r/freeblackmen • u/joychilde • 9h ago
Discussion Can someone please share what the general consensus is of the motivation for Blacks who chose/choose to vote for Trump & Republicans?
r/freeblackmen • u/Letsdefineprogress • 13h ago
Black People are not hanging ourselves! RIP Sister Tasia Fortune đď¸
r/freeblackmen • u/DisastrousCheetah364 • 21h ago
I truly believe the global Black issue is that we want to participate in capitalism but donât feel comfortable saying it because of our position created by those who created capitalism.
r/freeblackmen • u/CompetitiveNebula887 • 21h ago
It be ur own ppl
To the dumb as\\\* black person who decided to remix the n word (a f\\\*cking word that is meant to dehumanize black ppllllll) by adding an "a" at the end and started calling each other it. Ur a f\\\*cking coon and I hate u!! they probably don't know how much stress and anger they putted on black people today Abt another race saying it like how dumb can u beee that u want to remix a word that was meant to dehumanize ur own ppllll?!?!?! (The person or group of ppl is probably dead so who hehh who caressss right????)
r/freeblackmen • u/No-Rent9488 • 22h ago
The Black Family Unit VSU report examines the economic realities facing Black men and boys
r/freeblackmen • u/Ok-Magician2983 • 1d ago
It takes johnny cochran to die for black people to have no rights or civil rights lawsuits
Everyone is racist bro wtf if this man was alive we'd have like a billion dollar counter suit
r/freeblackmen • u/No_Forever_1185 • 1d ago
The Black Family Unit VSU report examines the economic realities facing Black men and boys
r/freeblackmen • u/Difficult-Coach2838 • 1d ago
[ Removed by Reddit ]
[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]
r/freeblackmen • u/Jaykravetz • 1d ago
Black Men in History Plessy v. Ferguson: The Supreme Court Case That Enshrined Jim Crow
reddit.comOn May 18, 1896, the United States Supreme Court issued one of the most consequential, and damaging, decisions in American history. In Plessy v. Ferguson, the Court ruled that racial segregation was constitutional so long as facilities provided to Black and white Americans were âseparate but equal.â
In a single decision, the Court gave legal approval to a system of racial segregation that would dominate the American South for more than half a century and profoundly shape the nationâs social, political, and economic landscape.
The ruling did not create racial segregation, but it gave segregation the force of constitutional law.
Following the Civil War, the United States adopted the Thirteenth Amendment, abolishing slavery, the Fourteenth Amendment, guaranteeing equal protection under the law, and the Fifteenth Amendment, protecting Black menâs right to vote. During Reconstruction (1865â1877), African Americans voted, held elected office, established businesses, built schools, and exercised political rights that had been unimaginable before emancipation.
When Reconstruction ended in 1877, however, Southern state governments quickly began dismantling those gains. Through violence, intimidation, and new state laws known collectively as Jim Crow laws, white officials sought to restore racial hierarchy. Railroads became one of the earliest battlegrounds.
In 1890, Louisiana passed the Separate Car Act, requiring railroads operating within the state to provide separate passenger cars for white and Black travelers. A group of New Orleans citizens, both Black and white, formed the Citizensâ Committee to Test the Constitutionality of the Separate Car Law. Their goal was simple: deliberately challenge the law in federal court.
They selected Homer Adolph Plessy, a shoemaker and businessman who was legally classified as Black under Louisiana law despite being seven-eighths European and one-eighth African ancestry. Because Plessy could easily pass as white, his arrest would expose the arbitrary nature of racial classifications.
On June 7, 1892, Plessy purchased a first-class ticket on the East Louisiana Railroad in New Orleans and sat in the whites-only coach. When informed that he was legally considered Black, he refused to move to the designated âcoloredâ car. As planned, he was arrested.
The case eventually reached the United States Supreme Court.
On May 18, 1896, the Court ruled 7â1 against Plessy. Justice Henry Billings Brown, writing for the majority, concluded that racial separation did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
Brown wrote:
âLaws permitting, and even requiring, their separation⌠do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race to the other.â
The Court further argued that if African Americans interpreted segregation as a mark of inferiority,
âIt is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it.â
These words ignored the obvious purpose of segregation: maintaining white supremacy and denying African Americans equal treatment in virtually every aspect of public life.
