A Darkened Diamond: How Baseball Fostered Institutional Racism in American Culture

By: Joshua Vadeboncoeur

A senior honors thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with honors from the Department of Political Science

1 Baseball’s Cultural Foundation: An Introduction

Prior to its modern-day representation as a hierarchically structured business, the game of baseball was exactly that, a game – a game that held American citizens accountable to the preservation of their roots and connected with the overarching national character that is the celebration of the individual spirit (Goldstein 1989, 3-5). In the years that have passed since the inception of the game of baseball into the fabric of American culture, the United States has been tested through economic collapse, social upheaval, and the perils of war, but remaining constant through all of this linear unrest has been the unwavering figment of baseball in the timeless imagination of a country that holds onto the admirable, yet arguably deferred dream of American democratic values and daring ingenuity. But how exactly did the game of baseball rise to the occasion as this embodiment of the American cultural spirit?

The answer to that question finds its vantage point in a time that witnessed a rapidly changing industrial and social landscape, that of an American east coast in the 1840s. Following the rapid industrialization and urbanization of this region, the allure of team sports grew to extraordinary heights in the decades that followed due to various social repercussions of the industrial revolution (Helyar 1994, 3-4). Beginning in the 1850s, the game grew in reverence as a gentleman’s sport, as young artisans and clerks throughout some of the larger east coast cities developed an amateur game of leisure, establishing formal social clubs that were oftentimes referred to as “base ball fraternities” (Goldstein 1989, 3). This genteel notion of sportsmanship and Victorian middle-class culture that had defined the game met an intriguing cultural boundary line that would forever relegate the game to a pastime fulfilled by young American men at all levels of the societal spectrum (Goldstein 1989, 16-17).

2 In the advent of the American Civil War, the game of baseball extended its influence from the east cost and entered the lives of rural and small town America, becoming a polarizing fixture across small towns and whistle stops throughout the southeast and far stretching fields of the Midwest (Story 2001, 19-20). Unlike most games of leisure and/or sport, baseball, through its respective design structure, elicited not only a comradely ethos, but also a sense of individual recognition – an intriguing emotion that spoke to young American men of lower skill levels (that is in terms of both societal caste rank and respective level of capability on the playing field), which aided in cementing the conventional wisdom of the time that baseball was a definitive source of social mobility for the lower-class young American male (Story 2001).

However, like a deferred dream, this conventional wisdom was in reality an unconventional parable. Beginning in the late-1850s, a semblance of what would later become professional baseball materialized in these larger east coast cities, namely that of New York. For instance, sixteen local base ball fraternities/social clubs collaborated in establishing the National

Association of Base Ball Players (NABBP) in 1857, a trend that later spread to surrounding large cities such as Baltimore, Detroit, New Haven, Philadelphia, and Washington, DC within the next four years (Duquette 1999, 2-3). The overarching intent of the NABBP was to bring a definitive organization to the game of baseball, wherein a uniform code of rules and established order were set in place to not only help bring a realized legitimacy to the growing stature of the game, but also foster the fraternal nature that had long since defined the game (Duquette 1999).

That fraternal character, as previously noted, was not preserved, as the dynamic of pre- professional shifted from purely leisure to that of determined competition, which gradually steered the game on the course towards realized professional status within the next decade. As the fraternal nature of these clubs was sifted away in favor of this all-encompassing ethos of

3 competition and the focus on the individual spirit, the conventional wisdom suggested the plausibility of social mobility for the lower-classes, but inversely so, such teetered on the zip line that was one of the larger myths of America’s pastime – as previously aforementioned, a dream deferred (Story 2001, 26-28; Riess 1980, 235-50).

As pre-professional baseball heightened, so too did interest from all facets of society across the country. Open recruitment to join these respective clubs (and in due time, that of professional baseball clubs) took on an image similar in context to the modern-day notion of an assured equal opportunity, but an ever-atypical equal outcome (Riess 1980). This notion of open recruitment, although meritocratic in nature, was certainly not democratic as the underrepresentation of the lower-classes subjected that class to a severe lack of opportunities

(opportunities as in the ability to develop the required skills necessary to pursue a foreseeable profession in the sport of baseball) and as such, promoted this veiled notion of upward social mobility by way of baseball (Riess 1980).

While unsuccessful in fulfilling the conventional wisdom of the time, this veiled notion was of key importance in fortifying the American values of individualism, hard work, and a strong belief in democracy, pushing forward the principle that in a rapidly changing and complex society, the functionalism of these American values are tried and true for those who believe in the American dream that celebrates and remunerates the determined individual spirit (Story

2001). This unconventional parable was also key in promoting these values to immigrants, who were captivated by the sport upon arrival and utilized the culture of the game as means to adapt to and participate in the American experience, in turn learning the traditional virtues of what constituted a “good” American citizen (Riess 1980). Nevertheless, while the lower-classes and immigrants remained captivated by the culture of the game, the game remained what it had been

4 since its initial inception into American culture in the 1840s, a means through which well- educated, middle to upper-class native American white males (as well as some Irishmen and

Germans) could maintain their respective social status and help proliferate this social dynamic under the veil of traditional American values and our national pastime (Riess 1980).

