U.S. history is filled with government officials creating legal loopholes to prevent Native Americans in assorted regions from voting. Including after those laws. I am interested in whether the laws brought more attention to Native voters in places where the government allowed it.
US: The Federal Government defeated the rebels and during Reconstruction radical republicans and northerners ensured voting rights for the newly freed population. But after the 1876 election and the 'compromise' of 1877 southern democrats took over and ended the Reconstruction. Southern democrats started to systematically disenfranchise the black population: starting with the Georgia poll tax in 1877, from 1890 to 1908 Southern state legislatures passed new constitutions, constitutional amendments, and laws that made black (and white poor) voter registration and voting more difficult. Electoral rolls were dramatically reduced. Blacks in the South had to way 90 years to get voting rights again with the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Separated but equal. Institutionalized racism.
South Africa: End of slavery in 1863 due to the United Kingdom's Slavery Abolition Act, but in 1892 the Franchise and Ballot Act established limits based on financial means and education of the black population. Sounds familiar? The Black population only got voting rights with the end of apartheid in the early 1990's.
If I'm forgetting something, let me know. I don't see any difference.
I've read a lot of things about what theoretically could happen in worse case scenarios, but what are some realistic things that would actually and probably occur if both of these laws were totally repealed? Substantial changes? No substantial changes? Why? Why not?
Edit - I'm not looking for debate, just honest and sincere insight from those with bonafide knowledge and/or experience.
They'll tell you Americans need the Second Amendment to stand up to "tyrannical government" but they don't want you to participate in peaceable change of government. Somehow requiring a license and background check for a deadly weapon is a government invasion of privacy, but requiring a license or ID to excercise one's right to vote is A-OK. Preventing people on the terror watch list from getting firearms is a subversion of due process, but preventing someone from voting simply because they don't drive is the only way to have fair elections.
