second day or any other.
C42C327F-92B3-43F5-AF3F-E4B5FD7E88A4.jpeg

The 1960s
-MLK 2-

Gradually MLK would begin to lose faith in his non violent direct action tactics as he and his fellow civil rights activists would be put down repeatedly.

When it came to campaigns in Selma, a peaceful march of black people was violently put down by state troopers who used lethal and brutal force to break up the group. The troopers would go as far as to actively seek out and oppress the media by destroying all footage of the events. This would mean that there would be no second Selma march as whites would not show up to aid the blacks in their efforts.

When returning home after the failure in Selma, MLK would discover that his wife had been murdered by the KKK. This would be the breaking point for MLK as he lost all faith in the ability of non violent methods to truly make change in the USA.
FEA24A34-1558-41D3-8630-0C9723C5A03A.jpeg

The 1960s
-Black Nationalism-

The black nationalist movement would gain great traction from the failures of the non violent civil rights camp.

During the March Against Fear, Stokely Carmichael and MLK would unite in making joint, highly militant speeches to the black people of the US. MLK would now become radicalised to the ideas of black power and black nationalism as no whites had come to help him in his previous efforts and segregation had hardly changed in his days of peaceful campaigning.

The Black Panther Party would be established in 1966 and MLK would work with them to aid black communities. Although MLK would never become a Marxist or anti-capitalist like many in the Black Panthers, he would still come to advocate for an amount of black self determination and with MLK’s large support base, he would bring many more blacks to this belief.
A732CEF6-738E-486D-A343-3B8E8435DAB9.jpeg

The 1960s
-Black Nationalism 2-

Fred Hampton would visit Jackson Mississippi in the late 1960s and would see a city with a very large population of blacks. He would also see that the areas surrounding Jackson in western Mississippi and parts of Eastern Louisiana had very high black populations compared to a lot of the US where areas of black majority were scattered. With the help of Martin Luther king and Malcolm X (who narrowly escaped assassination in 1965 after leaving the nation of Islam for the more prominant Black Panthers) Hampton would campaign for a new black state in this black majority area.

As years went by, popularity grew for a project known as “the 51st state of New Afrika” and blacks across Mississippi, Louisiana and Arkansas began a new campaign to the local legislatures of the three states to allow for secession. These campaigns would be violently put down and this would end up causing an all out race war in Jackson and some areas across western Mississippi, Eastern Louisiana and south western Arkansas.

After campaigns were put down, and brutal violence had broken out between blacks and whites across three southern states, the federal government finally stepped in and sent federal troops to end this. One of the last Presidential actions of Lyndon B. Johnson would be to pass a motion through Congress to force state legislatures in Louisiana and Mississippi to hold a referendum in a demarcated area called “The Black State”. This referendum would decide if the people of Fred Hampton’s “New Afrika'' would be in favour of creating a new US state. The referendum was won for the Black Nationalists and after months of campaigning, the state legislatures of Louisiana and Mississippi allowed for the area (including the city of Jackson) to secede and become the 51st US state of “New Afrika”.
9E356144-ABAF-4C61-BE63-B8F665AB5989.jpeg

The 1970s
-The New Afrikan Front-

New Afrika would see an immediate problem after passing its constitution in 1970. The city of Jackson would see heavy racial violence as Mississippi was in the process of moving its state capital to Gulfport. During this turbulent time, the first senatorial elections were meant to take place in New Afrika. When the Republican Party tried to run two white candidates, and the Democrats the same, the black population revolted. Neither of the main political parties of the US would ever run again in this state. Instead, the New Afrikan Front Party (NAFP) would win both senators after the election was delayed. This party was mostly black, however had a few white members which allowed for relative peace to develop with the white minority on average not being too aggressive.