But let’s take a step back for a quick glance. Upon closer examination, one may argue that my brief assessment of the history of baseball’s origins as a leading embodiment of the

American spirit and the typically accepted conventional wisdom of the late-nineteenth and early- twentieth centuries is rather shortsighted and blatantly ignorant of the often overlooked social landscape that defined much of the United States throughout this time period, a period that witnessed the growth of baseball as much more than a sport of competitive determination, but rather as a purveyor of the prescribed American notion of traditional values. Although my assessment presents the glaring social dynamic that existed between the middle to upper-classes and the lower classes, such an assertion was premised on the notion that the classes involved are comprised of not only native American white males, but also that of immigrants of eastern and southern European descent. As such, I am ignoring the veil placed upon the sector of society comprising the many minority groups that have been negatively influenced by this respective social dynamic. At least in this particular conversation, the two groups that I will be focusing on are African Americans and American Indians, two groups that have served on the receiving end of the institutional racism that has ravaged American society for the entirety of baseball’s existence as the preeminent national pastime.

The game of baseball (and by the term baseball, I’m particularly evoking that of professional baseball) has long since remained a crucible of American democratic values and daring ingenuity, but a darkened veil has long since hidden such values and the truth behind the

5 assertion that professional baseball was at one point an unabashed crucible of cultural and racial prejudices for both African Americans and American Indians, a realized beacon of the discriminatory sentiment that was fostered in American traditional values and façade behind which our modern-day conception of institutional racism was given proper sustenance to cultivate and affix itself to the fabric of American cultural sentiment (Elias 2010, 20-22). With that being said, one must examine the impact and nature of institutional racism within the context of American culture, from which a better understanding of the backdrop of this larger issue involving professional baseball can be found. Upon examining institutional racism as it exists within our respective society, the historical trajectory of professional baseball as a façade behind which the exploits of institutional racism could be fostered and metastasize can be traced with a greater understanding of the manner by which this issue affecting our social landscape persists still to this day.

An Inside Look at the Power of Institutional Racism

Racism can be defined as a belief or doctrine that individuals of a particular human race possess inherent characteristics and differences specific to that respective race, as means to the act of distinguishing whether such warrants labeling as inferior or superior in accordance with another race(s) and as justification for non-equal treatment of individuals of that particular race.

Racism is well ingrained within the fabric of American society, primarily through our respective social institutions, which are predominantly skewed towards the values of what is typically referred to as White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant (WASP) culture, a set of values that have been regarded as the purveyor of American culture and the permeation of what is typically referred to as an overarching cultural orientation and definitive lifestyle (Better 2008, 41-42). Although asserting that this particular orientation is inherently malfeasant is rather misleading, the manner

6 by which this orientation has been applied in American culture is of prime concern, as those who do not fully adhere to the norms of this prescribed orientation are rather inherently victims of social injustice.

When the policies and practices of American institutions are oriented in such a manner that favors the predominant culture, those who do not conform to this notion of cultural standards are in turn unfairly limited in the manner by which they can freely exercise their opportunities under the respective policies and practices of our institutions (Better 2008, 42). As such, when an individual is subject to this reality, the act of institutional racism is in place. But in the wake of paramount government social reform, can the argument be made that the notion of institutional racism is no longer an issue of primary concern, as it carries no definitive legal status?

Unfortunately that is not the case as this stigma has continued to persist as an underlying facet of our social institutions, wherein it persists not so much as a result of individuals who perpetuate bigoted and racially intolerant sentiment, but rather as a result of following in accordance with the policies and practices that have allowed for institutional racism to permeate American society. Although it is not difficult to point out the manner by which racism presents itself within our modern-day society, making a concerted effort to determine an individual perpetrator is quite the arduous task, given the fact that the power of institutional racism exists so that no single individual must act accordingly to sustain the notion, but rather it can operate freely on the basis that individuals are following in line with the policies and practices of American institutions without giving much heed to the underlying issue of racism that is encapsulated by such societal devices (Better 2008, 42-43).

While the notion of institutional racism is an accepted term within our vernacular, the question of the manner by which it receives its power can be posed. A norm can be defined as a

7 generally, yet widely accepted custom or practice that is typically rooted within a given social context, and as such, institutional racism can be looked upon as a definitive societal norm within

American culture. Institutional racism is exactly what its label purports it to be, institutional within our society, wherein it presents itself as a bastardized image of tradition and a pattern of normalcy that follows a prescribed, almost expected means of action. In most societies, the employment of a certain image of social stratification, which refers to the societal arrangement by way of graded statuses, is commonplace, wherein the United States has maintained a semblance of this social stratification, but in terms of race, where race ideology is the leading factor by which American society is stratified (Better 2008, 44).

