Southern Strategy denialism

[BobLibDem]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Possibly. But Reagan was pretty clear on what he meant. You’re saying that the word is so loaded that even if he clearly used it in a different context that he was relying on an appeal to racists who would realize that what he really meant was that he would keep down the blacks. Sounds dubious to me.
…
Consider that the Founding Fathers were mostly slave-owners. Is it offensive to honor these people? Now as it happens, there are people who think it is, but it hasn’t gained widespread support yet. But imagine that this changed, and enough people decided that they were offended by the honoring of these slave-owners that people stopped honoring them. Does that mean that anyone who currently honors them intends to send a coded pro-slavery message?

Was Reagan clear enough regarding his racial beliefs by giving his first post-convention speech in 1980 in Philadelphia, MS?

It’s not offensive to me that we honor the Founding Fathers, but it is offensive that so many consider them to be infallible and that the Constitution came down from Mt. Sinai. With a lot of compromise, they came up with a decent idea for a government that has only recently begun to be dysfunctional with the rise of the Teahad movement. But they fucked up big time counting blacks as 3/5 for a person as well as the horrible 2nd Amendment.

[BrainGlutton]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Yes, I do. The south has been sort of an outlier politics-wise for a while, and people resent the federal government imposing things on them.

And you think that has nothing to do with race? Nobody resented it when the Tennessee Valley Authority was “imposed” on them. The Civil Rights Act, OTOH . …

[BrainGlutton]

@Ibn_Warraq

Also IIRC, the modern KKK, inspired by the movie Birth of a Nation, was founded in French Lick, Indiana, the hometown, ironically enough of Larry Bird.

No, Atlanta, Georgia.

[BrainGlutton]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

You’re entitled to your stance on these issues, but they were and are legitimate issues. I’m not going to argue this point, though. As I said before, it’s a No True Scotsman logic.

It’s not a True-Scotsman thing and it’s not a matter of opinion. The politics of “welfare queens” and “takers” were always bullshit issues and you motherfucking know it. And they always will be bullshit issues, in a country with a welfare state as meager as ours. (Except for Social Security, but for some reason nobody every calls retirees “takers.”) Welfare cheats will never matter, they’ll never make up a drop in the bucket. And, in particular:

@tomndebb

“Welfare queens” was never a legitimate issue. The original “Welfare Queen” was a white crook who was engaged in a life of crime that involved most methods of fraud, welfare abuse under a fraudulent name being only one of those crimes. When Reagan began telling the story, (in multiple versions as he made them up as he went along), she became a woman who was on welfare who gamed the system because the system was corrupt. The impression he created was that she was one of a multitude of black women in Chicago or other cities who were simply living the high life on the dole.

[BrainGlutton]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

I don’t think opposing a MLK holiday is at all racist. Or supporting Confederate symbols.

You can’t possibly expect us to believe you mean that seriously.

[Jophiel]

@kunilou

If there was no Southern Strategy, then what exactly was Michael Steele apologizing for?

Former RNCC Chair Ken Mehlman as well.

[lance_strongarm]

The Southern Strategy thing is way overblown because it’s not the underlying force. It was just a strategy that took advantage of much bigger forces.

There’s no denying that over several decades, many southern Democrats switched to the Republicans due to the influx of black voters caused by the civil rights movement.

[iiandyiiii]

@lance_strongarm

The Southern Strategy thing is way overblown because it’s not the underlying force. It was just a strategy that took advantage of much bigger forces.

It’s not overblown, because it’s continuously denied by loons like Coulter (and even mainstream GOP figures). If it were admitted and accepted, like the incredible Democratic racism for the hundred years before the CRA (which included policies and activities far more brutal and oppressive than anything the GOP has supported in the last several decades), then it wouldn’t be discussed so much.

[elucidator]

How could white racist Southern Democrats move towards the Republican Party, given the massive and firm support by the Party for civil rights and equal justice? There are simply scads of such examples, dozens of them! As it happens, I can’t think of any right off the top of my head, but I’m sure Fotheringay-Phipps has them right at his fingertips, so I will simply defer to him on this.

Take it away, FP!

[lance_strongarm]

@elucidator

How could white racist Southern Democrats move towards the Republican Party, given the massive and firm support by the Party for civil rights and equal justice?

How did those racist Southern Democrats remain in the Democratic party for so long in the first place? Did that mean the entire Democratic party was racist to the core back then?

[BrainGlutton]

@lance_strongarm

The Southern Strategy thing is way overblown because it’s not the underlying force. It was just a strategy that took advantage of much bigger forces.

There’s no denying that over several decades, many southern Democrats switched to the Republicans due to the influx of black voters caused by the civil rights movement.

You mean, the constituency-exchange between the parties would have happened more or less the same way if Kevin Phillips had never pushed the SS?

[lance_strongarm]

@iiandyiiii

It’s not overblown, because it’s continuously denied by loons like Coulter (and even mainstream GOP figures).

The two don’t follow.

It’s overblown, and then denied.

If it were admitted and accepted, like the incredible Democratic racism for the hundred years before the CRA (which included policies and activities far more brutal and oppressive than anything the GOP has supported in the last several decades), then it wouldn’t be discussed so much.