The New Afrikan Front would split however, shortly after the assassination of Malcolm X (now an extremely close brotherly friend of MLK) by a communist who was against Malcolm X’s religiosity. MLK founded the Liberal Democratic Party of New Afrika in 1973. The rest of the NAFP would side with Fred Hampton and establish the Communist Panther Party.
1A4DD4EB-3648-4B26-ADE7-435889F3BEA2.jpeg

The 1970s
-A left wing haven-

Both the Liberal Democratic Party of New Afrika (LDP) and the Communist Panther Party (CPP) were some degree of left wing that was not the norm in the US.

In the 1973 Gubernatorial Elections, Chokwe Lumumba would become the Governor of New Afrika as a member of the LDP. 1973 would also be the year that the house and Senate of the legislature of New Afrika would become split by the LDP and CPP. the CPP would gain a narrow majority and would go on to work well with the LDP to implement left wing policies to support previously highly poor black communities. Welfare, cheaper healthcare and better education would follow the CPP victory. Communities that previously had no governmental help now started to prosper under socialist leadership.
D5D329CC-680C-4AFD-B86B-2D9598E9B0B0.jpeg

The 1970s
-A Brighter Socialist Future-

With the image of success in New Afrika, the left could receive a new lease of life in the US. Many in the US were disenfranchised by the two main parties even more so than before as neither party had tried to resolve any civil rights issue and it had led to the splitting up of Mississippi and Louisiana as well as more black violence across the country than ever.

The young generation and many blacks that couldn’t move to New Afrika, as well as some from all different walks of life, turned to a new political party that had risen out of the dust of a conflict within the Democrats after a crushing defeat to Ronald Reagan in the 1976 Presidential Election.

The Prosperity Party was a union of the Communist Party of the USA, the Socialist Party of America and a few Democrats that fled what they saw as a failing party that couldn’t combat the Republicans. It is a party that seeked to end the two party system in America and try to implement left wing policy in order to win over the American people to socialism and progressivism.
19732FBB-E3D1-45E3-A673-52426EA09FDE.jpeg

The 1970s
-A Reagan Presidency-

When Reagan became President in 1976, he had a hardline stance against black and white integration. The creation of New Afrika only hardened this stance as Reagan believed that it was just as much a state's right to keep segregation as it was New Afrika’s right to base their entire state around the preservation of black self rights and self determination.

Reagan would cut taxes while slashing public services throughout his two terms (the second ending in 1984). This would be quite popular with the middle and upper class white population, but a large amount of the black population and working class whites would be up in arms as the wealth gap grew and poorer people were left behind. The race tension that had been ever increasing and never improved, caused Reagan to be the subject of two assassination attempts by black nationalists and subject to critisism by the Prosperity Party, which rapidly grew in Congressional elections during his presidency.
6CC2D29E-E0A8-4711-A64F-013377648A27.jpeg

The 1980s
-Fresh Elections-

The 1984 House of Representatives election would see a house more divided than ever before. Senatorial elections would look similar. The Prosperity Party would gain over twenty seats in the house (the first time since its formation that it would have over ten) and would come close to winning a senator in Louisiana and California.

These elections would lead to the Prosperity party becoming king makers in the House and almost having the ability to have power in the senate, scaring the establishment Democrats and Republicans.

The 1984 Presidential election would see George H. W. Bush become President and he would attempt to appease blacks and the working class by trying to get congress to pass the “Workers Safety Revival Act”. The act was destroyed by the Republicans (still mostly in a Reagan mindset of rejecting higher government spending), the Democrats (that believed the bill was a step in a good direction but was filled with holes, like blatantly trying to win over black people with civil rights activism that wouldn’t be accepted by state legislatures), and the Prosperity Party (that didn’t think it was anywhere near enough and needed to have more funding towards poor communities).
E0775BAD-F470-4168-B459-8B4973610951.jpeg


That is as far as I have gotten with this scenario, however I wanted to share it in its current form to get people’s opinions and also to see how people think I could expand it. I want to expand into how the world could be effected. Things like Vietnam, the protests surrounding it, Thatcher and the wider UK. Could communist nations become involved with the Prosperity Party? When would MLK and Fred Hampton die in this timeline? Thanks for reading if you have and all comments are appreciated.
 
