Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Steven Dutch's avatar

Before the Civil War, we had the Democrats, who reflected rural and agrarian voters, including slave holders, and the Republicans who were anti-slavery but otherwise represented urban and moneyed interests. After the Civil War, we actually had four parties. Southern Democrats (embittered whites), freed blacks who voted Republican, patrician Northern Republicans and northern Democrats who courted immigrants. By the 1884 election, we could see the shape of things to come, when Republicans painted the Democrats as the party of "Rum (lower class vice), Romanism (all those immigrants) and Rebellion" (self explanatory). As long as social policy was purely local, it was perfectly possible to be an economic progressive and a social reactionary (William Jennings Bryan, and perhaps Woodrow Wilson). But with the New Deal, Federal policy increasingly came to affect local policy and the old coalition began to totter. Barry Goldwater's candidacy in 1964 completed the crossover.

So it's true that Democrats supported slavery, but that's as relevant to today as boycotting Ikea because the Vikings raped your great times forty grandmother. The question is, if we tried to restore slavery today, who'd be most likely to support it? Who defends slavery today?

Expand full comment
Alliekitty's avatar

What was that comment in context. Is this really all this idiot could come up with. I hope this idiot is fired by now. Maybe the da will post THIS comment too.

Expand full comment
23 more comments...

No posts