It’s discussed so much because it’s…overblown.

What I mean is that it’s not the most important part of history. It’s just an after-effect of much larger forces.

[Human_Action]

@BrainGlutton

And you think that has nothing to do with race? Nobody resented it when the Tennessee Valley Authority was “imposed” on them. The Civil Rights Act, OTOH . …

The TVA wasn’t imposed on Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia, their elected officials overwhelmingly supported it.

Had the people of those states opposed the TVA and had it voted in anyway, you can bet there’d be plenty of resentment about it.

[lance_strongarm]

@BrainGlutton

You mean, the constituency-exchange between the parties would have happened more or less the same way if Kevin Phillips had never pushed the SS?

Yes! Of course! He pushed it because of that constituency-exchange. He didn’t create it.

Decades of hard work by civil rights leaders to get blacks the right to vote in the South is what did it.

[Voyager]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

I’ve already agreed that code words exist. But that doesn’t mean that everything is a code word.

“States Rights” means the states are free to do X. X can be anything. In the context of the Wallace campaign, it was obvious to everyone that he meant suppress the blacks. That doesn’t mean the term has this meaning in all circumstances.

Not just in the context of the Wallace campaign - it was used this way in the context of opposition to the Civil Rights movement. In the early 1960s states rights was the code word for racism, and I don’t recall it being used anywhere else.

BTW, “Welfare Queen” wasn’t used by itself. It was “Cadillac-driving welfare queen” (here is a cite), and welfare queen Cadillac came up with lots of hits. Back then Cadillac was the car black people drove. Despite the fact that the actual welfare queen was white, the “Cadillac driving welfare queen” was understood to be black.

Really, if the right was as willing to trash the capitalist system for the much larger sins of those practicing it as they are willing to trash welfare because of a few criminals, we’d be living under socialism now.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

The concept of coded language exists, but in this specific case it’s being used to supress discussion of legitimate issues by tarring them as racist.

It’s not really that coded.

Here’s a few sections from the Dixiecrats party platform, which represent the bulk of their distinct concerns:

We stand for social and economic justice, which, we believe can be guaranteed to all citizens only by a strict adherence to our Constitution and the avoidance of any invasion or destruction of the constitutional rights of the states and individuals. We oppose the totalitarian, centralized bureaucratic government and the police nation called for by the platforms adopted by the Democratic and Republican Conventions.

We stand for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race; the constitutional right to choose one’s associates; to accept private employment without governmental interference, and to earn one’s living in any lawful way. We oppose the elimination of segregation, the repeal of miscegenation statutes, the control of private employment by Federal bureaucrats called for by the misnamed civil rights program. We favor home-rule, local self-government and a minimum interference with individual rights.

We oppose and condemn the action of the Democratic Convention in sponsoring a civil rights program calling for the elimination of segregation, social equality by Federal fiat, regulations of private employment practices, voting, and local law enforcement.

We affirm that the effective enforcement of such a program would be utterly destructive of the social, economic and political life of the Southern people, and of other localities in which there may be differences in race, creed or national origin in appreciable numbers.

You are aware, are you not, of the actual name of the Dixiecrats’ political party? it was the States’ Rights Democratic Party.

[Human_Action]

@Voyager

Back then Cadillac was the car black people drove.

:dubious: Do you have a cite on that? Cadillacs have always been the province of wealthy folks, which means they are also the province of white folks, and old white folks in particular. The demographics have shifted some with the introduction of the Escalade in 1999 and the Art & Science redesign in the early 2000s, but when were Cadillacs ever “the car black people drove”?

This article from 1991 states that the typical Cadillac buyer earns $70-$85,000 per year.

By the way, as your cite notes, the actual welfare cheat Reagan was talking about actually did drive a Cadillac (and was white).

[ElvisL1ves]

Pimpmobile

The most popular cars for this customization were Cadillacs and Lincolns, especially the Cadillac Eldorado and Lincoln Continental produced between 1971 and 1978. However, lower luxury models such as Chryslers, Buicks and Oldsmobiles, were also common. The cars used for these conversions were originally targeted at well-to-do retirees who wanted a large luxury vehicle; however, with the “pimpmobile” conversions, the cars came to signify menace, mystique, and glamor.

[elucidator]

Whole damn country was racist to the core “back then”, depending on what you mean by “back then”. Hell, at one point, huge numbers of white people hated other white people for being Irish and/or Catholic.

[lance_strongarm]

@Human_Action

when were Cadillacs ever “the car black people drove”?

:eek:

How old are you?

I’m laughing when I read this, because I thought everyone knew the insulting stereotype of the Cadillac-driving black guy. The “joke” was that blacks had fancy Cadillacs, but lived in shacks - they spent all their money on their cars and not their homes.

Assuming you’re not aware of this because you’re too young, this post is a great example of how “code words” are forgotten, and then an innocent person accidentally uses one and gets pounced on by those who still remember them. I think that’s unfair. Ironically, racists who know the insults are careful to avoid them, it’s the innocent who walk into the trap.