The Former Confederacy & Modern American Politics, Part Thirteen

NOTE: I forgot to mention this in an earlier segment: In the primaries of 1972, George Wallace ran in the Democratic Party primaries. He opposed busing, but said that he had changed his mind about desegregation in the general sense. In the former Confederate states, Wallace won a stunning victory in the Florida Democratic primary, winning 75 of the state's 81 delegates to the Democratic Convention, with nearly 42% of the vote, far more than any other candidate in the race. Hubert Humphrey finished a distant second with 18 1/2% of the vote, and he won the 6 remaining delegates. Wallace also won big victories in North Carolina, where he received more than half of the primary vote, and in Tennessee, where he garnered more than two-thirds of the vote. In May of 1972, Wallace, while campaigning in Maryland, was shot and paralyzed from the waist down by Arthur Bremer. Bremer, who had actually intended to assassinate President Nixon, but then chose Wallace, was released from prison (probation) in late 2007. The assassination attempt ended Wallace's presidential bid in 1972. I was on my way to umpire a little league baseball game when I heard the news of the shooting, as a man was running along the sidewalk shouting, "George Corley Wallace just got himself shot."

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

The 1970s saw the American economy struggling with increased oil and gasoline prices (brought on by instability in the Middle East), which put upward pressure on overall prices, which put a drag on the economy, a situation that came to be called "stagflation." Further, automation continued to whittle away at jobs, and business people with industries in northern cities began to look more and more to the South for ways to cut costs. Southern states had resisted labor unions to a great extent, so business people saw this as a way of cutting labor costs. Gradually this transfer of jobs and industry (and not just heavy duty industry) southward to the "Sunbelt" (named for the warmer climate) would pick up steam, leaving behind the communities in the northern part of the country as the "Rustbelt;" that is, older, declining industrial centers. The Confederacy had surrendered more than a hundred years before, but suddenly the slogan "the South will rise again," began to come into play.

The Republican Party had long been tilted in the direction of conservatism, going back more obviously to the split in the election of 1912, which saw former Republican president, Teddy Roosevelt, run against his Republican successor, William Howard Taft, who proved to be too conservative for the more progressive Roosevelt.* This split allowed the election of Democrat Woodrow Wilson as president. Wilson was a Southerner, having been born in Virginia and raised there, as well as in North Carolina. He later became president of Princeton University in New Jersey, which led to his election as governor of that state.

With the Great Depression and the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt in four successive elections, Republicans generally staked out positions at least somewhat to the right of Roosevelt. This general tendency toward conservatism was solidified during the turbulent 1960s and 1970s, as Republicans, generally seen as pro-business, were also seen as, and campaigned on, being the party of law and order, especially as compared to the Democrats, who slugged it out with each other over the Vietnam War, segregation and many social issues, such as abortion and women's rights, in the 1960s and 1970s, leaving socially conservative elements of the party to come more into play for Republicans. If you've been following this series, you've seen the Republicans become more and more competitive in the former Confederacy.

A longstanding foreign policy issue was over the Panama Canal, or actually more specifically, the Panama Canal "Zone," which had been under U.S. control from the time of Teddy Roosevelt. The overall debate about the canal zone is complex, as the international situation of the U.S. versus the Soviet Union, the fear of the spread of communism and the political positions of Latin American governments had much to do with the politics of the canal. "Generally" speaking, many conservatives, sort of led by Ronald Reagan and South Carolina senator, Strom Thurmond, opposed the negotiation of a new treaty about the canal or the canal zone. The issue became highly  contentious, but in the end there were two separate treaties signed and then ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1978 (ratification requires 2/3 affirmative vote of the Senate).

In what became a major event of the times, following a revolution in Iran, which brought to power a fundamentalist Islamic government, more than 50 American embassy personnel were taken hostage and held prisoner beginning in November 1979. The crisis went on and on, and the network news shows (no cable news in those days) began opening their newscasts with, "Day 120," or, "Day 187."** An American military rescue attempt in the spring of 1980 failed and the hostage crisis continued to hang like a dark cloud over the 1980 election process.  

In the nomination process for the 1980 election, incumbent Democrat and Southerner, President Jimmy Carter, was challenged by Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy of Massachusetts, the brother of slain President John F. Kennedy and slain presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy. Carter won all primary contests by big margins in the former Confederacy against Kennedy.

