--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see no indication that Republicans are abandoning
> Nixon's Southern
> strategy. It doesn't make sense.  From an economic
> standpoint, lower middle
> class whites belong in the Democratic camp. 
> Republicans can get them by
> appealing to their nervousness about pushy
> minorities.

See Dan, this is where we disagree, because you're an
old Marxist at heart :-)

While I don't happen to agree with your economic
standpoint, for now I'll accept it as a debating
point.  So what?  There Are More Important Things Than
Economics.  Always have been, always will be.

Right now, of course, that issue is national security.
 Lower middle class whites are smart enough to realize
that when someone is trying to kill them, it's
probably a good idea to defend yourself - something
that distinguishes them from a fair amount of the
Democratic Party, apparently.  During the Cold War and
after they voted Republican in large part because of
national defense issues.

Social issues are at least as important.  It's true
that behaviors that, in an earlier time, might have
been called indicators of social deviance are no less
likely to happen in that group.  They are, however,
more likely to be condemned by large members of that
group.  Again, social values trend Republican.

More important than any of those is secularism, in my
opinion.  The Democratic Party has a remarkable
ability to have leaders who are fairly secular
(Mondale, Dukakis) or actively disdain religion (Dean,
if he wins the nomination).  Americans are, on the
whole, quite religious.  Lower middle class whites are
_really_ religious.  Bill Clinton, who spoke the
language of faith well, was able to neutralize much of
the traditional Republican advantage on this issue, do
fairly well among lower middle class whites and, not
by coincidence, win the election.  Other Democrats
have been unable or unwilling to do this, and paid the
appropriate penalty for that.

"The Southern Strategy" was certainly based on race at
one point.  But racism is something that's evenly
distributed among the parties and the states. 
Actually, if you redid the empirics given the rise of
anti-semitism on the left, I'd bet it's _more_, not
less, common among Democrats.  But I haven't seen
numbers which postdate 1995 or so on that topic, so
that's uninformed speculation and not worth much.  If
the southern strategy was a raced-based appeal
_today_, it wouldn't be Southern.  It would work every
bit as well in the North and the West.  But it
doesn't, because it's not about race any more.  It's
about culture - and culture is always more important
than economics.

=====
Gautam Mukunda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Freedom is not free"
http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to