Privileges of POWs & Labor of African American Sharecroppers

During World War II, German and Italian soldiers were held in POW camps in the US. Contrary to common belief, these POWs were given many privileges, such as dances, sports, and educational programs. They were also allowed to send and receive letters. In comparison, African-American sharecroppers faced harsh conditions and exploitation, similar to slavery. This shows the contrast in treatment based on race. The Geneva Convention protected the rights of POWs, highlighting their humanity. The treatment of POWs and sharecroppers reflects power dynamics, prejudice, and societal structure. It is important to learn from history and work towards a more just future. World War II was a pivotal point in American history. Much is known about the war and how it affected the U.S. alone, specifically the POW camps. These camps were where German and Italian soldiers were held to uphold laboring tasks, or they were. The research addressing these prisoners of war rarely explored how demanding their labor was and more about the activities and privileges they had. This segues into the topic of discussion. How were POWs treated compared to African-American sharecroppers, and if so, were they treated better than African-American sharecroppers at the time, and what this comparison says about how people are treated based on the color of their skin. Hi, my name is Jordan Sanders. I'm here with my 361 History class, and this is Privileges of POWs and Labor of Sharecroppers. During World War II, German and Italian soldiers were captured and held. The captives, or POWs as they were called, were held in camps called intimate camps, where it was thought that they were forced to do labor. But a surprising amount of evidence around Camp Como, located in Como, Mississippi, showed that these prisoners were given a lot of privileges. Part of this reason being that officers were not required to work. One of the buildings, they made a dance floor out of it, and they danced at least one night a week. This clip is from an interview with a group of Sardis townsfolk that had some insight on Camp Como. Here they're saying how a hotel was used for the POWs to go and have dances at least once a week. This statement contradicts any idea that the POWs were treated poorly. The Southern Reporter is also a good source that backs this statement. The Southern Reporter is a long-term newspaper article filled with war propaganda and political cartoons during the 1900s. A lot of the articles consist of information about the types of activities POWs had and a lot of the privileges they had or the types of things that they were allowed to do along with them. For example, POWs played a lot of different sports, such as basketball or tennis, and they often held tournaments and competitions for entertainment. Some other articles highlight that POWs were allowed to send and receive letters from their loved ones. The officers watching over the camp even allowed these soldiers to go for hour-to-two-hour walks and were expected to come back. They took lessons in professions he wanted to learn when he joined the army, and this was structural engineering, and so he learned a lot about mechanism, business, construction, and so on. Here's an interview clip with Marga Stallman. She's the daughter of a German POW named Werner Ludbach, who was held at Camp Como. He passed, but she kept a lot of his belongings from the camp. It's even more fascinating that the POWs were allowed to partake in educational programs while they were held captive. How did the camp change? Was it a good image of America? Well, I can only speak for Camp Como, but they had really good treatment there. I know they did, and they would have dances. While the Italians were there, they had a party in good time, and the Germans were very disciplined, very proud. Werner told me that they were really sad that they had lost the war, even though they weren't Nazis, just simply because it meant they didn't fight well. They were ahead of all the terrible things that were going on in Germany, and they did not know about the concentration camps. He said that was all behind them. They saw that on newsreels at Camp Como. It was the first time they knew about it. He said, we were always ahead, and we never knew it. He told me he saw Hitler once. He hated Hitler. He said, I saw him once. He was about five or six feet from me. He said, I didn't mean anything to him. I was just a soldier. I guess I'd say no to your question. Yes, they were treated good. Oh, yes, they were treated very well. Sharecropping is a farming system that came to rise after the abolition of slavery and post-Civil War. Here, people can rent plots of land from a landowner to grow crops. Then in return, they receive a portion of what they grew. Typically, the landowners were wealthy whites, and the renters were poor whites in recent freed slaves. Although slavery was abolished, sharecropping was a way for white supremacy to reassert itself. Black codes were passed that forced previous enslaved Africans to sign yearly contracts, or they would be arrested. These conditions then forced people into large amounts of debt due to high interest rates and exploitation. In a way, sharecropping was a way of captivity that held Africans in harsh conditions and poor living arrangements, which was basically a reincarnation of slavery. Now, if it wasn't more obvious, POWs were indeed treated better than sharecroppers. According to previous scholarships, POWs were protected from harm under captivity by the Geneva Convention, which only goes to show that Americans didn't have to provide coupons that the soldiers could use to buy things or hold competitions within the camp. They were just unable to force the POWs to do labor or vicious punishments or anything of that sort. Ultimately, the way POWs were treated represents the humanity that was present during war to recognize that foreign soldiers were still people in the midst of conflict. But sharecropping highlighted how the denial of rights and acceptance showed the dehumanization of African Americans, highlighting racial superiority and inferiority to those who were born on our own soil. The ultimate contrast between these two historical contexts highlights the importance of understanding how power dynamics, prejudice, and societal structure shaped the treatment of individuals during times of crisis. World War II Looking at the aftermath of World War II, international agreements were made to prevent actions of captivity to be conducted again, recognizing that human rights are universal and inalienable. Although slavery was emancipated around 1860, there was a continuous battle among African Americans for civil rights and equality, with continued discussions of racism and social justice today. By examining these historical narratives side by side, we gain insights into the complexities of privileges, oppression, and resilience. It is our responsibility to learn from the past and actively contribute to building a more just and inclusive future. Thank you listeners for tuning in on this eye-opening topic of World War II. I hope this episode sparks a deeper and broadening understanding of what was going on in not just Mississippi, but across the country and world. If you enjoyed this episode, check out the other episodes produced by my fellow classmates found on the University of Mississippi website through eGrowth.