Political Ships of Theseus | The Party Switch

Political Ships of Theseus | The Party Switch


Everyone knows that the parties flipped during
the Civil Rights movement. It’s common knowledge, I mean how did the
country go from looking like this to looking like this? And until recently, it was common knowledge. But there’s been a push to dispel the “party
switch myth” for… reasons. The myth of the Southern Strategy is just
the Democrats’ excuse for losing the South and yet another way to smear Republicans with
the label ‘racist’ – don’t buy it. This video is brought to you by Skillshare. So this is the situation we’re starting
with, Democrats in blue, Republicans in red (1908-1920). This is what the country looked like at the
end of Reconstruction, Republicans were dominant in the north and west and Democrats in the
South. Lincoln was a Republican and the states which
formed the Confederacy were mostly Democrats. So yes, it is true that when the KKK was formed,
they supported the Democratic party. But to say that the Democrats started the
KKK is a bit of a stretch, that’s like saying Republicans started Unite the Right… wasn’t
the KKK part of that? During the era of Reconstruction, federal
troops stationed in the South, helped secure rights for the newly freed slaves. Hundreds of black men were elected to southern
state legislatures as Republicans. And 22 black Republicans served in the US
Congress by 1900. It’s interesting that she stops the count
in 1900, when Jim Crow was firmly in place, because from 1900 to 2018, there’ve only
been eight, three of which are serving right now. There’s been 117 black Democrats, 47 right
now. But during these elections, there were zero
black congressmen – so what happened here, why is this one yellow? That was Teddy Roosevelt who was the first
Republican to really break with the party. Lincoln and the other previous Republicans
were very pro-business, railroad tycoons were a thing because of them. Roosevelt was not, he was very progressive. He passed anti-trust laws to break up monopolies,
wanted to stop corporations from donating to political campaigns, and was very environmentally
friendly. The Republican party wasn’t and in 1912
Roosevelt said… My feeling is that the Democrats will probably
win if they nominate a progressive. So when he lost the Republican nomination,
he split off to form the Progressive Bull Moose party. Wilson won that election because of the Republican
split. Both parties, then and now, subscribe to the
economic philosophy of Liberalism – capital L – and more recently Neoliberalism, but
the struggle between and within the two parties was over the government’s level of involvement
in the economy. And that was really decided during the New
Deal. FDR is president, the Great Depression has
crashed the world economy, and the government decided to do something about it. FDR’s New Deal started several federal programs
and borderline socialist economic policies. Many of his ideas were implemented in France,
Germany, and Japan after the war, but he died before he could fully put them in place here. The New Deal caused a major political realignment,
which is just the fancy term for party switch. Before this, there were fiscal conservatives
and liberals in both parties, they were all over the spectrum. But now, if you believed in a conservative
economic policy, you were Republican, and if you were more liberal, you were Democrat. Jim Crow was still very much in place, so
very few black people who were allowed to vote, switched to the Democratic party because
those economic policies benefitted them the most. But when it came to social issues, the parties
were still very mixed. In 1948, Truman, a Democrat, desegregated
the military and Hubert Humphrey gave a speech at the Democratic National Convention. The time is now arrived in America for the
Democratic Party to get out of the shadow of states’ rights and walk forthrightly
into the bright sunshine of human rights. The time is now arrived in America for the
Democratic Party to get out of the shadow of states’ rights and walk forthrightly
into the bright sunshine of human rights. This made southern Democrats so mad that they
split off to form the States’ Rights Democratic party, more commonly known as the Dixiecrats,
nominating Strom Thurmond for president. Keep an eye on him I think he becomes important
later. The Dixiecrats later rejoined the rest of
the Democrats, but still lost to Eisenhower in 1952. Won the states of Tennessee, Florida, and
Virginia. And in 1956, he picked up Louisiana, Kentucky,
and West Virginia too. You know, when she has it listed like that
it sure looks compelling, but when you look at the maps, it tells a different story. This is the Solid South, the idea that they
almost always vote together. Eisenhower, despite being a huge war hero
was very much anti-big military, fearing what he called the Military Industrial Complex
– corporations profiting from a perpetual state of war. The Founding Fathers were also against the
idea, there are two amendments in the Bill of Rights addressing it. The Second Amendment created state militias,
because they wanted that to be the country’s primary defense rather than a standing federal
army. And then there’s the Third Amendment, the
one everyone forgets, regarding quartering troops. Eisenhower was a Republican who was against
having a big military, which was kind of the norm at the time, but he was also the general
