Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> After the Democrats signed the Civil Rights act of 1964, the racists got out of the Democrat's party, and started to align themselves to Republicans.

Note that this was the last of several splits between the White supremacists and the Democratic establishment; why this one stuck but others didn’t is that, unlike with, say, the Dixiecrat split in the 1940s, the Republicans actively courted and shaped their message to appeal to the disaffected racists after the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In previous splits, the racists who wanted any influence had always coming slinking back to the Democrats because of structural duopoly and the fact that the Republicans were not welcoming to them. In the 1960s, that changed.



[flagged]


> This is oft repeated, but what’s the evidence?

All over the place.

But probably the simplest evidence is Strom Thurmond.


One politician flipped an entire party’s platform? What about the 20 democrat senators who voted against the act and stuck with the party?

A campaign of FUD regarding states rights (the basis of democrats own secessionist arguments) and conservative policies and blindness to continuing racist liberal policies is more likely (including the current president).


> One politician flipped an entire party’s platform?

I think you need to learn the difference between saying something is a simple piece of evidence of an effect and saying it is the cause of the effect.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: