Politics in the twentieth century Whither Dixie
[00:04 - 00:09]
The National Association of educational broadcasters welcomes U2 with or
[00:09 - 00:14]
Dixie an examination of the forces reshaping southern politics. One in a
[00:14 - 00:19]
series of discussion programs titled politics in the 20th century produced and transcribed by
[00:19 - 00:23]
the Community Education Project at San Bernardino Valley College. First you'll hear Samuel
[00:23 - 00:28]
Lubell political analyst journalist and author speaking from his study in New York and
[00:28 - 00:33]
calculating some of the forces that are remaking the American political scene. Next you'll hear a
[00:33 - 00:38]
group of foreign experts and scholars picking up the discussion at the Department of Government seminar room at
[00:38 - 00:43]
promoting College in Claremont California. The group will be led by Dr. Charles Nixon
[00:43 - 00:48]
political scientist University of California Los Angeles and will have as its regular members
[00:48 - 00:53]
Dr. Frank Lee sociologist University of California Riverside and Dr. Lee
[00:53 - 00:57]
MacDonald a political scientist from own a college. We have as our special guest
[00:57 - 01:02]
today Mr. Gladwin Hill correspondent New York Times Los Angeles and
[01:02 - 01:05]
now here is Samuel bell as recorded in New York.
[01:05 - 01:12]
Almost everywhere in the south today one sees evidence of economic and social revolution.
[01:12 - 01:17]
Cattle graze in fields which once were devoted exclusively to cotton and tobacco
[01:17 - 01:22]
tractors chug past abandoned tenant shacks dramatizing the
[01:22 - 01:27]
fact that machines are at last freeing the south from its ancient dependence on
[01:27 - 01:32]
cheap subservient hand labor. Each tractor replaces from two to
[01:32 - 01:37]
five families each mechanized cotton picker to harvest as much
[01:37 - 01:42]
cotton as 20 to 30 hand pickers in the southern cities
[01:42 - 01:46]
where the people displaced from the land moved to the pace of change seems equally
[01:46 - 01:51]
hectic. Since the war's end. Hardly a day has passed
[01:51 - 01:56]
without one or more new plants being opened and some one of the 11 Southern
[01:56 - 02:00]
states between 1940 in 1952 alone
[02:00 - 02:05]
bank deposits in the south quadrupled and average incomes
[02:05 - 02:10]
tripled as roughly a million new jobs were created in manufacturing
[02:10 - 02:15]
employment and another million new jobs in trade.
[02:15 - 02:20]
Now revolutions are supposed to sweep aside the old order and to usher in a new scheme
[02:20 - 02:25]
of things. But the revolution reshaping Dixieland
[02:25 - 02:31]
has been making the south more not less conservative politically.
[02:31 - 02:36]
The march of industrialization has not brought any appreciable increase in the strength of organized
[02:36 - 02:40]
labor. If the economic lot of the individual Negro has
[02:40 - 02:45]
improved in the Deep South at least seems to be startling in its
[02:45 - 02:50]
determination to maintain segregation. What is a stake
[02:50 - 02:56]
politically in this conservative revolution which is sweeping the south.
[02:56 - 03:01]
Essentially it is a struggle of unification versus separatism.
[03:01 - 03:06]
It is a conflict between the forces which are pressuring the south towards political unity with the rest of
[03:06 - 03:11]
the country on a two party basis and those forces which are
[03:11 - 03:15]
tugging hard to keep the south separate and solid from the rest of the nation.
[03:15 - 03:21]
To follow this struggle as it unfolds in the years ahead we should keep in
[03:21 - 03:27]
focus the two streams of political protest which dominate the south today.
[03:27 - 03:32]
One is economic. The other is racial. It is from the economic
[03:32 - 03:36]
changes that the main pressures for unification with the rest of the country are coming.
[03:36 - 03:41]
The process can be seen best in the cities particularly in the newly developing
[03:41 - 03:45]
urban middle class the young lawyers doctors merchants and businessmen
[03:45 - 03:51]
in the main these rising middle class elements look to industry and business for the South's
[03:51 - 03:56]
future. Their political views are no different from similar business minded
[03:56 - 03:58]
aliments and northern cities.
[03:58 - 04:03]
The one difference is that living in a one party democratic state their votes are
[04:03 - 04:08]
thrown away and a custom merchant explained why he voted for
[04:08 - 04:13]
Eisenhower in one thousand fifty two. We were paying all these taxes he said.
[04:13 - 04:18]
We wanted to reverse the trend in Washington. The only way we could make our anger felt
[04:18 - 04:23]
was to vote for a Republican president. After the 1952
[04:23 - 04:27]
election I pulled in the vote by precinct for 13 southern cities
[04:27 - 04:33]
in each of these cities. The silk stocking and suburban precincts cast
[04:33 - 04:37]
from 62 to 80 percent of that vote for Eisenhower. This was not
[04:37 - 04:42]
too different from similar areas in the northeast. Nor is this
[04:42 - 04:47]
stratification of voting by economic status confined to upper income Southerners.
