The "Southern Strategy" — is/was it racist?

This topic has 15 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by bnw.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)

Author

Posts
November 18, 2016 at 9:55 am #58813

wv
Participant

Anybody wanna post any articles, thots on the Reps famous “Southern Strategy” ? Was/is it racist? Or just conservative?

============
link:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/24/how-racism-explains-republicans-rise-in-the-south/
…Lee Atwater, an adviser to President Reagan, discussed the Republican Party’s “Southern strategy” in an interview in 1981, explaining that some white voters might subconsciously support conservative policies apparently unrelated to race, if those policies had different consequences for different races.

“You say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff and you get so abstract,” Atwater said. “You talk about cutting taxes and these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.”

More than two decades later, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman criticized that strategy.

“Some Republicans gave up on winning the African American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization,” he said in 2004. “I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong.”

Yet research suggests the racial undertones of policy debates continue to affect some Americans’ political affiliations. A study published in 2013 concluded that white respondents to an online survey were more likely to identify with the tea party if they held anti-black sentiments.
===============

November 18, 2016 at 10:00 am #58815

bnw
Blocked

More BS. Beat that drum though.

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.

November 18, 2016 at 11:21 am #58833

— X —
Participant

wv wrote:

Anybody wanna post any articles, thots on the Reps famous “Southern Strategy” ? Was/is it racist? Or just conservative?

============
link:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/24/how-racism-explains-republicans-rise-in-the-south/
…Lee Atwater, an adviser to President Reagan, discussed the Republican Party’s “Southern strategy” in an interview in 1981, explaining that some white voters might subconsciously support conservative policies apparently unrelated to race, if those policies had different consequences for different races.

“You say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff and you get so abstract,” Atwater said. “You talk about cutting taxes and these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.”

More than two decades later, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman criticized that strategy.

“Some Republicans gave up on winning the African American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization,” he said in 2004. “I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong.”

Yet research suggests the racial undertones of policy debates continue to affect some Americans’ political affiliations. A study published in 2013 concluded that white respondents to an online survey were more likely to identify with the tea party if they held anti-black sentiments.
===============

I have no doubt that there was some separation between black voters and the republican party several decades ago, but what’s perpetuating the racial divide now? Why do blacks feel they’re disenfranchised (if they do think that at all)? What is the left doing to assuage their concerns about race relations? If nothing, then they don’t care either. They’re also using them for political gain.

wv wrote:

Yet research suggests the racial undertones of policy debates continue to affect some Americans’ political affiliations. A study published in 2013 concluded that white respondents to an online survey were more likely to identify with the tea party if they held anti-black sentiments.

That’s lazy. Source? Questions they asked and form?

You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss

November 18, 2016 at 12:43 pm #58842
wv
Participant
— X — wrote:

wv wrote:

Anybody wanna post any articles, thots on the Reps famous “Southern Strategy” ? Was/is it racist? Or just conservative?

============
link:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/24/how-racism-explains-republicans-rise-in-the-south/
…Lee Atwater, an adviser to President Reagan, discussed the Republican Party’s “Southern strategy” in an interview in 1981, explaining that some white voters might subconsciously support conservative policies apparently unrelated to race, if those policies had different consequences for different races.

“You say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff and you get so abstract,” Atwater said. “You talk about cutting taxes and these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.”

More than two decades later, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman criticized that strategy.

“Some Republicans gave up on winning the African American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization,” he said in 2004. “I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong.”

Yet research suggests the racial undertones of policy debates continue to affect some Americans’ political affiliations. A study published in 2013 concluded that white respondents to an online survey were more likely to identify with the tea party if they held anti-black sentiments.
===============

I have no doubt that there was some separation between black voters and the republican party several decades ago, but what’s perpetuating the racial divide now? Why do blacks feel they’re disenfranchised (if they do think that at all)? What is the left doing to assuage their concerns about race relations? If nothing, then they don’t care either. They’re also using them for political gain.

wv wrote:

Yet research suggests the racial undertones of policy debates continue to affect some Americans’ political affiliations. A study published in 2013 concluded that white respondents to an online survey were more likely to identify with the tea party if they held anti-black sentiments.

That’s lazy. Source? Questions they asked and form?

————

All good questions. Now over the next few weeks lets all do a search now and then. See whats out there. I got no time the next few days.

wiki:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
In 2005, Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman formally apologized to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), a national civil rights organization, for exploiting racial polarization to win elections and ignoring the black vote.[13][14]

w
v
- This reply was modified 8 years ago by wv.
November 18, 2016 at 12:54 pm #58846

— X —
Participant

wv wrote:

All good questions. Now over the next few weeks lets all do a search now and then. See whats out there. I got no time the next few days.

K.

You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss

November 18, 2016 at 1:06 pm #58852

wv
Participant

btw, i do ‘get’ the fact that the ‘racism’ issue really sets you and bnw off. You guys react strongly and swiftly to that issue/belief.