On the Republican side, Ronald Reagan easily defeated George Bush (Sr.), and a number of other candidates, in primaries in states of the former Confederacy, although the vote in Texas was much closer, Reagan 53% to 46% for Bush. Overall, Reagan won the Republican nomination by a comfortable margin.

Next... The Republicans Choose Reagan and The South Follows

* Teddy Roosevelt was a distant cousin of future Democratic president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, but he was the uncle of Franklin's wife, Eleanor Roosevelt, the daughter of Teddy's brother.

** A friend of mine told me that his wife, who suffered from bipolar disorder, was so distraught over the hostage situation, that he and his family had to keep her away from the television during the news, as it upset her so much. 

WORD HISTORY:
Ordeal-The main body of this word, "deal," goes back to Indo European "dail/dhail," which meant "divide." This gave Old Germanic "dailiz/dailaz," meaning "a part, a share, a portion." The prefix "or-" goes back to Indo European "uds," with the notion of "upwards, up, out." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "uz," meaning, "out, out from, away from." In Old English this developed into "or-," while in German, for instance, it developed into "ur-" (originally "ir-," and it also gave German the prefix "er-," for many words, and in English also "a-" as a prefix in some words). The prefixed form in West Germanic was the verb "uzdailijan," meaning, "to deal out a judgment;" that is, "to give a verdict." Lying behind the meaning was the notion of "judgment received from the gods," and later, after Christianity spread among the Germanic tribes, "judgment by God;" that is, "judgment rendered by a physical test," as survivors or those uninjured were seen as innocent and non survivors or those injured were seen as deservedly dead or injured, as they had been guilty. "Ordeal by fire" is still something we hear of in modern times. The West Germanic word produced the Old English noun "ordal," meaning, "judgment by test;" with the spelling later becoming "ordeal," and the meaning of, "something that severely tests a person," still very much a meaning in the word, which has kept it much closer to the original meaning; whereas, in the other West Germanic languages, the word has come to mean "judgment, verdict," in the more general sense, without the "physical test" element. Forms in the other West Germanic languages: German has "Urteil," Low German Saxon "Ordeel," Dutch "oordeel," West Frisian "oardiel." 

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Ten

First published September 2012 
See NOTE at bottom of article for update


The Reagan Coalition and the Rise of the American Political Right, Part Two

You can't really understand the election of Ronald Reagan, unless you understand the presidency of Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter and the nation faced a serious problem over a continuing energy problem, or perhaps it would be better to say, over a lack of energy. Oil and gasoline prices soared, dragging the price of everything else along. The long time Democratic coalition continued its disintegration, and overseas, a fundamentalist Muslim revolution in Iran brought down the American supported government of the Shah of Iran, only to be replaced by a fanatical fundamentalist Muslim cleric, the Ayatollah Khomeini. Iranian students and revolutionaries took over the American embassy in November 1979, along with more than fifty Americans who were held hostage. The crisis had grave consequences, which are still with us today.* As the crisis went on, it was eventually covered by the news media as, "Day 79 of the Iran Hostage Crisis," .... "Day 101 of the Iran Hostage Crisis," .... Day 250 of the Iran Hostage Crisis..." and so on and so on. Americans were angry and frustrated, as no one really knew what to do. After the first couple of months of the crisis, it was revealed that Canada had hidden several American diplomats in their embassy in Iran, eventually granting special "Canadian passports" to the Americans and then flying them out of Iran to safety. All over the United States the announcement was greeted by standing ovations for the Canadians and Canadian flags were displayed and the Canadian national anthem played on radio stations and at sporting events, it was a little victory in a dismal situation, as the actual hostages remained in Iran.

In the midst of all that was going on, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. This prompted President Carter to have the American team boycott the 1980 Olympic Games, which were held in Moscow. It was a decision that brought mixed reviews, as many critics, fairly or unfairly, believed the Olympics should have been free of international politics.** 

President Carter also negotiated a treaty with Panama to turn control of the Panama Canal over to Panama on December 31, 1999, while maintaining the neutrality of the canal, so it could be used by all nations, and giving the U.S. the right to enforce that neutrality. Conservatives exploded, accusing Carter of giving away control of a necessary American shipping passageway to a dictator (which was true, as the ruler of Panama had taken power in an overthrow of the government several years before). The Senate ratified the treaty anyway, but conservatives fumed for years over the loss of what was "like sovereign American territory," as I believe some of them put it, and perhaps even Ronald Reagan said it, I just forget, as he opposed ratification of the treaty.

