Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Southern Rebels' History: From Slavery To The American Taliban


As a "Study Suggests Southern Slavery Turns White People Into Republicans 150 Years Later," a second study, "The Republican De-Evolution from Political Party to Domestic Terrorists," explains the rest of the problem in this country.

We've been seeing a lot of maps lately that show the South to be first in poverty, federal assistance, bigotry, and rightwing politics, and the first essay by Ian Millhiser at Thinkprogress.org, "Study Suggests Southern Slavery Turns White People Into Republicans 150 Years Later," tells us why:

"White Southerners are one of the great outliers in American politics. President Obama polledsignificantly worse with white voters in the South than he did with whites in swing states. One survey of working class white voters found Obama only 4-8 points behind Romney in the majority of the country, while hepolled 40 points behind Romney among Southern white working class voters. And a new study by political scientists Avidit Acharya, Matthew Blackwell and Maya Sen suggests that theremay be a simple explanation for this divide — slavery.

"The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution banned slavery nearly 150 years ago, yet this study suggests that the legacy of slavery continues to drive voters in areas that once housed large numbers of slaves to vote Republican:
"Drawing on a sample of more than 39,000 southern whites, we show that whites who currently live in counties that had high concentrations of slaves in 1860 are on average more conservative and express colder feelings towards African Americans than whites who live elsewhere in the South. That is, the larger the number of slaves in his or her county of residence in 1860, the greater the probability that a white Southerner today will identify as a Republican, express opposition to race-coded policies such as affirmative action, and express greater racial resentment towards African Americans. We show that these differences are robust to a variety of factors, including geography and mid-19th century economic conditions and political attitudes. We also show that our results strengthen when we instrument for the prevalence of slavery using local measures of the agricultural suitability to grow cotton. In fact,our findings indicate that in the counterfactual world where the South had no slaves in 1860, the political views of white Southerners today would be indistinguishable from those of similarly situated white Northerners.
"The authors offer several potential explanations for how a human rights atrocity banned more than a century ago can continue to drive political attitudes today. Among them, the authors suggest that 'the sudden enfranchisement of blacks was politically threatening to whites, who for centuries had enjoyed exclusive political power.' In addition, the 'sudden emancipation of blacks substantially undermined whites’ economic power by suddenly increasing blacks’ wages and threatening the plantation economy.' These two factors, according to the author of the study, 'led Southern white elites to promote localized anti-black sentiment by encouraging violence towards blacks, propagating racist norms and cultural beliefs, and, to the extent legally possible, pushing for the institutionalization of racist policies (such as Jim Crow laws). In turn, these racially hostile attitudes have persisted as each successive generation has, to some degree, inherited the attitudes and beliefs of the previous generation.'"


And as the Rebel States stayed the course, as "...,the larger the number of slaves in his or her county of residence in 1860, the greater the probability that a white Southerner today will identify as a Republican, express opposition to race-coded policies such as affirmative action, and express greater racial resentment towards African Americans," the second piece by Allen Clifton at Forwardprogressives.com, "The Republican De-Evolution from Political Party to Domestic Terrorists," brings us up to date on the criminal cartel known as "Conservatism":


"I remember back during the Bush administration, a friend of mine said something along the lines of, 'I can’t wait till Bush is out of office. Republicans can’t get much worse than this.' I told him at the time that he shouldn’t be so certain of that.

"During that time the tea party didn’t exist (or at least it had no national popularity) so neither of us had definitive proof that something worse was on the way. However, I’ve just always lived by the belief that when it comes to politics, it can always get worse.

"Being a liberal, it goes without saying that there are very few issues where I find myself agreeing with conservatives. But to look back at their de-evolution from an opposing political party to what now basically amounts to a domestic terrorist organization, is downright shocking.

"A few days ago, I wrote an article where I said that Republicans have officially become the 'American Taliban.' This of course brought out the right-wing trolls who called my claim absurd. Of course, most had no information to support their belief that my claim was false, but that didn’t stop many of them from aggressively bashing the piece.

"The stereotype of a terrorist (at least the American stereotype) is some form of Islamic radical who wishes to harm the United States in some way. Most simply equate this to some kind of public explosion or mass killings of American citizens.
"This, of course, is a completely ignorant and shallow stereotype. There are all forms of terrorism and it doesn’t just originate from Islamic radicalism.