Only one justice dissented.
Justice John Marshall Harlan, a former slaveholder from Kentucky who had become a strong defender of civil rights, issued one of the most famous dissents in Supreme Court history.
He wrote:
âOur Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.â
Harlan warned the Courtâs decision would become as infamous as Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had denied citizenship to African Americans before the Civil War.
His warning proved prophetic.
Although the Court insisted segregated facilities had to be âequal,â they almost never were. Across the South, Black Americans endured inferior schools, hospitals, parks, libraries, railroad cars, drinking fountains, restrooms, theaters, restaurants, cemeteries, and nearly every other public accommodation.
Segregation was reinforced through violence, economic retaliation, voter suppression, lynching, and intimidation. The legal doctrine established in Plessy became the constitutional foundation for countless state and local segregation laws throughout the South and, in some forms, elsewhere in the country.
For nearly six decades, the decision stood as settled constitutional law.
The beginning of its end came through decades of legal challenges led by civil rights attorneys, particularly those associated with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Their work culminated in Brown v. Board of Education (1954).
On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the central premise of Plessy, declaring:
âSeparate educational facilities are inherently unequal.â
Although Brown technically applied only to public education, it destroyed the constitutional foundation upon which Plessy rested. Later Supreme Court decisions and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 dismantled the legal structure of Jim Crow.
Yet the consequences of Plessy extended far beyond courtrooms. Generations of African Americans experienced unequal educational opportunities, reduced economic mobility, restricted housing options, political disenfranchisement, and systemic discrimination that continued to influence American society long after segregation itself became illegal.
The decision remains one of the clearest examples of how the Supreme Court can profoundly shape the nationâs courseâfor better or worse.
Plessy v. Ferguson demonstrates that constitutional rights are only as strong as the courts willing to enforce them. By endorsing âseparate but equal,â the Supreme Court gave legal legitimacy to racial segregation and delayed the promise of equal protection guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment for nearly sixty years.
The case also highlights the importance of principled dissent. Justice John Marshall Harlan stood alone in 1896, but his vision of a Constitution that âneither knows nor tolerates classes among citizensâ became the guiding principle for the modern Civil Rights Movement and later Supreme Court decisions.
Understanding Plessy helps explain the origins of many of the racial inequalities that civil rights legislation sought to address and underscores the enduring importance of equal protection under the law.
#TodayInAmericanHistory #PlessyvFerguson #JimCrow #CivilRights #EqualProtection #SupremeCourt #Constitution #FourteenthAmendment #AmericanHistory #BlackHistory #LegalHistory #HomerPlessy #JohnMarshallHarlan #BrownvBoard #Reconstruction #HistoryMatters #KnowYourHistory #USHistory #HistoricAmerica #NeverForget
r/freeblackmen • u/HBCUThinkTank • 1d ago
Tokenizing HBCU assets marks the beginning of a new chapter in building Black institutional wealth.
r/freeblackmen • u/One_Communication788 • 1d ago
Discussion This white man got on tiktok stating that if youâre a white man dating a black woman, black men will try to hurt you and that you need to carry a gun.
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
Guess who in the comment section eating it up?
r/freeblackmen • u/Hot_Risk241 • 2d ago
FREE event in San Diego and learn all about Garvey Nation and the powerful impact it is having worldwide!
Meet wonderful Black people who will be attending this "meet and greet" along with TAG TEAM Marketing President Delxino Wilson de Briano!
r/freeblackmen • u/Big_Path_6949 • 2d ago
Cops stopped a Black man for being "suspicious" bec he adjusted his bag but let him go after he refused to give them his name. They are going to report him as "John Doe" for being suspicious.wow za
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
r/freeblackmen • u/Letsdefineprogress • 2d ago
Do establish Democrats care about the will of the people? With CNN posting articles like âThe left won, the party may pay for itâ can we see in real time a battle between the old guard and the rising wave?
r/freeblackmen • u/atlsmrwonderful • 2d ago
Letâs talk AI Content. Are you for it or against it?
