Skip to main content

Back in 1969 I was a college sophomore, and, although the word did not yet exist, a pretty nerdy kid who liked to read nerdy books no one else would read.  One of these books, hot off the press, was The Emerging Republican Majority by Kevin Phillips.  Phillips argued, convincingly, that the country was entering a new political era of conservative Republican rule, and his conclusions seemed impossible to refute.  I was particularly impressed by his 147 charts and 47 maps that offered seeming unarguable proof of his thesis.  I spent hours lying in the sun of the campus mall pouring over these awesome maps - maps and charts showing, for example, county by county votes of the 1928 presidential elections.  Nothing to match the multi-colored interactive maps published on Daily Kos, but impressive for 1969.

Since President Obama's re-election, many diaries and comments have been published on Daily Kos prophesizing the Emerging Democratic Majority, a majority made inevitable by demographic change and Republican extremism.  So I thought it would be interesting to reread this book of an earlier political era.  Finding a copy was not that easy.  Only the central downtown library carried it, and it had long ago been removed from the shelves and consigned to the storage vaults under the building.  I had to ask the librarian to climb down the narrow stairs to retrieve the library's copy, and he dutifully did so, staring at the book, then at me, then at the book, then I me, then at the book, and then at me.  I wonder what he was thinking?

Well, it was a great read in 1969, but a chore this time around.  My thoughts below the squiggly line.

Flipping over the title page, one reads the following:  

This book is respectfully dedicated to the emerging Republican majority and its two principal architects:  President Richard M. Nixon and Attorney General John N. Mitchell.
When I read that back in 1969, I must have thought that dedication to have been appropriate. Today, I think, Wow, the Unindicted Co-Conspirator and the Convicted Felon!

In rereading this book, it is clear to me that Kevin Phillips did not want the Republican Party to be the Party of NO, the party of reactionary politics.  "Liberal" had become a dirty word, but Phillips wanted the Republican Party to be known as the party of progressivism and populism. The Establishment - a dirty word to the anti-war and other street protesters of the late 1960's - was now represented by the Democratic Party, the party of the New Deal and social programs that had become the status quo.  Preserving these programs was conservatism, true progressives support change, and the Republican Party of 1969 was the Party of Change.  But what change did they advocate?  Phillips never said.

What struck me in 2013 that did not affect me in 1969 was the book's racism, or, if not explicit racism, then a willingness to remain indifferent to racism in order to win the votes of the racists. In the Introduction, we learn that there is a "Negro problem [that has] become a national problem rather than a local one," and this "Negro problem" is the principal cause of the breakup of the New Deal coalition.  And Phillips returns again and again as to how the Democrats' obsession with "Negros" is dooming the Democratic Party.  For example, on page 458:  

[T]he California Interior was considerably more Democratic than the state as a whole during the years between 1936 and 1956, but since the rise of the civil rights and Negro revolutions, the gap has been shrinking.  The explanation is simple:  the Democratic ideology of the Pacific Interior is geared to progressivism, the New Deal and the Fair Deal - to public power, government agricultural programs and irrigation projects - rather than to the new Establishment liberalism and its preoccupation with urban change and racial integration.
Phillips did not see the majority white electorate as monolithic.  For Phillips, voting patterns were and, in 1969, still motivated by ethnic, religious and national origins:  Descendants of German Catholics voted like this, descendants of Scandinavian Protestants voted like that, etc. Personally, I doubt that one's European ancestry plays any role in how the white majority votes today.  For the past 44 years, there's been a lot of mixing; the ancestors of today's white American often hail from numerous parts of Europe.

Yet regardless of ancestry, for Phillips, the overwhelming majority of American whites were conservative, unhappy over Negro (to use his word) advancement, and unhappy over social programs that supposedly helped Negros and no one else (and Phillips says not a word to dispel the falsity of the latter notion).  There were only two groups of white folks who would still vote for politicians that favored the interests of the Negros over the interests of the majority, and they were "Yankees", primarily residing in New England but some of whom had spread out to Wisconsin, Minnesota, and the Pacific Northwest, and Jews.  I'm not too sure I understand who these "Yankees" were or are, but they have always been the most conservative force in the country, routinely voting for the status quo and conservative Republicans, but now they vote for Democrats - the party that by 1969 was really representing conservatism (as Phillips defines it) and the status quo.

Aside from these two groups, white voters will ensure that the Republicans rule the country for decades to come.  Many of these voters had been lifelong Democrats, but they could no longer abide the Democrats' preoccupation with Negro rights and social programs that only benefitted Negros.  For many of them, George Wallace (who Phillips calls a "populist" but not a racist) was merely a way station out of the Democratic Party.  Starting in 1972 and thereafter (absent future 3rd party runs), these whites would certainly be voting Republican.  

And these whites were on the move.  Fleeing the decaying cities - leaving them behind for the Negros and the white Democratic politicians to whom the Negros are beholden - and creating white, conservative rings around the cities (absent older and wealthier liberal enclaves inhabited by these "Yankees") that will increasingly outnumber the Negros back in the cities.  And these whites were on the move from the decaying Northeast and Rust Belt to the Sun Belt, a Great Migration in reverse, to the South transforming Florida and the former Confederacy, to the Southwest transforming Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Southern California into impenetrable bastions of conservative Republicanism.

California, our largest state, had become all but hopeless for the Democrats, as conservative Republican Southern California outnumbered liberal "Establishment" San Francisco and Berkeley and their environs, and the rest of liberal "Establishment Northern California.  For Philips, the entire South, the entire Southwest, most of the Heartland south of the decaying old cities, and the Rocky Mountains and all the West outside of Washington and Oregon, were safely conservative and Republican.  Democrats will predominate in New York and New England, and they have a chance of occasionally taking Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland and Delaware, but these states are not enough to win the Presidency.

That was 1969.  What happened to change all that?

For one thing, Phillips was not so arrogant that he predicted a permanent Republican majority, only a Republican majority that would last 32 to 36 years, and that would include the occasional Democratic victory.