Very interesting. Is MLK not becoming anti-capitalist part of his personality change?

Or is the personality change the result of the death of his wife? If so, hes already won a Nobel Peace Prize for non-violent resistance, making his turn to violent resistance even more powerful

IOTL, MLK was decidedly anti-capitalist by the end of his life.
 
Very interesting. Is MLK not becoming anti-capitalist part of his personality change?

Or is the personality change the result of the death of his wife? If so, hes already won a Nobel Peace Prize for non-violent resistance, making his turn to violent resistance even more powerful

IOTL, MLK was decidedly anti-capitalist by the end of his life.
him not being anti-capitalist is part of his personality change, yes. He could have possibly became anti-capitalist, however his new found friend Malcolm X being killed by an anti capitalist made it so he would stay undecided and would not too closely affiliate with anyone anti capitalist.

the fact that he turned to violent resistance was extremely powerful to all people in the US. And the fact that his speeches will Stokely Carmichael were so profound and so definite in the way that he definitely saw the end of peaceful resistance, meant that a lot of his support base were happy to continue following him and believing that he was the best thing for the civil rights movement.
 
People have speculated on the possibility of a Native American state emerging out of the territories of eastern Oklahoma. Before the region was opened to White settlers the Five nations there were a potential block of some sort of large Native American entity. Had administration of the South Western cessation from Mexico been handled differently a 'Hispanic' territory/state might have emerged. Then there were the assorted French, German, and Portuguese speaking enclaves east of the Mississippi. None of those came as far as becoming the language, ethnic, and cultural composition of a state, but some came closer than others. The WASP cultural domination of the US did not occur until the early twentieth Century, with the local mandates to teach only English in the public schools, the revival of the KKK, and doubling down on the anti immigrant laws. With PoD in the early to mid 19th Century a state with a language/cultural alternative to the WASP dominated model is possible.

In the 1960s I recall a proposal for all of Mississipi to become the African American state. Malcom X mentioned it, tho i don't recall if it originated with him. A few others repeated the idea in that decade. How that might have enraged the white inhabitants of Mississippi I cant say.
 
This is a interesting scenario. I feel that it would be more likely for a “new afrika” state to potentially be Liberia instead, as it could have been a state like Alaska and Hawaii. However, I still feel this scenario is pretty cool, and I can’t wait to see into the 21st century
 
This is a interesting scenario. I feel that it would be more likely for a “new afrika” state to potentially be Liberia instead, as it could have been a state like Alaska and Hawaii. However, I still feel this scenario is pretty cool, and I can’t wait to see into the 21st century
Well, I went of the basis that Black nationalist organizations like "The New Afrika Republic" had at the time. They wanted to establish a quite large black nation including all of Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia and South Carolina. I wanted to make it a lot more "realistic" you could say by having a much smaller area with every county black majority and have it remain in the US rather than it be it's own independent nation.
 
In the 1960s I recall a proposal for all of Mississippi to become the African American state. Malcom X mentioned it, though i don't recall if it originated with him. A few others repeated the idea in that decade. How that might have enraged the white inhabitants of Mississippi I cant say.
I'd imagine some sort of population transfer where White Mississippians move to other Southern states and Black people from other Southern states move to Mississippi. I don't think the government would do it, but I think it'd be an informal and organic process over the course of a few decades.
 
No way in hell would the USA allow a Marxist hotbed - of ANY color - to develop as a US state.

You are better off having a more wildly successful black version of the Free State Project. Have a single Southern State chosen as a migration destination for residents of the Black Belt in the South.

You might - horrifyingly - see this supported by segregationists. "They openly embrace 'Separate but Equal', all the (redacted) move away, and all it costs us is Mississippi? Hell, we'll help em pack!"
 
You might - horrifyingly - see this supported by segregationists. "They openly embrace 'Separate but Equal', all the (redacted) move away, and all it costs us is Mississippi? Hell, we'll help em pack!"
Segregationists didn’t want the removal of blacks from South since it depends on black labor.
 
