----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Double Standards on Regional Bigotry


> --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's race, John.  Richard Nixon saw this and
> > developed a Southern strategy
> > that appealed to the racist voters who, after the
> > passage of Civil Rights,
> > were so mad at the Democrats that they were willing
> > to vote for a
> > Republican, party of Lincoln not withstanding. This
> > really started with
> > Dixiecrats like Thurman becoming Republicans, and
> > was accelerated by Civil
> > Rights.  As Johnson said, he handed the South to the
> > Republicans for 100
> > years with one stroke of his pen.
> >
> > Dan M.
>
> I don't think you're right about this one, Dan.  The
> South (according to the social science on the topic
> I've seen, as well as personal experience) is no more
> (or less) racist than the rest of the country.  It is,
> though, more socially conservative.  In 1964, was it
> about race?  I have no doubt that it was.  In 1994,
> was it about race?  I honestly think that it was not.

Its certainly not as simple as saying that the South is racist and the
North is not.  There is a lot of racism in the North.  But, the Southern
strategy of the Republican party does include ensuring that the racist
Southern vote in the South is squarely in their camp.

There is an obvious potential  problem for the Republicans in that poor
whites would tend to stray from the Republican party to the Democratic
party because the Republican party traditionally favors the acceleration of
the concentration of national income in the top 1%-2% or so (5% is the
smallest slice I can get numbers on, but I think they favor a tighter
concentration than that.)

For example, while I know of racists in Minnesota, I cannot fathom a former
Grand Wizard of the KKK getting the clear majority of white votes in a race
for governor.  I can't fathom it in New York either.

One hypothesis is that the racism in the South has long been a foundation
of the politics there, but the racism in the North is harder to tap.  Its
still there, but not as easy to exploit with a few key words spoken at Bob
Jones University or a visit that reminds people which Jesse one's party
supports.

My understanding is that, after the Democrats got the black vote solidly
lined up after sacrificing their party for civil rights in '64, the
Republicans rightly concluded that getting the racist vote should would
compensate for this, as long as they didn't offend too many whites by how
they did this.

Dan M.





_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to