To structure a mathematical perspective reaching back to 1828, political history divides into four cycles:  1828-60, 1860-96, 1896-1932 and 1932-68.  All four cycles lasted thirty-two or thirty-six years, and all four included steady rule by one party, with an interregnum of just eight years when the lesser party held power.  The interregnums were:  1) the tenures of Whig generals Harrison and Taylor amidst the otherwise Democratic span of 1828-60; 2) the two Grover Cleveland administrations in the 1860-96 post-Civil War era; 3) the two Woodrow Wilson administrations amidst the 1896-1932 rule of industrial Republicanism; and 4) the Eisenhower years in the middle of the 1932-68 New Deal Democratic cycle.  The Nixon administration seems destined by precedent to be the beginning of a new Republican era.
If 1968 to 2008 was a Republican era, then it too had interregnums:  the 1976 election of Jimmy Carter in the wake of the Watergate scandal, and the two administrations of President Clinton, elected with 43% of the vote in 1992 thanks to Ross Perot siphoning off 19% of the vote.  Both Democratic presidents were arguably Republican Lite - pushing the deregulation that contributed to the Great Recession of 2008, with Clinton proclaiming, "The era of big government is over!"

Much has been written on Daily Kos by diarists smarter than me about how the Republican Party is fated to a long decline.  Kevin Phillips did not foresee the white America would no longer be the overwhelming majority they were in 1969, and, in fact, that we would be fated to become a Minority Majority nation.  Phillips conceded that Hispanics were a growing and important presence in Texas, Southern California, and New Mexico, but he asserted that they would not be numerous enough to be part of a majority coalition.  Phillips saw California, New Mexico and Nevada as integral cogs of Republican rule - that didn't last for the 32 or 36 years he had predicted.  Nor did Maryland and Delaware remain the battleground states as he had predicted. And not everyone moving to the South and Southwest was a right wing racist - for example, the migration into North Carolina's Research Triangle has helped to make that state competitive.

Nor did Phillips foresee that religious fundamentalists would become one of the dominating components of the Republican coalition.  Their presence and dominance has been both a blessing and curse for the Party.  A blessing, as these people have been enthusiastic in promoting the Party, a curse, because their demands on abortion, and their ignorance of basic science, repel so many.  

The inner suburbs of our cities are no longer dominated by racist whites who have fled "the Negro socioeconomic revolution and liberal Democratic ideological" social programs of the cities. Housing discrimination is now illegal, and the inner suburbs, if not the outer suburbs, are no longer 100% lily white, and are no longer Republican bastions.

The Emerging Republican Majority was silent as to what the Republican Party would be for (other than a promise of vigorous enforcement of existing civil rights laws, with no new civil rights laws to be enacted).  Republicans sought to build their 32 or 36 years of promised rule on racial resentments and lies as to who was benefiting from Food Stamps and other Great Society programs.  This negativity has little appeal to younger voters, and particularly educated younger voters, who thankfully are less likely to share the racial prejudices of the parents and grandparents.  Was a Party built on moderate racism and lies bound to fail; were the wealthy manipulators destined to lose control over their minions?  I think that is what happened.

Originally posted to Navy Vet Terp on Mon Aug 19, 2013 at 04:49 PM PDT.

Also republished by History for Kossacks, Readers and Book Lovers, and Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (174+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Infected Zebra, ybruti, Dave in Northridge, scott5js, Susan from 29, MsGrin, antooo, high uintas, Bronx59, Blazehawkins, Al Fondy, Stude Dude, Lorikeet, Egalitare, winkk, alain2112, MikePhoenix, outragedinSF, gregsullmich, cspivey, Pam from Calif, TheMeansAreTheEnd, mettle fatigue, Yosef 52, dennis1958, radarlady, dopper0189, Dirtandiron, litho, duhban, Bush Bites, afox, hlsmlane, joedemocrat, Dartagnan, Tony Situ, Jorybu, citizen dan, pucklady, arlene, serendipityisabitch, kleinburger, RandomNonviolence, NewDealer, karmsy, SteelerGrrl, papercut, NYC Sophia, some other george, sawgrass727, our better angels, Buckeye Nut Schell, Glacial Erratic, madmsf, DBunn, monkeybrainpolitics, blue aardvark, MadGeorgiaDem, milkbone, avsp, No one gets out alive, triplepoint, global citizen, TracieLynn, Johnny Wendell, gizmo59, claytonben, Dr Swig Mcjigger, Railfan, itskevin, NM Ray, zerelda, Siri, beaky, Redfire, puakev, eeff, ProgressivePastor, p gorden lippy, Loudoun County Dem, science nerd, Ohkwai, J M F, yoduuuh do or do not, Kurt from CMH, erratic, SuetheRedWA, Matt Z, Eddie L, Noodles, TrueBlueMajority, surfbird007, Subterranean, dotsright, Involuntary Exile, BachFan, camlbacker, fumie, greengemini, llywrch, LillithMc, Timaeus, Tracker, golem, praying manatheist, kpbuick, Empower Ink, rsmpdx, roses, cville townie, Arahahex, Senor Unoball, FogCityJohn, Darmok, ParkRanger, P Carey, MKinTN, TDDVandy, markdd, stony, TX Freethinker, Nulwee, IreGyre, blue71340, Emerson, Monsieur Georges, maybeeso in michigan, AdamSelene, Its a New Day, political mutt, cosmicvoop, Things Come Undone, dannyboy1, Panacea Paola, brooklyns finest, OllieGarkey, Rhysling, bryduck, Josiah Bartlett, devis1, bvljac, psnyder, rhutcheson, Mayfly, Youffraita, Aunt Pat, wuod kwatch, Dodgerdog1, Odysseus, Sun Tzu, bibble, Robynhood too, willard landreth, oceanview, rantsposition, linkage, slothlax, Lilredhead, Dbug, Panama Pete, Rashaverak, DrCoyle65, LLPete, Theodore J Pickle, lbl1162, Ex Con, SherwoodB, Jimdotz, Dave925, Jyotai, SuWho, prfb, Lujane, Nisi Prius

    "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

    by Navy Vet Terp on Mon Aug 19, 2013 at 04:49:31 PM PDT

  •  Hilarity in hindsight (20+ / 0-)

    Unintentional hilarity, but hilarious nonetheless.

    Here's to a Dem blitzbrieg in 2014 being more than wishful thinking.