I hope you do understand no-one is calling you guys racists. Some of us do indeed believe that part of the Republican strategy is to pull in the ‘racist bloc’ of white folks in the south. I think its been a ‘strategy’ for a long time. Doesn’t even mean Nixon/Bush/Reagan were ‘racists’ — just means they wanted that voting-bloc so they exploited the issue.

I could be wrong of course. I haven’t studied on it much. I might change my mind after further review, who knows.

w
v

November 18, 2016 at 1:12 pm #58855

bnw
Blocked

wv wrote:

I hope you do understand no-one is calling you guys racists. Some of us do indeed believe that part of the Republican strategy is to pull in the ‘racist bloc’ of white folks in the south. I think its been a ‘strategy’ for a long time.

So you mean AFTER it was an undeniable democrat strategy?

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.

November 18, 2016 at 1:16 pm #58858

— X —
Participant

wv wrote:

btw, i do ‘get’ the fact that the ‘racism’ issue really sets you and bnw off. You guys react strongly and swiftly to that issue/belief.

I hope you do understand no-one is calling you guys racists. Some of us do indeed believe that part of the Republican strategy is to pull in the ‘racist bloc’ of white folks in the south. I think its been a ‘strategy’ for a long time. Doesn’t even mean Nixon/Bush/Reagan were ‘racists’ — just means they wanted that voting-bloc so they exploited the issue.

I could be wrong of course. I haven’t studied on it much. I might change my mind after further review, who knows.

w
v

I know *you guys* aren’t calling me a racist. That just happens to be the prevailing line of thought by the vocal majority of the left when it comes to describing Trump supporters. If we support Trump or Bannon or don’t actively speak out against political incorrectness, then it means we’re endorsers of racism or white supremacy, or whatever. Which, subsequently, and by default, means we’re also racists.

I understand the topic at hand, and I don’t entirely disagree with it. What I do have an issue with is the idea that Republicans are actively ‘pulling in racists’ with their policies or words. They’re not responsible for how racists interpret policy or political statements anymore than the left is responsible for the positions of Farrakhan or Sharpton or Jackson and all of their followers. Fucked up people are gonna be fucked up people.

But yeah, I’ll delve into it deeper with you. Who knows what we’ll find.

You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss

November 18, 2016 at 1:25 pm #58863

wv
Participant

— X — wrote:

wv wrote:

btw, i do ‘get’ the fact that the ‘racism’ issue really sets you and bnw off. You guys react strongly and swiftly to that issue/belief.

I hope you do understand no-one is calling you guys racists. Some of us do indeed believe that part of the Republican strategy is to pull in the ‘racist bloc’ of white folks in the south. I think its been a ‘strategy’ for a long time. Doesn’t even mean Nixon/Bush/Reagan were ‘racists’ — just means they wanted that voting-bloc so they exploited the issue.

I could be wrong of course. I haven’t studied on it much. I might change my mind after further review, who knows.

w
v

I know *you guys* aren’t calling me a racist. That just happens to be the prevailing line of thought by the vocal majority of the left when it comes to describing Trump supporters. If we support Trump or Bannon or don’t actively speak out against political incorrectness, then it means we’re endorsers of racism or white supremacy, or whatever. Which, subsequently, and by default, means we’re also racists.

I understand the topic at hand, and I don’t entirely disagree with it. What I do have an issue with is the idea that Republicans are actively ‘pulling in racists’ with their policies or words. They’re not responsible for how racists interpret policy or political statements anymore than the left is responsible for the positions of Farrakhan or Sharpton or Jackson and all of their followers. Fucked up people are gonna be fucked up people.

But yeah, I’ll delve into it deeper with you. Who knows what we’ll find.

—————

Fwiw, I really like Sharpton’s policies. I looked at a list of his policy statements once and I couldnt find any that i disagreed with. I know he can be a self-serving pompous ass, but his policies are in line with mine. He’s a ‘leftist’ as the term is used on ‘this’ board.

Fair-a-con is another story. Though there’s plenty of things I’d agree with him about.

w
v

November 18, 2016 at 4:22 pm #58904

zn
Moderator

wv wrote:

btw, i do ‘get’ the fact that the ‘racism’ issue really sets you and bnw off. You guys react strongly and swiftly to that issue/belief.

I hope you do understand no-one is calling you guys racists. Some of us do indeed believe that part of the Republican strategy is to pull in the ‘racist bloc’ of white folks in the south. I think its been a ‘strategy’ for a long time. Doesn’t even mean Nixon/Bush/Reagan were ‘racists’ — just means they wanted that voting-bloc so they exploited the issue.

I could be wrong of course. I haven’t studied on it much. I might change my mind after further review, who knows.

w
v

There are profound and deep and wide issues of race in the USA. There’s no getting around that. And it drives a lot of politics.

And it’s such a messed up issue because the conversations are always skewed. So for example, the general way the word “racist” is used, it means an open, militant bigot with clearly stated and repugnant views based on straightforward stereotypes and generalizations. Which is a generally rejected, morally abhorrent thing. If I put a type like this in a movie, they are meant to be reviled.

Problem with that is, it disguises the real problem.

Two things happen. We can look at that “type” and say, clearly I am not that.

AND when the term “racism” comes up, people can then get defensive and say “you’re calling me THAT.”

But…the racial issues in the USA persist, they are clearly part of the society, BUT most of it comes from just denying the racial issues are real and matter. Which is probably the biggest problem in the current impasse.

Of course there’s the “well there’s no problem” problem, and then there’s the AGGRESSIVE “anyone who says there is a problem is promoting victimhood” version. The latter being it’s own kind of problem.

Another problem of course is that the actual real open KKK, David Duke style openly bigoted racism still exists.

For example most people could not name the key platform points behind blacklivesmatter. If you actually look at them, they make unbelievable sense. In fact anyone from a right libertarian to an actual leftist ought to agree with every single principle (I of course do mean not what mainstreamers call the left, which isn’t, but the left).

November 18, 2016 at 4:36 pm #58907

wv
Participant

zn wrote:

wv wrote:

btw, i do ‘get’ the fact that the ‘racism’ issue really sets you and bnw off. You guys react strongly and swiftly to that issue/belief.

I hope you do understand no-one is calling you guys racists. Some of us do indeed believe that part of the Republican strategy is to pull in the ‘racist bloc’ of white folks in the south. I think its been a ‘strategy’ for a long time. Doesn’t even mean Nixon/Bush/Reagan were ‘racists’ — just means they wanted that voting-bloc so they exploited the issue.

I could be wrong of course. I haven’t studied on it much. I might change my mind after further review, who knows.

w
v

There are profound and deep and wide issues of race in the USA. There’s no getting around that. And it drives a lot of politics.

And it’s such a messed up issue because the conversations are always skewed. So for example, the general way the word “racist” is used, it means an open, militant bigot with clearly stated and repugnant views based on straightforward stereotypes and generalizations. Which is a generally rejected, morally abhorrent thing. If I put a type like this in a movie, they are meant to be reviled.

Problem with that is, it disguises the real problem.

Two things happen. We can look at that “type” and say, clearly I am not that.

AND when the term “racism” comes up, people can then get defensive and say “you’re calling me THAT.”

But…the racial issues in the USA persist, they are clearly part of the society, BUT most of it comes from just denying the racial issues are real and matter. Which is probably the biggest problem in the current impasse.

Of course there’s the “well there’s no problem” problem, and then there’s the AGGRESSIVE “anyone who says there is a problem is promoting victimhood” version. The latter being it’s own kind of problem.

Another problem of course is that the actual real open KKK, David Duke style openly bigoted racism still exists.

For example most people could not name the key platform points behind blacklivesmatter. If you actually look at them, they make unbelievable sense. In fact anyone from a right libertarian to an actual leftist ought to agree with every single principle (I of course do mean not what mainstreamers call the left, which isn’t, but the left).

———
As you know, i agree with all that.

Its hard to converse about race. And politics. And religion. And play-calling.

w
v

November 18, 2016 at 4:42 pm #58910

zn
Moderator

wv wrote:

As you know, i agree with all that.

Its hard to converse about race. And politics. And religion. And play-calling.

w
v

That’s exactly the kind of nonsense I would expect from a dedicated Schottenheimerite.

Why don’t you just move to North Korea if you hate playcalling so much.

November 18, 2016 at 5:01 pm #58912

— X —
Participant

wv wrote:

For example most people could not name the key platform points behind blacklivesmatter. If you actually look at them, they make unbelievable sense. In fact anyone from a right libertarian to an actual leftist ought to agree with every single principle (I of course do mean not what mainstreamers call the left, which isn’t, but the left).

Well, I bothered to read their guiding principles. And the breakdowns.

Black Lives Matter is an ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise. It is an affirmation of Black folks’ contributions to this society, our humanity, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression.

Targeted systematically, intentionally, with the end game being deadly oppression.
I’m not 100% on board with that.

We are committed to building a Black women affirming space free from sexism, misogyny, and male‐centeredness.

Who’s “we”? And why is that very, very, very far from being a reality?

You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss

November 18, 2016 at 5:39 pm #58917

bnw
Blocked

Because Hip Hop and Gangsta Rap are misogynist.

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.

November 18, 2016 at 6:15 pm #58926

— X —
Participant

bnw wrote:

Because Hip Hop and Gangsta Rap are misogynist.

Yep. But it’s far more violent than misogyny. Also, although black women only make up 8% of the population, 22% of homicides that result from domestic violence happen to black women and 29% of all victimized women, making it one of the leading causes of death for Black women ages 15 to 35. That’s why I wanna know who “we” is.

You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss

November 18, 2016 at 8:53 pm #58940

bnw
Blocked

— X — wrote:

bnw wrote:

Because Hip Hop and Gangsta Rap are misogynist.

Yep. But it’s far more violent than misogyny. Also, although black women only make up 8% of the population, 22% of homicides that result from domestic violence happen to black women and 29% of all victimized women, making it one of the leading causes of death for Black women ages 15 to 35. That’s why I wanna know who “we” is.

Perhaps the whites that were ordered to the rear of the BLM protest march?

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.
Author

Posts