This stratification becomes ever present when taking into the account the psychological advantages of those privileged by the policies and practices of American institutions. A definitive gap in ego and self-confidence is perpetuated based on the acceptance (and in turn, expectation) of minority groups holding a diminutive social status, which further reinforces this notion of institutional racism and the power of the self-fulfilling prophecy that becomes the low- esteemed stature of those who do not orient themselves (or are not given the ability to orient themselves as a result of social norms) with what can be deemed as modern-day WASP values

(Better 2008). When disproportionate numbers of minorities are placed in circumstances of poverty and limited social mobility, such reinforces the notion of low-esteemed sentiment and in turn perpetuates race ideology and a continuation of the institutions that have allowed for this social climate to persist within American society.

Baseball and White American Superiority Travel Abroad

As means to approach the sentiment concerning institutional racism at home, a historical trajectory must be constructed to display the progression by which the United States came to

8 build up the game of baseball as a perfectly constructed representation of the American traditional culture, utilizing such sentiment abroad as reinforcement of WASP values for the means of providing rationale behind American foreign policy and ensuring that not only

American superiority, but also that of white American superiority was driven home in the international sphere. In order to fully examine this sentiment and gain a perspective on the motives behind which this superiority came to entrench minority races at home, one must look to the widely accepted myth concerning Abner Doubleday and the creation of baseball, which can be argued to have been the catalyst behind which the United States rationalized their foreign policy abroad and later social policy within the confines of American borders.

Henry Chadwick, a pioneer baseball statistician and sportswriter, posited in a 1903 article that the American game of baseball was an evolution of the British games of cricket, which is believed to have been first played in southern England at some point in the 16th century, and rounders, a game bearing striking similarities to that of American baseball at the time, having been first introduced during the Tudor Times with its earliest reference coming in a leisure pamphlet dated to 1744 (Elias 2010, 47). Albert Spalding, co-founder of the A.G. Spalding sporting goods company, organizer of the National League, and orchestrator of a baseball world tour in the late-1880s through the early-1890s that introduced the game of baseball to three continents, took charge upon the publishing of Chadwick’s piece, asserting that the game was unique to American culture. As means to insist baseball’s ancestry, Spalding launched an investigation and in doing so, established a handpicked commission in 1905 headed by former-

National League president and trusted Spalding colleague, A.G. Mills, which consisted of

Morgan G. Bulkeley, the first president of the National League in 1876; Arthur P. Gorman, former president of the Washington Base Ball Club; Nicholas E. Young, president of the

9 National League from 1885 until 1902; James Edward Sullivan, then-current president of the

Amateur Athletic Union; and Alfred Reach and George Wright, two leading sporting goods distributors and former professional baseball players (Elias 2010, 47-48).

The Mills Commission put forth an objective to ensure that baseball was not in fact beholden to any foreign nation and in the process distributed publications across the country requesting individuals to come forward with any information suggesting the origins of baseball

(Stewart 1907, 307-19). After nearly two years of investigation, the Mills Commission based their commission report on a 1907 letter from Abner Graves, a 71-year old mining engineer from

Denver, Colorado, who in his response posited that Civil War Union Major General Abner

Doubleday had first refined what was known as “town ball” at both Green’s Select School and the Otrego Academy in the Cooperstown community in New York in 1839, upon which

Doubleday coined the term “base ball” (Bairner 2001, 96). The Mills Commission failed to investigate the claim by Graves and reported that “Base Ball is of American origin, and has no traceable connection whatever with ‘Rounders’ or any other foreign game,” as the claim supported the intended venture of the investigation by offering an origin that proved baseball to be of American invention (Pope 1997, 71).

As quick as the Mills Commission was to accept the claim by Graves, the validity of such a claim was quite the grand fallacy. Doubleday could not have helped refine the game of baseball in Cooperstown in 1839, as he was then a cadet at the United States Military Academy at West

Point, a fact that Mills himself would have surely knew given the fact that the two had served together in the Civil War and remained close friends until Doubleday’s death in 1893 (Bairner

2001). The Doubleday glorified by the Mills Commission report was an invention of the game itself, rather than the other way around, and for good reason, as the mythic figure of Doubleday,

10 a former-Major General who fought in the Civil War, Mexican War, and Seminole War, helped incorporate the game with the glories of military heroism and the respective, yet growing strength of the American military (Elias 2010, 48-50).

This glorification helped personify the growing sentiment of American exceptionalism and coupled with the Doubleday myth, allowed for the United States to break away from the shadow of Great Britain and proclaim a definitive sense of national identity, as the adoption of baseball as a native game made up for the absence of a native language and people (and by native people, such is in reference to a native white people, as American Indians were not typically cast in the light as a glorified native people representative of the American notion of superiority) (Brown 1991, 43-69). This notion of superiority reigned supreme under the acceptance of the Doubleday myth and reasserted itself with the continued occupation of

Caribbean and Latin American countries that had begun in the early 1900s, as American soldiers reported claims that indigenous peoples had been playing variations of the then-modern version of baseball since before the Spanish expeditions commenced their westward travels in the late-

15th century (Elias 2010). American inferiority at the thought of having to hold the game of baseball in regard as a British pastime was bad enough for Spalding and likeminded Americans, let alone having the game face the threatening notion of derivation from nonwhite, native peoples of Latin America, which prompted expansionist sentiment to carry the objective of not only American superiority, but also that of white American superiority (Elias 2010).