  •  One further comment, a little off point (24+ / 0-)

    I do not agree with Phillips that 1896 to 1932 was a Republican era with an 8 year interregnum for Woodrow Wilson.  The presidencies of Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft and Woodrow Wilson form the Progressive Era that cannot in my opinion be lumped in with McKinley or with Harding, Coolidge and Hoover at the bookends of this 36 year cycle.  Taft may have been the conservative of the 3 Presidents of the Progressive Era, but he did more Trust Busting than the so called Great Trust Buster Teddy Roosevelt.

    "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

    by Navy Vet Terp on Mon Aug 19, 2013 at 08:31:36 PM PDT

    •  At the the time both parties had (18+ / 0-)

      conservative and liberal wings. The Republican party of that time was a mostly North and West based party. The Democrats were mostly a South and Interior based party (basically the opposite of what we have now). So in many ways what was considered a conservative position or a liberal one in each party was heavily influenced by what these regions considered liberal or conservative.

      The parties back them were more divided over economics and foreign policy, unlike today when the divide is more over social issues and the role of government. Not saying there isn't/wasn't still a divide other the other ones, just what the biggest divides were over has changed.

      -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)!

      by dopper0189 on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 02:33:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Definition of "we" (5+ / 0-)

        Strikes me that political coalitions often revolve around people's understanding of who "we" as a nation, state or town really are or ought to be.

        During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there was a significant divide between native-born American whites and newly arrived European immigrants, especially those from the European periphery. Should the Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles etc be considered part of "us" or not? At least in some regions, the Democratic/Republican divide corresponded pretty cleanly with the distribution of newly arrived white immigrants relative to longer estabished white Americans.

        Both parties effectively excluded Black Americans during this period, of course, but outside the South, the Democratic Party was generally friendlier to the newer arrivals. This pattern continues to the present day.

        At the level of ideology, the Democratic Party has gradually come to realize that the same inclusive moral logic that said that Irish, Italians and Jews have a right to be part of "us" also must apply to Blacks, gays, women, Hispanics, Muslims, youth and so forth. Hence the current Obama coalition. These groups vote heavily Democratic at this time.

        The Democrats' (increasingly tenuous) commitment to economic inclusiveness-- i.e. concern for the poor, the sick the elderly-- ultimately draws upon a similar moral logic. However, it is not clear to me that all individuals who currently vote Democratic because the Republican Party seeks to exclude them on racial, ethnic, gender, religious, or other "identity" grounds would, if Republicans ceased to exclude them, continue to do so out of loyalty to the principles of economic inclusiveness.

        If Republicans could bring themselves to stop excluding a few of these groups on identity grounds, they might again be able to build electoral majorites, this time of people who are attracted to economic selfishness.

        •  Yep. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DBunn, dopper0189
          If Republicans could bring themselves to stop excluding a few of these groups on identity grounds, they might again be able to build electoral majorites, this time of people who are attracted to economic selfishness.
          This is their way back to power, and I bet they figure it out sooner rather than later. I want so badly to be proven wrong on this, but I fear I will not.

          "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

          by bryduck on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 11:46:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  you're just mixing up progressive/conservative (7+ / 0-)

      with Democratic/Republican. Back in that era my great-grandfather was a Republican and a proud union member, but that's because the Republican Party in Oregon was much more welcoming to progressives, while up till the 1920s the Democratic Party of Oregon was under the influence of the KKK.

      Part of the reason these realignments occur, though, is because of the ideological changes in the parties, which I think are, short of major demographic changes, bigger than ideological changes in places. By the 1970s the Oregon Democrats were much more progressive, and in the 1980s the hard right started taking over the Republican Party here, so my grandmother, a lifelong Republican but a progressive one, became a Democrat.

      And so goes the story of why Oregon is a Democratic state. It's not because the state changed, its because the parties did.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 09:50:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Which sounds about like Texas. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        IreGyre, Navy Vet Terp, Aunt Pat, jncca

        Texas became a Republican state because the parties changed, not because the state changed.

        Most of the Democratic elected officials from Texas pre-1980 or so weren't that much different (ideologically) from today's Republican elected officials.  In fact, in many cases the old Democratic elected officials literally ARE today's Republican elected officials (see: Perry, James Richard.)

        29, white male, TX-07 (current), TN-09 (born), TN-08 (where parents live now)

        by TDDVandy on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 10:19:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Very nice diary! (10+ / 0-)

    Having been a fan of the "Emerging Democratic Majority" blog for a while (and a while ago...sheesh, where does the time go?) I appreciate the education herein!

    "A liberal is a man or a woman or a child who looks forward to a better day, a more tranquil night, and a bright, infinite future." - Leonard Bernstein

    by outragedinSF on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 12:12:47 AM PDT

  •  On white ethnic voting patterns (9+ / 0-)

    Although not as strong as they were 40 years ago white ethnic voting patterns are still apparent. You can see clear patterns of voting depending on if an area was first settled by German Catholics, Irish, Scandinavians, Scott-Irish, Cajuns, etc. Maybe the groups already there have a meaningful impact on newcomers politics and beliefs, but it is really there. Nate used to have a post on his old 538.com blog that matched voting patterns from the 2008 election to the majority ancestrial country of origin of different counties. The results were pretty amazing (I wish we could still access those old post).  

    -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)!

    by dopper0189 on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 02:28:25 AM PDT

  •  Growing up in the South, I saw Phillips' book (14+ / 0-)

    on sale at the college bookstore and didn't even have to read it. I was already watching it happen. The kids at my high school and later my college who told "n*gger" jokes and hated MLK became republicans, at first for Presidential politics and then for everything else.

    I also knew George Wallace's party wasn't a stable formation, and its supporters would become Republicans.

    Find out about my next big thing by reading my blog. Link is here: http://bettysrants.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/my-next-big-thing/

    by Kimball Cross on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 04:20:34 AM PDT

  •  the one undeniable constant (4+ / 0-)

    has been progress to a more progressive, more tolerant and more open society.

    The GOP traded the short term for the long term as it currently stands.

    •  1968-20? = "short-term"? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Navy Vet Terp, Aunt Pat

      Their coalition has lasted longer than most in US history . . .

      "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

      by bryduck on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 11:48:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  even 40 years in the long term is nothing (0+ / 0-)

        progress stretches back all the way to the Magna Carter over 1,000 years ago.

        Hell even if you limit it to the USA that's still nothing compared to where we started. You are staring at a tree and mistaking it for the forest.

        •  In the US, 40 years is indeed (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RiveroftheWest

          a long time, political movements-wise. How long did the "New Deal Era" last? How about the "Progressive Era", or the "Gilded Age"? Heck, political anti-slavery parties only rose up beginning in 1840--less than 25 years later, there was no need for them any longer. Find me one political movement/coalition in the US that has lasted longer than this one . . .
          Burnham is the standard-bearer for this kind of analysis; he determined that political realignments occur every 30-36 years; we are pretty much right in the middle of that now, if you date it just from Reagan's election--far beyond that if you date it from Goldwater's failure, or even Nixon's Southern Strategy.

          "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

          by bryduck on Wed Aug 21, 2013 at 11:43:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  um actually (0+ / 0-)

            the Abolitionist movement begin in 1808 with Jefferson signing the Act Prohibiting the Importation of Slaves.

            Further Women's Sufferage was a 70 some year political movement. The New Deal frankly still continues on both with SS and Medicare but also with the ACA. It's never really 'died' not even during the height of the GOP dominance.

  •  Phillips' "whites" began "Reagan Democrats"... (4+ / 0-)

    .....so he more or less got that part right, I guess.

    Never read his book, though I made a mental note to pick it up when I read about him in The Selling of the President, then forgot about it.

    I saw him speak at a business convention, though, where he correctly predicted that Dukakis was going to lose, which pretty much everybody knew.

    For time-warp appeal, a book in the 70s called "The Establishment" is also good. Talks about the Rockefellers, Trilateral Commission, various government agencies in a non-CT sort of way. Unfortunately, I just Googled for it and couldn't find a trace of it.

    Another one -- the first 50 years of the Soviet Union -- was also good, and I still have it around somewhere. Bunch of NYT writers went to the SU on the anniversary of the Revolution and wrote about different aspects of Soviet society, including arts and culture. Really interesting.

  •  Great NY Times interview from 1970 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CoExistNow, sawgrass727, kpbuick, Aunt Pat

    with Kevin Phillips.

    p.s. Thanks for the review of his book! Excellent stuff

  •  Seeing as Republican ideology (7+ / 0-)

    has taken over the Democratic Party -- leaving Republicans to flirt with full-blown fascism -- I daresay that that Republican majority emerged just fine.

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 06:19:57 AM PDT

    •  The DLC is fading away (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cville townie

      If not already dead. There are strong progressive voices that frequently call out the republican light ideologies on the policy failures.

      Unfortunately politics is about winning elections. What plays well in California is anathema to rural democrats in the midwest.  Given the recent progress on social issues moving back towards economic inclusiveness is almost inevitable.  Government intervention for the least fortunate does is supported by a plurality of americans in surveys. The Democratic party ignores that truth at its peril.  The GOP currently says "who cares" with the Teahadist base.  The democratic party is on the right side of history when it listens to the basic values of fairness, equity and opportunity. The obvious challenge to communicationg those values are through policy. With our dysfunctional house and senate the Administration is left with pursuing regulatory remedies to what should be congressional actions.

      •  "The DLC is fading away" (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Geenius at Wrok, bryduck

        if only because it is no longer needed.  Just like the suffragette movement.  The DLC won.  "Progressive" voices are few within the Party hierarchy, and when they get loud, they're invited onto Air Force One for come-to-Jesus talks.  

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 09:07:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  With the rapid acceptance of gay rights in America (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        puakev, Navy Vet Terp, Odysseus

        ... having essentially tipped the scales in the opposite direction in half a decade I think that, as an example, shows that what works for Dems in Cali will start playing more across the nation with moderates on both sides of the aisle. The fairness meme, from civil rights to the inequality of income to the NSA infringements has only begun to make broad changes on how people think in America. Assuming that Obama care brings greater health care equality and cost reductions this too may bring a sea change in political attitudes.

        Another interesting block to watch will be the minority of libertarians who are strongly in favor of social liberalization of all sorts and their effect on the GOP. I predict that in another 10 years or so they will be a much louder voice on the right.

        •  I think if you look at the voter suppression effor (0+ / 0-)

          in NC. You can see the impact of social changes. The Gop has been backed down a couple times already with its efforts to suppress black college student voting. (A double minority...)

          Every time citizen protest stops GOP repression that is a long game victory for progressives. Pushbacks against oppression eventually lead to progress.

          Its important to consider the long game. Unfortunately progressives forget that lesson and get tied up with fighting short term battles instead of focusing on the long game.

  •  It came and now its going. Great diary. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    P Carey

    The GOP of today is not at all what Phillips had in mind.

  •  GOP = Graying Old Partisans (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ohkwai, Navy Vet Terp, LLPete

    The current trajectory of the GOP will hopefully result in it wiping itself off the face of the American political scene within 4 years.

    And frankly, that's EXACTLY what should happen.

    When a party holds adherence to its idiot ideology to a higher standard than its duty to We, The People, and actively works to undermine the government, it should be abolished, or at VERY least, be stripped of its ability to impede the repair of the very ills that IT inflicted on the nation during its last period of power.  

    Republicans have shown they CANNOT effectively run this nation and promote the general welfare - they only make the rich richer by gaming the system to provide benefit to their overlords.

    America's LAST HOPE: vote the GOP OUT in 2014 elections. MAKE them LOSE the House Majority and reduce their numbers in the Senate. Democrats move America forward - Republicans take us backward and are KILLING OUR NATION!

    by dagnome on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 06:58:58 AM PDT

    •  Frankly, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      IreGyre, LillithMc, Theodore J Pickle

      I wonder if the current Republican party has any commitment to our democratic form of government.  