No way in hell would the USA allow a Marxist hotbed - of ANY color - to develop as a US state.

You are better off having a more wildly successful black version of the Free State Project. Have a single Southern State chosen as a migration destination for residents of the Black Belt in the South.

You might - horrifyingly - see this supported by segregationists. "They openly embrace 'Separate but Equal', all the (redacted) move away, and all it costs us is Mississippi? Hell, we'll help em pack!"

The odds of the USA supporting a Marxist state as part of the union would make almost any other ASB scenario seem realistic by comparison.
 
Amazon's "Black America"
Never heard of it before you mentioned it, description is interesting:

The show imagines what would have happened if Southern states had seceded from the union—and newly freed slaves were given the territories of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama as reparations, per Deadline. Here’s how the rest of the plot goes:

“The sovereign nation they formed, New Colonia, has had a tumultuous and sometimes violent relationship with its looming “Big Neighbor,” both ally and foe, the United States. The past 150 years have been witness to military incursions, assassinations, regime change, coups, etc. Today, after two decades of peace with the U.S. and unprecedented growth, an ascendant New Colonia joins the ranks of major industrialized nations on the world stage as America slides into rapid decline. Inexorably tied together, the fate of two nations, indivisible, hangs in the balance.”
 
Somewhat related to the idea of a Black majority US state, yet in an earlier ATL (butterfly netted) scenario where the US adopted Sam Houston's proposed borders between it and Mexico. Which territory in Northern Mexico would be best suited for an ATL more wildly successful Black version of the Free State Project, both in terms of population capacity as well as potential resources (be it pre-existing or more Sakhalin like - where the latter was initially dismissed as useless before the discovery of oil)?
 
Quite interesting, indeed. But how Washington could handle it differently?

One detail would have been the better recognition of Existing Mexican law and records of land rights. Even 'white' settlers who had acquired their land & documentation during Mexican administration had problems retaining their claims against new migrants. For the Hispanics it was worse. The fight for the land & derived economic power marginalized the Spanish speaking population. This was particularly important for the small percent that comprised the previous ruling class. The reinstatement of slavery in Texas over Spanish abolition was a symptom of this rejection of mid 19th Century Mexican culture, including language, religion, and law. Much of this had to do with the white protestant ruling class extending its economic power base (slave economy) further west. Some like Harrison failed to do that north of the Ohio when the NW Territory was settled and States established there. They succeeded in Texas, & Missouri, & ultimately failed in the New Mexico territories. That political objective led to things like suppression of the Spanish language from law and business, or education, the weak recognition of previous Mexican law/land rights, discouragement of the Catholic religion, and discouragement of immigration from Mexico. That is low tier laborers were ok, but educated middle class tradesmen and merchants less so and wealthy investors even less. Like so much in the political/economic development of the US it revolved around a wealthy and powerful bloc based on slavery. There were of course other WASP political groups of other economic basis, but those were more flexible & had different moral underpinnings. ie: the Society of Friends or Quakers who constituted a much forgotten and understudied economic and political power bloc in 18th and early 19th Century US. Other assorted ethnic groups comprised local or regional power blocs, usually when affiliated with the Catholic religion, tho their ethnic diversity and passion for hands on democracy prevented the Catholics from becoming a monolithic power bloc.

Anyway, my view is the WASP retention of political dominance & related cultural suppression was not inevitable. A earlier end of slavery would have been one major change in the course of US history. Others are visible as well.
 
I'd imagine some sort of population transfer where White Mississippians move to other Southern states and Black people from other Southern states move to Mississippi. I don't think the government would do it, but I think it'd be an informal and organic process over the course of a few decades.

That would be practical. Like old northern industrial cities becoming 'Black' through immigration it would also occur in this southern state. I've noticed over my life a certain degree of African American reverse migration to the south. Older AA either retiring or at some sort of economic dead end move back to the old family home area. usually they have cousins or even siblings still there. I found this counter intuitive, but have met enough of these reverse migrants to see it actually does happen. In the case of a African American state a portion of the growth could be from retired northerners headed there instead of Florida or Arizona.
 