"So, why can’t Republicans be classified as domestic terrorists? Because that sounds too extreme to say? If you believe that I understand, but is it really that extreme of a belief? Is it more extreme than what they’ve been attempting to do to our nation?


"Let’s just look at the definition of the word “terrorism.”

"Terrorism:
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
"Are Republicans not using threats as a means to coerce government? ”Defund Obamacare or else we’ll shutdown the government/not raise the debt ceiling!” Both actions would cause massive devastation for millions of Americans and (as it relates to the debt ceiling) quite possibly crash our entire economy.

"But that’s not a threat? Of course it is. And it’s not just a threat—it’s a purposeful act which they know will harm millions of Americans. They simply don’t care. They have their 'demands' they want met, and they don’t care who they have to hurt in order to get what they want.


"The state of fear and submission? Oh that’s easy. Please, outside of straight, white, conservative Christian males, who aren’t Republicans afraid of? The Republican party, and the conservative media, constantly perpetuate fear mongering against homosexuals, women, minorities, Muslims, liberals, any media that isn’t right-wing approved, Hollywood, science, history, math, education, the poor—hell, they’ve classified Bill Nye as 'liberally biased.'

"Bill freaking Nye! You really have to be fear mongering to turn a guy mostly known for Saturday morning kids science shows into some kind of political enemy.

"Oh, and Obamacare—holy cow. These people are terrified of Obamacare. But can you blame them? Have you seen the kinds of ads right-wing groups are putting out there? Seriously, click that link and go take a look. It’s worth your two minutes to see those ridiculous ads funded by the Koch brothers. Nothing quite like a spooky clown-looking version of Uncle Sam appearing between a woman’s legs in the middle of an intimate doctor’s exam (with creepy music playing in the background) to insinuate that the government is out to inject itself into your privates—uh, I mean private life.

"This party thrives on fear. Fear socialism! Fear communism! Fear a dictionary which might inform you of the definitions for both of those economic ideologies! Because most Republicans, as it stands now, sure as heck don’t know how to define either.


"A terroristic method of governing or of resisting government? Well, let’s just go back to their strategy of refusing to do their jobs unless they get their way. Threatening to raise taxes on every American if the top two-percent didn’t keep their tax cuts. Threatening to default on our debt in 2011 (and now) by refusing to raise the debt ceiling if they don’t get the budget cuts they want. Threatening to shutdown the government (they actually did in the 90′s) if the president refuses to defund the law of the land, 'Obamacare.'

"Their entire party is built on resisting government. They’ve created this 'boogeyman' called the Federal Government that they blame every problem in America on. Then their supporters, and a few of their politicians, advocate secession whenever they don’t get their way. Some even talk of the violent overthrow of our government in an attempt to 'take the country back.' These irrational thoughts and rants are often the results of something not going their way.

"This is is the party that was once represented by the likes of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower. They’re now represented by people like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and John Boehner.
"Talk about a massive drop-off in quality of representation.

"A party that once had a president bring the country to civil war in the fight to free slaves, is now the one that will risk destroying its economy to deny millions of Americans health care.

"So please, tell me, how aren’t Republicans a form of domestic terrorists?


"Isn’t the basic premise for a terroristic act against the United States a deliberate act to harm Americans or American interests? As I said in the piece I wrote a few days ago, imagine if Islamic radicals were threatening to sink our nation’s economy if they didn’t get their way. Would we not call that a threat of terror?

"Because that’s the very threat Republicans are now using. Give into their demands or they’ll harm millions of Americans and quite possibly crash our economy—on purpose.

"A main difference I see is that while a group like al Qaeda might make threats to harm Americans and hurt our nation’s economy, yet lack the ability to do either—Republicans are making those very same threats and seem poised to actually do both."

**********

The evolution of the Southern Rebels as the present-day American Taliban is nothing new to our readers.  The decision by the Fascist Five on the Supreme Court that racism was no longer a Southern problem was a political decision to hide the true nature of the Southern States in today's Tea Party world, and it serves as an indictment of the entire Conservative "movement" as nothing more than an un-American, traitorous gang of criminals.





-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought
which they seldom use.”

Søren Kierkegaard. (Danish philosopher, theologian, poet, social critic, and religious
author, widely considered to be the first existentialist philosopher. 1813 – 1855.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No comments:

Post a Comment