As the United States continued their occupation of Latin American countries through the application of both dollar and gunboat diplomacy, in the process promoting financial interests by way of banking and natural resources, American companies that held a firm presence in these regions sponsored baseball and promoted it to the peoples of these regions as means to glorify

11 the “American way” as the preeminent, superior culture and in turn hoping that an

Americanization of the region was plausible, not only as a way to introduce American industry abroad, but also to assert white American superiority as a leading international display of might

(Gems 2006, 3-25). Moving along these lines of American industry aboard, the Doubleday myth was quite the useful marketing ploy at home, as the proud national sentiment evoked from the game’s supposed American derivation appealed to American citizens, encouraging an increase in ballpark attendance at professional baseball games, the sale of baseball equipment for the many

American individuals (children and adults alike) who were inspired to uphold the American tradition instilled within baseball by partaking in their own respective Little League, American

Legion, and/or even sandlot pick-up games, and the many depictions of professional baseball and its players through media advertisement and key product endorsement (Ogden 2007, 66-78).

As he did when orchestrating his world tour of baseball across three continents and his eventual incorporation of the Reach and Wright sporting goods companies into the A.G.

Spalding brand, Spalding was fully cognizant of the dynamics of the Doubleday myth and fervent American patriotism, and their subsequent advantages in terms of financial capital, wherein the sporting goods tycoon was successful at promoting his personal interests at home and abroad, while at the same time promoting the American way abroad and even at home, that sustains the exact cultural and economic institutions that continued that continued to allow individuals like Spalding to maintain his economic and social status and maintain the symbiotic relationship existing between himself and the macrocosmic notion of American superiority

(Zingg 1982, 388).

12 Colonists at Home: Baseball, African Americans, and American Indians

While American superiority was supplanting itself abroad, as the United States continued it’s motivated pursuit of virility and a permeation of the international sphere with the values embodied by the American way, citizens at home were faced with the reality that the territorial frontier – once a beacon of undiscovered opportunity and adventurous conquest – was coming to an abrupt end (Elias 2010, 55-56). Much like the waning frontier, the popular tales of Horatio

Alger that told of the American dream and the optimistic manner by which social mobility could be accomplished were unsustainable, as the perilous veracity of capitalism was ever the present issue for much of the country at the turn of the twentieth century. As such, individuals took to games of leisure to seek refuge from the hardships of everyday life, wherein as the notion of new conquest and opportunity at home shifted away from the prior revelries of the territorial frontier and the rags to riches stories that fixated the American dream within the minds of everyday

American citizens to that of a disillusionment and leeriness of a definitive American dream, the

United States was more than willing to continue its new conquest abroad as a purveyor of international supremacy, which witnessed the American dream become an export abroad as means to further the notion of American superiority (Elias 2010). The international sphere served as the testing ground for the United States’ new conquest and at the forefront of that effort was the utilization of baseball, a pairing of interweaving narratives that is rather nicely explicated by

Robert Elias in his book The Empire Strikes Out:

For civilization to spread, there must always be a new conquest, just as there’s always another game to win, another team to vanquish. This vision of sporting practice relied on the non-American world as the testing ground for the national game’s success, just as that world was also viewed as the gauge for America’s national “manliness” and its national economic and political systems. In baseball, the point was not merely to implant the game abroad, but to beat the new teams and players. It didn’t always work out that way, especially when local populations embraced baseball to resist U.S. domination. Nevertheless, the progress of

13 baseball promoted the progress of “civilization,” and vice versa – the two narratives intertwined, slowly tying up the globe (Elias 2010, 56).

As the United States continued to occupy and colonize countries abroad, it can be argued that a pair of occupations was erected at home that would forever serve as the basis and foundation for the perpetuation of institutionalized racism within American society, that of the African

American and American Indian communities. An examination of the plight of each community in regards to professional baseball and societal context is necessary as means to gain further insight on this notion of foreigners at home and how baseball aided in the exacerbation of this concept as it relates to that of institutionalized racism.

Much like that of their white American brethren, African Americans openly embraced the game of baseball throughout the second half of the 19th century, wherein African American teams were commonplace throughout New York and Philadelphia prior to the Civil War, often times playing against white teams (Malloy 2001, 62). Despite the early prevalence of African

American teams, the post-emancipation and reconstruction periods saw these respective players become confronted with a definitive lack of opportunities, which served as an honest reflection of the American experience for African Americans, as bigoted sentiment, discrimination, and acts of violence gradually limited the progression and realistic opportunities for those seeking careers (and in more cases than naught, opportunities to participate as means for leisure activity and societal escape) in organized baseball (Malloy 2001, 62-63). Beginning with the National

Association of Base Ball Players in 1867, a precedent was established that barred African

American baseball clubs from joining that particular league, as a number of organized baseball leagues followed suit in upholding exclusionary policies against African Americans, such as that of the National League’s “gentleman’s agreement,” an unwritten rule that gained esteem

14 beginning in the early-1890s and made for the barring of African Americans at the professional level, including that of many minor leagues across the country (Malloy 2001, 63, 81).

