- ‹ previous
- 97 of 2794
- next ›
Gone With the Wind
After the election last November I noted that "for the first time since Reconstruction, the South will be almost completely shut out of national power....This is the first time this will be true in well over a century."
Over at the Economist, an exile from Dixie puts a little more meat on those bones. During the 90s and early oughts, he notes, Washington was 
almost completely controlled by Southerners: Clinton, Gore, Gingrich, Armey, Lott, Bush, Frist, and DeLay. "It was southerners in every position of power for an unusually long time."
In 2006, things started to go wrong. Nancy Pelosi (California) and Harry Reid (Nevada) took over the top jobs in Congress. Then Barack Obama (Illinois) was elected president, and declined to balance his ticket regionally by picking a southerner.
But the Republican leadership shifted too. The party ran two non-southerners for president and vice-president in John McCain and Sarah Palin. The RNC is now run by a black Marylander, Michael Steele. The House minority leader, John Boehner, hails from Ohio. The whip's job has gone to Eric Cantor who, though Virginian, is an atypical southern Republican in being Jewish. Only Mitch McConnell (Kentucky), the Senate majority leader, is the stereotypical white Protestant southerner. His whip and assistant, John Kyl, comes from Arizona.
"I want my country back," has become a conservative-populist rallying cry. They have not truly lost their country, but have seen a wild swing of power north and towards the coasts. It won't last, either. But it's a painful reality right now for a region that once revelled in separatism, then dominated the country as a whole for an oddly long stretch.
Despite the oceans of ink spent analyzing the electoral shift in 2006 and 2008, I continue to think this transformation has been underappreciated. The Old South has punched above its weight in American politics ever since 1787, and during the few times their influence has temporarily waned (Reconstruction, the 60s) it drove them crazy with fear and persecution mongering. So it's not really surprising that it's happening again.
It's hard to say what's next. Republicans are the party of the South these days, and sure, the GOP will regain power eventually. But will they be able to do it if they remain a party dominated by the culture of Dixie? Demographics suggest pretty strongly that they can't, which means that eventually the South will have to come to grips with the fact that they no longer hold the whip hand in American politics and probably never will again. This means acknowledging that they're just another region, one with influence that waxes and wanes but basically corresponds to their population. I wonder how long it will take for them to do that?
I wonder how long it will take for them to do that?
I'm kinda hoping for a couple of decades.
Low Dixie Turnout = Palin-style Pick-ups
The Dems grabbed some improbable seats down there with unprecedented presidential election year turnout in 2008. But off-year elections are different.
2010 voter registration, early voting, absentee voting, and election day GOTV are needed, in Richard Nixon's 1972 rallying cry, "Now More Than Ever." Democrats should probably spend less time on TV (or running their mouths on Internet comments areas, for that matter) and more time in the streets. Starting this Saturday.
Virginia eligible voters' preferences, for example, probably havn't changed much, if at all, since 2008. But Virginia voter participation sure as hell has.
An aroused Palin base combined with low off-year turnout is something for dems to worry about, nowhere more so than in the former confederacy.
Um, California (Pelosi) is
Um, California (Pelosi) is about as "south" as a state can get and still be a part of the United States. Same for Nevada and Arizona (Reid and McCain/Kyl). Illinois (Obama) is at right about the median. So, of the named politicians, well over half are from the south. As noted, McConnell is from Virginia and that's part of the south too, despite the article's attempts to handwave it away by invoking anti-semitism.
What was the point again? California, Florida and Texas are all southern states and alone have 116 electoral votes (representing 42% of the total needed to become President) and will probably have more after the census. A candidate who sweeps the south is essentially guaranteed victory. The south is and remains a dominant political force.
Darryl: "California (Pelosi)
Darryl: "California (Pelosi) is about as "south" as a state can get and still be a part of the United States."
Hawaii is about 700 miles south of California.
Really Darryl? Really? This
Really Darryl? Really?
This is an argument you want to make in a public forum? An argument you feel adds to the debate and makes you look good?
OKayyyyyy....
facepalm.jpg
facepalm.jpg
Delaware was a slave state
And mostly south of the Mason-Dixon line too. But that said someone needs to remind Darryl that "The South" in the US means the cultural south, not the geographic south.
Category error
(1) That the South held power for so long is a mathematical implication of the old deadlock between the urban Northeast and West coast versus the suburban and rural Midwest and West (Chicago excepted). The South broke the tie, and thus (like Lieberman) had disproportionately large power.
(2) "The South" is just a placeholder for white Christianist supremacy, where everyone who is not in that club knows their place. This is the preference of many people in many places, and it is a strong factor in any political contest with a national dimension (which given the importance of money, is an increasing number of them).
(3) Ultimately, "the South" per (2) is a declining and reactionary element. They will continue to play a role, and their decline (which they sense better than most) will drive them to greater heights of fervor, but their day is done. In less than a generation, they will be the US equivalent of the Le Pen voters in France, or the CSU in Germany: angry revanchists with appropriate representation, but never again in a position of national leadership. (And thank their God for that!)
Urban humanity does not coalesce very well
This tendency is not unique. At it's core is urbanization. An overwhelming proportion of the population of most Western countries is now urban, secular, better educated in comparison to past standards, heterogeneous, and most importantly, detached from primal patterns of social control based on kinship and community. In The City, nobody knows nor cares what you think or do in the privacy of your dwelling. The corollary is that nobody in their dwellings knows nor cares what aged former community leaders and dispensers of favours might think or do about you unless resort is made to blatant bribery.
The worship of primitive beliefs and archaic practices is now found in the depopulating rural margins in many countries. If taken to it's ultimate conclusion, with 10,000 acre farms and 1 million chicken factories, rural areas will in the fullness of time be virtually without people and thus influence. The semi-literate agrarian peasantry and it's service providers in small towns will vanish from the political landscape as surely as did the horse harness makers of previous eras. And their anachronistic values will die with them. And none too soon. Bon Voyage Hayseed Nation.
How does the electoral college factor into this?
Tripp
the decline of the South
Interesting points, and I think quite accurate. I have been thinking about who will eventually emerge as the presidential candidate for 2012 and I suspect it isn't any of the usual suspects. I also suspect that the person will be a quintessential representative of the South. It will be a white male, of course, someone untainted by any major scandal and who will not be readily labeled as a loony wingnut (sorry, Steve King). I am inclined to predict it will be someone like Jim DeMint, if not him, who will emerge. It will not be Sarah Palin, but it will be someone Sarah is willing to support. Just a prediction.
Speaking for "them"
One wonders if we are allowed to be part of the same country as our betters on the left coast.
I'm convinced that the
I'm convinced that the Republican debacle in NY-23 demonstrates the ultimate limits of an excessively Southernized Republican party. The phony, calculated crap that plays so well in Alabama just doesn't cut it among wary and skeptical Northerners.
They won't go quietly
I agree with the above commenters that the South's day is pretty much done, but I think they may not go quietly. This is a region that launched an armed rebellion once, and while I don't expect full-fledged secession, I wouldn't be surprised if the protests eventually turn violent.
For now the Xtianist extremists are sure that 2010 will be another 1994, and that they'll shortly be back in the catbird's seat. Once it dawns on them that this isn't going to happen, things could get ugly.
A long time
How long before they get over it? Well, you can still buy Confederate flags, so I'd say at least 150 years.
However, I don't think the Southern power bloc was ever based on ideology. I think it was based on seniority. The South keeps electing the same people over and over, and eventually those people get hold of the reins.
You see the same thing in state legislatures. The rural areas hold the legislative power because they keep getting re-elected. Urban legislators get challenged more frequently, or as they grow more successful, they move to a bigger stage. The rural legislators end up controlling the key positions. The result: overspending on highways and underspending on mass transit.
Also complicating things at the federal level: for much of the 20th Century, the South has been part of the majority coalition. From Roosevelt to the early 80s, they were Democrats and held seniority positions with the majority party. In the 80s, they switched to the Republicans as that party ascended and again held positions of authority.
With the retirement of the old Dems-turned Republicans, the current Southern Republicans don't have the seniority yet. But when the Republicans come back to power, the South will rise again.