      We can have democracy in this country, or we can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. Louis Brandeis

      by Ohkwai on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 08:19:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't wonder at all (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tracker, LillithMc, Theodore J Pickle

        I am certain that it does not. The conservative platform is a road map to an authoritarian police state with a warlord-president. Much of the base, I'll warrant, would be thoroughly content with outright fascism. Most of the funders would no doubt dislike the optics of genocide, but I'm sure they'd be fine with more low-key forms of mass ethnic and political persecution. And co-opting gun owners into a paramilitary citizen militia would be an easy way to dupe the "constitutional originalists" into believing that their civil liberties were still intact, seeing as how their idea of those liberties begins and ends with the Second Amendment.

        "The great lie of democracy, its essential paradox, is that democracy is the first to be sacrificed when its security is at risk. Every state is totalitarian at heart; there are no ends to the cruelty it will go to to protect itself." -- Ian McDonald

        by Geenius at Wrok on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 09:13:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Kevin Phillips books a must read (5+ / 0-)

    Though I often disagree with his philosophy, his books in the last days are valuable.  The 2003 book on the Bush dynasty is powerful reading.

    "AMERICA DID NOT INVENT HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN RIGHTS INVENTED AMERICA"

    by michealallison on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 07:22:15 AM PDT

  •  I appreciate the Diary! (5+ / 0-)

    And, the sacrifice in time that it took the Diarist to re-read Kevin Phillips.  Phillips wrote his books for the Klan-leaning, white Republicans of the late '60's.  It must have taken a lot of diligence to persevere through the hate language.  

    You are right that Phillips began to hate what he had sowed as he saw what the Christian Right was doing with the Republican party.

    My wife, daughter and granddaughters should have more privacy in their doctor's office than I have buying another rifle or shotgun.

    by NM Ray on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 07:58:32 AM PDT

  •  Phillips failed to see that rather than the (6+ / 0-)

    Republican Party capturing the South, the Republican Party was captured by the South. That didn't prevent their emerging majority, but it did end it by 2008.

    ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

    by James Allen on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 09:12:34 AM PDT

  •  Globally (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IreGyre, Navy Vet Terp

    Nationalists are forming across Europe and strong in Russia.  Their abuse of gays in Russia is more from the base of the Nationalists than Putin who has to respond to their power.  Some Republicans and Nationalists are descended from the German fascist party.  American Republicans may not like the comparison, but I write this often in comments and lately it is not rejected.  Perhaps this was not the intention of the old Republican party, but their love of power and control leads them in that direction.  When the economy is weak it is a natural magnet.  While we see racism in action largely due to the Republican absorption of the south after integration, the deamonization of the poor and tendency to make them illegal and pushed into gerrymandered ghettos is of more concern.  We need to fight now against not only the fascist trend, but the multi-national corporate capture of the Democratic party.  The violence in Northern Ireland that lasted for years began with the "in your face" gerrymanders of the Orange against the Catholics.  We need to fight for the right to legal redistricting and honest voting.  Love Kevin Phillips.

    •  Unfortunately, the 5 SCOTUS hacks (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LillithMc

      put dicta into their decision striking down the VRA that gerrymandering is OK.  Of course, if it were the Democrats clinging to power as a minority through gerrymandering, they would rule differently.

      "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

      by Navy Vet Terp on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 01:32:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Republican majority HAS emerged. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bryduck

    It now calls itself the Democratic Party.  The GOP is now comprising extremists and nutters and the party of the 1%.

    The "elite" have effectively moved the political spectrum so as to exclude any true left.  This is the result of their great '60s scare.

    I can't wait 'till global opposition to these Dickensian policies ripens into a full-scale, world-wide, progressive revolution.

    THEN, we will see human beings thrive.

    “For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.”

    George Orwell

  •  Thank you so much for this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Navy Vet Terp

    Really fascinating to have this perspective.

    And while I find it easy to scoff now, I'm impressed by how much Phillips got right - not about what should have happened in the post-1969 future, but about what actually did.

    And although history does not move in convenient cycles of 8 - 9 presidential terms, it is uncanny to think of the cycle of the Republican majority booming in 1972 and ending in... 2008.

    "Republicans Vote To Repeal Obama-Backed Bill That Would Destroy Asteroid Headed For Earth." 2/2/11 The Onion

    by brooklyns finest on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 11:45:55 AM PDT

  •  Um... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Navy Vet Terp, johanus, LillithMc, linkage
    Personally, I doubt that one's European ancestry plays any role in how the white majority votes today.
    Hi.

    I'm a White (Agressively Scottish) Protestant. (That's aggressively Scottish, not aggressively protestant for people doing the math.)

    I'm a progressive because of the culture I was raised in.

    A culture that encourages questioning of authority and exploration of the way the world works.

    "Science is Real" is a statement I can get behind, enthusiastically.

    Our poetry is socialist, anti-wealth, anti-religious, anti-war, and anti-racist.

    Socialist:

    What though on hamely fare we dine,
    Wear hoddin grey, an' a that;
    Gie fools their silks, and knaves their wine;
    A Man's a Man for a' that:
    For a' that, and a' that,
    Their tinsel show, an' a' that;
    The honest man, tho' e'er sae poor,
    Is king o' men for a' that.

    A man's a Man, Robert Burns

    Anti-Wealth
    Farewell to the heather in the glen
    They cleared us off once and they'd do it all again
    For they still prefer sheep to thinking men
    Ah, but men who think like sheep are even better
    There's nothing much to choose between the old laird and the new
    They still don't give a damn for the likes of me and you
    Just mind you pay your rent to the factor when it's due
    And mind your bloody manners when you pay!

    For there's no gods and there's precious few heroes
    But there's plenty on the dole in the land o the leal
    And it's time now to sweep the future clear
    Of the lies of a past that we know was never real

    No Gods and Precious Few Heroes, Dick Gaughan

    Anti-religious
    Did you no' think tae tell when John Knox himsel'
    Preached under your branches sae black
    Tae the poor common folk who would lift up the yoke
    O' the bishops and priests frae their backs
    that you knew the bargain he sold them
    and freedom was only one part
    For the price o' their souls was a gospel sae cold
    It would freeze up the joy in their hearts
    The Yew Tree Brian McNeil
    Anti-Racist
    Nae mair will our bonnie callants
    Merch tae war whan our braggarts crousely craw
    Nor wee weans frae Pitheid an Clachan
    Mourn the ships sailin doun the Broomielaw
    Broken faimilies in launs we've hairriet
    Will curse 'Scotlan the Brave' nae mair, nae mair
    Black an white ane-til-ither mairriet
    Mak the vile barracks o thair maisters bare

    Freedom Come-All-Ye Hamish Henderson

    Anti-War
    When the King's son came along
    He called us all together
    Saying, brave highland men
    Will you fight for my father.
    I will go, I will go
    When the fighting is over
    Tae the land o' MacLeod
    That I left to be a soldier
    I will go, I will go

    When we landed on the shore
    And saw the foreign heather
    We knew that some would fall
    And would stay there forever
    I will go, I will go...