Although exclusionary policies were highly practiced throughout the country, such a practice was not uniform, as a number of African American players were permitted to participate on integrated teams throughout various levels of organized baseball, wherein a handful of white minor leagues throughout the North and Midwest extended a measure of tolerance for some of the better African American players of the day, as was evidenced through the signings of John

W. “Bud” Fowler and Moses “Fleetwood” Walker to play in the Northwestern League (a reputable white minor league) in the early-1880s (Negro League History 101). However, by the late-1880s, the prevalence of threatened player boycotts served as the final nail in the coffin that was the complete barring of African Americans from organized baseball, as a number of influential white professional baseball players (such as the Chicago White Stockings’ Cap

Anson) were outspoken in their disdain at the object of sharing the baseball diamond with

African American players, a glaring sentiment of racial discrimination that virtually eliminated any and all traces of African American players from organized baseball by the start of the 20th century (Negro League History 101).

While the likes of Fowler and Walker were striving to find a place in white organized baseball, a sizeable number of urban centers and small cities along the east coast had begun to bear witness to over 200 African American independent teams across the country by the early-

1880s (Peterson 1970). Eastern teams such as the Cuban Giants, Cuban X Giants, and the

Harrisburg Giants took part in primarily independent (albeit loosely organized at times) leagues throughout the 1890s and by the early-1900s, African American professional baseball spread throughout the Midwest and into the South. In the first two decades of the 20th century, powerful

15 baseball clubs emerged throughout the Midwest such as the Indianapolis ABCs, St. Louis Giants, and Kansas City Monarchs rose to the occasion as challengers to the might of some of the leading professional teams of the East, as well as that of Alabama’s industrial leagues in the

South (Clark and Lester 1994). In the advent of the First World War, baseball became the primary entertainment attraction for African American populations across the country and by

1920, the Negro National League was established in Kansas City, Missouri, fielding a set of eight professional teams that helped foster the rise of fellow Negro League circuits such as the

Eastern Colored Leagues, Negro American League, and the Negro Southern League over the course of the next three decades (Clark and Lester 1994). As such, the Negro Leagues were testaments to the resolve of African Americans in the struggle of discrimination, segregation, and the many social disadvantages in American society (Negro League History 101).

Although African Americans were successful in establishing what was once considered one of the most successful African American owned and operated enterprises in the United

States, that of the Negro Leagues, the fact that they were forced to build such an establishment in the first place is a testament to the relentless deprivation of opportunity to which African

Americans were subject (Malloy 2001, 81). This sentiment was voiced by Walker (who having been a leading figure in African American baseball, he was also well educated, having attended

Oberlin College for three years and the University of Michigan for one) in his 1908 pamphlet entitled, “Our Home Colony: A Treatise on the Past, Present and Future of the Negro Race in

America” (Peterson 1970). The piece, while having no connection with baseball, was a tract on radical separatism that preached black emigration and served as a precursor to the “back-to-

Africa” campaign that black nationalist leader Marcus Garvey hoped would have promoted a definitive African diaspora (Malloy 2001). Walker asserted that African Americans were looked

16 upon as the white man’s problem in the United States and as such were subject to the violent aggressions of American racist sentiment, which was manifested in the act of lynching, an act

Walker labeled as complete barbarism (Malloy 2001). Walker was alarmed that reasoning men of one of the most civilized countries in the world could become influenced by racist sentiment to a degree that made them act out in displays of virulent abhorrence against African Americans, for which he concluded the following:

The Negro race will be a menace and the source of discontent as long as it remains in large numbers in the United States. The time is growing very near when the whites of the United States must either settle this problem by deportation, or else be willing to accept a reign of terror such as the world has never seen in a civilized country. African Americans are alien and always will be regarded as such in this country…only practical and permanent solution of the present and future race troubles in the United States is entire separation by Emigration of the Negro from America. Even forced Emigration would be better for all than the continued present relations of the races (Walker 1908).

The views presented by Walker can be considered extreme, but that is not to discount the fact that African Americans had faced a systematic deprivation in all aspects of American life, even in a period of the self-proclaimed American image of the United States serving as a beacon of both equality and justice for all. At the time, racist policies and practices were in place throughout the country, essentially barring African Americans of the virtues of both dignity and justice (common virtues that should have been afforded to all individuals of American society, in theory) wherein these policies stripped the African American community of opportunities in terms of quality of life (education, employment, housing, medical care), expressive arts

(literature, science, academia as a whole), and justice and representation of rights (government, law) (Malloy 2001, 81-82). At the turn of the 20th century, African Americans were painted in a light that suggested they were intolerable citizens and racially inferior to whites, as a number of

Southern politicians solicited “negrophobia” to their constituencies so as to preserve their votes

17 and to ensure that African Americans did not compromise the labor force and were a non-factor in terms of political elections (Malloy 2001, 82).

