"WE AIN’T WHAT WE WAS" CIVIL RIGHTS IN THE NEW SOUTH by Frederick M. Wirt. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1997. 286pp. Cloth $49.95. Paper $16.95

Reviewed by Mary Alice Nye, Department of Political Science, University of North Texas.
 

Against the backdrop of the national civil rights movement Frederick M. Wirt explores law and social change in one rural Mississippi county. Having witnessed the origins of change in Panola County a quarter century ago, Wirt provides a unique perspective on the events that have unfolded since the passage of major civil rights legislation in 1964 and 1965. Wirt sees Panola County as it existed prior to federal intervention as a "microcosm of the South" where "race dominated all its institutions in a set of complex taboos and behaviors that had generated separate ways of life for each race." Panola County’s reactions to federal law result from underlying traditional differences between "the Delta" and "the Hill people" and allow for a remarkable comparative perspective.

The process of change that Wirt explores rests on the notion that "law when enforced can change reality, which can change perception, which can alter behavior, which, in time, can alter attitudes." To carefully assess this premise the author analyzes change at both the individual and institutional level. Included in the book are the results of over 100 interviews, ranging from individual comments from private citizens and public officials to a more systematic analysis of the opinions of local school board members. With two newspapers covering the county, but serving different constituencies, Wirt is able to carry out a comparative content analysis of changes in local perspectives and interests. In addition, he makes extensive use of public records to measure change. Finally, he conducts an attitudinal survey of public and private school students, based on a sample of approximately 1200 6th, 9th, and 12th grade students. Though not included in his study, Wirt looks occasionally at the local churches and their role, or the lack thereof, in this process of social change.

Wirt focuses specifically on the role of federal law in changing local politics, education, and economic activity. In terms of local politics, changes in voting were initially the most rapid due to the involvement of federal voting registrars. However, the emergence of black elected officials has come much more slowly as has the evolution of a new generation of white leaders. Wirt categorizes white reactions to civil rights laws in terms of the recalcitrants, exceptionalists, pragmatics, and the transformed. He saves this typology until the end of the book, but it might have had more impact if used throughout his study and more fully developed. A local school superintendent, someone who "recognized as a child that white discrimination was basically unfair" does not seem "transformed" but rather someone with a viewpoint contrary to the white majority who was finally able to act on his beliefs. Notably absent is any typology of black responses to civil rights, suggesting, though indirectly, that their response was uniform.

Differences between North and South Panola’s responses to federal law exist across all areas that Wirt explores, but are most evident in education. Three chapters of the book focus on the administration, teachers, students, and schools of North and South Panola. Those in South Panola gradually accepted desegregation, although the path was not smooth or easy. In North Panola efforts led instead to an all-white private school. The two school systems easily reflect the "fight" or "flight" responses typical of the era. While citizens in South Panola initially fought school desegregation, the school board eventually closed the all black schools and established a new desegregated school, so that by the early 1970s South Panola had a fully desegregated school system. The author follows and closely explores the consequences of desegregation. He examines the enlarged role of the state government in establishing mandates for public school curriculum and the reaction of teachers to these new requirements. He highlights this discussion with data on minority employment in the public schools, drop out rates, achievement scores and survey data.

South Panola’s eventual concession to desegregated schools stands in stark contrast to North Panola where Delta whites "withdrew their leadership from the public school system, leaving them weakened financially and under poor leadership." The private school in North Panola flourishes today and the lack of support for the students who remain the public schools is reflected in the lack of voter support that would provide an adequate financial foundation for these students. Wirt emphasizes the importance of leadership in the schools of Panola county and notes that in the absence of leadership at the local level, no amount of state support would be sufficient.

Economic differences between North and South Panola County serve to pull together the various streams flowing through "We Ain’t What We Was." Underpinning their reactions to changes in civil rights, whether it concerned equal education, black political empowerment, or economic development are the original historical and cultural differences between the landowning "plantocrats" of the Delta to the North and the people of the Hill country to the South. In other words, the differences that pitted the large plantation owners against the small farmers and merchants. The large landowners were loath to embrace changes in education or economic development that might threaten the available workforce, either through reducing its numbers or raising wages if education and industry made better jobs available. Thus, South Panola more quickly embraced economic development, a direction not taken in North Panola until the 1990s.

Although focusing on the drama played out locally in Panola County, Wirt never strays far from his emphasis on the role of the federal government, without which no change would have been possible. In terms of voting and education, the role of the federal government centered on litigation and the intervention of federal civil rights officials, for example, Leon Panetta, Director, Office of Civil Rights. However, where federal influence in voting and the schools was resisted, federal economic subsidies in Panola County constituted "a golden cascade--military contracts, job and farm worker training, poverty studies, Medicare assistance, industrial park development, city planning, promotion of economic growth, more recreation facilities, and the building of a new library, bridge, hospital, and five water systems."

The economic, educational, and political changes in Panola County mean that it can now be regarded in broader terms of the "New South." Wirt relates many interesting anecdotes that suggest change in Panola County, not the least of which is the role played by its citizens in the retrial and conviction of Byron De La Beckwith for the murder of civil rights leader Medgar Evers, made famous in 1996 by Hollywood movie makers. Likewise, he relates changes in the perception of and reaction to church burnings in 1993 compared to 1963. Today Panola County faces many of the more typical problems of the 1990s. More jobs and more people have meant more crime. Although blacks are hired for entry level positions, few are promoted. A lack of discipline in the schools plagues the teachers. Yet, much remains unchanged in Panola County as well. Despite years of federal economic subsidies, considerable poverty and deprivation remain. While race no longer dominates the institutions of Panola County, Wirt notes that on the level of "intimate" relationships, very little has changed.

In general this is a well-written, insightful, thorough, and interesting study. The author blends individual and institutional change across voting, education, and economic development in order to explore fully the role of federal law in influencing social change. Rather than simply relying on interview or historical record, he utilizes a variety of sources to check his accuracy. The divisions within Panola County and their distinct responses to change add an important comparative component to the study.