Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
TOP NEWS      
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
The Democrats' own history with race
By Bruce Bartlett
Poll
Will Hillary Clinton fight for the nomination past June 1st?


NAACP Chairman Julian Bond probably spoke for most blacks and liberals last week when he said the Republican Party is equivalent to the Nazi Party.
 
"The Republican Party would have the American flag and the swastika flying side by side," he told an audience at Fayetteville State University.

 Also last week, a new "scientific study" was released showing that Republicans are racist by nature. "The study found that supporters of President Bush and other conservatives had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did," The Washington Post reported.

 For decades, it has been a template of the major media that Republicans are the party of racism. It repeats uncritically any charges of Republican racism, no matter how unfounded. Democrats, on the other hand, are always given a pass whenever they commit racist offenses. Even a cursory review, however, will show that the media template is totally contrary to history.

 Slavery is the greatest evil ever to beset black people in this country. In the decades leading up to the Civil War, there was intense political debate on what to do about it. The Republican Party was founded in 1854 for the express purpose of ending slavery. The Democratic Party, by contrast, defended it to the bitter end.

 Just to show how far Democrats would go to defend slavery, it's worth remembering what happened to Sen. Charles Sumner, Republican of Massachusetts. After giving a speech denouncing slavery in 1856, he was viciously beaten by Rep. Preston Brooks, Democrat of South Carolina, for daring to question the right to own slaves. Being a coward, Brooks waited until the elderly Sumner was seated alone at his desk in the Senate and, without warning, struck him repeatedly with a cane. It took months for Sumner to recover.

 In 1858, Sen. Stephen A. Douglas, Democrat of Illinois, debated Republican Abraham Lincoln on the question of slavery. Said Douglas during one of those debates: "For one, I am opposed to negro citizenship in any and every form. I believe this government was made on the white basis. I believe it was made by white men for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and I am in favor of confining citizenship to white men, men of European birth and descent, instead of conferring it upon negroes, Indians and other inferior races."

 So prevalent were these views in the Democratic Party that Douglas was named its presidential candidate in 1860. Amazingly, Southerners actually viewed Douglas as being too moderate on the slavery issue and instead voted for Vice President John C. Breckinridge, a slave-owner who also ran as a Democrat, thus splitting the pro-slavery vote and allowing Lincoln to win.

 After the war, the Democratic Party held a lock on the South for more than 100 years. All of the "Jim Crow" laws that prevented blacks from voting and kept them down were enacted by Democratic governors and Democratic legislatures. The Ku Klux Klan was virtually an auxiliary arm of the Democratic Party, and any black (or white) who threatened the party's domination was liable to be beaten or lynched. Democrats enacted the first gun-control laws in order to prevent blacks from defending themselves against Ku Klux Klan violence. Chain gangs were developed by Democrats to bring back de facto slave labor.

 President Woodrow Wilson, the second Democrat to serve since the Civil War, reintroduced segregation throughout the federal government immediately upon taking office in 1913. Avowed racists such as Josephus Daniels and Albert Burleson were named Cabinet secretaries. Black leaders like W.E.B. DuBois, who had strongly supported Wilson, were bitterly disappointed, but shouldn't have been surprised. As president of Princeton University, Wilson refused to admit blacks and as governor of New Jersey ignored blacks' requests for state jobs, even though their votes had provided his margin of victory.

 When Franklin D. Roosevelt had his first opportunity to name a member of the Supreme Court, he appointed a life member of the Ku Klux Klan, Sen. Hugo Black, Democrat of Alabama. In 1944, FDR chose as his vice president Harry Truman, who had joined the Ku Klux Klan in Kansas City in 1922. Throughout his presidency, Roosevelt resisted Republican efforts to pass a federal law against lynching, and he opposed integration of the armed forces.

 Another Ku Klux Klan member, Sen. Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, personally filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 14 straight hours to keep it from passage. He is still a member of the U.S. Senate today. As recently as the 1980s, Sen. Ernest Hollings, Democrat of South Carolina, publicly referred to blacks as "darkies" and Hispanics as "wetbacks" without suffering any punishment from his party.

 In short, the historical record clearly shows that Democrats, not Republicans, have been the party of racism in this country.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Bruce Bartlett is a former senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis of Dallas, Texas. Bartlett is a prolific author, having published over 900 articles in national publications, and prominent magazines and published four books, including Reaganomics: Supply-Side Economics in Action.

Be the first to read Bruce Bartlett's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
With all this slant, use italics
Mr. Bartlett could have been more accurate without losing any force to his argument. For crying out loud- Byrd by himself is all one would need for demonstrating Democratic hierocracy with racism. The other examples are somewhat disingenuous. Specifically: in the era of the Civil War, the nature of the Democrats versus the Republicans were inverted from contemporary values (the Democrats were "conservative" and the Republicans were "Liberal"- remember "the party of Lincoln" was the Republican party). This is not to say that the author is wrong, but in a current context doesn't really mean anything. Then there is the "scientific study" that alleges Republicans are prone to racism by virtue of their makeup or some such idiocy. Don't forget Nixon is on tape in the national archives saying to Erlichman that blacks are genetically inferior to whites. He had "scientific" support too- means nothing but is hurtful just the same.
Woodrow Wilson is a problem on so many more levels that Bartlett had space to illustrate, and there is no defense for this man.
Hugo Black, however is more multi-faceted and enigmatic than this article shows. For starters, he was not a "life member". Do the homework and you'll see mixed messages. On the one hand he was apparently active enough in the clan over a number of years, but on the other, he claims to have been to only a few meeting (which is difficult if not impossible to disprove at this point), and has apologists who liken his presence with the Klan to spying. Were this the only measure of the man, I'd be inclined to go along with the racist angle, but in his lengthy career on the Supreme Court doesn't mesh with racism. Black should have been an example of how the Democrats didn't seek a better (that is to mean, less likely racist) candidate, and this is the group Bartlett means to hold accountable.
Most off base, I think, is the treatment of Truman. Here's a man who never attended a meeting and was never made a member. I am familiar with the story that Bartlett uses for this slight, and it's apocryphal at best. It involves Truman paying a friend a membership fee in the Klan, but even this story mentions that Truman then asked for the money back. That seems a mighty spurious account to use to malign a man.
It's a pity, because the core premise of this article is very defendable, but is poorly substantiated, although I'd be sure to include that BOTH parties play host today to unsavory and thoughtless people who prevent us from progressing as a society. Perhaps this topic should be revisited?


Did you mean "Radical Republicans"?
Nice try but different faction of the Republican Party. Most Republicans during that period did nothing, but fail their own senses ie.. eyes, ears etc... which made them just as guilty. Typically states that supported slavery were democratic (primarily the southern states). This subject is very debatable but the facts remain true however, "When Legend becomes fact, print the legend" Robert Wuhl.

One criterion taken in consideration is the represented state and not the party nowadays in the black community. What puzzles me so much is this: Why is this a stat that someone has been allowed access to? I've always been taught, your vote is private and confidential, I guess not? Do the majority of white people vote Republican or are you just speaking for your party??
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.