Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, the parties did not "essentially switch roles." That talking point has been debunked so many times I'm not going to do it again.
No, it hasn't. Republicans were always the party of business, of course, so in that sense they did not switch roles, but there's no denying that Republicans were formed as a progressive party to assert federal control and reconstructionist civil rights because businesses saw it in their best interest to establish a strong central government for stability and growth in the 19th century amid an increasingly global economy.
Democrats, in their modern central government / social justice model, didn't begin emerging until after the Civil War and reconstruction era, 1896 at the earliest, and then there was a transition period of often conflicting policy values until FDR showed up in full-on modern Democratic mode.
Modern Republicanism, of the small government / tax cuts variety, lagged in response to the Democratic shift and showed up a few decades later in the 1920s.
The last vestiges of the Dixiecrat as a major political force faded with the 1960s civil rights laws that again asserted a strong central federal control over states, and Lyndon Johnson accurately predicted the laws he signed would lose the conservative South for the Democrats for decades.
Do you really think the Republicans of today would be on the side of a strong central government telling states what to do in a way that harms their economic foundations for the greater good (i.e. eradicating slavery)? Just look at how environmental or gay rights issue have played out for a hint about the role they would have played. The South hasn't changed much in its core philosophy since the Civil War.
No, it hasn't. Republicans were always the party of business, of course, so in that sense they did not switch roles, but there's no denying that Republicans were formed as a progressive party to assert federal control and reconstructionist civil rights because businesses saw it in their best interest to establish a strong central government for stability and growth in the 19th century amid an increasingly global economy.
Democrats, in their modern central government / social justice model, didn't begin emerging until after the Civil War and reconstruction era, 1896 at the earliest, and then there was a transition period of often conflicting policy values until FDR showed up in full-on modern Democratic mode.
Modern Republicanism, of the small government / tax cuts variety, lagged in response to the Democratic shift and showed up a few decades later in the 1920s.
The last vestiges of the Dixiecrat as a major political force faded with the 1960s civil rights laws that again asserted a strong central federal control over states, and Lyndon Johnson accurately predicted the laws he signed would lose the conservative South for the Democrats for decades.
Do you really think the Republicans of today would be on the side of a strong central government telling states what to do in a way that harms their economic foundations for the greater good (i.e. eradicating slavery)? Just look at how environmental or gay rights issue have played out for a hint about the role they would have played. The South hasn't changed much in its core philosophy since the Civil War.
No, it hasn't. Republicans were always the party of business, of course, so in that sense they did not switch roles, but there's no denying that Republicans were formed as a progressive party to assert federal control and reconstructionist civil rights because businesses saw it in their best interest to establish a strong central government for stability and growth in the 19th century amid an increasingly global economy.
Democrats, in their modern central government / social justice model, didn't begin emerging until after the Civil War and reconstruction era, 1896 at the earliest, and then there was a transition period of often conflicting policy values until FDR showed up in full-on modern Democratic mode.
Modern Republicanism, of the small government / tax cuts variety, lagged in response to the Democratic shift and showed up a few decades later in the 1920s.
The last vestiges of the Dixiecrat as a major political force faded with the 1960s civil rights laws that again asserted a strong central federal control over states, and Lyndon Johnson accurately predicted the laws he signed would lose the conservative South for the Democrats for decades.
Do you really think the Republicans of today would be on the side of a strong central government telling states what to do in a way that harms their economic foundations for the greater good (i.e. eradicating slavery)? Just look at how environmental or gay rights issue have played out for a hint about the role they would have played. The South hasn't changed much in its core philosophy since the Civil War.
It's not accurate, it's history changing Progressive propaganda, nothing more.
So you believe today's Conservatives would have elected Lincoln, who espoused a strong central government over limited government and states rights? Sure they would...
Democrats, in their modern central government / social justice model, didn't begin emerging until after the Civil War and reconstruction era, 1896 at the earliest, and then there was a transition period of often conflicting policy values until FDR showed up in full-on modern Democratic mode.
you are correct in some ways...wrong in others
the democratic party has changed... they have gone from moderate to far left fascism
the change started in the late 1880's
FDR was a full blown fascist, pushing the fascist/socialist agenda
This is a stupid premise. If democracy is dead (and I do believe it's seriously threatened), it's because of those in power who spend big bucks to override the votes of the people. New Orleans - amongst others - is a classic example where huge amounts of outside money was poured into local school board elections so further privatization of public schools can happen.
My point with this thread is that in other cities, power truly changed hands at least once, but the Democrats have had a monopoly on New Orleans ever since the Louisiana Purchase. I do admire white Southerners who were once part of a racist Democratic Party but have been voices for tolerance, such as Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Jimmy Carter who now is on his deathbed.
But still, isn't it disturbing that the USA is the only country in the world where two enemy parties traded places?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
