Did the Democrats stand for slavery in the past

[IronLionZion]

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?

[w13rd0]

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.

[rogerashton]

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 --

[deminflorida]

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 Carolina—other 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.

[worldgonekrazy]

4. Yeah

It is an undisputed fact.

But times change and people realize they were wrong.

[Rex]

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.

[Alex146]

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.

[lovedems]

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.

[elperromagico]

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

[Yupster]

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.

[MacCovern]

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!

[beanball]

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.

[arewethereyet]

12. of course

the only constant is change

don't make too much of this sort of thing

[IronLionZion]

14. yes times do change

oh well the next change will have to be a regime change here in the US

[coda]

13. LOL. Nice tagline.

No doubt, I know a much broader range of Democrats and Republicans than you. :-)