The Republican Party of the Civil War and Reconstruction was opposed to slavery and the terrorism that followed it. That party supported the rights of freemen and nonracist white Southerners to full participation in society, including suffrage for all men. Reconstruction failed, mainly because the federal government stopped supporting it.
The sharecropping system, Jim Crow and then segregation de jure rose to replace slavery. Most Southern whites either supported those practices or acquiesced in them. The Republican Party lost support as blacks were locked out of voting, often under threat of death. In its wake, most voters in the South (white, of course) became Democrats.
As early as the 1940s, some leaders the Democratic Party openly opposed some aspects of discrimination. Southern leaders, segregationists almost to a man, threatened to bolt the party for that reason. In 1948, Strom Thurmond ran for president as a third-party candidate for the States Rights' Democratic Party. The monicker applied to some Southern Democrats from then on was 'Dixiecrats' -- white Southerners who were Democrats, but opposed to desegregation. Thurmond also wrote the Southern Manifesto, the position paper of white Southerners who opposed integration, in 1956. George Wallace would repeat Thurmond's gestures in the 1960s and 1970s.
By the 1960s, desegregation had become real, instead of just a threat. The Republican Party courted angry white voters who were opposed to integration and other changes in the status quo. The term to describe that courtship came to be known as the Southern Strategy. It was and continues to be very successful. Most Southern whites have switched from being Democrats to being Republicans, either literally or by being reared in now Republican families. The GOP could not win its races nationally without them. Georgia is the most recent state to become Republican dominated. Its current governor, Sonny Perdue, was elected partly on the basis of support from still segregationist neo-Confederates. (A capsule history of the Southern Strategy can be read here.)
An event in the Republicans' support of bigotry is directly related to the Mississippi Burning murders. Ronald Reagan kicked off his 1980 campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, a town obscure except for being the site of the murders of Schwerner, Goodman and Chaney. Doing so was a wink and nod to Southern voters who opposed civil rights.
To summarize, the Democrats lost the Dixiecrats to the Republicans. It is now the GOP that is the standard bearer for those who oppose racial equality. Black voters support the Democrats by close to 90 percent of the vote. Other minorities also vote Democrat most of the time.
Whenever I see the 'Democrats are the party of racism' claim being made, I wonder if the person making it is purposely trying to mislead others or just plain stupid. The only way one could not know that claim is false is not to know that the Democrats became more inclusive from the Civil Rights era on, while the GOP regressed. I expect intelligent people to know contemporary history.
Another lie trotted out to in the same way is that Congressman Byrd was a longterm leader of the Ku Klux Klan. Not so. He was briefly a member as a young man, but resigned when his conscience bothered him. He has volunteered that information, which he could have kept secret. The late Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black was also a member of the Klan, under the same circumstances. (In many Southern cities, young white men joined as a matter of course.) Like Byrd, he saw and admitted the error of his ways. But, members of the GOP who are segregationists, such as Trent Lott, have not changed.
Welcome to FR. I hope your stay is short troll.
Who are you kiddin'? It was the GOP that passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, pancake lady.
What kind of scam are you tryin' to pull, signing up with the nickname "Jemima"? Is that not racist, in itself.
As for Trent Lott, he is not a segregationist, and Byrd's involvement in the KKK was much more than you detail.
You're just a garden variety troll.
Why don't you return when you can say something that is true?
We may have live one here.
Sen. Lott is not a segregationist as you say. He just said something nice about Sen. Thurmond and the liberal media had him hanged.
I'm a white guy who graduated from a historically black university (Virginia State, in Petersburg, VA). When I saw people wearing T-shirts that said "The Blacker the college, the sweeter the knowledge," I knew that we had a long way to go to meet Dr. King's vision of a world where people were judged not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character.
I do have to give you credit, however, for at least trolling in clear, readable English, and for replying to posts. It's way better than most trolls do.
Oh, and welcome to FR.
Frist - Tenn Alexander - Tenn Hutchinson - Texas Cornyn - Texas Allen - Virginia Warner - Virginia Graham - SC DeMint -SC Dole - NC Burr - NC Chamblas - Georgia Isakson - Georgia Martinez - Florida Miss - Lott Miss - Cochran Ala - Shelby Ala -Sessions Louisiana -Vitter
Which of the above GOP Senators from the former Confederacy do you consider patent or latent racist, or race card players, other than the senator you mentioned?