[04:47 - 04:52]
In each of these cities the lower down the income scale one goes the heavier
[04:52 - 04:57]
the Democratic vote becomes. The revolutionary significance of this
[04:57 - 05:02]
fact. Is that this is the same voting cleavage one finds in all
[05:02 - 05:06]
northern and western cities. As far as the cities of the South are
[05:06 - 05:11]
concerned the basis for a real two party politics already
[05:11 - 05:16]
exists. But what about the racial pressures in
[05:16 - 05:21]
the border states. The Supreme Court's decision seems to be bringing about a
[05:21 - 05:25]
gradual and to segregation in the schools. But in the deep south
[05:25 - 05:30]
public opinion is being mobilized to prevent any crack in the racial solidarity of these
[05:30 - 05:35]
states. The possibilities of a gradual evolutionary change in
[05:35 - 05:40]
race relations are no longer even talked about in many parts of the
[05:40 - 05:44]
South. As long as the south remains a nation apart
[05:44 - 05:49]
racially. No clean cut political realignment. On a two party basis is
[05:49 - 05:54]
possible still a return to the old one party rule of the
[05:54 - 05:59]
past is not likely either to impose and hold a solid racial
[05:59 - 06:04]
front. The racial extremists want to maintain a one party
[06:04 - 06:08]
monopoly but if they settle back to where the South's
[06:08 - 06:13]
allegiance to the Democratic Party can be taken for granted these racial
[06:13 - 06:19]
insurgents have no means of countering the political influence of the negro in the north.
[06:19 - 06:24]
My own feeling is that before a two party system emerges in the south we
[06:24 - 06:29]
will see a transition period in which Southerners will try to defeat the
[06:29 - 06:33]
Democrats nationally but without giving up one party control locally
[06:33 - 06:38]
with a Republican in the White House. This need for a third party or Republican
[06:38 - 06:43]
bolt tends to decline. But whenever the Democrats win the presidency
[06:43 - 06:48]
the famished out of insurgency would be likely to rise.
[06:48 - 06:54]
Apart from these immediate political prospects what has been happening in the South
[06:54 - 06:59]
should cause all of us to discard the old assumptions which have colored on thinking
[06:59 - 07:04]
about the south for so long. Twenty years ago for example
[07:04 - 07:09]
many people contended that the solution to the south racial problems was to lift
[07:09 - 07:13]
her out of poverty. But the mechanisation of Agriculture and the spread of
[07:13 - 07:18]
industrialization have made the Negro a less important economically and have
[07:18 - 07:23]
tended to push him out of the south's economy. When the Wright primary was
[07:23 - 07:28]
opened to Negroes liberals hailed it as a great victory. But the
[07:28 - 07:33]
registration of negroes in large numbers only spurred a heavier outpouring of
[07:33 - 07:37]
anti negro Godas. Ever since negroes began voting in the south
[07:37 - 07:41]
liberal candidates have had a tougher time winning.
[07:41 - 07:48]
That's was Mr. Samuel Lubell recording in his study in New York. Now let's continue
[07:48 - 07:53]
our discussion of the forces reshaping Southern politics as we join our
[07:53 - 07:58]
scholars and our guest in Room Six Department of Government at the Moana college here is Dr.
[07:58 - 08:00]
Nixon.
[08:00 - 08:05]
Gentleman you heard Mr. Little Bell's analysis of the developments shaping up in
[08:05 - 08:10]
southern political life today. I'm wondering how they strike you. Mr. McDonald as a
[08:10 - 08:14]
political scientist what impresses you particularly about what Mr. lvalues had to say.
[08:14 - 08:19]
Well I think Mr. LaBella is an emphasis upon the mechanical revolution in the industrial revolution in the
[08:19 - 08:24]
south is very appropriate very significant. And I'm not quite sure what he means by this word
[08:24 - 08:29]
conservative revolution is the South really stiffening in its determination to
[08:29 - 08:34]
maintain segregation certainly among some groups this is the case. But I wonder whether in
[08:34 - 08:38]
the long run. This can be called a conservative revolution or
[08:38 - 08:41]
perhaps a liberalizing revolution.
[08:41 - 08:46]
Mr Lee is a sociologist. What impresses you and Mr Lubell this
[08:46 - 08:47]
analysis.
[08:47 - 08:52]
I was particularly caught by one of his concluding
[08:52 - 08:56]
remarks in which he talks about the fact that the increasing
[08:56 - 09:01]
industrialization of the South has made the Negro a less important economically speaking.
