In civil rights history, what happened to the democrats and republicans?

[fuzzybabybunny]

Back during reconstruction and the end of slavery the Republicans in the North wanted to free blacks and the racist Southern Democrats wanted to keep them slaves.

Then during the times of Martin Luther King it was the Republicans in the South who were being racist and the Northern Democrats who fought for desegregation, equal rights, etc?

Huh?

 

[Ryan]

Racism and inequality have no singular political affiliation.

 

[daveshel]

Just look how the Republicans changed over the last 30 years, going from isolationism and fiscal conservatism to whatever the hell has been going on for the last 6 years. This is not my grandfather's Republican Party.

But if I recall correctly, the Republican Party of the 19th century is not really the same party that emerged with the same name later.

 

[Heisenberg]

The South has historically been mostly Democratic. It's only recently that Republicans gained power there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_south

 

[IronWing]

Please, please, please take it to P&N.

Short history:
FDR assembled a Democratic coalition of liberal northerners and conservative southerners that held until LBJ signed the Voting Rights Act which pissed off southern conservatives. Nixon saw the opening and developed his "southern strategy" for encouraging those disaffected conservatives to join the Republicans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

 

[BAMAVOO]

Originally posted by: daveshel
Just look how the Republicans changed over the last 30 years, going from isolationism and fiscal conservatism to whatever the hell has been going on for the last 6 years. This is not my grandfather's Republican Party.

But if I recall correctly, the Republican Party of the 19th century is not really the same party that emerged with the same name later.

The same can be said of democrats.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: Ryan
Racism and inequality has no one political affiliation - never has, never will.

Yep. You can't just lump all ignorant people into one camp. Both sides had their bad apples. Don't think for a minute there weren't slaves in the North and that they were all for desegregation.

Your view of the South must have come from the movies.

 

[JLGatsby]

The Republican part was hijacked by religious nutjobs.

My hero, Barry Goldwater is rolling in his gave.

 

[her209]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixiecrats

 

[nageov3t]

the south really broke off from the democratic party as a result of the civil rights the godless north easterners were pushing in congress and they realigned with the republican party, making up a lot of the base religious right wing who vote on social issues.

some have claimed that there's a similar realignment going on right now with fiscal conservatives, but it's really too early to tell and will probably depend on what the democrats manage to accomplish.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby
The Republican part was hijacked by religious nutjobs.

My hero, Barry Goldwater is rolling in his gave.

And the Dems by Socialists. (I can generalize too)

 

[Fayd]

republican party is same official party from lincoln to now. (GOP)

party platforms change year to year to keep up with emerging societal trends. during the 60's, the parties had something of a switch in the area of civil rights.

that's not to say the republican party is racist, or the democratic party is the champion of civil rights. in terms of modern party platforms, simple examples would be republicans are less likely to favor advantages to minorities like affirmative action.

but as i said, racism is not exclusive to any party. Strom Thurman (rep...formerly dem..) was a dixiecrat. but, for example, Robert Byrd (dem) was a member/leader of a chapter of the KKK.

simply put, it's too simple to say they switched party platforms.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: slsmnaz
And the Dems by Socialists. (I can generalize too)

You mean to tell me the average Democrat voter doesn't have socialist intentions? They do. Your "generalization" is correct.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: loki8481
the south really broke off from the democratic party as a result of the civil rights the godless north easterners were pushing in congress and they realigned with the republican party, making up a lot of the base religious right wing who vote on social issues.

some have claimed that there's a similar realignment going on right now with fiscal conservatives, but it's really too early to tell and will probably depend on what the democrats manage to accomplish.

They both happened around 1948. Republicans haven't been fiscially conservative since that election.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: dullard
They both happened around 1948. Republicans haven't been fiscially conservative since that election.

Ronald Reagan: O RLY?

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: Ryan
Racism and inequality has no one political affiliation - never has, never will.

Yep. You can't just lump all ignorant people into one camp. Both sides had their bad apples. Don't think for a minute there weren't slaves in the North and that they were all for desegregation.

Your view of the South must have come from the movies.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: dullard
They both happened around 1948. Republicans haven't been fiscially conservative since that election.

Ronald Reagan: O RLY?

I just knowed this thread belonged in P&N.

In what way was Reagan a fiscal conservative?

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: dullard
They both happened around 1948. Republicans haven't been fiscially conservative since that election.

Ronald Reagan: O RLY?

Are you seriously implying that Reagan was fiscally conservative?

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: ironwing
In what way was Reagan a fiscal conservative?

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: Ryan
Racism and inequality has no one political affiliation - never has, never will.

Yep. You can't just lump all ignorant people into one camp. Both sides had their bad apples. Don't think for a minute there weren't slaves in the North and that they were all for desegregation.

Your view of the South must have come from the movies.

You mean movies lie??

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: Ryan
Racism and inequality has no one political affiliation - never has, never will.

Yep. You can't just lump all ignorant people into one camp. Both sides had their bad apples. Don't think for a minute there weren't slaves in the North and that they were all for desegregation.

Your view of the South must have come from the movies.

You mean movies lie??

Shens. Hollywood Socialists would never lie. Michael Moore is a beacon of truth!

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: dullard
They both happened around 1948. Republicans haven't been fiscially conservative since that election.

Ronald Reagan: O RLY?

Are you seriously implying that Reagan was fiscally conservative?

Even with increases in [justified] military spending, Reagan always proposed a balanced budget...which the Democratically controlled Congress rejected and fvcked up and added social crap.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: yllus
Are you seriously implying that Reagan was fiscally conservative?

I'm not saying an "absolutely perfect" fiscal conservative, but in the general sense.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: JS80

Even with increases in [justified] military spending, Reagan always proposed a balanced budget...which the Democratically controlled Congress rejected and fvcked up and added social crap.

Nope, not even close to true.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: yllus
Are you seriously implying that Reagan was fiscally conservative?

I'm not saying an "absolutely perfect" fiscal conservative, but in the general sense.

What does that mean? You're either or you aren't. You can't be in between.