Charles Carroll’s The Negro A Beast (1900) and Robert W. Shufeldt’s The Negro, A

Menace to American Civilization (1907) helped to spread the notion of Caucasian superiority by way of pseudoscientific misrepresentation (and misapplications) of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution; whereas Thomas Ryan Dixon’s The Clansman (1906) depicted African Americans in the reconstruction era as sub-human beasts, which inspired the American film The Birth of a

Nation (released to audiences in 1915), a highly acclaimed picture that misinformed generations of white Americans about African Americans in the South throughout the reconstruction era, including that of political scientist and future-American President Woodrow Wilson who lauded the film as an momentous depiction of American history (Malloy, 82-83).

African Americans would have to wait until April 18, 1946 until the color barrier was breached in white professional baseball, which served as the date when Brooklyn Dodgers’ owner Branch Rickey signed Negro Leagues player Jackie Robinson to the Dodgers organization, who made his debut with the Montreal Royals of the International League later that year (a minor league affiliate team of the Dodgers) (Negro League History 101). Robinson made his major league debut the following year and helped usher in a steady flow of African American players into white professional baseball, wherein by the 1952 season, 150 African American players were on professional rosters (Clark and Lester 1994). While professional baseball underwent significant racial integration throughout the midpoint of the 20th century, the social stigmas that had previously held down African Americans to an inferior racial and social status remained in place, and despite Civil Rights upheavals throughout the 1950s and 1960s, African

Americans continue to battle against these early notions of racial inferiority still to this day as

18 their personal images dignity and justice remain tarnished after the decades of systematic deprivation and societal inequality.

As the United States perpetuated white superiority abroad through the help of baseball serving as an image of the American way, such a notion was ever present at home. While baseball held peoples of Latin America to the binding values of white American culture, the very same values held down African Americans, as the assertion can be argued that they were held in the same regard as colonial subjects within the confines of the mainland United States (Elias

2010). As such, this notion of colonial subjects at home can be extended to that of the American

Indian community, who although did not face the obstacles in terms of participation in professional baseball and on a broader scale, as members of American society, American Indians were also subject to an integration impasse within both professional baseball and American life.

Pioneer baseball historian Harold Seymour touched on this perception in his piece, Baseball: The

People’s Game:

Of the two races that fared worst in the United States, the blacks and the Indians, the Indians came off better as far as baseball was concerned. Unlike the blacks who, except for a short space, were barred from the House of Baseball until after World War II, the Indians at least had access to its basement, from which they could aspire to its upper story. For Organized Baseball accepted Indians and rejected blacks. Prejudice toward blacks was racial, but toward Indians it was mainly cultural (Seymour 1991).

Although American Indians were not held at such an inferior status as African Americans,

Seymour’s assessment that prejudice toward African Americans was racial while cultural toward

American Indians may be shortsighted due to the fact that the American Indian baseball community (and this remains applicable to that of American society) was subject to racial exploitation and stereotypes. Once again, it is imperative to reiterate the fact that American

Indians were at no point throughout the late-19th and early-20th centuries in the same

19 circumstances as African Americans, but that is not to discount the fact that American Indians were looked upon as an inferior racial class to that of the white American, which permeated professional baseball and as such, while the Native American player was permitted in small numbers in the early decades of the 20th century, such came at the cost of racial condescension from white America (Elias 2010, 58-59). Harking back to Seymour’s assessment, labeling the prejudice displayed toward American Indians as cultural in temperament may serve as a minimization of the racial sentiment placed upon the American Indian community – while white

America was at odds with the cultural discrepancies presented by that of the American Indian community, it was a sentiment of racial superiority that held white Americans reticent in accepting American Indians as more than just an exotic, yet dignified “savage.”

As stated by Seymour, American Indians were relegated to the “basement,” which essentially labeled them as foreigners within their own country, wherein they were colonized by way of reservations and what were known as Indian Schools, which were government boarding schools established for American Indian youth (Elias 2010, 58). At the most, white Americans held their interactions with the American Indian community ambivalently, viewing American

Indians as noble savages who have the potential to serve a role, albeit limited, within white

American culture, whereas at the least, American Indians were considered primitive individuals whose segregation from American society was of prime necessity. Although the American

Indian population had been decimated after decades of western conquest by white American settlers, those who remained were seen as curiosities, as such served as an intriguing phenomena in professional baseball (Elias 2010).