[09:01 - 09:06]
I think this is true in a certain sense but I would also like to point out that
[09:06 - 09:11]
at the same time that this might be true that the economic importance of the Negro has
[09:11 - 09:16]
been growing in terms of his buying power and therefore he is able to
[09:16 - 09:20]
wield greater influence than he has at other times in the past history of the South.
[09:20 - 09:26]
Mr. Hill as a reporter for The New York Times you've recently spent
[09:26 - 09:31]
considerable time in the south and reporting on conditions which are shaping up there does Mr.
[09:31 - 09:35]
the balance analysis strike you as a legitimate one.
[09:35 - 09:39]
I think so I have a few qualifications on
[09:39 - 09:44]
his emphasis on some points. For instance I think on
[09:44 - 09:49]
this question of the South's stiffening in its determination to maintain
[09:49 - 09:54]
segregation that certainly is true. But I think that stiffening is a
[09:54 - 09:59]
very transitory thing in the main conclusion of the
[09:59 - 10:03]
New York Times survey of the South made this spring was that
[10:03 - 10:09]
segregation is doomed and most of the dozen
[10:09 - 10:13]
reporters who were down in the south on the survey
[10:13 - 10:19]
concluded that most of the people in the South Deep down
[10:19 - 10:24]
in their diets are in the back of their minds are convinced and know that it is doomed
[10:24 - 10:27]
it's only a matter of time. So if you
[10:27 - 10:33]
withdraw that that factor from
[10:33 - 10:36]
the situation in other words if you have a.
[10:36 - 10:43]
In the near future I grade a degree of integration that is going to have a tremendous
[10:43 - 10:48]
impact on the interaction with all these other factors most of OBL mentioned.
[10:48 - 10:54]
Do you mean that Southerners accept the idea that segregation is doomed in the south.
[10:54 - 10:58]
I think even Knaus who seem
[10:58 - 11:04]
verbal most in finance are against it realize
[11:04 - 11:08]
that in the back of their minds because they won't be try this
[11:08 - 11:13]
repeatedly in a conversation by such references as saying a
[11:13 - 11:19]
legal challenge is that they are erecting a legal barrier as
[11:19 - 11:24]
well fend off integration for 20 or 25 years that is
[11:24 - 11:29]
the longest figure I've heard. Well you can see that even
[11:29 - 11:34]
there is a presumption of eventual capitulation and I
[11:34 - 11:38]
think their guess of 20 to 25 years is as
[11:38 - 11:42]
optimistic and subjective and that actually will be a lot sooner.
[11:42 - 11:47]
Well if this is true how do you square this with new bills closing statement
[11:47 - 11:52]
that ever since the negroes have been voting in large numbers liberal candidates in the south have had a harder
[11:52 - 11:54]
time winning.
[11:54 - 11:58]
I'm wondering if. This suggests in that the liberals are being
[11:58 - 12:03]
squeezed out of the situation is really a long time trend in the South or whether
[12:03 - 12:08]
this is a short time reaction to the thrusting
[12:08 - 12:13]
of the school segregation issue into the forefront of Southern consciousness at the
[12:13 - 12:18]
present time. In this context I'm wondering if the might say the
[12:18 - 12:23]
liberal Southerner hasn't been squeezed out of the issue is this a permanent squeeze out or is
[12:23 - 12:27]
this a temporary and a No basically a short term reaction
[12:27 - 12:32]
to the changes which are occurring and I wonder if the liberal has really been squeezed out or whether the
[12:32 - 12:37]
Liberals have been forced to pay lip service perhaps to some of the older symbols
[12:37 - 12:40]
that they had forgotten about a little bit earlier.
[12:40 - 12:45]
So I think there are several basic facts we should recognize in a situation one
[12:45 - 12:50]
is that there are real liberals and a few and far
[12:50 - 12:54]
between. Organized labor is one of the principal
[12:54 - 12:59]
conspicuous liberal elements. Another factor in
[12:59 - 13:04]
this negro voting is that while Negroes now can vote in many
[13:04 - 13:09]
parts of the South their vote is not large
[13:09 - 13:14]
enough in most places to arouse apprehension on the part of.
[13:14 - 13:22]
What you might call a conservative anti immigration whites. Another
[13:22 - 13:27]
point is that the for various
[13:27 - 13:31]
reasons this integration and segregation issue has not shaped up
[13:31 - 13:37]
as a partisan question and the sum of some of the reasons are
🔍
This program has been transcribed using automated software tools, made possible through a collaboration between the American Archive of Public Broadcasting and Pop Up Archive. Please note that no automated transcription is perfect nor is it intended to replace human transcription labor. If you would like to contribute corrections to this transcript, please contact MITH at mith@umd.edu.