who defeated Hitler, so he was incredibly popular. These are the maps I want you to remember,
because this is the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement. Technically, it started in 1954 when Brown
v. Board of Education decided that separate was inherently not equal and ordered all public
schools to be desegregated. Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott
happened a year later. In 1956, the Dixiecrats, headed by Strom Thurmond
and Richard Russell wrote the Declaration of Constitutional Principles, more commonly
known as the Southern Manifesto, declaring that Brown v. Board of Education was a clear
abuse of judicial power, and that defending states’ rights should be the official platform
of the Democratic party. Three southern Democrats refused to sign it,
including LBJ and Al Gore’s dad. The Dixiecrats were part of the Democratic
party, but if it helps, you can think of them like the Tea Party being part of the Republicans. Part of it, but an extreme wing of it. And while the parties were pretty solid in
their economic ideas after the New Deal, they were still split on social issues – more
often than not, the Dixiecrats teamed up with socially conservative Republicans and defeated
over a hundred civil rights bills. In 1957, Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights
Act of… 1957. There’s going to be a lot of these and they’re
all named the same so, get used to it. This was the first major dismantling of Jim
Crow, prior to this you could only serve on a jury if you were registered to vote and
almost everyone registered to vote was white. So white perpetrators of lynchings tended
to not get convicted while black people were almost always convicted of whatever they were
accused. The new law made it so that federal jury selection
was no longer tied to state voter rolls and set up several commissions on civil rights
to investigate what future legislation might be necessary to ensure equal rights. Including voting. The Civil Rights Act of 1960, which outlawed
poll taxes and other racist measures meant to keep blacks from voting-
What?! No it didn’t! The 24th Amendment did that, it’s literally
the only thing that amendment is about. Look, I don’t expect all of you to know
what every civil rights law did, nor do I expect you to know all twenty-seven amendments. But you’re not a professor of Political
Science attempting to teach people the “truth” about the civil rights movement. *Breath* The Civil Rights Act of 1960 made
it a federal crime to not follow court orders, specifically in response to southern governors
refusing to integrate schools. The 24th Amendment was proposed in 1962 and
enacted in 1964. It abolished poll taxes, which meant you had
to pay a dollar or two, which was big money back then, every time you wanted to vote. Every state in the South and about a dozen
states in the north and west had some form of poll tax. No state in the Solid South ratified the amendment
until after it was already in place. Even then, the amendment only applied to elections
for federal office and it took yet another Supreme Court decision for it to apply to
state and local elections as well. But let’s take a step back to 1960 when
Kennedy was elected, what’s going on there in the south? JFK was socially liberal, he picked Lyndon
Baines Johnson, a southern Democrat, as his running mate to try and secure the Solid South. But LBJ was socially liberal too. So when the election came, many southern electors
protest-voted for Harry Byrd, a Dixiecrat who wasn’t even running. In 1963, two major events occurred, Martin
Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech and the assassination of JFK. He had been working on a landmark civil rights
bill that LBJ continued to push for when he assumed the office. No memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently
honor President Kennedy’s memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights
bill for which he fought so long. That bill became the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
which outlawed racial discrimination in employment, businesses, public housing, state and municipal
facilities, schools, and any program which received federal funding. This is also the event that most people mark
as the moment the parties flipped, so let’s take a closer look. The only serious congressional opposition
to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80% of Republicans in congress supported the
bill, less than 70% of Democrats did. Democratic senators filibustered the bill
for 75 days until Republicans mustered the few extra votes needed to break the logjam. Most of everything she said there is true
or at least based in truth, but it doesn’t tell the entire story. This debate wasn’t between Democrats and
Republicans, it was between the social conservatives and social liberals. Which for the most part meant the South versus
everyone else. Most of the serious opposition to the bill
came from Democrats, because most southern congressmen were Democrats. Southern Republicans who were part of the
Conservative Coalition also opposed the bill and participated in the filibuster. Nobody ever seems to agree on how long the
filibuster lasted, it really boils down to whether or not you count weekends when the
Senate wasn’t in session. It was the longest filibuster in US history
