3 ms·
1968 is one of a few time periods when people like to say the parties switched (others put it decades earlier). And I understand the ‘65-‘68 theory, probably th
by aksss 6y ago
1968 is one of a few time periods when people like to say the parties switched (others put it decades earlier). And I understand the ‘65-‘68 theory, probably the most compelling of the theories; but I just don’t think it holds much water beyond the hopeful ambition of the time, diluted as it is by the countervailing evidence in the years since.
I don’t think a Democrat of, say, 1871, would find the practical outcomes of the 2021 party’s racial politics all that alien.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> And I understand the ‘65-‘68 theory, probably the most compelling of the theories; but I just don’t think it holds much water beyond the hopeful ambition of the time, The description of a post-1968 political realignment has nothing to do with “hopeful ambition”; that racists were disillusioned by Johnson’s action is well-established fact (as it is they had been by Truman’s 20 years before), that the Republicans exploited this disillusionment, preventing it from resolving as the Dixiecrat split did is well-established fact. That the same institutions (and, until they died) that had supported, or been Democrats, advocating against racial equality, racial integration, or against federal action on those fronts under thr banner of “states rights”, largely switched to the Republican Party if they didn’t recant is also well-established fact. > the countervailing evidence in the years since. What countervailing evidence? The Democratic support by and for overt white supremacist rallies? The crowds backing a Democratic Partt waving confederate battle flags that stormed the Capitol?
- aksss 6y agoI think we've now come full circle to the first comment I made, which had examples to get you started.