Chain Rection: The Impact of Race, Rights, and Taxes on American Politics

Hector12

Platinum Member
Feb 28, 2023
8,267
3,751
938
Chain Reaction: Th: Impact of Race, Rights, and Taxes on American Politics, by Thomas Byrne Edsall with Mary D. Edsall

Chain Reaction was published in 1992. It explains the decline in the New Deal Coalition that dominated American politics from the elections of 1932 to 1964.

Chain Reaction can be used to understand the elections of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, and their subsequent reelections by landslides. It can also be used to understand the popularity of Donald Trump.

There were a number of reasons the New Deal Coalition died. Disappointments connected with the civil rights movement is the leading reason.

During the beginning of the civil rights movement - let's say the 1954 Brown vs Bord of Education Supreme Court Decision that found segregated schools to be unconstitutional - liberals were begrudgingly aware that Negroes tended to do poorly on mental aptitude tests, and in the class room, and that they had higher rates of crime and illegitimacy than whites. They thought that when blacks were given equal rights, they would emulate the behavior and performance of whites.

What happened instead was that white rates of crime and illegitimacy rose, and black rates rose even higher. Black intellectual performance improved little, if at all.

The civil rights legislation of the 1960's and The War on Poverty declared the same year were followed by five years of black ghetto rioting, and more enduring increases in black social pathology.

The popular image of Negroes held by most whites was no longer that of peaceful demonstrators singing hymns as segregationists beat them up. It became one of black criminals chanting "burn baby burn," as they looted and burned stores.

Liberals did not recognize the change, and continued to talk and write as though Negroes were unoffending victims of irrational color prejudice. While most whites wanted a harsh criminal justice system, liberals continued to advocate a therapeutic approach toward criminals.

The Watergate Scandal made Democrats think they did not need to reevaluate their racial beliefs and policies. Nevertheless, most whites who in 1974 thought Nixon should resign did not wish that they had voted for George McGovern in 1972. They wished that the Republican Party would give them a candidate with Nixon's policies but without Nixon's neurotic penchant for self destruction. When the GOP offered them Ronald Reagan, they voted for him in 1980 and 1984.

I am reasonably confident that Bill Clinton read Chain Reaction. The Crime Bill he signed in 1994, which increased the severity of the criminal justice system, and the Welfare Reform Bill he signed in 1996, which made cuts in welfare, indicate that he got the message.

Unfortunately, the sympathy many liberals displayed for the George Floyd riots of 2020 indicates that many of them still have not learned. That is why Donald Trump has a good chance of being reelected.
 
As usual, you don't know what you are talking about.

The problem with your premise is that it assumes white people started abandoning the Democratic Party after the civil rights movement. That is simply not true.

The "New Deal Coalition" you mentioned only existed for FDR's four terms. When the economy improved, white people returned to voting Republican.

How do you think Eisenhower got elected twice? Or Tricky Dick got within a hair of beating JFK? Because white people overwhelmingly voted for them. You could also make the argument that the white majority voted against Harry Truman in 1948, but split their vote between Strom Thurmond and Thomas Dewey.

The only "outlier" in your data would be 1964, when LBJ signed the Civil and Voting Rights Acts and lamented, "I've lost the South for a Generation". (Supposedly).

But 1964 was indeed an outlier. Republicans completely shit the bed nominating Barry "Deep Down You Know He's Nuts" Goldwater. Five Southern States voted for him because they disliked LBJ, but that was about it. It should also be pointed out that this was the first election where Black COULD vote in large numbers, and it turned out very well for the Democrats.

Now, moving on to 1968. Were racial concerns about the Civil Rights movement a factor in white people acting awfully? Sure it was. So was the Vietnam War. So was the women's rights movement. But at the end of the day, Tricky Dick only got 43% of the vote against an indecisive Hubert Humphry, with George Wallace taking a huge chuck of the Inbred Racist vote in the south.

1972- Sorry, man, that election doesn't really prove your case, either. The Democrats truly shit the bed on that election in nominating McGovern. A guy whose own running mate called him the Candidate of "Acid, Amnesty and Abortion" and lost the Catholic vote (Nothing to do with civil rights) before he was forced off the ticket for getting electric shock therapy. (Ironically, Amnesty was granted, and Abortion was legalized within five years of that vote.)

Now we can move on to elections where we have data for. Lo and behold, you can make the argument that white people didn't vote democratic in any of them.

1725749586169.png


But Crunching the numbers, they did okay in 1976, although Carter still needed blacks to push him over the top. They did decently in 92 and 96, but that was more because Ross Perot siphoned off white voters from the GOP candidate. Carter and Clinton both carried southern states!

Final point on these numbers... Prior to 1980, no one was really counting Hispanics as a separate voting block, they were usually lumped in with whites. So the pre-1980 numbers for Democrats might have been a tad skewed. So it wasn't so much that Democrats "lost" white votes in that they simply had voters calling themselves something else now.

It becomes increasingly irrelevent when the electorate is becoming less and less white. Democrats CAN win with only 40% of the white vote. The main reason why Hillary "lost" in 2016 was because black voters didn't show up for her. They remember her many slights against Obama. They remember her husband stabbed them in the back and signed draconian welfare reform. (Almost all of it got rolled back with three Republican recessions gobsmacking people into realizing why we need a safety net.)

1725749979868.png


Final thought. Sometimes it's not about winning, it's about doing the right thing. Fixing our racism is the right thing.
 

Forum List

Back
Top