Check the presidential elections. The South
was never more than nominally Democratic. While the dominant party pretended to be Democrats, the actual politics in regards to the Presidential elections reveal that the reactionary element was always in power. From Thurmond to Wallace, the South actually voted for a succession of reactionary white supremacist candidates until Reagan took power in 1980. Control of the Senate and Congress was often in Southern "Democratic" hands, but the actual leaders were more often reactionaries like Russell or Talmadge of Georgia, Thurmond of South Carolina, ad naseum, than actual party members like LBJ because the South elected these nut cases over and over and over until seniority devolved into their hands. Southern politics, where the name of the game is getting rich through any means possible ala Nathan Deal, Sonny Purdue, Phil Gingrey, (just to name my local hacks), sees no problem in any sort of corruption with the exception of sexual shortcomings. Talmadge's pockets full of oil company millions, Purdue's sweetheart real estate deals and tax breaks, Deal's lining his pockets with campaign contributions from companies he gets earmarks for, that's all allowable under the "Jesus loves the rich" theology of the Southern Baptists.
From the later Roosevelt terms until Shrub, the Democratic Party has never been in actual control of the country. Now they are. Making them do something with the newfound power is the problem.
What will likely happen is
What will likely happen is that southern states themselves will become less "Southern" over time, thus hollowing out the potential for the kind of regional cohesion that made national politicians track south even if they were from Connecticut, as George H.W. Bush was.
Florida, North Carolina, Virginia and Texas are the vanguard. It's not that they will be like California or Massachusetts, but more like Ohio, that is, more representative of the nation as a whole, and it will not be a reliable strategy to pretend otherwise.
With respect to the Virginia governor's race, the irony is that it was the Republican McDonnell who actually go this fact, doing his utmost to persuade Northern Virginia of his roots in NoVa and his moderation as a politician. Even if it was all a big lie, as many of us believe, it was a lie that was required in a state where an increasing number of voters weren't born in the state, or even if they were, don't give a hoot about the confederacy or southern traditions, like my children.
Deeds, on the other hand, was all about Old Virginia -- about rural Southern roots and distrust of government programs. That's why new Virginia Democrats stayed home.
So even in defeat of the Democrat, the reality of the demise of Southern culture as a political force is manifest.
To further elaborate:
To further elaborate: George Allen's loss in 2006 to Jim Webb demonstrates my point rather wonderfully. Jim Webb is native Virginia (at least, his family goes way back in the southwestern part of the state) while George Allen was born and raised in Califorina and speaks fluent French (French mother). While Jim Webb overtly tried to unite both sides of the state, George Allen has spent his whole life acting like a hayseed in order to rise politically. Allen learned in the hardest way possible the new limits of acting like a hayseed and trumpeting his affinity for the "real" Virigina as a successful political device.
It's hard to convey if you don't live here, but the person he insulted ("Macaca or whatever your name is") is the epitome of everything we love here in NoVa: a young idealistic public university student who went through the flagship regional public math and science high school and whose dad immigrated from India and started a successful business -- not just a good kid, but one who reflects the things that NoVa does well, and maybe better than almost any other place in the country. The kind of kid I'd be really happy to see my daughter associate with.
That slip up narrowed Allen's scope of appeal, you might say and drove a wedge between Old Virginia and the "rest of us" that statewide politicians in Viriginia now have to overcome. This is the future for more and more of the South and it is going to end up moderating if not eliminating appeals to racial resentment and the infusion of religion in public life.
And not a moment too soon.
Kentucky Not the South
The basic rule of thumb on South and non-South is what side the state was on during the Civil War. By that standard, McConnell's Kentucky is not part of the South. Kentucky stayed neutral for a while, while both sides courted it. Eventually, after it felt that the Confederates were violating that neutrality, it came down for the Union.
There were similar divded sentiments in Maryland and Missouri, and Virginia actually broke in two, with the formation of West Virginia. But none of these (West Virginia, not Virginia) are properly considered part of the South.
Who cares? Does the average
Who cares? Does the average person in the south care whether they're in the driving seat? If they do maybe it's time to rethink they're politics.
All this chattering is amongst the political nerds.
Vivien is hot though.
McCain is a bit of a
McCain is a bit of a southerner. His family roots are in Mississippi,
he was moved around a lot while growing up but spent more
time in Virginia than anyplace else, and Arizona is in the southwest.
One wonders if we are
One wonders if we are allowed to be part of the same country as our betters on the left coast.
As one who grew up in California and has lived in the South for many, many years now, I can tell you the above comment is the type I've heard often. For some reason there is real resentment in Southerners for California. On the Left Coast, they don't even mention Southerners. They just don't care.
California never did a damn thing to them, either. And they don't like "Yankees". And they certainly don't like blacks. And Mexicans . . . OK, they don't much like anybody.
The South
You just need to travel, as we do, in the US and understand that Florida is not southern except in the Panhandle which is like AL. Florida is made up of people from all states in the US. Virginia is really not southern except for where it is located. I feel like AL, MS, LA, OK and TX are all alike and not to my liking. The education in most of these states is very poor but they do have the Christians and they are that way only while in church.
Been there, seen it!
The Florida Panhandle
A few years ago my husband and I were visiting my family in Pensacola, his first trip to the Florida Panhandle. We dropped in to take a look at a nearby house for sale. He was amazed at how much house you can get for the money and eagerly suggested that we consider the Panhandle as a retirement spot. Later that day we made a grocery run to Walmart. After looking around at our fellow shoppers, he commented "This place is just Alabama with palm trees, isn't it?" Yup.
South will rise, but differently
The GOP traditionalists, who think the South will be their salvation, are gravely mistaken. Even there, the demographic and cultural shifts currently occurring will make the South much less hospitable to the firebrand conservatism of today's GOP.
California "Southern"?
Actually, yes and no. California is the most populous state, and though the heavily populated Los Angeles County and San Francisco Bay are largely liberal and left and maintain majorities in the state legislatures, the mountain north and east, the southeastern deserts, and much of the farming behemoth that is the Central Valley are sometimes quite fiercely to the right; in these areas strident displays of theocracy and racism, all the way up to the point of Confederate fascism, are easy to spot along the major freeways.
Actually, ironically enough, I was invited by some neighbors to come to an ACORN conference in Sacramento once, and while on the freeway saw a group of pickup trucks flying Stars'n'Bars, evidently heading for their own equal and opposite event.
"You just need to travel, as
"You just need to travel, as we do, in the US and understand that Florida is not southern except in the Panhandle which is like AL."
I live in Florida. There's a lot more deep south here than just the Panhandle. Jacksonville, Daytona Beach, Tallahassee and every rural county is southern demographically and deep red politically. The I-4 corridor (Orlando and Tampa/St. Pete) is midwestern and swing state, while south Florida is a blue area with a large Cuban population that votes Republican. It's a weird place.
Southwest is not the South
The comment was made that John McCain is from Arizona, which is in the southwest. The southwest is not "the South" by any stretch of the imagination. The southwest is, if anything, part of "the West," which is finally gaining some traction after a hundred and fifty years. Not saying I support or oppose any of these people in particular, but... Reid, West; Pelosi, West; McCain, West; Palin, West; Obama, West (Hawaii is in the West!); Baucus, West; Napolitano, Salazar, Sebelius, and scores of other key players... all from west of the Mississippi. And its about time, too! It's time the South realizes... and lots of the East and Midwest as well... that it isn't just about "the Coasts." There's a whole segment of the country that pundits and pontificators don't often notice, but we're here, and it's time for the New West to rise!
An alternative view
It is always interesting to come to boards like Mother Jones and see ripe hypocrisy in action. Whilst you guys pontificate about how racist the south is and how knuckle-dragging "Christianist" "fascists" are constantly foaming about the mouth, you fail to see the hateful, anti-religious bigotry coming from your corner.
You see, oh Mother Jones types, not everyone in the south is a Christian, white, a fascist, or racist. I'm actually an immigrant from India who has lived in Texas all of his life, and experienced NO racism towards me whatsoever from rural white folk. Nope, not one incidence of beatings, cross-burnings or whatever, and I was the only Indian-American in my high school. I was treated like everyone else, culturally and socially.