and lasted from March 30th to June 10th, which is 72 total days. The bill was finally voted on on June 19th,
making it 81 days. So whether you count the weekends or the time
after the filibuster was broken, you can end up with answers ranging from 60 to 80 days. Republicans didn’t break the filibuster…
at least not alone. It was a combined effort from LBJ, Hubert
Humphrey, and Republican Everett Dirkson, an event dramatized by the HBO movie All the
Way, which I highly recommend. So how did the votes break down? If you do it by party, she is correct. 80% of Republicans in Congress voted for the
final version of the bill, and only 64% of Democrats. But, when you divide the votes by region instead,
you see a completely different story. We’re going to consider the South to be
any state was part of the Confederacy. Northern and western states voted 90% in favor
of the bill, while southern states only voted 7% in favor. But we can break this down even further. Democrats in the north and west voted in favor
by 95%, while Republicans voted in favor 85%. And here’s where it gets interesting, if
you were a Dixiecrat, that is, a Democrat from the South, there was only an 8% chance
you voted in favor, and if you were a southern Republican? There was a 0% chance you voted in favor. This bill was not decided by Democrats versus
Republicans, it was the South versus everyone else. So, here we are at the beginning of the civil
rights movement and here we are in 1964. LBJ won the election but lost the south to
Barry Goldwater, a Republican who voted against the Civil Rights Act. How did everything flip around? PragerU likes to paint the flip that didn’t
happen as black people deciding to vote Democrat. The Democrats came up with a new strategy,
if black people are going to vote, they might as well vote for Democrats. As President Lyndon Johnson was reported to
have said about the Civil Rights Act, “I’ll have them n*****s voting Democrat for 200
years. Forgetting for a moment that even Dinesh D’Souza
says that black people switched to the Democrats during the New Deal, that is a pretty inflammatory
statement. And do you know where it comes from? It’s not on tape, he didn’t say it in
public. It’s comes from a 1993 interview with a
flight attendant on Air Force One, who says he overheard LBJ say it 30 years earlier. That’s an ironclad, bulletproof source. So was the black vote really able to change
the map this much? No, of course not. While 96% of them voted for LBJ, only 5.5
million African Americans were able to vote in that election, which is a huge improvement
over previous elections for sure, but not enough to sway the results. LBJ won by 15.6 million votes, while still
losing the South. The Democratic party just lost the South for
the rest of my lifetime… and maybe yours. That quote, often used by Democrats, is also
very poorly sourced. Southern Democrats, angry with the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, switched parties. Fact, of the 21 Democratic senators who opposed
the Civil Rights Act, just one became a Republican. That one was Strom Thurmond, I told he’d
be important. She leaves out the house, where two more switched,
but that doesn’t matter. It wasn’t the politicians who changed, it
was the people. While the South did overwhelmingly vote Republican
for the first time in history, states like California and New York also switched. In 1965 the Voting Rights Act was put in place,
which made it a federal crime to obstruct anyone’s ability to vote and also got rid
of literacy tests, put in place by the Dixiecrats in order to stop black people from voting. You might be thinking that it makes sense
that if you want to vote, you should know English… but that’s not what the literacy
test was. Write down the Bill of Rights… all of them…
from memory. In 1968, they passed the Ci… you know what,
we’re going with the alternate name for this one – the Fair Housing Act. This made it so you couldn’t discriminate
who you rented or sold houses to based on race. Just because these civil rights bills were
passed, doesn’t mean we have racial equality everywhere, it’s not like all of the sudden,
segregated cities became homogenous mixes. Just because the civil rights era is over,
doesn’t mean we live in a meritocracy where everything is equal, we had, and still have,
a long way to go. Myth #3, Since the implementation of the Southern
Strategy, the Republicans have dominated the South. Fact, Richard Nixon, the man who is often
credited with creating the Southern Strategy, lost the deep south in 1968. She makes a compelling argument, until you
look at a map and realize he didn’t lose to the Democrats. The Dixiecrats, yet again, split off to form
a third party. He was running against this guy in the South. And I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow,
and segregation forever. Nixon still won that election and in 1972
won the South. This is when the second political realignment
occurred, when social conservatives shifted to the Republican party, and social liberals
to the Democrats. Nixon employed the Southern Strategy to win
over the social conservatives. And the thing is, PragerU and Dinesh D’Souza
both say it happened. They just disagree with why it happened. Why does the South vote overwhelmingly Republican? Because the south itself has changed, it’s
values have changed. The racism that once defined it doesn’t
anymore. Hah! Ahem, sorry. In an article that might as well be titled