The Republican Party lost support as blacks were locked out of voting, often under threat of death. In its wake, most voters in the South (white, of course) became Democrats.
Ummm, no. The South was solidly Democratic before the war as well. In fact, Abraham Lincoln didn't even appear on most ballots in the South in the 1860 election.
As early as the 1940s, some leaders the Democratic Party openly opposed some aspects of discrimination. Southern leaders, segregationists almost to a man, threatened to bolt the party for that reason. In 1948, Strom Thurmond ran for president as a third-party candidate for the States Rights' Democratic Party. The monicker applied to some Southern Democrats from then on was 'Dixiecrats' -- white Southerners who were Democrats, but opposed to desegregation. Thurmond also wrote the Southern Manifesto, the position paper of white Southerners who opposed integration, in 1956. George Wallace would repeat Thurmond's gestures in the 1960s and 1970s.
You're correct...and both were Democrats.
By the 1960s, desegregation had become real, instead of just a threat. The Republican Party courted angry white voters who were opposed to integration and other changes in the status quo.
The "other changes" that you mention were the hard left turn the democrats took on all kinds of social issues, not just race relations. Remember that in the '40s the Democrats had to essentially purge themselves of communist influences. By the '60s, the extreme left wingers in the US were almost to a man identified with the Democratic party.
The term to describe that courtship came to be known as the Southern Strategy. It was and continues to be very successful. Most Southern whites have switched from being Democrats to being Republicans, either literally or by being reared in now Republican families. The GOP could not win its races nationally without them. Georgia is the most recent state to become Republican dominated. Its current governor, Sonny Perdue, was elected partly on the basis of support from still segregationist neo-Confederates. (A capsule history of the Southern Strategy can be read here.)
No, it was from Georgians who were pissed because the previous Governor didn't put the state flag issue to a referendum to let the people decide for themselves. I know, because that's why *I* voted for Perdue. And, BTW, I like the current flag much more than the old one with the battle flag on it.
An event in the Republicans' support of bigotry is directly related to the Mississippi Burning murders. Ronald Reagan kicked off his 1980 campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, a town obscure except for being the site of the murders of Schwerner, Goodman and Chaney. Doing so was a wink and nod to Southern voters who opposed civil rights.
Too bad the rest of the country saw it as a token of respect to the three who lost their lives there.
To summarize, the Democrats lost the Dixiecrats to the Republicans.
The Democrats lost a lot more than just the Dixiecrats. Thurmond only got 2.4% of the popular vote in 1948, and the only states he carried were his home state of South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, along with 1 EV from Tennessee.
It is now the GOP that is the standard bearer for those who oppose racial equality. Black voters support the Democrats by close to 90 percent of the vote. Other minorities also vote Democrat most of the time.
That's rapidly changing. According to This CNN website, 30% of nonwhite men and 12% of nonwhite women voted for George Bush in 2004.
Whenever I see the 'Democrats are the party of racism' claim being made, I wonder if the person making it is purposely trying to mislead others or just plain stupid. The only way one could not know that claim is false is not to know that the Democrats became more inclusive from the Civil Rights era on, while the GOP regressed. I expect intelligent people to know contemporary history.
Intelligent people know that when the Democrats started hemorrhaging voters due to their hard left turn in the 60s, they became the party of special interests: race baiters, gays, environmentalists, etc. "Inclusivism" is code for "we can't thing of anything else we have in common." When I look around, I only see one party that believes in Dr. King's dream that men - white or black - should be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skins, and that's the Republicans.
Another lie trotted out to in the same way is that Congressman Byrd was a longterm leader of the Ku Klux Klan. Not so. He was briefly a member as a young man, but resigned when his conscience bothered him. He has volunteered that information, which he could have kept secret. The late Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black was also a member of the Klan, under the same circumstances. (In many Southern cities, young white men joined as a matter of course.) Like Byrd, he saw and admitted the error of his ways. But, members of the GOP who are segregationists, such as Trent Lott, have not changed.
I will agree that I'd never seen anything substantiated that said Byrd had any long term position in the Klan. The fact remains he was in the Klan. That by itself should be a disqualifier. The Dems even let Fritz Hollings stay in their party - and you certainly won't argue that *he* changed his spots, will you?
As for Trent Lott, he made a boneheaded statement while trying to humor an old man. Would you have preferred him to say, "Good thing you lost in '48, you doddering old fool?"
Anyway, thanks for stopping by FR. Like I said before, at least you post coherently. :)