Racial boundary agreements were permanent for whites but tactical expedients for blacks

Evidence

What these whites failed to understand, however, was that such boundary lines were rarely permanent. “Black involvement in any discussions of this type represented an attempt to avoid the violence that they faced from whites while securing land,” historian Ronald Bayor has noted. “Although white leaders saw these boundary lines as final statements on the black land and housing issue, blacks viewed them as temporary and expedient; they expected to eventually cross the boundaries and barriers.” — Kevin M. Kruse, White Flight, 232

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies the asymmetrical meaning of negotiated racial boundaries: finality vs. expediency depending on which side reads them.
• QUESTION: This suggests black home-seekers strategically used white violence-avoidance as leverage to secure land — worth chasing what forms this leverage took in other transition cases.