Years ago @David T had this scenario - I've always liked it because it means the white South outsmarted itself:
"
Delta Secedes From Mississippi
In 1890 a state constitutional convention was called in Mississippi. The chief, though not only, motive for it was the disfranchisement of the remaining African American voters in the state. Actuallly, the task of disfranchisement had already largely been accomplished, as was shown by the fact that only one of the delegates to the convention was black; but
the danger that the Lodge bill for federal supervision of elections might pass Congress led to a desire to disfranchise blacks "legally" rather than just by force. Besides, in some of the black counties, some blacks did vote in local elections and were allowed to hold some minor offices under "fusion" arranagements with local whites.
The convention gave disfranchisment a legal basis through various means such as a poll tax, residency requirements (since blacks were more likely to have moved recently), and the notorious requirement that every voter must be able to read any section of the state constitution, or "be able to understand the same when read to him, or give a reasonable interpretation thereof." "There was a 'general understanding' that any white illiterate would be passed by the registrars while no Negro would be.' Albert D. Kirwan, *Revolt of the Rednecks: Mississippi Politics, 1876-1925*, p. 69. https://books.google.com/books?id=65ofBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA69 The disfranchisement was a quick success, at least in state-wide elections (though some river counties maintained their fusion sysytems and continued to send a few African Americans to the state legislature until the end of the century). As late as 1884, Blaine had gotten over 43,000 votes in Mississippi; in 1892 Harrison got fewer than 1,500.
However, disfranchisement was not the only purpose of the convention. Reapportionment was another. The white counties were upset that the black counties--which of course had far fewer voters--had a majority in the state legislature. In addition to arguing that this gave unfair power to the Delta planter against the hill country yeoman farmer, they argued that
it was a potential menace to white supremacy: What if the federal courts declared Mississippi's disfranchisement clauses unconstitutional and Congress passed the Lodge bill? The legislature must be reapportioned so that *even if* blacks were allowed to vote, they could never control it. The white counties did not get all they wanted, but the number of
representatives in the legislature was increased by thirteen, the increase being all allotted to the white counties. In addition, several legislative districts were carved out of white sections of black counties.
The overwhelming majority of the delegates of black counties at the convention opposed the reapportionment plan, but a few supported it (including the convention's only African American, Isaiah T. Montgomery of Bolivar County). Together with the white county delegates, they were enough to enable the plan to pass. As it turned out, the black counties
would still have a majority under the new apportionment, though a smaller one than before. This, however, was not obvious at the time. The plan was bitterly attacked by the press of the black counties, which argued that the fear of Negro domination was a "phantasm" and that it had in fact been the black counties that had been most faithful to the Democratic
Party as the guardian of "white rule," while many of the white counties had supported Independent movements. Indeed, according to Kirwan (p. 80):
"So great was the opposition to the scheme in the Delta that there was actually talk of secession from the state. A supplemental report of the legislative committee of the convention provided that 'the Legislature may consent to the creation of another State or territory...out of a portion of this State whenever the consent of the Congress of the United States
may be given thereto.' [1] But this clause was stricken out by the Convention." https://books.google.com/books?id=65ofBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA80
POD: The clause is not stricken out, and the Delta decides to secede, the white counties (or enough of them to get a legislative majority for consent) saying "good riddance." In 1893 there is a Democratic President (Grover Cleveland) and a Democratic Congress happy to have another Democratic state. So Deltaland (let's call it) becomes a state. Of course for decades it elects only whites to federal, state, and (except in a few all-black towns) local offices. But then in 1965 comes the Voting Rights Act (I assume it's not butterflied away). So we get the first black *voting* majority state since Reconstruction..."
 
I've heard there have been cases where local Gerrymandering backfired along the lines described in post 19. Don't know the details, but people often outsmart themselves in business and many other affairs.

I wonder if 'Deltaland' would be as corrupt and incompetently administered as the new Orleans region often has been?
 
Top