That Southern Strategy

Us old farts will know what I mean by the “Southern Strategy”……..it was a Reagan idea to gain the support of the Democratic Southern states….by focusing on social issues and not reality…..

But for those that are too young to recall this political strategy……

In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.   As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party. It also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right.

The “Southern Strategy” refers primarily to “top down” narratives of the political realignment of the South which suggest that Republican leaders consciously appealed to many white Southerners’ racial grievances in order to gain their support.   This top-down narrative of the Southern Strategy is generally believed to be the primary force that transformed Southern politics following the civil rights era.   This view has been questioned by historians such as Matthew Lassiter, Kevin M. Kruse and Joseph Crespino, who have presented an alternative, “bottom up” narrative, which Lassiter has called the “suburban strategy“. This narrative recognizes the centrality of racial backlash to the political realignment of the South, but suggests that this backlash took the form of a defense of de facto segregation in the suburbs rather than overt resistance to racial integration and that the story of this backlash is a national rather than a strictly Southern one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

There seems to be a bit of this political strategy being employed by the Trump machine, if we could call it that…….hyper-nationalism and racist undertones……

Contemporary Republican politicians like to invoke the legacy of Ronald Reagan to bolster their policies. However, the type of White nationalism being espoused by Donald Trump and his supporters more accurately traces back to two less appealing Republican personalities: Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon, and to the backlash created by the Civil Rights Movement of the nineteen sixties.

It was the Civil Rights Movement that weakened the Democratic Party’s hold on the South, a hold that dated back to the post-Civil War period of Reconstruction. The Goldwater 1964 Presidential campaign took advantage of the opportunity by appealing to Southern White prejudice, and thus pioneered the “Southern Strategy” that was further developed by Nixon and has continued in effect to the present day. Goldwater’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act and his defense of “states’ rights” won him five Deep South states that had not gone Republican since Reconstruction. Donald Trump’s electoral “base” is of course not limited to the South, but it’s nevertheless true that Southern and border states constitute the bedrock of the GOP today.

The Southern Strategy and Donald Trump

Mr. Trump’s largest group are old white men in the South……so he will use the “Southern Strategy” to help vault him into the good graces of other like minded “people”…..

The new South is much like the old South…just with a few minor tweaks….

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Wrote and now You Know”

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Advertisements

But The Kurds Are Our Friends

Turkey’s assault of the Kurds in Northern Syria has the world on the edge of disaster…..and the abandonment of the Kurds by the US is an insult to our long time friends….

And the MSM has lost its timy mind over the Trump decision and keeps feeding the crap that they were allies and friends….even to the point of posting a fake attack video…..

With the headline “Slaughter in Syria,” ABC aired footage of what it said was a Turkish attack on a Syrian border town on Sunday and Monday. One problem: The video was actually of a popular military gun demonstration in Kentucky, Mediaite reports. ABC apologized after the video was shown on World News Tonight Sunday and Monday’s edition of Good Morning America. The network said it “regrets the error” and it pulled the footage as soon as “questions were raised about its accuracy.” It did not explain how the error occurred. The footage from the night shoot at the Knob Creek Gun Range was uploaded to YouTube in 2017. It’s not clear whether it was edited before ABC aired it.

Check the video…..

Yes they were Allies…they were Allies because the US was their best chance of gaining a nation of their own, a Kurdistan……I think they will tolerate a lot with the chance of that dream being realized.

But let’s be realistic…friends?  Not necessarily so.

The American embrace of the SDF was always a temporary solution to the problem of ISIS. The United States never has supported a greater Kurdish nation. And while there’s been much lip service to the idea of using the SDF as a vehicle to destabilize the government of Bashar al-Assad, regime change has never been seriously pursued by the United States in Syria. Today there is widespread recognition that, following the intervention of Russia in 2015, Assad is here to stay. 