    When we came back to the glen
    The winter was turnin'
    Our kin lay in the snow
    And our houses were burnin'
    I will go...  I will go

    Tha mi'n Dùil Traditional Gaidhlig, Circa 1790

    I don't know of other cultures that still sing their traditional songs, who keep their cultural identity alive, with the possible exception of the Irish. And except for a few lace curtain assholes like bill O'Reilly, they're fairly left wing. There are a handful of cultures that do.

    Just because the rest of you have decided to give up Brahms and Grieg for Britney Spears and Katie Perry doesn't mean that we've given up on Robert Burns and James Joyce.

    Combined with the Irish, there are about 60 million Gaels in the United States. Not all of us are exceptionally active. Most of us don't know much about our culture.

    And that can be taken advantage of by unscrupulous conservatives who know enough to be dangerous.

    And I'll leave you with this last point: Unless you understand the highland clearances, the potato famine, and the Scots Irish, you'll never understand why the tea party is so popular in the rural south.

    Understanding that history is the key to unlocking a naturally progressive vote throughout much of the south.

    Yes, there are racist aspects to it. But a lot of the anti-government stuff has always been there.

    Before now, it was the militia movement. Before that, it was neoconfederates. Before that it was the whiskey rebellion. Before that, it was the regulators. And before that, these same people were fighting for and against the British empire across half the planet. And it goes further back, and further back until about the time that writing was invented.

    These folks are often motivated by ideals our culture developed when we were fighting the Romans.

    TL;DR, a lot of these people are ignorant of their own culture and history, but that doesn't stop them from feeling absurdly strong about some of our cultural ideals, or keep them from being motivated by their shoddy understanding of a story that stretches all the way back to Brennus' sacking of Rome in 400 BC.

    Except for that nit, excellent, excellent diary, tipped and recced.

    An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t'Saoghail. (The truth against the world.) Is treasa tuath na tighearna. (The common people are mightier than the lords.)

    by OllieGarkey on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 11:48:46 AM PDT

    •  Dead pn. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OllieGarkey, LillithMc
      Unless you understand the highland clearances, the potato famine, and the Scots Irish, you'll never understand why the tea party is so popular in the rural south.
      We'll fight you on anything that we think takes away any of our "freedom".  

      Never mud wrestle with a pig. You only get dirty, and the pig enjoys it.

      by SpamNunn on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 12:14:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, partially. (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        johanus, SpamNunn, LillithMc, linkage, LLPete

        The other part is that at their hearts, they'll always be antigovernment reactionaries.

        You have to understand that our culture worships rebels, criminals, and antiheroes.

        There's a lot of us on the left too, and a lot of them are communists who post revolution porn on facebook and want to smash shop windows.

        I convinced one of them that the Conservatives were actually pro-big government, and rather than joining the democratic party, they got involved with revolutionary anarchism.

        They defected from the Teaparty, to revolutionary anarchy.

        Which as progressives, we understand isn't a big jump.

        The point of view is that "We'll fight you on everything because governments exist for no other reason than to be fought."

        And this is what's so hilarious about the tea party.

        They cannot be controlled. Ever. By anyone. Not by their churches, not by their kings, not by their elected leaders, no one in history has ever been able to successfully lead this particular cultural group.

        So the right wing Koch brothers funded this group of people, and are watching in horror as they actually want to shut down the government.

        I think it's hilarious that the republican establishment thought that they could successfully control or lead this particular group of people.

        These people are antiauthority to the point of being self-defeating.

        Look at the '45. They were 100 miles from London with a force of about 15,000. Between them and the king stood 500 provincial militiamen who were rich dandies that liked to dress up in uniform and had never seen combat. The rest of the Army was in India or the Continent, or had been destroyed by the Jacobites.

        So of course, on the eve of victory, they got pissed at Prince Charlie and went home.

        I'm serious. That actually happened. They could have sacked London, cut off the King's head, and installed James as King. But they chose to go home because they got mad at the people in charge.

        The only people capable of stopping the Jacobites were the Jacobites.

        And we see now that the same thing is happening with the tea party. They're turning on their own "leadership" and causing a delicious amount of chaos among their own ranks.

        Anyway, we're way off topic here. Sorry, that's my fault.

        An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t'Saoghail. (The truth against the world.) Is treasa tuath na tighearna. (The common people are mightier than the lords.)

        by OllieGarkey on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 12:41:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  '45 (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          OllieGarkey

          Great posts, by the way.  (Everyone else too!)

          "Look at the '45. They were 100 miles from London with a force of about 15,000. Between them and the king stood 500 provincial militiamen who were rich dandies that liked to dress up in uniform and had never seen combat. The rest of the Army was in India or the Continent, or had been destroyed by the Jacobites.

          So of course, on the eve of victory, they got pissed at Prince Charlie and went home. "

          Where can I look up this story?

          In passing, say what you want of them, the brits can fight.  I'd be surprised if only 15000 could sack London.  Just my $.02 (some ancestors Scotch Irish,  Fea).

          •  Any book on the '45 will cover the events in (0+ / 0-)

            Darby, where the war council voted to turn around, but here's a decent BBC Rundown:

            An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t'Saoghail. (The truth against the world.) Is treasa tuath na tighearna. (The common people are mightier than the lords.)

            by OllieGarkey on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 04:10:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  OK point well taken (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OllieGarkey, puakev, linkage

      I'm Jewish and much of my political ideology derives from my faith and the texts on which it is based.  Then there is more recent history to boot, including, for me, an uncle by marriage murdered by the Klan to make their town Jew-free.  That was back in the era of State's Rights and these things were none of the federal government's business.