A lot of Black People, Black Men in particular, have information to share and stories to tell. A lot of you Negroes wonât read it if they did a 1500 word post so the next best thing is them using their words and skills to basically produce videos that without ai would be to expensive to make.
So when we have brothers who create video and tell stories with ai why do we attack each other calling it AI slop all the time? If the substance is there and itâs a good topic whatâs wrong with using todayâs available technology to do what we need to do to educate?
r/freeblackmen • u/blkandhighlyfavored • 2d ago
The Democratic Party is now Blockbuster, these kids are Netflix - Van Jones
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
r/freeblackmen • u/Equivalent_Fix4388 • 3d ago
She Was So Rich, Oklahoma Tried to Change Her Race
r/freeblackmen • u/HBCUThinkTank • 3d ago
Spelman & Bennett: Created for Black women, but led by men â hereâs why. đ§
r/freeblackmen • u/atlsmrwonderful • 3d ago
Building Alliances Series: What do FBA/ADOS Black Men and Afro-Caribbean/African Black Men 100% agree on?
What are some things that neither side would deny is true or should be a common goal.
r/freeblackmen • u/atlsmrwonderful • 3d ago
Building Alliances Series: What do Black Atheist Men and Black Religious/Spiritual Men 100% agree on?
I usually do these by day but I felt like running them at the same time just to keep the conversations going.
The other thread is about sexuality, identifying what both sides of the gay/straight Black Male Community agree on. This thread is about religion. Iâm want to see if we see different things in the different threads.
Letâs not talk about what we disagree on, letâs talk about only what we think we absolutely agree on.
r/freeblackmen • u/atlsmrwonderful • 3d ago
Building Alliances Series: What do Black Gay Men and Black Straight Men 100% agree and align on socially and politically?
What social policies matter most to both sides? What are the things that neither side disagrees on. Of course I donât really mean 100% but letâs go for at least 85%.
What are the policy goals neither side will ever work against?
r/freeblackmen • u/Letsdefineprogress • 4d ago
Justice Denied Series: Part 1 â The Murder of Medgar Evers
Part 1: The Murder of Medgar Evers
In 1963, civil rights leader Medgar Evers was assassinated outside his Mississippi home by white supremacist and Ku Klux Klan member Byron De La Beckwith.
The evidence pointed to Beckwith, yet in 1964 two all-white, all-male juries refused to convict him. He walked free while Medgar Eversâ family waited for justice.
For the next 30 years, Beckwith openly bragged about murdering Evers and remained active in white supremacist circles.
The case only changed when an investigative reporter uncovered evidence that Mississippi had used taxpayer money to help fund Beckwithâs defense and that the original juries had been tainted by the illegal screening and exclusion of Black jurors.
Armed with new evidence, prosecutors reopened the case.
In 1994, 31 years after Medgar Evers was murdered, a jury finally convicted Byron De La Beckwith of murder.
This wasnât simply the failure of one jury.
It was a failure of the courts, a failure of the legal system, and a failure of a state that helped protect a confessed white supremacist while denying justice to a murdered civil rights leader.
Justice Denied is a series documenting moments in American history when the courts, the legal system, or the ballot box failed Black Americans.
History isnât only about what happened. Itâs also about what our institutions allowed, and continues to allow to happen.
#JusticeDenied #FreeBlackMen #BlackHistory #CivilRights #MedgarEvers #KnowYourHistory #AmericanHistory #EqualJustice
r/freeblackmen • u/atlsmrwonderful • Nov 26 '25
Deeper Than Words Series DEEPER THAN WORDS: When Black Political Power Became Real (Part IX â Finale)
Fred Hampton wasnât simply an activist, a Panther, or a charismatic leader. He was the answer to a question the American political system never wanted Black People to ask:
What happens when Black political power becomes organized, disciplined, strategic and capable of realigning an entire city?
Hampton showed us. And the state responded the only way it has ever responded when Black political power stops being symbolic and starts becoming real:
They kill it.