“The Switch That Never Happened, Why the Switch Happened” Dinesh D’Souza writes… Nixon appealed to these Peripheral South voters
not on the basis of race but rather on the basis of Republican policies of entrepreneurial
capitalism and economic success. He just described the Southern Strategy. Not winning over white southerners by directly
appealing to their racial hatred, but by using dogwhistle politics. According to Lee Atwater, a Republican strategist
and later chairman of the Republican National Committee… Y’all don’t quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, “N*****,
n*****, n*****.” By 1968 you can’t say “n*****” — that hurts
you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’
rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re
talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic
things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. You don’t say “Segregation now, segregation
tomorrow” you say forced busing is an assault on our constitution and states’ rights. Most people will hear constitutional or economic
argument and might even agree, but this guy just doesn’t want black kids in his school. Reagan was famous for using the term “welfare
queens” – and despite the fact that plenty of white people are on welfare, we all picture
the same thing. The Democrats did it too, the Clintons often
used the term “urban violence” or “urban gangs” – they didn’t say it, but we’re
all picturing it. The Southern Strategy is pretty well documented
and even Dinesh D’Souza agrees that it happened, he just doesn’t agree that the policies
were racial dogwhistles. And I’ve said this before, but that’s
kind of the point of a dogwhistle, that you can deny that it’s a dogwhistle. We all agree that Nixon used “economic policies”
to win over the South. In contrast, Democrat Jimmy Carter nearly
swept the region in 1976, twelve years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Yet again, she’s leaving out pretty crucial
facts. Nixon was the first president to resign in
disgrace and left the Republican party in shambles, furthermore, Jimmy Carter was a
southern Democrat. It’s extremely rare for someone to lose
the region they’re from. But then Reagan was elected, a Democrat who
switched to being a Republican in 1962. I didn’t leave the Democratic party, the
Democratic party left me. He’s referring to the fact that the Democratic
party moved left on social issues during the 60s, while the Republican party moved right. Which caused a major political realignment,
or flip. In fact, almost everyone in Congress who ever
switched parties, went from Democrat to Republican… there’s also a weird trend in where these
people are from. But you also might notice that the majority
of the politicians who did so, did so during the 80s and 90s. On average, those 20 seats didn’t go Republican
for another two and a half decades. Republicans didn’t hold a majority of southern
Congressional seats until 1994, 30 years after the Civil Rights Act. I like that she says on average there, because
while some of them, like Al Gore’s dad were replaced immediately, others didn’t switch
for 40 years or more, so when she averages them, she can make them all seem like they
took decades. But there is a noticeable lag between how
the South voted in presidential elections and how they voted congressionally and on
the state and local level. And explaining that is something people devote
their entire academic careers to. I guess that’s my cue– Hi everyone. My name’s Peter Licari. I’m a PhD student in Political Science,
specializing in political behavior and psychology and the host of the Professor Politics YouTube
channel. So after decades of research, Political Scientists
have largely settled on a few different reasons for why this happened. These reasons include generational replacement
and the Republican’s embrace of socially conservative positions. But they also include race. We know from decades of political science
that the most stable and enduring political attribute people have, in the aggregate, is
their Party ID– you know whether they identify more with Democrats or with Republicans. And their ID is also the most important predictor
of how people are going to vote, largely for two reasons: First, people tend to vote for their in-group
and will only rarely deviate from that when very pressing issues are on the table. And, Second, because people use it as a heuristic
when voting for candidates that they otherwise know very little about. For White Southern Democrats in the 1960’s,
race was absolutely one of those things. But, because Party ID is so stable, only a
small percentage of them changed sides immediately, with those who did being younger and more
politically active. They did, however, start voting Republican
more frequently in national campaigns. State and local races, though, are low information
environments. Think about it, do you know who your state
rep is? Your agricultural commissioner? Who your mayor is? Do you even have a mayor as opposed to a city
council? So these Democrats would use their party ID
as a heuristic, giving the Democratic party a boost on the local level. At the same time Republicans were accelerating
a push to the right, socially, as that they had been doing since the 1950’s. In the 1970s, a number of other polarizing
social issues came to the fore including abortion. These joined race under the umbrella term