With inflation a constant problem, and gasoline prices at record highs (the Middle East/Iran situation),*** the economy stumbled along in a period of what was termed "stagflation;" that is, stagnant economic growth, but persistently high inflation which was threatening to climb to double digits. President Carter wore a sweater, told Americans to adjust their thermostats to help control energy costs, and a 55 mph highway speed limit had already gone into effect under President Nixon in 1974. At first, many Americans saw the need for such measures, but Americans were not used to such things, and many people began to resent the conservation measures. In an effort to get control of rising prices and restore economic growth, President Carter, a moderate, appointed Paul Volcker as Federal Reserve Chairman. Volcker began to raise interest rates, but with rate increases came a downturn in economic growth, which brought Carter trouble from labor unions and businesses. The 1980 election season was then underway. 

* The U.S. imposed economic sanctions against Iran back then, which were later intensified over other matters, and these sanctions continue to the present, President Obama having turned the screws even more tightly. The American public was so outraged over the hostage taking (countries had long agreed to the non arrest of foreign diplomatic personnel and to help protect such personnel from harm), that politicians were careful not to be seen as in any way associating with Iran, thus keeping any diplomatic ties from being reestablished, and preventing talks aimed at averting other crises. With no presence in Iran, when the anti-government protests developed there a year or two ago, the U.S. was pretty much out in the cold. Now, the other side of this is certainly true; that is, while Khomeini died in 1989, the religious fundamentalist governmental system he established is still in place, and this government not only allowed American embassy personnel to be held captive, but actively supported it. The problem is, no one, Republican or Democrat, really knows what to do about the situation, in spite of hot-air rhetoric to the contrary. The Middle East has been a powder keg for decades, seemingly waiting for the lit match. The world dependence on oil from the Middle East has given countries there a daunting trump card, as anything that threatens the world oil supply sends oil/gasoline prices skyrocketing, threatening economic turmoil everywhere. 

** In retaliation, the Soviets boycotted the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles.   

*** For much of the 1970s gasoline prices were high compared to previous decades, and this was in large part due to the Middle East being so unstable, including war between Israel and Arab nations, and revolution in Iran.

NOTE: The situation with Iran goes far beyond the revolution there and the taking of American hostages in late 1979, but the tensions between many nations, including the U.S., and Iran do trace back to the Iranian Revolution. In more recent times, Iran began research and development in the nuclear field. This brought more sanctions from the U.S. and others. In 2015, the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Russia, and several other countries reached an agreement with Iran over nuclear research and sanctions against Iran. 

WORD HISTORY:
Shot-This word, closely related to "shoot," goes back to Indo European "skeud," with the notion of "to project, to throw, to move quickly." This gave its Old Germanic offspring a noun "skot(an)," "something thrown or discharged, the result of shooting." This then gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "sceot," with the same meaning, but also "a payment, a contribution" presumably from the notion of "handing over; that is, projecting the payment to another." It had this same ("payment") or similar ("tax") meaning in the other Germanic languages too, but this meaning has died out, except in the expression "scot free;" literally, "payment free," and the original hard "c" or "k" sound is still present, while in "shot" the sound softened. Common in various forms in the other Germanic languages: German has "Schoss," which means "lap (of a person);" that is, "a projection from a sitting person," and also "a young sprout from a plant, for which English uses the related "shoot;" further, German has "Schuss," meaning "shot." Low German Saxon has "Schott" (shot) and "Schoot" (lap of a person). Saterland Frisian has "Schoat" (shot) and "Schoot" (lap); Dutch has "schot" (shot) and "schoot" (lap of a person). Danish has "skud" (shot) and skød (lap); Icelandic has "skot" (shot); Norwegian has "skudd" (shot); Swedish has "skott" (shot). Notice that the North Germanic languages, Danish, Icelandic, Norwegian and Swedish have all retained the "k" sound.