Comments on: Historical Revisionism Big Time

By: *

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:42:08 +0000

So the fact that Herbert quoted Atwater without analyzing the context makes the content of the quote somehow less relevant? I’m just not following you. You haven’t explained what context makes it any less damning, either.

By: zdexter

zdexter — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:33:14 +0000

For what we are arguing, read above. As for the quote – the origin of that particular block of text (that is, the point and period in time when it started to be quoted) is a Bob Herbert column from a while back. He quoted exactly those words from Lamar’s interview and made no attempt to even analyze the context.

By: *

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:27:27 +0000

I'm not quoting a Bob Herbert column, perhaps BH was quoting the same thing I was? Either way, being your research assistant isn't really a big priority for me here. You are the ones making the controversial assertion that the Southern Strategy didn't exist, or that it had nothing to do with race, or something, I'm not really sure what you are claiming. I've suggested a few readings above, here are a few more: The origins of the southern strategy by Bruce H. Kalk; The southern strategy revisited by Joseph A. Aistrup; The southern strategy by Reginald Murphy and Hal Gulliver; and, for a primary source, the Harry S. Dent papers at Clemson.

By: zdexter

zdexter — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 02:43:06 +0000

He just quoted a Bob Herbert column. Mr. Herbert’s opinion columns do not constitute an objective academic source.

By: cwjones

cwjones — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:51:51 +0000

Ok, so maybe you don’t have them on hand, but have you read any of them? Have you read any book that cites them?

By: *

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:47:14 +0000

cwjones, I don’t have any primary documents at hand here in my underground bunker, but it’s a topic that has been widely studied, and there are numerous books, articles and dissertations that address it directly and indirectly. UNC has an excellent library…

zdexter, I’m curious about what it is about the context of the Lamis interview with Atwater that makes you think he was not talking about GOP electoral strategy?

By: cwjones

cwjones — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 23:16:28 +0000

Are any documents available to support the claim that the Republicans deliberately attempted to bring ex-Democrat racists into the fold? Anything such as minutes of meetings, official strategy papers or the like?

By: zdexter

zdexter — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:53:12 +0000

Well, so have the Democrats. And as for the party that has done it most recently: the Democrats (Hillary), unfortunately, in 2008.

It’s not the concepts of Medicare and Medicaid as much as their distortions to the market incentive structure. And in fact, many US citizens who are uninsured do not need insurance. But with the recession, many more surely need insurance. That doesn’t mean that the federal government should try its hand at what is fundamentally a business operation (they don’t run any large, profitable businesses).

Our health system is illiberal at its core, and that is the primary reason that costs are so high. Governments already control a number rapidly approaching 50% of healthcare spending in the United States.

We will cover healthcare extensively in the fall both on this blog and in the print publication. Economically liberal components of our healthcare industry have made U.S. care for diseases and injuries the best in the world. Our survival rates, where those rates depend on quality of care, for many serious health problems are higher than in countries with socialized medicine. Of course, this is a general claim and we will go into serious detail in our upcoming health care features. Look for those in the fall; the timing will most likely correspond with Obama’s push.

By: *

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:33:24 +0000

No one is suggesting that there are not racists in both parties; you are quite handy at knocking down these straw men. My point, again, is that the original post is plainly incorrect; there is no revisionism in acknowledging that the GOP has, in recent history, embraced racism as a means to accrue political power. This is hardly a controversial position among political scientists or historians of the 20th century.

Re: health care — I am simply stating that the quality of health care in the US falls far short of that offered in other industrialized countries with national health care systems. I am not saying it is failing — it has already failed, in that tens of millions of US citizens lack health insurance or are underinsured and cannot afford basic or preventive care. You wanted an example of of lasting economic harm caused by economic liberalism; I think that’s a pretty good one. Perhaps in a separate post you could explain how the “free market” can provide health care for everyone, if only Medicare, Medicaid and the VHA were abolished?

By: zdexter

zdexter — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:05:13 +0000

No, the free market is not imaginary. “Free” doesn’t mean ‘not influenced by price makers.’ I think you can figure out what “free” means. And, as you know, I didn’t say it could not fail.

On claim that U.S. healthcare is very bad: you are unable to show a causal relationship between the quality of U.S. healthcare and any of the typical party-line statistics that the left uses to claim that our system is failing.

You can find racists in both parties.

I suggest that you read the context of Lamis’s interview in order to understand what he was saying. He was not exactly describing a GOP strategy.

Reagan’s policies were not determined by a desire to appeal to racist Democrats.