raharris1973
Well-known member
This inquiry is sparked by some observations @Mikestone8 has made about what turned out to be temporary and fading Republican Party commitments to African-American civil rights in the reconstruction era, which suggested that peak Republican support for their Civil Rights came when they were seen as electoral allies of necessity against untrusted Democrats that Republicans felt were close to disloyalty and inches from power. As a corollary to that, when the Republican felt more comfortable winning the White House and Congressional majorities with the north and the newly admitted western states alone, they significantly lost interest in the voting rights of Freedmen in the southern states, because even a solid Democratic south, with no Republican votes counted, could not counter Republican strength elsewhere for most of the Gilded Age and then beyond into the Progressive Era and Jazz Age.
The observations in the paragraph above, beg the question, if the Democrats were stronger nationally from 1866-1894, the Gilded Age, and from 1894-1930, when the Republican post-Civil War advantage increased with the Panic of 1893 and election of 1896 to become quite hegemonic in OTL, would the Republicans have had a different attitude?
Would stronger competition from Democrats have made Republicans hesitate more to leave any potential voters in any states on the table unclaimed, and thus press for actual black suffrage? Would it made Republicans unite more strongly behind efforts like the Lodge Bill, which opposed granting representation when uncoupled from voter participation, in their reduced duration periods of power?
Would Democrats have found any constituents in the north or west who found 'excess' emphasis on white supremacy a turn off? Or any areas of the north with sufficiently growing African-American populations (and insufficient white backlash) that staying full steam on the white supremacy express would mean just handing over certain, otherwise winnable, urban wards and Congressional Districts to Republican machines?
Or is the 'script' of declining northern white interest in African-American voting rights, and expanded appeasement of Jim Crow over two, if not three c, consecutive generations, simply "unflippable", even if we reverse the pragmatic political incentives and takes the Republicans' ability to feel complacent in the early 20th century that they are the 'natural' party of power who can win, or steal, sufficient white votes in the north and west to dominate politics and patronage usually? [1876 Oregon may have provided a preview, with the possibility of Republican cheating in that state changing the outcome in GOP favor just as vote suppression in the south would work in the other direction against the GOP].
If the script is 'unflippable' is it just because there is some undefinable, ineffable, innate cultural zeitgeist* that guaranteed an in increase of racism and white solidarity between 1873 and 1903 and 1913 and 1923? Something no single political variable can explain?
Your thoughts please.
*German, literally for 'time-ghost', best translation is probably, 'spirit of the times'
The observations in the paragraph above, beg the question, if the Democrats were stronger nationally from 1866-1894, the Gilded Age, and from 1894-1930, when the Republican post-Civil War advantage increased with the Panic of 1893 and election of 1896 to become quite hegemonic in OTL, would the Republicans have had a different attitude?
Would stronger competition from Democrats have made Republicans hesitate more to leave any potential voters in any states on the table unclaimed, and thus press for actual black suffrage? Would it made Republicans unite more strongly behind efforts like the Lodge Bill, which opposed granting representation when uncoupled from voter participation, in their reduced duration periods of power?
Would Democrats have found any constituents in the north or west who found 'excess' emphasis on white supremacy a turn off? Or any areas of the north with sufficiently growing African-American populations (and insufficient white backlash) that staying full steam on the white supremacy express would mean just handing over certain, otherwise winnable, urban wards and Congressional Districts to Republican machines?
Or is the 'script' of declining northern white interest in African-American voting rights, and expanded appeasement of Jim Crow over two, if not three c, consecutive generations, simply "unflippable", even if we reverse the pragmatic political incentives and takes the Republicans' ability to feel complacent in the early 20th century that they are the 'natural' party of power who can win, or steal, sufficient white votes in the north and west to dominate politics and patronage usually? [1876 Oregon may have provided a preview, with the possibility of Republican cheating in that state changing the outcome in GOP favor just as vote suppression in the south would work in the other direction against the GOP].
If the script is 'unflippable' is it just because there is some undefinable, ineffable, innate cultural zeitgeist* that guaranteed an in increase of racism and white solidarity between 1873 and 1903 and 1913 and 1923? Something no single political variable can explain?
Your thoughts please.
*German, literally for 'time-ghost', best translation is probably, 'spirit of the times'
Last edited: