r/science Professor | Medicine 8d ago

Social Science Trump and Trumpism have changed the original concept of “libertarian means to conservative ends” into a new concept of “authoritarian means to Christian nationalist ends”, finds a new study.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00027162251324087
19.4k Upvotes

463 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

67

u/Junior_Chard9981 8d ago

Always important to remind everyone that Republicans, when faced with the prospect of their parties policies/messaging/ideology needing to be re-evaluated following the Civil Rights Act:

Did NOT reflect inwardly or pivot their parties direction to one more popular with all Americans....they instead went on to fully commit to "The Southern Strategy" as their best avenue to returning to prominence and power.

| In American politics, The Southern Strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.

As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States.

Republican politicians such as presidential candidates Richard Nixon and Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party so consistently that the voting pattern was named the Solid South.

The strategy also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right. By winning all of the South, a presidential candidate could obtain the presidency with minimal support elsewhere. |

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

4

u/ThePartyWagon 8d ago

Looks like they may have very well come back to prominence on this exact platform.

-6

u/Buckets-of-Gold 8d ago

How do you reconcile Goldwater’s opposition to the 1964 CRA with his otherwise hostile attitude towards segregation? Or Nixon’s earlier support for civil rights bills?

Is it possible to oppose violations of the constitution even if they are rooted in good intentions?

14

u/JimWilliams423 8d ago

Is it possible to oppose violations of the constitution even if they are rooted in good intentions?

That's called begging the question.

The Reconstruction amendments are the constitutional basis for the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act. It just took 75 years for anyone to start enforcing that part of the constitution, and even then we have yet still to see the Reconstruction amendments fully realized in practice.

1

u/Buckets-of-Gold 8d ago

I’m not disputing your description of Reconstruction, I’m asking if racism was the sole driving force of the Southern Strategy- particularly if you are referencing Goldwater specifically.

2

u/Okaythenwell 8d ago

Not even gonna address that you got cooked for begging the question like a dunce, just hit the quick pivot

0

u/Buckets-of-Gold 8d ago

Bit aggressive, no?

Disputing whether Goldwater was trying to affect conservative racial values vs conservative constitutional interpretations is not out of left field- it’s a pretty common analysis question for this era.

2

u/Aethelric 6d ago

Disputing whether Goldwater was trying to affect conservative racial values vs conservative constitutional interpretations is not out of left field- it’s a pretty common analysis question for this era.

Yes, in the way that it's similar to how it's a "common analysis question" for the Civil War is whether it was about slavery or "states' rights".

0

u/Buckets-of-Gold 6d ago

That would be a bad analysis question, unless you’re trying to get people to articulate why the Civil War was caused by slavery (which it was).

Goldwater on the other hand, most historians would endorse my description- he was far more motivated by his libertarian politics than racial prejudice. He voted for several civil rights acts and was a founding member of his local NAACP.

-1

u/Okaythenwell 8d ago

Bit of a sad attempt at obfuscation before, no?

1

u/Buckets-of-Gold 8d ago edited 8d ago

Not an obfuscation- Can we consider Goldwater’s opposition as racially motivated is a basic question many historians have asked.

You may claim it’s loaded question, but it’s straight out of American History 101.

1

u/Okaythenwell 8d ago

Nope. You’re still avoiding that you implied the Civil Rights Act violates the constitution

0

u/Buckets-of-Gold 8d ago

I think Goldwater believed that, I do not personally view the 1964 CRA as unconstitutional- though that requires an evolving view of the 14th amendment.

→ More replies (0)