      "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

      by Navy Vet Terp on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 01:37:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Okay, then why is it (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LillithMc, OllieGarkey, LLPete

      that denizens of the rural South are some of the most jingoistic, bigoted, nativist, anti-science, religious nutballs in America?  And why is it that it is folks from this region who are most opposed to measures that would reduce wealth inequality and constrain the power of the business community?

      They weren't always like that (well, at least with regard to addressing inequality and challenging the power of business), in fact the rural South and rural America in general was behind many historical movements that advocated for things like public ownership of power, progressive income taxes, and politicians from these regions were instrumental in passing progressive legislation from the New Freedom to the New Deal.  

      But that all began to change in the late 1930s, and really accelerated from the mid-1960s on.  The reason, of course, was that northern progressives began attempting to extend the benefits of the New Deal to minorities.

      So in that regard, I disagree with your attempt to downplay racism ("Yes, there are racial aspects to it") as a factor in why the rural South for instance, and I would argue the white working and middle class in general, is no longer the "naturally progressive" voting bloc it once was.

      Racism, or white supremacy in particular, was the foundation of not only southern culture and society but that of America in general until about 1965 or so (arguably it still is in many parts).  Sure, anti-government sentiment has always been a big part of the Scots-Irish tradition in particular, but such sentiment were cast aside when it suited the interests of the white working class, such as with the explosive growth of government during the New Deal and postwar America, which they heartily supported when government benefitted them.  However when those benefits were extended to minorities, that support eroded.

      Fact is, the people who make up the tea party today had no problem when Medicare Part D passed in 2003, had no problem with the explosive growth in government spending and deficits when Republicans were in charge, and had no problem with the civil liberties abuses of President Bush.  But the minute a Democrat takes office, they are suddenly up in arms.

      This isn't just about Obama being black, although that has made their hysteria worse.  Clinton was a victim of a whole lot of crazy in his term in office as well.  It's about the idea of government - and their tax dollars - being used to benefit minorities, when it is supposed to be for them, the deserving ones, i.e. white folks.  That's what all this "take our country back" stuff is about.  As a result they hate white liberals as well for giving the government to those people.

      In other words, I don't believe that saying the magic words will somehow unlock the latent progressivism among folks in the rural South.  Because whatever progressive tendencies they might have are outweighed by more emotional and visceral feelings like nativism, cultural resentment, and racism.  That, at the end of the day, is why many white Southerners may favor certain progressive policies but will oppose such policies the minute someone with a 'D' next to their name advocates them, and especially if that someone is a black guy with a Muslim name.  This is the same dynamic that caused them to flee the Democratic Party and liberalism in the first place.  

      "Those who have wrought great changes in the world never succeeded by gaining over chiefs; but always by exciting the multitude." - Martin Van Buren

      by puakev on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 02:15:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're right about a lot of things that you post (4+ / 0-)

        here and the issue is propaganda.

        These people have been absorbing right wing propaganda for generations, propaganda that has targeted them as a cultural group, and propaganda that has been developed by people from within their cultural group.

        Why is it that denizens of the rural South are some of the most jingoistic, bigoted, nativist, anti-science, religious nutballs in America?  And why is it that it is folks from this region who are most opposed to measures that would reduce wealth inequality and constrain the power of the business community?
        The main issue with this group of people that you describe quite accurately is that they are an intellectual underclass.

        This nation has not educated them, at all. There's no real option for most of them to acquire higher education, and there's not effective K-12. There's a minority of these people, and a sizable one, that is functionally illiterate.

        They can't educate themselves about our culture in the same ways that I've been able to.

        Racism, or white supremacy in particular, was the foundation of not only southern culture and society but that of America in general until about 1965 or so (arguably it still is in many parts).
        Not just white supremacy, but anglo supremacy as well.

        There was a Gaidhlig-Speaking population in North Carolina until the General Assembly banned the teaching of any language in schools other than english, except to fill a foreign language requirement.

        They wiped out the American Gaeltachd. It was a form of cultural cleansing designed to remove a troublesome ethnic identity.

        The Highland Festivals you see are an attempt to hang on to that culture and to educate ourselves, but we're too busy hanging on to the scraps of our intellectual culture to do the real, in-depth educational work we need to do to shift minds.

        When you say:

        I don't believe that saying the magic words will somehow unlock the latent progressivism among folks in the rural South.
        - you're absolutely right. It will take decades of cultural work focused on teaching them about their own culture, their own songs, their own poetry, through a process of de-assimilation from racist anglosupremacist culture, the ideals of which come not from Scots-Irish culture, but from the anglo plantation culture which has reigned supreme in the south for hundreds of years, and which has only grown in strength in the last 150, wiping out almost everything else.

        The seeds are there, but you can't grow an oak tree with a few magic words. It takes decades of work. They can become a progressive powerhouse, but it will mean doing free college for poor white folks, it will mean investing in regions that democrats don't get votes in, and it will mean investing in the long term health of the country to take care of people who might never vote for us, and who wont thank us for it.

        [T]he minute a Democrat takes office, they are suddenly up in arms. This isn't just about Obama being black, although that has made their hysteria worse.  Clinton was a victim of a whole lot of crazy in his term in office as well.  It's about the idea of government - and their tax dollars - being used to benefit minorities, when it is supposed to be for them, the deserving ones, i.e. white folks.
        Yes, that's absolutely true.

        Racism is strange amongst these folks. They don't hate their black neighbors. Those are the "good ones," the ones who are just like them.

        But they're told they're poor because "urbans" don't want to work for a living.

        That's what they talk about. And they want to "turn off the EBT cards" and start a race war that will burn the cities down because the cities are full of hated liberals.

        They're told that they're poor because urban blacks are taking all their money. That's the propaganda these people have been soaked in since the end of the civil war.

        Yes, you are poor sharecroppers, but I can't pay you any more because of all those blacks in the cities living off the government dime.

        And they're not educated enough to realize that they weren't part of the "Noble Knights" of the "gallant south" that they always think about, they don't know that this was the culture of the same wealthy assholes who sent them to bleed and die at gettysburg.

