Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did the Democrats stand for slavery in the past

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:24 PM
Original message
Did the Democrats stand for slavery in the past
and the Republicans were abolitionist? And the Democrats were royally racist and didn't change until the second half of the 20th century and the most blacks were Republican way back in the day. That would explain the solid Southern support in the past.

Is that true?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
w13rd0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. They were called the Dixiecrats...
...and most of them, like Strom Thurmond, switched to the Republican party when the Democratic leadership made it clear that they would not support their racism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rogerashton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. In the late 19th century,
the Repubs stood for the rich, the small businessmen and farmers -- and black folks, in their place. The democrats represented the south -- and the northern urban working class. The Repubs were probably no less racist, but more genteel about it, and maybe that counts for something.

The intellectual leaders of the abolitionist movement (I don't think you are ready for this) were the evangelical Christians -- and some utilitarian economists --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deminflorida Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. Everything turned with the Dixiecrats...
The birth of the modern day GOP, a fact most Freepers rarely admit.

http://gi.grolier.com/presidents/ea/side/dixicrat.html

Dixiecrats, a splinter group of Southern DEMOCRATS in the U.S. elections of 1948, who rejected President Harry S. TRUMAN's civil-rights program and revolted against the civil-rights plank adopted at the Democratic National Convention. A conference of states' rights leaders then met in Birmingham and suggested Gov. J. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina for president and Gov. Fielding Wright of Mississippi for vice president. The group hoped to force the election into the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES by preventing either Truman or his Republican opponent, Thomas E. DEWEY, from obtaining a majority of the ELECTORAL votes.

The plan failed. Although Thurmond electors ran and won as the official Democratic candidates in four states -- Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolinaother Thurmond electors running as "States Rights Democrats" lost to Truman slates. Thurmond polled 22.5% of the total Southern vote to Truman's 50.1%. Nationally, Thurmond obtained 39 electoral votes with 1,169,032 popular votes. The Dixiecrat movement encouraged Northern blacks to vote for Truman, but it ultimately strengthened the Republican party in the South, for many Dixiecrats became Republicans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
worldgonekrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yeah
It is an undisputed fact.

But times change and people realize they were wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
5. In a nutshell
Democrats took hold of the populist movement around the turn of the century. Various sub-groups have splintered away from the Dems (Hoover Dems) and in the late 40s the "Dixiecrats" broke away to join the Republicans. The two parties have done a reversal of what they started as.

The "Party of Lincoln" fought tooth and nail against Civil Rights...go figure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alex146 Donating Member (556 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. Yes, but they were conservatives back then...
and the Repubs were Liberals. So it's better to say that conservatives supported slavery and racism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovedems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yes, if I remember my history
there was the whig party and the democratic party. The republican party actually formed as the party to stop slavery. Actually, they would let slavery stay in the south but any new state in the union couldn't adopt slavery (nebraska, kentucky ???) They didn't want slavery to be allowed to grow. I think Lincoln was the first republican president. My how times have changed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elperromagico Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'm afraid you're essentially correct.
Of course, not all Democrats stood for slavery, and not all Republicans stood for abolition.

The Democratic party is an outgrowth of the Democratic-Republican party, which was an outgrowth of the Anti-Federalists. They represented states rights, and part of states rights (at the time) was the belief that states should decide for themselves whether to ban slavery or allow it.

The Republican party is an outgrowth of the Whig party, which in turn was an outgrowth of the Federalists. Their platform rested on the concept of a strong national government and the abolition of slavery (among other things).

I think the shift began earlier than the mid 20th century. The Democratic emphasis on a strong national government was evident as early as the Wilson administration, and certainly evident in FDR's administration.

Truman's desire to integrate the Army led to the States Rights party, formed in 1948, which sought to enforce segregation forcefully. That brings us to the South, which was always a little behind the nation in terms of political thought. From the end of the Civil War until about 1964, the South could always be relied upon to cast its vote for the Democratic presidential candidate.

In the South the Democratic party remained, for the most part, the party of states rights. Republicans in the South (Winthrop Rockefeller of Arkansas comes to mind) were generally more progressive than their contemporary Democrats.

The election of 1964 really brought about the change. LBJ's progressive civil rights policies caused many notable defections from the Dem ranks (such as Strom Thurmond). While LBJ swept the rest of the country, he performed (IIRC) most poorly in the South, where Goldwater beat him by wide margins in several Southern states. That was essentially the end of the Solid South.

I'm not sure if I've told you anything new, but I think I've hit on a few key moments. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
9. Yes it's true
Jefferson Davis was a Democrat. So were pretty much all the other Confederate leaders. So was the Ku Klux Klan. So were George Wallace, Lester Maddox and Bull Conner. The Civil Rights Act was voted against by every southern senator. Every one was a Democrat. One (Strom Thurmond) later switched to the Republican Party.

Race has not been the Democratic Party's proudest issue. There is a lot owed.

In fact, when I hear groups talk of reparations, I wonder why they have not gone after the Democratic Party, because there was no institution in America that fought harder for slavery, and then Jim Crow Laws and segregation than the Democratic Party of America. The Grandfather Acts, the poll taxes, the literacy tests, the segregation laws, were all passed by southern Democratic Party legislatures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MacCovern Donating Member (336 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
10. Southern support for Dems does go way back...
and it is evaporating as an older generation of Southerners loyals to the Democratic party passes away, and more conservative Northerners move to the South.

Also, remember that a much-higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats supported the 1964 civil-rights bill. For example, in the House, Republicans voted for civil rights by a margin of 79 percent to 21 percent, 136-35. The Democrats margin was 153-91 or 63 percent to 37 percent. One of the reason for the Democratic percentage being lower was the high number of racist Southern Demoratic Congressmen voting against the civil rights bill!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beanball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 10:55 PM
Response to Original message
11. Civil Rights(human rights) and the two parties.
The real republicans were mostly pro civil rights,Jacob Javets and the eastern liberals of the republican party were staunch supporters of human rights but the southern democrats Bilbo,Thurmond,and that ilk were just plain racist.The republican party was the minority party until Nixon and his handlers decided to court the southern democrats, all or most of the dems changed parties because Nixon made them an offer they coudn't refuse.Fifty years ago you coudn't find a republican in office in any of the southern states,the real party of Lincoln has been taken over by the party of Jefferson Davis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arewethereyet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 11:09 PM
Response to Original message
12. of course
the only constant is change

don't make too much of this sort of thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. yes times do change
oh well the next change will have to be a regime change here in the US
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-06-04 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
13. LOL. Nice tagline.
No doubt, I know a much broader range of Democrats and Republicans than you. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 18th 2014, 06:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC