The South, the economy, and racism

Matt takes issue with what Paul Krugman says here:

And if you look at the political successes of the G.O.P. since it was taken over by movement conservatives, they had very little to do with public opposition to taxes, moral values, perceived strength on national security, or any of the other explanations usually offered. To an almost embarrassing extent, they all come down to just five words: southern whites starting voting Republican.

His objection?

It's true that the recent political success of the GOP has an enormous amount to do with the party's success in the white south, but I think the evidence strongly suggests that conservative politicians get the votes of white southerners precisely because white southerners like conservative positions on taxes, moral values, and national security. Southern Democratic politicians of the Jim Crow era, after all, mostly took conservative stances on all of these issues. The weird thing about Jim Crow politics is that white southerners with conservative views on taxes, moral values, and national security would vote for Democratic presidential candidates who didn't share their views. They did that as part of a strategy for maintaining white supremacy in the South....

Racism is a key part of the story, but it plays a much bigger role in explaining why Adlai Stevenson and John Kennedy won South Carolina than in explaining why Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush won there.

I usually wait until it's late on a Friday to interject myself into a debate between two people who are substantially smarter than I am, and here we are! Fortunately, I'm just here to say that I think they're both correct.

Implicit in what Matt says is the fact that, in the south, racial and social issues trumped economic ones by quite a ways. It was only after the day finally came when the Democratic party became less racist than the Republican party that southern whites switched allegiances. When that happened, the Republicans went Hail Mary on both social and economic conservatism--a strategy that has been to their great, but perhaps temporary, benefit--and over time this has resulted in a shift in public opinion. As it was happening, though, national public attitudes about both economic and social policy weren't changing day by day. Barry Goldwater's economic ideas were still of middling popularity nationwide and Jim Crow-esque ideas about race and sex were, if anything, falling out of favor nationally, but as the culmination of a years-long political movement.

Indeed, southern whites were more at home in the Republican party and their big switch was only natural. But it didn't signify in any way that conservative ideas about welfare and social security had won the day with the American people.

Comments

And here I am, taking refuge even later on Friday evening to somewhat disagree with all of you. hahaha. I must be the dumbest of all.

Southern (white) Dems have not (at least since New Deal days) been against populist appeals and economics per se, but just against any political programs that would lead to racial equality or benefits targeted for any except the white folks (with perhaps side effects that benefited all in the region). They loved TVA. They loved getting back far more tax dollars than they paid to the Federal government. They loved all those military bases and the contractors that went with the bases. They loved all those agriculture subsidies, highways and flood control. And they hated Wall Street for ignoring their presence (or making fun of the hicks) and pointy-headed liberal intellectuals for ignoring their desire to remain segregated racially and by class. Most of all, they hated being the losers in a war of cultures on their 'way of life', including a good deal of fantasy history about their 'chivalrous military culture' (mixed with real support for the military because it was a prime way of escaping southern poverty for the enlisted men, and a way for the educated men to have a career in a mostly non-industrial southern region).

The religious/social values thing is/was late to the game - except to the extent they were religious fundamentalists, like forever, but it wasn't a political touchstone. The values furnace as a political principal was stoked by Nixon's Southern Strategy and reinforced as dogma in the GOP ever since. The liberals pulled away just as the Republicans came to join the family.

I think Krugman would be hard pressed to demonstrate that the south was/is conservative in the classic senses of that poly science and economics term. The south (and other regions) are way too complicated to secumb to easy categorization.

And lets not forget that although the southern states vote Republican quite often on national elections, it isn't overwhelming (i.e. 75% GOP) in most cases. There's lots of Dems (and liberals, too) in the south.

Now it's time for a Friday night beer or two.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR on August 24, 2007 09:54 PM

Post A Comment