Tea Party Politics and the Dixiecrats of 1948

by: Dr. Wilmer J. Leon III, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

Tea Party Politics and the Dixiecrats of 1948
In 1948, after breaking off from the Democratic Party in protest of civil rights planks in the party platform, the Dixiecrats nominated Strom Thurmond (pictured) as their presidential candidate. (Photo: US Senate)

It has been said and rightly so, history has a way of repeating itself. The British philosopher Edmund Burk said, "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it."

This Tuesday, November 2, as Americans go to the polls they face a real challenge. Making an intelligent informed decision amid all of this partisan, ideological, rhetoric is a daunting task. Many attribute this dissension and rancor to the election of President Obama, the rise of the Tea Party and the refusal of most Republicans to work with the president on any level that would result in positive policy output for the country. It's much, much deeper than that.

When you take a step back and look at our political landscape from a broader historical perspective, what you see is that our current dysfunctional situation is not a recent development, but the culmination of a conservative backlash that can be traced back to 1948 and the rise of the States' Rights Democratic Party, which quickly became known as the Dixiecrats.

The Dixiecrat Party was formed after 35 Democratic delegates from Mississippi and Alabama walked out of the 1948 Democratic National Convention. These delegates were protesting the adoption of Sen. Hubert Humphrey's (D-Minnesota) proposal of civil rights planks calling for racial integration and the reversal of Jim Crow laws in the party platform.

They met in Birmingham, Alabama, and nominated Gov. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina for president. They opposed abolition of the poll tax, while endorsing segregation and the "racial integrity" of each race. Their campaign slogan was "Segregation Forever!" and their platform also included the call for "states' rights." Like the modern day Tea Party, the Dixiecrats called for freedom from governmental interference in an individual's or organization's prerogative to do business with whomever they wanted. Thurmond received more than one million votes in the 1948 election, won four states and 39 electoral votes.

The Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights report "Tea Party Nationalism: A Critical Examination of the Tea Party Movement and the Size, Scope and Function of Its National Factions" says from the outset, "... the majority of Movement supporters are people of good will." But integrated into their calls for a reduction of the budget deficit and smaller government are concerns about race, sexual orientation, national identity, national birth rights and who qualifies to be an American. As the Tea Party Movement has taken shape amid this fiscal rhetoric; racist, white nationalist, anti-immigrant, homophobic and anti-Semitic elements have found their way into the "Movement."

Tea Party's keynote Sarah Palin calls for "states rights" and says, "it's pretty simple. It's a smaller, smarter government, not growing government to control more of our lives and our businesses and make decisions for us." This sounds a lot like a page taken right from the Dixiecrat playbook.

The Tea Party, like the Dixiecrats, is not for as much as it is against. In his book White Nationalism Black Interest, the late Dr. Ronald Walters described the politics of resentment. A resentment of African-American demands for social justice and the federal government's sanctioning the institutionalization of these rights resulting in a large number of whites becoming cynical about government and alienated from it. They are resentful of this "big government" exercising too much control over their lives. This resentment also applies to the anti-immigration and anti-gay and lesbian rights rhetoric of the Tea Party.

Independent journalism is important. Click here to get Truthout stories sent to your email.

Some wonder whether the Tea Party will have any impact on third party politics going forward? Not really. Palin has stated, "... because the Tea Party movement is not a party and we have a two-party system, they're (Independents) going to have to pick a party and run one or the other: 'R' or 'D'."

The Dixiecrats only lasted about four years. By 1952, most of them returned to the Democratic Party and formed a very strong Southern bloc. They remained in the Democratic Party until Republican conservative Barry Goldwater liberated them in 1964 by articulating some of the Dixiecrat ideologies in his politics.

Based on Walter's politics of resentment, there have been other groups and movements based primarily in ultraconservative politics and aligned with reactionary politicians. For example, Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and the Silent Majority, the "forgotten middle-class" of the 1970's, the Moral Majority, the Christian Coalition and from there the latest manifestation is the Tea Party Movement.

This Tuesday, November 2, as Americans go to the polls they face a real challenge. History does have a way of repeating itself and unfortunately, too many people don't know their history.

Creative Commons License
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.





     

»



Dr. Wilmer Leon is the producer/host of the nationally broadcast call-in talk radio program "On With Leon" and a Teaching Associate in the Department of Political Science at Howard University in Washington, DC. Go to www.wilmerleon.com or email wjl3us@yahoo.com.


Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



Dr. Leon does readers a

Dr. Leon does readers a "solid" referencing the Tea Party's historical Dixiecrat lineage. What is needed is a dissection of the financing of the politics of resentment. A similar historical perspective - similar to Wm. Manchester's "The Arms of Krupp" about how the arms merchants and industrialists funded The third reich's politics of rage....



Missing from this article is

Missing from this article is the current climate of fear... What the Tea Party has that goes beyond anything the Dixiecrats could have hoped for is states like New Jersey and Vermont where Republican ire manifested itself strongly.. Look at the gubernatorial seats that were picked up. If you look at the "Governor" map you see a sea of red...

We all must remember that thanks to "Citizens united" and a cabal of the "Ultra" rich..This new wave of conservatism has all the allure of new furniture and a swiffer mop put together...
Dixiecrats had to contend with an educated public, the Tea Party doesn't, Dixiecrats were in the middle of a time when economic expansion wasn't hindered as they say these days by "Over Regulation" ..Sure the Dixiecrats rebelled against the "Socialist" tide but John Q public was busy buying a Buick and a Track house with his new found wealth... today? Not so much.

The hate runs deep, the fear runs deeper...
Maybe progressives should be considering 2nd amendment remedies ?



One reason the Democrats are

One reason the Democrats are losing power is they persist in accusing those who disagree with them of racism. This shows Democrats have a listening problem.

What is new is that now people are not cowed into silence by these spurious charges of racism. Independents see through it.



Yeah it's not corporate

Yeah it's not corporate money, it's not outsourcing jobs, it's not people wanting to have a better quality of life...

It's "We don't have to be afraid of being called a racist anymore" One Reason Democrats aren't doing better is because Democrats are afraid to call the Tea Baggers the racist scum they are.....



Thanks, Dr. Leon. Yes, to

Thanks, Dr. Leon. Yes, to Anon. J. There will always be a "movement" concocted by oligarchs to capture the imagination of poorly educated, regular people using fear as a lever. In this go-around, it's Dick Armey for the TEA Party. This happens simply because rubes are low hanging fruit ripe for picking, and America is full of them. Or more accurately, they have disproportionate power in our "representative democracy". Just look at the kooks who won primaries: Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell, Joe Buck, etc. We don't get the gov't. we deserve as much as we get the gov't. the rich convince the average voter is the best one to battle the scary monsters, whomever they may be. This election has proven again that fear, not facts, is decisive (and divisive).



Ok, I have a few issues with

Ok, I have a few issues with this article.

1. While Dr. Leon makes a good point making the connection between 1948 Dixiecrats and the current Tea Party, it seems a bit simplistic. Clearly the States Rights Democratic Party was a direct ancestor of the Tea Party, it was by no means the sole precursor of it, even in that era.

2. The roots of the Tea Party, even going only along the Dixiecrat side of its family tree, go much further back than 1948. The resurgence of the Klan in the 1920's springs to mind as well as the Red Shirt Movement in the Reconstruction South, not to mention the original "Invisible Empire".

3. A very interesting twist to the more modern Tea Party is how, for lack of a better term, rural culture throughout the country has been thoroughly "Southernized" and "Fundamentalized" over the last half century.

Consider this:

According to Pew Research, over 75% of Tea Party members have 3 things in common.

-white
-rural
-over 50

By only emphasizing the Dixiecrat connection, one runs the risk of writing off the Tea Partiers simply as a bunch of Old Jim Crow racists. Doing so underestimates the movement and does not completely explain the appeal of the movement beyond the Old South. We have not heard the last of the Tea Party and without really looking deeply at their ideological foundations, we run the risk of losing even more to them in and outside of future elections.



That's right, 15:43, "We

That's right, 15:43, "We don't have to be afraid of being called a racist anymore". Liberals have misused the term so consistently and so often that it has become meaningless. The good news: People who disagree with liberals are more willing to speak out. We don't need liberals' condescending analysis to tell us who is racist--and who isn't.



Amazing New Powerful Article Spinner, WOW!

Thanks, I like your post!

http://article-spinner.info/



Check This Out

Hab ihn gelesen und finde Ihn sehr hilfreich Danke nochmal :-)

http://www.ipcounter.net/



get paid to post

One of the Amazing paid to post, honest paying everytime!

http://earnchat.com/