Leading up to the turn of the 20th century, American Indians were still viewed as foreigners, a status that relegated them to government boarding schools such as the Carlisle

20 Indian Industrial School, which helped produce impressive athletic talent (Powers-Beck 2001,

508-09). At this time, African Americans had been subjected to exclusionary policies (i.e. gentleman’s agreement) and as a result were barred from participation in professional baseball, but white organized baseball would find itself in a contradiction that ultimately opened the door for American Indians in organized baseball. Having already established racial barriers, white baseball was able to work around such exclusionary policies and incorporate some of the more talented American Indian talent, working around the notion that said individuals were not of

African American identification (Elias 2010, 59). Such a “pass” on exclusionary policy was significant, as a definitive “loophole” was established in white professional baseball, which prompted a handful of attempts by African Americans to pass as American Indians – none as notable as the attempt by New York Giants manager John McGraw, who in 1901 tried to sign a

Negro League player by the name of Charlie Grant under the guise of an American Indian named

Chief Tokahoma (Elias 2010). Although the plan was unsuccessful, the acceptance of American

Indian players such as Lou Sockalexis, Charles Bender, Jim Thorpe, John Mayers, and Zack

Wheat paved the way for other minority races to push the racial boundaries of professional baseball, as light-skinned players of Latin American descent followed in suit (Burgos 2007, 76).

Despite this limited sense of acceptance, such an acceptance came at the price of racial condescension, as American Indians were the victims of racial stereotypes and displays of white

American superiority. Common practice was to give American Indian players the nickname

“Chief,” while each player was consistently greeted at the plate by “whoops” and “chants”

(Burgos 2007, 85). The following passage from a 1922 issue of Literary Digest helps display the common stereotypes placed upon American Indians by white Americans:

Louis Sockalexis lugged his Penobscot Indian war club into our national game and started to whale the scalps off the paleface pitchers of the baseball world…a

21 reincarnation of the racial proclivities [of Native Americans] for deeds of valor in open-air sports has arisen Phoenix-like (Literary Digest 1922).

Such sentiment trickled over into matters of team names, as witnessed through the Cleveland

Naps’ desire to change their team name in 1915, upon which they settled on the Cleveland

“Indians” (Powers-Beck 2001, 509-11). Cleveland’s rationale behind the name change was to honor former player Lou Sockalexis, but instead of being seen as a kind-hearted gesture, such can be looked upon as condescending and an example of cultural and racial exploitation. At the time, American society was only 25 years removed from the events at Wounded Knee and

American Indian culture was seen as foreign, unwelcomed traditions of primitive nature, rather than a celebrated piece of the puzzle that is American culture (Elias 2010). American Indians were given limited opportunities to participate in white professional baseball, but rather the argument can be made that these individuals were seen as nothing more than a colonized, foreign people who provided white America with entertainment and yet another race to exploit in the name of white American superiority.

Baseball and Institutional Racism an On-going Affair: Concluding Remarks

While baseball was utilized as a façade behind which our modern-day conception of institutional racism was able to cultivate and grow, could it be still plausible that baseball still maintains a connection with that notion of racial sentiment (albeit in a more directive manner, as it can be assumed that baseball no longer serves a purpose in the cultivation of institutional racism – although it can be looked upon as a purveyor, along with other American institutions, of institutional racism)? In order to depict the appearance of institutional racism in our modern-day

American society, specifically in regards to that of Major League Baseball (the premier sanction for professional baseball in the United States), one can look to a research study conducted by

22 Southern Methodist University (SMU) in 2011. Researchers at SMU looked at QuesTec computerized pitch-monitoring system data (which is in operation at select Major League

Baseball ballparks across the country), wherein they examined over 3.5 million pitches thrown between the 2004 and 2008 seasons as means to determine whether there is correlation between the demographic information of the individual pitching and the individual calling said pitches either as a ball or strike, and that of whether ethnicity plays a role in discretionary decision making of individuals in positions of power (Sirota 2011).

The SMU study came to three definitive conclusions, the first being that home-plate umpires were found to disproportionately call more strikes on pitches thrown from pitchers of the same ethnicity as the umpire (Sirota 2011). Given the fact that a sizeable majority of home- plate umpires are Caucasian, SMU researchers posit that white pitchers are afforded a sense of racial privilege due to the fact that they are receiving a disproportionate amount of favorable called strikes on questionable calls at the plate (Sirota 2011). Second, minority pitchers were found on average to adjust to the strike zone adopted by the home-plate umpire, a zone that was found to be much narrower in composition, in turn pressuring the pitchers in question to throw pitches closer to the heart of the plate and compromising the chance of the batter to make contact with the pitch (Sirota 2011). Third, data indicated that the racial bias of a home-plate umpire is at a subconscious level, wherein such was determined through monitoring the percentage of called strikes in ballparks that have an installed QuesTec system to those in a ballpark that did not have such a system (Sirota 2011). Researchers found that the bias of umpires was at a lower level when cognizant of being monitored by the QuesTec system, which was of similar regard in situations of high-attendance and/or high-stakes (such as a playoff or big market game), wherein racial bias was indeterminable (Sirota 2011).