        The same sort of propaganda was used quite effectively by conservatives in Scotland, and it took a century to stamp that kind of thinking out.

        You're absolutely right about most of what you're talking about.

        The difference between them and me is that while we share heritage, they have a warped view of their own culture.

        They think their heritage reaches back 150 years to the civil war.

        They don't trace it back further.

        They don't ask why they live in this country.

        They don't ask why they're poor.

        They don't know their culture or their history.

        They accept the supremacy of anglo culture without thought or question.

        The problem, frankly, is that they're anglicized.

        An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t'Saoghail. (The truth against the world.) Is treasa tuath na tighearna. (The common people are mightier than the lords.)

        by OllieGarkey on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 08:55:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hugh Hewitt (2006) Painting the Map Red (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Navy Vet Terp, puakev, linkage

    "Painting the Map Red: The Fight to Create a Permanent Republican Majority"  

    I heard this guy blathering in 2006 on oh-so-"liberal" NPR and I knew he was hallucinating.

    You can probably get this book on Amazon for $1

  •  California (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Navy Vet Terp, ybruti, LillithMc, puakev

    Tough to have predicted what happened here. California has had a strong libertarian streak which divided into conservatives who only cared about fiscal issues, and liberals who cared primarily about social issues. As the GOP invaded the bedroom it turned off more and more California conservatives. In the end, the party comprises a large number of Bible bangers in Orange Country and the inland areas. My original hometown, the relatively affluent/middle class town of South Pasadena, was solidly 2/3 Republican in the mid-80s, but in 2012 the city provided Obama with 6,364 votes to Romney's 2,614. The much larger city of Pasadena has done a similar flip-flop.

    Misconduct by the government is by definition NOT a government secret.

    by Doug in SF on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 12:09:31 PM PDT

    •  Surprising to read about the change in California. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RiveroftheWest

      Quoting from Phillips:

      [T]he California Interior was considerably more Democratic than the state as a whole during the years between 1936 and 1956, but since the rise of the civil rights and Negro revolutions, the gap has been shrinking.  The explanation is simple:  the Democratic ideology of the Pacific Interior is geared to progressivism, the New Deal and the Fair Deal - to public power, government agricultural programs and irrigation projects - rather than to the new Establishment liberalism and its preoccupation with urban change and racial integration.
      and the diarist's words re California in 1969 as seen by Phillips:
      California, our largest state, had become all but hopeless for the Democrats, as conservative Republican Southern California outnumbered liberal "Establishment" San Francisco and Berkeley and their environs, and the rest of liberal "Establishment" Northern California

      The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right. -- Judge Learned Hand, May 21, 1944

      by ybruti on Wed Aug 21, 2013 at 02:38:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What happens to "White Privilege" when this (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Navy Vet Terp, LillithMc, Chitown Kev

    happens?

    Kevin Phillips did not foresee the white America would no longer be the overwhelming majority they were in 1969, and, in fact, that we would be fated to become a Minority Majority nation.
    It will be interesting to see how society changes, if at all, when the balance finally shifts.  

    Never mud wrestle with a pig. You only get dirty, and the pig enjoys it.

    by SpamNunn on Tue Aug 20, 2013 at 12:11:43 PM PDT

  •  loved this! thanks (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Navy Vet Terp

    I hope the emerging Dem one lasts a longer time and effects a more more permanent representative and useful change.
    I think the ACA is one

GainesT1958, Odysseus, Timaeus, Subterranean, TrueBlueMajority, madmsf, Emerson, Wintermute, eeff, alain2112, TracieLynn, afox, litho, pucklady, roses, vmckimmey, itskevin, oceanview, fumie, high uintas, Alna Dem, Redfire, tidalwave1, psnyder, NYC Sophia, Tracker, Noodles, wdrath, Calidrissp, papercut, zerelda, ybruti, tomjones, bibble, decitect, sawgrass727, Ohkwai, maybeeso in michigan, radarlady, LakeSuperior, SherwoodB, llywrch, Pam from Calif, Sun Tzu, cspivey, markdd, Yamara, Rusty in PA, MadGeorgiaDem, BachFan, golem, tobendaro, Kimball Cross, dopper0189, arlene, oldmanriver, global citizen, erratic, slothlax, Bush Bites, el cid, hlsmlane, Nulwee, DBunn, bvljac, dotsright, Loudoun County Dem, camlbacker, milkbone, devis1, Dartagnan, puakev, jds1978, karmsy, blue71340, FishOutofWater, LillithMc, Matt Z, Jimdotz, Dave in Northridge, joedemocrat, rantsposition, Mark Wallace, Empower Ink, gizmo59, Mighty Ike, MKinTN, TX Freethinker, MikePhoenix, Youffraita, Senor Unoball, Involuntary Exile, NewDealer, Buckeye Nut Schell, treesrock, monkeybrainpolitics, Lujane, RandomNonviolence, triplepoint, LLPete, Al Fondy, Mayfly, rhutcheson, kpbuick, RWN, Rhysling, bluemoonfever, J M F, Zorge, Glacial Erratic, greengemini, A Southerner in Yankeeland, petral, Livvy5, Railfan, brooklyns finest, FogCityJohn, serendipityisabitch, Susan Grigsby, Things Come Undone, NM Ray, Eddie L, MsGrin, science nerd, praying manatheist, Liberal Capitalist, CoExistNow, Haf2Read, political mutt, KVoimakas, Dbug, blue aardvark, Kurt from CMH, Rashaverak, ParkRanger, No one gets out alive, Monsieur Georges, SuWho, nominalize, James Allen, Siri, midgebaker, Betty Clermont, JGibson, This old man, DrCoyle65, Lilredhead, Arahahex, Buckeye54, OllieGarkey, bryduck, avsp, T C Gibian, Robynhood too, MugWumpBlues, Panacea Paola, akadjian, kleinburger, Panama Pete, Aunt Pat, Icicle68, Blazehawkins, duhban, Politikator09, lbl1162, palmer18, Chas 981, dannyboy1, Dodgerdog1, Fish Man, breadman23, Auburn Parks, Tony Situ, evilcommunist

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site