San Antonio Traction Company: Racism Justified

San Antonio Traction Company: Racism Justified

San Antonio, Texas is no exception to the inherent racism and Jim Crow law that dictated African American lives soon after Reconstruction. However, one question needs to be asked when analyzing racism, what enables the justification of racism in society? By analyzing the San Antonio Traction Company Correspondence, one can view firsthand accounts of Jim Crow law enforcement and gain insight towards the reasons for the justification of racism. In the early 1940s, the San Antonio Traction Company enforced the racist Jim Crow laws rather than face the consequences of breaking a law, upsetting whites, and opposing the normalized racism in the south at the time.

The San Antonio Traction Company bus

operators were tasked with enforcing Jim Crow laws and handling race situations that occurred on their buses. On June 4, 1943, the San Antonio Traction Company sent out a notice that included guidelines that every operator was required to follow, and one such guideline mentioned, “Operator’s duties under Jim Crow Law” (“Special Notice”, June 4). This law was put in place by the legislature of the state of Texas and delves into specific detail on the authority of the bus operator in race situations. Additionally, the notice defines the term ‘negro’ explaining a negro as all who are of African American heritage. With the method in which this law is explained, there is a lack of reasoning behind the justification for a law to separate races on motor buses. Sitting in the back of the bus, being refused a seat, or even a ride due to one’s race is extremely unequal and displays the power whites maintained over African Americans. The legislature of the state of Texas most likely promoted this legislation by explaining that Jim Crow law upholds the law of separate but equal. However, to enforce a law separating races solely on the basis of race is unequal, and suggests that the law is in place as a means for whites to remain in power and to suppress African Americans. One reason why racism on the San Antonio Traction Company motor buses may have been justified occurred when the state legislature passed Jim Crow laws, therefore requiring buses to be segregated despite the San Antonio Traction Company’s opinion on race. Yet, before the implementation of the law, segregation on buses must have been a common practice especially since the Supreme Court case of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 which involved separating races on a train which could easily extend to include buses.
Due to the enforcement of Jim Crow laws, there was a strain on the relationship among whites and blacks and even the San Antonio Traction Company addresses this issue. In a 1943 notice to all of the bus operators, the Superintendent of Transportation discusses the tension Jim Crow law instigates between the races and urges operators to cautiously handle violations of the law while a convention where several thousand African Americans from the north will attend in San Antonio (“Special Notice,” Sept. 7). The emphasis on avoiding friction between the races suggests that the company realizes that Jim Crow laws are not widely practiced everywhere and even cause pressure in their own community. Similarly, the company understands they are not responsible for deciding the morality of Jim Crow law and one may even infer that the company did not necessarily agree with the law, but is responsible for upholding it. Once again, racism seems to be justified due to the laws in place enforcing the separation of the races rather than through racist tendencies by the San Antonio Traction Company. In addition, the idea of racial threat may also help explain why racism and Jim Crow law was justified. Racial threat states that, “a superordinate group becomes more racially hostile as the size of the proximate subordinate group increases, which punitively threatens the former’s economic and social privilege” (Rocha 415). Therefore, as the African American population increased or gained more rights, whites became hostile because their dominance and privilege was threatened. Jim Crow law was enforced to oppress African Americans and inversely to protect the social privilege of whites. Any occurrence which threatened white dominance received great backlash from whites, therefore, Jim Crow law was enacted and the African American push for equality was heavily impeded.
Even in the early 1940s, there are indications of African Americans opposing prejudiced law.

In 1943, a white passenger was an eyewitness for an altercation between a bus operator and a black passenger. The white passenger stated that the bus operator was “carrying out his duty” rather than intentionally being racist (“Letter”, Oct. 12). This altercation demonstrates that African Americans were willing to resist discriminatory laws, but faced obstacles from those who supported segregation laws. Aforementioned, with African Americans resisting Jim Crow laws and inevitably threatening whites’ power, there is backlash and a push for compliance towards the unequal and racist laws. Another possible reason for the normalization of racism was that Jim Crow law was believed to maintain the order of society by keeping African Americans in their subordinate place under whites. Then again, that type of thinking most likely derived from when African Americans were forcibly brought to America as slaves. As slaves, blacks were portrayed as subhuman savages and therefore, justified many whites to treat blacks as animals, not pay them, and keep them in abhorrent living conditions (Thomas 7). The rapid transformation of blacks from slaves to citizens may have had a great influence on many whites’ opinions of African Americans. First of all, slaves were considered property of many white southerners, but after the 13th amendment and later the 14th amendment, blacks were no longer slaves and gained citizenship. The southerners that owned the former slaves now had to hire and pay new workers rather than own slaves. One must imagine the difficulty many former slave owners had when trying to treat former slaves with respect and equality after having owned them and forcing them to work. It appears that many in the south in the 1940s still thought of African Americans as a lesser people due to their history as

slaves.
Furthermore, media outlets may have had an important influence on many San Antonio citizens’ opinions on African Americans in the 1940s. The media is often responsible for informing their audiences. When a media outlet is biased or has a certain view that is portrayed in their work; their audiences will often absorb those opinions. For example, the San Antonio Express, a popular newspaper in San Antonio provides news about the community and around the nation. Although in the 1940s the paper tries to portray themselves as an open minded newspaper towards race issues, the paper often portrays racism with its language. One phrase that appears in the August 5, 1943 paper is “negro mischief-maker,” which frames African Americans in an adverse manner (Westbrook 4). With racism casually portrayed in the media, racism becomes increasingly normalized in society.
Social institutions have power and responsibility in providing information to the public and additionally have great influence over what much of the public believes and endorses. Although upheld in the past, Jim Crow law is racist and helps prove the idea of racial threat where one race maintains power while subduing a subordinate race. The San Antonio Traction Company had the responsibility of upholding that racist legislation despite their opinion on the morality of separating races. Ultimately, due to discriminatory laws towards African Americans, the idea that African Americans were a lesser race, and blatantly racist coverage in the media, racism was normalized in San Antonio.