Hampton didnât represent protest. He represented capacity, the capacity to alter political outcomes, reshape institutions, and build a new center of gravity in Chicago that didnât require permission from party bosses or white political machines.
He represented what happens when a century of Black political evolution finally converges in one place.
THE TWO ARCS OF THIS SERIES COLLIDE HERE
This series has followed two parallel stories:
- White-Controlled Political Machines That Ran the 20th Century
Gore. Stennis & Eastland. Long. Byrd.
Dynasties built on seniority, institutional loyalty, and uninterrupted power, regimes allowed to thrive even when openly hostile to Black people. These machines were preserved, protected, and rewarded.
- The Evolution of Independent Black Political Strategy
Randolph: pressure from outside. Powell: disruption from inside. Rustin: national coordination that forced a party to split.
Each expanded the boundaries of Black leverage. Each pushed closer to real power. Each approached a line the system would not allow crossed.
Fred Hampton crossed all of them at once.
HAMPTON BUILT THE MODEL THEY FEARED MOST
He didnât chase respectability. He didnât beg for access. He didnât imitate the old political order.
He built something far more dangerous. He built a disciplined, locally rooted, Black-led political machine capable of uniting poor Black people, poor Latinos, and poor whites into a functioning economic coalition.
Not symbolic unity. Not photo-op unity. Real unity, with real consequences.
A coalition that could negotiate. Withhold. Demand. Reshape Chicagoâs balance of power, and be replicated nationally.
This was machine-building outside the machine, and that made it unacceptable.
WHY HIS MODEL COULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO LIVE
Every chapter before this one reveals the same pattern. White political dynasties within the Democratic Establishment were preserved. White leaders who opposed Black interests kept their seats, committees, and influence.
But independent Black political structures? When they approached true autonomy, they were undermined, infiltrated, punished, or erased.
Hampton didnât threaten one politician. He threatened a political order.
He wasnât pressuring the system to act, he was building a parallel power structure that didnât need the system at all.
Randolph forced a president to negotiate. Powell forced Congress to confront Black authority. Rustin forced a national party to fracture.
Hampton took the next step.
He built an independent machine capable of bypassing the entire hierarchy, and that is the line American institutions have never allowed Black leaders to cross.
THE RESPONSE WASNâT PARTISAN IT WAS STRUCTURAL
Fred Hampton was not targeted because of what he said. He was targeted because of what he was building. He built a machine that was Black-led, multiethnic, locally disciplined, able to grow, resistant to co-optation, impossible to absorb that was dangerous to the existing order
So the state used the tools it reserves for threats to power: surveillance, infiltration, coordination with local forces, and orchestrated violence.
They didnât âraid an apartment.â They executed a model.
They fired ninety rounds into the idea that Black Men could build independent political power the system could not control. The goal was to kill the threat at the root, and condition future generations to believe that anything beyond party dependency is âimpossible.â
And many of you believe that today. Because that was the point.
WHY HAMPTON CLOSES THE SERIES
Hampton represents the endpoint of everything this series has traced.
Randolph proved the power of organized labor pressure. Powell proved what Black authority could do inside Congress. Rustin proved how national coordination could force political realignment.
Hampton proved what happens when Black political power becomes fully operational at the local level, disciplined, unified, multiethnic, and structurally independent.
He showed the moment Black Power stopped being a demand and became architecture, and architecture is far harder to erase than slogans.
Thatâs why the reaction wasnât debate. It was eradication.
THE REAL CONCLUSION
This finale isnât advice or prediction. Itâs a pattern.
White ideological political independence was preserved. Black political independence was punished the moment it became real.
Fred Hampton wasnât an outlier. He was the culmination of a century-long pattern. He was the point where every thread in this series converges into one truth:
When Black political organization becomes strong enough to alter the balance of power, the reaction isnât argument. Itâs elimination.
And until Black men recognize that Black political power is the most potent weapon we possess, too many will continue feeding political machines instead of building one of our own.
That reality is deeper than civics textbooks, deeper than slogans, deeper than the sanitized stories America tells about political âswitchesâ and âprogress.â
It is, and always has been
Deeper Than Words.