No, it was only when I moved north to college and came across fellow Indian-Americans (another story for another time) who were more "light-skinned" than I. In fact, the ONLY time I have called the N-word is by a fellow Indian-American!! Now ain't that special?!!
With regards to the south and political power and representation, it is of course too soon to tell. Obama is not the messiah, and he now owns this putrid economy, as well as the foreign policy problems.
The Republicans will likely lose in 2012, and then and only then will we really see any internal Republican soul-searching. The party then can go two ways....modernize or go further into the wilderness.
For the Republican party to win from here on out, several things MUST happen:
1). Give up the social conservatism with regards to gay rights. Accept a "marital union".
2). Accept that 1st term abortion is here to stay, but never stop fighting to limit abortion around the edges (late-term abortions, partial birth, parental notification).
3). Do not give an inch on economic conservatism. The dude in Greenwich, CO or Westchester county, NY is never voting for you now, but if you follow #1 and #2, underneath it all, he is attractable for votes in an economic conservatism model.
4). Do not give an inch on strong national defense or border security. These issues are winners for Republicans, no matter what the lamestream liberal media say.
5). The next Republican Presidential and Vice-Presidential nominees better be highly educated, well-spoken, given to a flair on the stage a la Reagan, have no family issues like Palin, and be able to articulate a conservative vision of America.
Obviously, the Republicans have no candidate like that. But, after another humiliating defeat that I predict in 2012, they will have no choice but to follow the above.
So thus, you Mother Jones types, there you have it. Too bad I just knocked all your preconceived notions of what modern conservatives are out the door, but, hey someone had to do it. I just figured it would be me.
say whaaa?
Would a cross-burning intimidate a Hindu or Muslim Indian-American? I don't get it.
points 1-5
All your advise is sound, but puts you completely at odds with today's GOP.
**They don't want you.**
Gone with the wind, into the wilderness, unless...
As someone who support President Obama, I still have to say that what you've described is, in the broadest terms, probably the way back for the GOP out of the self-imposed Southern wilderness.
There needs to be a serious, adult opposition party to whomever is in power. I recognize that power unchecked is a dangerous thing.
But even you have to admit that what we've seen all summer, and for year, really, is a total embarassment. The GOP has been, and is, a bad joke. It's not a serious group of people, it's a staggering freak show.
As you say, and as I've warned my progressive friends (I've never voted for a Republican on the national level, although have done so on some local races) I don't see any serious reform inside the GOP until the loony toons who now control things are bashed into jelly by a couple more big losses.
I'm glad the health care bill is going to pass, and several other elements of the progressive agenda. It won't bring on the end times, and it'll carry within it the seeds of it's own destruction, just as the GOP agenda has since Nixon's time.
But it's time for this sad, sorry chapter to end. It'll just take a little longer.
So much oversimplification, so little time
Kevin, Baptist Planet (really the name) called you out for drumming Virginia, North Carolina and Florida out of the South.
Note that here in North Carolina, we have a Democratic governor (Bev Perdue) and Democratic majorities in both houses of the state legislature. We have a Democratic U.S. Senator [the other is Republican] and 8 of 13 Congressional seats are held by Democrats.
All of which is just to say, your killer line -- "Republicans are the party of the South these days, and sure, the GOP will regain power eventually " -- is a cheap shot.
Obama, Kay Hagan and a great many others broke the back of the Nixon Southern strategy and no matter what you say, Kevin, that South ain't gonna rise again in my lifetime.
" (3) Ultimately, "the
" (3) Ultimately, "the South" per (2) is a declining and reactionary element. They will continue to play a role, and their decline (which they sense better than most) will drive them to greater heights of fervor, but their day is done. In less than a generation, they will be the US equivalent of the Le Pen voters in France, or the CSU in Germany: angry revanchists with appropriate representation, but never again in a position of national leadership. "
Unless, of course, we abjure the realm. We dont have to accept sideshow irrelevence under a yankee union- we can form our own country, self-govern our way, and you are as welcome to your post-christian socialist paradise as we are our way of doing things.