23 In applying the findings from this SMU study to American society, we come to the conclusion that when individuals in positions of authority are cognizant of scrutiny, they are more likely to become conscious of their personal bias and make an effort to quell that particular bias before it influences their actions (Sirota 2011). However, in situations where that individual is not in a position to face scrutiny, subconscious bias is prone to appear and affect the decisions and behavior of that individual. Connecting to that of institutionalized racism, by perpetuating the modern-day notion that racism is not of primary concern and does not exist (at least in terms of what racism looked like in our history), we establish a foundation upon which our subconscious racial biases are able to manifest and essentially diminish our ability to curb those biases (Sirota 2011).

As previously iterated, the game of baseball has long since remained a crucible of

American democratic values and daring ingenuity, but behind that veil of American cultural values lies the assertion that professional baseball was at one point an unabashed crucible of cultural and racial prejudices for both African Americans and American Indians, a realized beacon of the discriminatory sentiment that was fostered in American traditional values and façade behind which our modern-day conception of institutional racism was given proper sustenance to cultivate and affix itself to the fabric of American cultural sentiment (Elias 2010,

20-22). Still to this day, minority groups continue to suffer from the ramifications of institutional racism, as the linear progression of systematic deprivation in all-encompassing aspects of

American society have created for generations and generations of continued depravity. This examination into the role of baseball in the fostering of the United States’ modern-day manifestation of institutional racism may provide further insight into the relationship between baseball and the dynamics of American culture, as well as the impact and significance

24 institutions such as baseball have on the many economic, political, and social issues that affect not only the United States, but also the international community.

25 Works Cited

Bairner, Alan. Sport, Nationalism, and Globalization: European and North American

Perspectives. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2001.

Better, Shirley. Institutional Racism: A Primer on Theory and Strategies for Social Change.

Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008.

Brown, Bill. “The Meaning of Baseball in 1992.” Popular Culture 4 (Fall 1991): 43-69.

Burgos, Adrian. Playing America’s Game: Baseball, Latinos, and the Color Line. Berkeley, CA:

University of California Press, 2007.

Clark, Dick, and Larry Lester, eds. The Negro Leagues Book. Cleveland, OH: Society for

American Baseball Research, 1994.

Elias, Robert. The Empire Strikes Out: How Baseball Sold U.S. Foreign Policy and Promoted

the American Way Abroad. New York, NY: The New Press, 2010.

Gems, Gerald R. “Sports, Colonialism, and United States Imperialism.” Journal of Sport History

33, no. 1 (Spring 2006): 3-25.

Goldstein, Warren. “The Base Ball Fraternity,” Chapter 1 of Playing for Keeps: A History of

Early Baseball (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989), pp. 17-31.

Helyar, John. Lords of the Realm: The Real History of Baseball. New York, NY: Villard Books,

1994.

Malloy, Jerry. “Sol White and the Origin of African American Baseball,” Chapter 5 of Baseball

History From Outside the Lines (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2001), pp.

62-91.

26 “Negro League History 101: Just where did that Robinson fellow come from?”

www.negroleaguebaseball.com, 2003.

http://www.negroleaguebaseball.com/history101.html (accessed January 12, 2014).

Ogden, David C. “Major League Baseball and Myth Making.” Nine 15, no. 2 (2007): 66-78.

Peterson, Robert. Only the Ball Was White. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1970.

Pope, Steven W. Patriotic Games: Sporting Traditions in the American Imagination, 1876-1926.

New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Powers-Beck, Jeffrey. “’Chief’: The American Indian Integration of Baseball, 1897-1945.”

American Indian Quarterly 25, no. 4 (Autumn 2001): 508-38.

Riess, Steven A. “Professional Baseball and Social Mobility.” Journal of Interdisciplinary

History 11, no. 2 (Autumn 1980): 235-50.

Sirota, David. “How Baseball Explains Modern Racism.” Express Milwaukee, September 30,

2011. http://expressmilwaukee.com/article-16279-news-::-how-baseball-explains-

modern-racism-::-the-shepherd-express:-milwaukee%27s-best-guide-to-events,-music,-

news-and-dining.html (accessed February 4, 2014).

Stewart, Charles. “The United States of Baseball.” Century Magazine 73, no. 2 (June 1907): 307-

19.

Story, Ronald. “The Country of the Young: The Meaning of Baseball in Early American

Culture,” Chapter 2 of Baseball History From Outside the Lines (Lincoln, NE: University

of Nebraska Press, 2001), pp. 19-33.

“The American Indian’s Warpath on the Diamond and Gridiron.” Literary Digest 73, no. 9 (May

27, 1922): 53.

27 Walker, Moses Fleetwood. Our Home Colony: A Treatise on the Past, Present and Future of the

Negro Race in America. Malabar, FL: P.F. Rieger, 1993.

Zingg, Paul J. “Diamond in the Rough: Baseball and the Study of American Sports History.” The

History Teacher 17 (1982): 388.

28