Trump’s decision to withdraw American forces from the Syrian border zone makes perfect sense: it avoids a damaging conflict with Turkey, a strategic NATO ally, and sidesteps a potential major power confrontation with Russia. This was always in the cards, since the United States was never a guarantor of the Syrian Kurds’ objective of autonomy. But the precipitous way that the American redeployment was announced, and the fact that it was done void of any coordination with either the Kurds or other U.S. regional allies, sets the stage for more geopolitical chaos in a region already wracked by conflict.

Why the Syrian Kurds Aren’t Necessarily Our Friends

Plus I see evangelicals saying that they are siding with the Kurds which I do not understand for Kurds are not necessarily protecting Christians….

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/assyrian-christians-face-persecution-kurdish-nationalists/

The media is driving this  situation like they do every situation….they are creating the news as they go.

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Closing Thought–15Oct19 #2

50 years ago today…..15 October 1969…….

Moratorium Day involved mass protests across the US. Religious services, rallies and meetings were held, aiming to bring the war to an end.

By this point, US troops had been fighting the Communist Viet Cong in Vietnam since 1965. About 45,000 Americans had been killed in action by the end of 1969.

In the frigid fall of 1969, more than 500,000 people marched on Washington to protest U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. It remains the largest political rally in the nation’s history. While President Richard Nixon was said to have spent the day watching college football inside the White House, to the rest of the world, the protests successfully proved that the antiwar movements comprised more than just politicized youth. The November rallies were part of a string of demonstrations that took place around the world in 1969, with groups from San Francisco to Boston and London petitioning for peace. Despite their cries, the war toiled on for six more years, ending with the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975.

(Time)

Check out the Great photos from this antiwar protest……

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49893239

Or for those that cannot read…..

See photos of the history of the peace symbol.

This was when the nation had a soul…..and the deaths of so many Americans for no reason was unacceptable….I miss those days.

And now for Country Joe……

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

What Were They Thinking?

A history lesson for a Tuesday…..

Most everyone who has a TV knows the Adolf Hitler was the leader of Nazi Germany….but how many realize that he was elected to the Reichstag in 1932…

The Nazis’ rise to power fascinated me…so in my younger days I found a good book that help me understand what the German people were thinking….

The Nazi Voter

The first study based on a large national sample of both urban and rural districts examines the Nazi constituency — how it was formed, from which social groups, under what conditions, and with what promises. Using advanced statistical techniques to analyze each national election of the Weimar era, Childres offers a new and challenging interpretation of who voted for Hitler’s NSDAP and why. He also provides a systematic examination of Nazi campaign strategy.

The Nazis didn’t just seize power—they were voted in. It’s hard to imagine, but there was a time when Adolf Hitler was a name on a ballot in a democratic election. He was openly fascist and anti-Semitic, but the people chose to make him their leader. They supported him while he dissolved democracy.

That book left as many questions as it answered…..

It’s easy to write off the rise of Nazism as a momentary lapse of reason, but the truth isn’t that simple. The people who voted for Hitler really thought they were making the best choice.

There were many reasons that the German people voted for and elected Hitler to represent them…..the top ten is listed below….

10 Reasons The German People Elected Adolf Hitler

Interesting how the people change their thinking to help a despot rise to power under the guise of “democracy”….

Thank God humanity has grown beyond this type of craziness….(sarcasm in case you missed it)…..

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Closing Thought–14Oct19

By now the whole world and even FOX News watchers know that Turkey is invading Northern Syria in search of the Kurds.

First, Kurds?

The Kurds are mostly Sunni Muslims who share a common language, customs and cultural traditions. But they don’t share a nationality.

https://www.newsy.com/stories/a-brief-explainer-on-the-kurdish-people/

And the Kurds DID assist the Allies in WW2…..

Image

The #Kurds DID fight on the Allied side in WW2. They helped break the siege after the 1941 pro-Nazi Coup d’état in Iraq & were part of the (pro-Allied) Iraq Levies. In 1942 Kurds made up 25% of the force. By 1943, 10 of the 44 companies of Iraq Levies were Kurdish.

Now that you have been brought up to date on the Kurds….

My problem is that Turkey has invaded a sovereign nation in this case Syria……I do believe that this is frowned upon by most international treaties.

Like treaties the US has signed over the years Trump is null and voiding most of them in his narcissistic rampage through our foreign policy.

I believe that this invasion is a violation of the United Nations Charter Article 2…..

  • The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
  • All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
  • All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
  • All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

I wish I could say that Turkey is the sole violator…but that would be a LIE.

Now we wait to hear what the UN will have to say and/or do…..

What about NATO…since Turkey is a NATO memeber and Syria were to attack them…..the US would be compelled to enter into this conflict….

  • Collective defence means that an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies.
  • The principle of collective defence is enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty.
  • NATO invoked Article 5 for the first time in its history after the 9/11 terrorist attacks against the United States.
  • NATO has taken collective defence measures on several occasions, for instance in response to the situation in Syria and in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine crisis.
  • NATO has standing forces on active duty that contribute to the Alliance’s collective defence efforts on a permanent basis.

All the confusion in and around Syria made me thonk of a song from my past…..

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Deadliest Battle For The USA

I have been studying World War One for a very long time……it has been 100 years since the end of this war and what have we learn?

To be honest…we have learned very little.

To Europe the war was a “Big Deal” because they lost so many young men that a whole generation was damn near wiped out.

It is not so important to us Americans…..but since we did participate in this conflict then what was the deadliest battle for our troops?

A century ago, the first shots were fired in one of the most important American military engagements ever — and the deadliest battle in U.S. history.

World War I’s Meuse-Argonne Offensive, which involved more than a million American soldiers and claimed the lives of 26,277, was launched in northern France on Sept. 26, 1918 to push the German army out of the country and reclaim a rail network vital to supplying enemy troops. The fight lasted a grueling 46 days and generated scores of stories of heroism and sacrifice.

But most notably, it helped bring an end to The Great War.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/americas-deadliest-battle-world-war-is-meuse-argonne-offensive-100-years-later

World War One, The Great War, The War To End All Wars, was considered by many as an accident brought about by events that spiraled out of control…..but to others including myself think that the war was NO accident…..

Not surprisingly, this has brought all sorts of stories and op-eds discussing the disastrous events that killed some 16 million people and wounded an additional 21 million others.

To this day, most observers continue to claim that World War I was an inadvertent war: that is, that none of the countries involved particularly wanted war but war came nonetheless. Some claim it was the major armament programs and offensive military doctrines adopted by European countries in the run-up to the war that made WWI inevitable. Others claim it was the hypernationalistic populaces that caused the war.  Still others blame the tight alliances that European nations formed in the years prior to WWI, which created an environment in which the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by an anarchist could plunge the entire continent into a bloody war. And then there are those that blame the situation on the irreconcilable interests of a rising Germany and a declining Great Britain. Regardless of the particular explanation invoked, most seem to agree that the war was an accident.

https://thediplomat.com/2014/08/the-great-myth-world-war-i-was-no-accident/

AS I have said…I studied WW1 because of the scope….others study WW2 because of its result……as they say Idealists study WW2; realists study WW1…..

Scenario one: a dominant superpower, serving as the unquestioned head of an international alliance, and possessing unmatched military and economic strength. This superpower appears exceptionally led at the military, political, and bureaucratic levels, and possesses the time and space to conceptualize a focused strategy against a specific threat.

Scenario two: several powerful nations operating in a multipolar world, pursuing divergent interests, with none possessing an absolute advantage over the others. Exceptional political and military leadership is lacking, and the rapid pace of change means these nations are carried forward by events over which they exercise little control. Few are certain what a future threat or strategy may resemble.

Our first scenario describes the world of 1945; the triumphant United States at the head of a new international order and poised to combat a clear challenger. Our second describes the world of 1918: victorious powers fighting over diverging interests, squandering their opportunities of peace, but convinced in their conceit that the world could be ordered in their image.

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/idealists-study-world-war-ii-realists-study-world-war-i-83031

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

“I Read, I Wrote and now You KNow”

“Lego ergo Scribo”

What About The Saudi-Iranian Mash Up?

Whatever happen to the brewing war in the Persian Gulf?

A week begins and this situation is a distant memory.

Just last month we were on the brink of an all out war (we seem to always be on the brink these days) with Iran over the Persian Gulf incidents…..and attack on a Saudi refinery and one on ma Saudi ship….

Saudi Arabia said on Monday that two of its oil tankers were among those attacked off the coast of the United Arab Emirates and described it as an attempt to undermine the security of crude supplies amid tensions between the United States and Iran.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-oil-tankers-fujairah/saudi-oil-tankers-among-those-attacked-off-uae-amid-iran-tensions-idUSKCN1SJ088

With the situation between the Saudis and the Iranians it is always a tit for tat……and so it was recently…an Iranian tanker has been attacked…..

Two missiles struck an Iranian tanker traveling through the Red Sea off the coast of Saudi Arabia Friday, Iranian officials said, the latest incident in the region amid months of heightened tensions between Tehran and the US. Saudi officials didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment, per the AP. The state-run IRNA news agency, quoting Iran’s National Iranian Tanker Co., identified the stricken vessel as the Sabiti. Iranian state TV said the explosion damaged two storerooms aboard the oil tanker and caused an oil leak into the Red Sea near Jiddah. The leak was later stopped, per IRNA. “This latest incident, if confirmed to be an act of aggression, is highly likely to be part of the wider narrative of deteriorating relations between [the Saudis] and the US and Iran,” private maritime security firm Dryad Maritime warned.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi described the incident as an “attack” carried out by those committing “dangerous adventurism.” In a statement, Mousavi said the Sabiti was struck twice in the span of a half-hour and that an investigation was underway. “The oil tanker … sustained damages to the body when it was hit by missiles,” IRNA said. The agency didn’t say whom Iranian officials suspect of launching the missiles. Images released by Iran’s Petroleum Ministry appeared to show no visible damage to the Sabiti visible from its bridge, though they didn’t show the ship’s sides. A spokesman for the US Navy’s 5th Fleet overseeing the Mideast said authorities there were “aware of reports of this incident,” but he declined to comment further.

Tit For Tat!

The president and his troubles with the legal stuff has overshadowed a news report that should have been a headline……Iran and Saudis hold talks….

the Saudis appear to be resigned to the fact that they just aren’t starting that war. Their fallback plan, it seems, is to now try to get some indirect negotiations going with Iran to reduce tensions, after spending years bringing those tensions to a boiling point.

Exactly how this process got going is unclear, put Iraqi and Pakistani officials say they were brought into the matter by the Saudi Crown Prince, and both are now intending to serve as mediators for the indirect talks.

Iran is on board for the effort, but Saudi officials, despite being reported to have started the whole thing, are now saying they’re considering the idea, but want to make sure everyone thinks Iraq and Pakistan are acting unilaterally, and they never approached anyone.

An official Saudi statement also insists that since the escalation was all the fault of Iran, they need to begin de-escalation, and that it’s not up to the Saudis to do that. This is in keeping with the Saudis’ stance of trying to provoke every action in the Middle East, but also keep up a narrative where they didn’t actually do anything, and just react to everything that happens.

And while the Saudis usually turn to the US to drive whatever policy they want, it is noteworthy that the US seems uninvolved in this peace process. It seems even the Saudis are well aware that the US isn’t a nation to try to use to make peace.

(antiwar.com)

This should have been a lead story since if these talks are successful then the war drums would be silenced and the the humanitarian crisis and war in Yemen could be negotiated to a halt.

This should have been the story of the week.

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”