To frame the early Saudi oil camps as “American apartheid” is to fundamentally misread a historical moment through a narrow, present-day Western lens. Saudi Arabia in the 1930s and 1940s was one of the least developed nations in the world. The American oil workers who came were only willing to relocate to such a remote and unfamiliar region if the company provided a standard of living comparable to what they had at home.
The living arrangements you describe weren’t about enforcing American racial hierarchy—they were a reflection of the mutual desire for communities to live in a way that preserved their norms. This allowed the nation to modernize on its own terms, without being culturally steamrolled. What you call “segregation” was, in fact, a carefully negotiated coexistence between two different worlds, undertaken with respect and cooperation. In fact, it is celebrated to this day in Saudi Arabia - which would not be the case if they viewed it as an “American apartheid.” You are forcing your views onto a situation, not reflecting actual attitudes.
Further, the Saudi government worked hand in hand with the oil company from day one to uplift the entire society. The oil company built schools, roads, hospitals, and eradicated diseases like tuberculosis, polio, and malaria. Promising Saudi children from across the kingdom were identified, educated, and trained for future leadership roles. The explicit policy was to train Saudis to take over every position, from labor to engineering and management. And they succeeded.
To reduce all of this to an accusation of “apartheid” is not only historically inaccurate—it erases the history of an extraordinary partnership that is celebrated in Saudi to this day.
To frame the early Saudi oil camps as “American apartheid” is to fundamentally misread a historical moment through a narrow, present-day Western lens. Saudi Arabia in the 1930s and 1940s was one of the least developed nations in the world. The American oil workers who came were only willing to relocate to such a remote and unfamiliar region if the company provided a standard of living comparable to what they had at home.
The living arrangements you describe weren’t about enforcing American racial hierarchy—they were a reflection of the mutual desire for communities to live in a way that preserved their norms. This allowed the nation to modernize on its own terms, without being culturally steamrolled. What you call “segregation” was, in fact, a carefully negotiated coexistence between two different worlds, undertaken with respect and cooperation. In fact, it is celebrated to this day in Saudi Arabia - which would not be the case if they viewed it as an “American apartheid.” You are forcing your views onto a situation, not reflecting actual attitudes.
Further, the Saudi government worked hand in hand with the oil company from day one to uplift the entire society. The oil company built schools, roads, hospitals, and eradicated diseases like tuberculosis, polio, and malaria. Promising Saudi children from across the kingdom were identified, educated, and trained for future leadership roles. The explicit policy was to train Saudis to take over every position, from labor to engineering and management. And they succeeded.
To reduce all of this to an accusation of “apartheid” is not only historically inaccurate—it erases the history of an extraordinary partnership that is celebrated in Saudi to this day.