https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/11/tom-mullen/jim-crow-laws-were-anti-capitalist-and-the-free-market-killed-them-long-before-the-government-showed-up/

Jim Crow Laws Were Anti-Capitalist and the Free Market Killed Them Long Before the Government Showed Up

By Tom Mullen

If you believe the approved narrative, the post-bellum South was a monolithic hive-mind of sheet-wearing racists who couldn’t wait to codify their hatred into law. While this fiction validates statists of every stripe and allows northerners to feel morally superior, the truth is uncomfortable for both: large parts of the South were already desegregating on their own until the government stepped in to stop them.

That’s right. Before the Jim Crow laws of 1890–1910, tens of thousands of Southern businesses – black and white owned – served both races without a second thought. Streetcars in New Orleans, theaters in Charleston, barbershops in Richmond, saloons in Mobile, and first-class railroad cars from Virginia to Texas routinely mixed Black and White customers. In many cities, the integrated establishments were not a courageous minority; they were the majority.

The free market was producing exactly what free markets always produce: a spectrum of choices, some segregated by private choice, most not. And the non-segregated ones were winning.

And then the government showed up to “help.”

Jim Crow Was Anti-Capitalist to the Core

Contrary to what the authors of the 1619 Project would have you believe, both slavery and Jim Crow laws were anti-capitalist. The fundamental premise of capitalism is that all exchanges of property between economic actors are voluntary. No one is forced to make an exchange against their will; and no one is forcibly prohibited from making an exchange with another willing actor. Freedom of association and freedom of contract are inherent to capitalism. Without them, whatever system is operating is not capitalism, whether supported by private business owners or not.

And many, in some southern cities most, private business owners were not segregating until forced to do so.

Every single segregation statute was a blatant violation of freedom of association and freedom of contract. The Louisiana Separate Car Act didn’t politely “ask” the railroad to add a colored car; it threatened prison for any conductor who let a Black passenger sit in the White section—or a White passenger sit in the Black section if he preferred the company. The Arkansas streetcar law of 1903 didn’t appeal to conscience; it fined drivers $25 (over $800 today) every time they failed to enforce the color line.

These weren’t “public safety” regulations. They were cartel enforcement mechanisms written by the losers in the marketplace who couldn’t compete with entrepreneurs – Black or White – who treated customers as individuals instead of racial categories.

White restaurant owners in Mobile didn’t lobby for segregation because they woke up one day disliking black people any more than they previously did. They did it because John Callahan’s café served Black longshoremen at the same counter for the same price and was stealing their lunch trade. White theater owners in Chattanooga didn’t care about “racial purity” until the Bijou started selling orchestra seats to Black patrons and cut their ticket revenue in half. White barbers in Little Rock passed a law banning barbers from cutting the hair of the opposite race because Black barbers had cornered the high-end White clientele.

And don’t think they only targeted Black competitors. White “race traitors” got it worse. The Richmond streetcar monopoly didn’t just want Black hack drivers gone; they wanted every White hack driver who still picked up Black passengers run out of business, too. Economic historian Jennifer Roback documented that Jim Crow laws systematically raised the cost of doing integrated business until only the state-protected cartel survived.

The Private Sector Tore Jim Crow Down First

More on link ^