
None
Over the years there has been a concerted effort, on behalf of many, to rewrite political history, especially when it comes to the Democrat Party. These rewrites, half-truths or urban legends misrepresent historical fact; and unfortunately have lead astray countless numbers of people through politically charged falsehoods. One such legend, which seeks to rewrite history, [...]
None
Eventually, politics in the South began to change. The stranglehold that white segregationist democrats once held over the South began to crumble. The “old guard” gave way to a new generation of politicians. The Republican Party saw an opportunity to make in-roads into the southern states appealing to southern voters. However, this southern strategy was not an appeal to segregationists, but to the new political realities emerging in the south.[4]
Conservatives vs. Segregationists
Despite this, and other overwhelming evidence to the contrary, these same “revisionists” would have you believe that conservatives and segregationists are synonymous. This could not be further from the truth. By definition, conservatives today are what were once called “classical liberals”, which Barry Goldwater clearly was. It should be noted here, that although in his latter years Goldwater sounded more like a Libertarian;[5] “classical liberals” believe, among other things, in liberty to reach ones fullest potential, own property, start a business, vote and worship without the assistance or interference of the Federal Government.[6] [FJM has dubbed these the R.I.S.E. principles, which stands for Responsible government, Individual liberty and fidelity, Strong family values and Economic empowerment (See R.I.S.E principles)].
As a matter of historical record, conservatives (classical liberals) have always taken seriously the US Constitution’s limiting of the scope and reach of government. This includes the very nature and letter of the Bill of Rights, especially the tenth amendment.
For example, conservative ideology differs from the segregationists in that segregationist used the tenth amendment to nullify the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments, as well as the Declaration of Independence.[7] An often misrepresented fact is, that Dixiecrats, not Republicans, tried to exalt states rights over the rights guaranteed to African Americans challenging the merits of the 14th amendment section one, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This amendment granted former slaves full citizenship and equal protection under the law, which segregationist tried to deny Blacks through black codes, Jim Crow, lynching and/or a rigged jury.
Additionally, the 15th amendment gave African Americans the right to vote. It states in Section 1. “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.” Segregationists denied this right through poll taxes and intimidation (the KKK).
The truth is, that “true” conservatives would (did) not agree with the segregationist interpretation of the Constitution, especially that of the tenth amendment. Conservatives, past and present, however do believe in responsible or limited government; but certainly not at the expense of turning the Constitution on its head to do so. Conservatives hold that the Constitution limits the Federal government to the enumerated powers explicit in the document, and therefore the Fed has no power when it tries to move past its constitutional restraints. All other powers belong to the states and the people. Bottom line, a person advocating for state’s rights should be able to do so without being labeled a segregationists. For conservatives, “the rights of the people” include all races, creeds, ethnicities and colors—all U.S. citizens.
Conclusion
While the notion that Dixiecrats all became Republicans is nothing more than another in a line of dubious urban legends; it’s clear that for generations its stories have been told (and retold) to manipulate and discourage Blacks from considering the Republican Party and, or more importantly, the tenets of conservative ideas. Unfortunately, the references made to State’s Rights commonly attributed to conservative ideology are still being widely used to link conservatives with segregationists. This, too, is nothing more than urban legend. Sadly, these live on to smear and misrepresent not only our history, but also the character and reputation of men and women of principle.
[1]Â Â See Democrat Party Platform: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29599#axzz1b4XiqKeL
[3]Â Â Read more at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.edu http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=2585#ixzz1b5UtKNCZ
[4]Â Â I will talk more about the Southern Strategy in another article
[5]Â Â Goldwater changed his mind on homosexuality and the legalization of drugs
[6]  Under the rubric of “conservative” some have identified other subgroups such as fiscal, social, and national security conservatives.
[7] Republicans passed and helped ratify the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The 13th amendment abolished slavery.
Comments are closed.

the ignorant & uninformed are those who would cling to ‘talking points’ in lieu of the FACTS
there’s no attempt to ‘rewrite’ history…simply an honest effort to clarify….BTW, it’s supported by the FACTS….anyone can check the congressional record and see Dr.Wallace is correct
Zwta55,
You are correct in that ideologies among parties can change. I do not dispute that. What I do dispute is the notion that the GOP moved into the segregationist camp. There is no proof. I used the platforms of both parties to argue my point. What are you using? You have no argument. All you are doing is repeating the talking points of those who wish to keep black folks ignorant of the truth.
Look you can be a democrat if you want too. I don’t care but stop perpetuating a falsehood about the GOP when you have no evidence to support your claim. That’s why the idea of the Dixiecrats becoming Republicans is an Urban Legend, because you have no proof to support your claim. All you can do is use pejorative terms to attack those with whom you disagree.
So here is a question: How does the Republican Party ideology mirror the Dixiecrats? The platforms of both parties are available on line. A Party’s ideology is reflected in their platform. I read the Dixiecrat platform. Have you? It would help if you also read the GOP platform in order to compare them. Then write me back with the similarities. Then we can have a discussion.
Dr. Wallace,
It is a pleasure to discuss this with you. I notice your discussion centers around the particular parties rather than around political ideoligies. you do this on purpose to avoid the fact that it was social conservatives of that era who opposed the civil rights movement. And, you should know that political ideologies can shift from one party to another. So, to speak in terms of democrats and republicans in reference to the Civil Rights movement as if that clearly defines where the two parties stand today on such issues at best is disingenuous. But, you already know this. You choose to discuss this relative to parties rather than ideology because were you to discuss it based on ideology you would have to admit that the ideology of the old Dixiecrat Party closely mirrors todays Republican Party, your party. There is good reason for this. those old segrgationist Dixiecrats found a welcoming in your party, the Republican Party.
Btw, I applaud your attempt at rewriting history, but it only works with the ignorant and uninformed, of which your party has in abundance.