of “states’ rights”– a platform championed by the GOP promising social conservatives
a way to maintain the status quo on several social issues. Including, as mentioned earlier, racial segregation. At least at its inception. By the 1980’s the Republican party itself
no longer considered segregation a legitimate states’ rights issue but they continued
to use the label for other issues. This continuation meant that the term would
appeal to ordinary social conservatives who found racism appalling while also appealing
to those who remember the racial connotation originally attached to the term. Now while all this is happening, you have
millions of people coming of age in the South growing up socially and religiously conservative. But unlike their parents and grandparents,
they didn’t have an attachment to the Democratic party label. They started identifying with the party that
was closer on their positions. Which was now unquestionably the Republicans. And when their conservative Democratic parents
and grandparents started passing away, they became an increasingly powerful voting bloc
in the south. And just as their parents would vote Democrat
on low-valence races, they would start voting Republican. And local/state level politicians as well
as party activists responded to the pressures of this shift, fielding the more conservative
candidates under the GOP label. Now it’s important to note that scholars are
still debating over the relative import of these and other mechanisms. But what is clear is that the South flipped
Party IDs, at least on the social dimension, and that one of the primary catalysts was
race — even if it took time for it to be felt in the electorate. Nobody, whether it’s me, Professor Politics,
PragerU, or Dinesh D’Souza denies that the South went from voting like this to voting
like this. And it’s pretty clear that something happened
in the 60s and 70s to cause that. Did the Republicans and Democrats completely
abandon their platforms and switch? No, but they did swap several planks both
within their party and across parties during a few key realignments. The Ship of Theseus is a thought experiment
where you take a boat and swap out planks until you have an entirely new boat, at what
point did it cease to be the original boat? Now imagine you have two boats, swapping planks
between them. Teddy Roosevelt wanted the government to be
anti-big business and pro-environment, Nixon was the one who created the Environmental
Protection Agency. But in the last presidential election, every
major Republican candidate wanted to abolish the EPA. The Democrats adopted states’ rights as
their platform with the Southern Manifesto, but Republicans are the states’ rights party
today. Eisenhower was against a large standing federal
army, while Trump is… I am the most military-based and the most
militaristic person on your show. The KKK was founded to support Democrats and
the Democrats put many Jim Crow laws in place that denied minorities the right to vote. But who does the KKK overwhelmingly support
today? And which party is pushing for voting policies
that disproportionately affect minorities? But you might thinking “all that’s in
the past, what have Republicans done for women and blacks lately?” The answer you’d hear from professors, journalists,
and celebrities is “not much” – and this time they’d be right. Prager University is not a real university,
it’s a far-right conservative youtube channel that tells people what they want to hear. Like that climate change isn’t real or that
if JFK were alive today, he’d be a Republican – but yeah, the switch didn’t happen. If you want to be told new things by a place
that doesn’t falsely claim it’s a university, you should go to skl.sh/knowingbetter2. Skillshare is an online learning community
with classes taught by experts in their field. Learn how to control people and build up your
political base by brushing up on your Machiavelli. Maybe you can make up a new Southern Strategy. Learn how to make political cartoons to annoy
conservatives or learn how to write persuasive articles to crush the libs. Or you can choose from 20,000 other classes
to hone whatever skills you think will increase your viability in the free marketplace of
ideas. So head over to skl.sh/knowingbetter2 and
get 2 months of unlimited access to all of Skillshare’s courses for free, and you’ll
be supporting the channel when you do. When people argue for or against the party
switch, what they’re really arguing over is which party is the most racist. Neither of them are openly racist anymore. It’s the policies that either hurt or help
minorities, like welfare, or immigration, or equal access to education and employment
that are different. Nobody denies that the parties and people
switched over certain issues, it’s why that’s up for debate. I’m not going tell you which party is more
racist or whether their policies are dogwhistles, you have to decide that for yourself, because
now, you know better. I’d like to thank ProfessorPolitics for
helping me with this video, check out his channel in the card or down below. I’d also like to give a shout out to my
newest legendary patron, Matt. If you’d like your name added to this ever
growing list, head over to patreon.com/knowingbetter. In the mean time don’t forget to realign
that subscribe button, follow me on twitter and facebook, and join us on the subreddit.

100 Comments on "Political Ships of Theseus | The Party Switch"


  1. Big thanks to ProfessorPolitics for explaining the lag between presidential and state/local elections. Check him out at https://www.youtube.com/c/professorpolitics
    And MicahPsych for lending his voice for those (sometimes racist) quotes!

    Reply

  2. Would you please do an episode on Claudette Colvin? She did the same thing as Rosa Parks, but a few months before. The difference is, she was a pregnant teenager, and the civil rights leaders didn't want a pregnant teen as the face of the movement.

    Reply

  3. Agree with most of the video except that PragerU is generically conservative and wants to make baby boomers and genx reps feel good about themselves through simple solutions to every problem. I wouldn't say it's far to the right on any issue unless you think Reagan was far right.

    Reply

  4. What are the names of these republicans who become democrats? and vice versa? I'd love for you to answer that.

    Reply

  5. It was only a switch in terms of the geographic location of the where the parties' voterbases were located. From an ideological perspective, it was not a switch, but rather the dropping of overt racism from the mainstream party platforms, and an embracing among the democrats of active progression.

    Reply

  6. So, according to this video, if I'm fiscally conservative, that makes me a racist. Limiting the size and role of government in our lives impacts races differently. Because of this, if I support such an agenda, I must be a racist? This is the policy that Goldwater ran on. Not race. Reagan was a Goldwater conservative, and there have been none since. If Democrats had a sea change and starting demanding smaller government, term limits, more accountablity, etc. I would switch parties. As it is, some Republicans have this agenda, and NO Dems. But it is about race, is it?

    Reply

  7. The claim of the flip is that politicians actually flipped parties and this really didn't happen. This claim is made to say that racism transferred from the Democrat party to the Republican party like racism is a political policy (Look at the Democrat KKK). Also, the KKK Democrats or Dixiecrats were not a small faction in the south. Yes, there were basically two parties because of the Tammy NY Democrats, but who cares? The Democrats in the south were basically Antifa with actual political control. Does the Republican party do anything the Democrats did for roughly 60 years in the South? Um, No. Party switch claim is silly because of this alone.

    Reply

  8. At about 15:00 you slide off into pure conjecture. Any argument utilizing the term "dog whistle" is at best presumptive and more likely baseless accusation.

    Reply

  9. And yet, even PragerU's video about the cause of the Civil War has the honesty and intelligence to admit slavery's role.

    Reply

  10. "We had and still have, a long way to go."

    Back then yes, we had a long way to go. But now?

    Maybe if you consider the discrimination against white people. I hope that's what you meant otherwise I dont really think you're much of a moderate driven by facts.

    Reply

  11. 1) Professor Politics speaks fast enough for my liking
    2) Great that you are letting people make up their minds but there are none so blind…

    Reply

  12. 9:08 dude you deserve a gold medal for rhetoric gymnastic, you basically explained nothing but you sounded like if you made a point

    Reply

  13. It's people who want to try and convince that their policies are not based on racism but are legitimately held to be true, I can understand why they would want to frame history this way. Of course, I'd say current events has shown that social policies have huge sway, especially because economic policy is more and more tied to social policy.

    Reply

  14. Flip or no flip, the Democratic party is and has always been a racist party, disliking anything not white. Everything Democrats do are to keep minorities on the plantation. For real, how the hell were blacks better off under Jim Crowe than today's democratic party's policies ?

    Reply

  15. "Borderline socialist economic policies"
    Da fuq you talking about. They were bare bones social democratic. Do you know what socialism is?

    Reply

  16. How tf can you be "socially liberal"? Liberalism is a economic ideology.
    One can be socially progressive, conservative or reactionary.
    Is this some other American nonsence? You folks think Bernie sanders, a centrist is far left. Lol.

    Reply

  17. How tf can you be "socially liberal"? Liberalism is a economic ideology.
    One can be socially progressive, conservative or reactionary.
    Is this some other American nonsence? You folks think Bernie sanders, a centrist is far left. Lol.

    Reply

  18. Lee Atwater: now, y'all dont quote me on this.
    Lee Atwater: [says something extremely racist]
    LeftTube: I'm about to end this man's whole career [quotes him]

    Reply

  19. It just comes down to racism. Being conservative doesn't equal being racist and people try to argue the party switch debate only because they're sick to death of being called racists. Weather or not the switch happened either fully or in part is irrelevant today. The fact is the tired ass finger pointing at anyone who isn't a leftist calling them racists is the root of the issue.

    Reply

  20. It doesn't matter if about the past if your present is complete garbage. The democrats are now still being extremely racist by making everything about race and just trying to beat Trump while the Republicans are making it about the economy and "America First" despite the inflammatory rhetoric.

    And also the immigration issue in your country is a mess. One party can't distinguish immigrants from illegal immigrants, and supporting media platforms aren't helping by claiming illegals are the same as legal immigrants. The other is sacrificing the environment en masse for the economy.

    Solutions?
    Energy: Go Nuclear. Least deaths per MW/hr until renewable is actually efficient and units replaceable without polluting the environment in disposal.
    Immigration: Stop conflating illegals who without screening could bring crime and unchecked cultural shifts that prevent peaceful assimilation with legal screened immigrants who are legitimately coming to work and contribute to the wealth and talent of the country. Much of America is uneducated to a high degree and can provide the skilled secondary industry labour. Give them jobs before illegals who work for cheap, because they're citizens who deserve the right to make an honest living.
    Politicians: Stop with speech that can be misconstrued and as a result empowers neo-nazis. Also stop labelling people things they're not like "racist" and "nazi" when they're proven false, since it makes them look childish and stops much needed conversation from happening. Also, stop deflecting when answering questions or using the wrong terms deliberately when referring to policies/people.
    Economy: Allow for a stratified minimum wage to reflect living wage per city to prevent a flat minimum wage from failing to help those in cities of a high cost of living while at the same time screwing over cities with a much lower living wage. Stop the military from lighting your money on fire with poor spending decisions. Transfer funds to summer programs for kids from poor economic backgrounds to lower crime and help them get out of poverty.
    Crime: Better reform programs for inmates which include educating them so they can hopefully go straight when they get out. Less private prisons since the industry is trash. Standardised laws across all states for crimes not on debate such as "hate speech" and "offending people" so that punishment for crimes won't be so egregiously harsh for some and lenient for others due to jurisdiction. Equality between the sexes: More shelters for battered men. Making hate crime/rape hoaxes a criminal offense, to stop men from getting their lives destroyed. Paid maternity leave enforcement for all industries that pay up to a certain monthly wage (maybe up to 3000/mth salaries?) Increased pay for female dominant public service jobs that actually deserve a raise like teaching and nursing. Protected sports for biological females. Make abortion legal, but have counsel to inform and advise on alternatives like putting the baby for adoption. Stop lying that it's okay to end a potential human life/actual person for convenience. Make sure the gravity of the situation is clear for those who want to abort out of convenience/lack of responsibility and check up on them post abortion to make sure they're actually doing the ABCs of sex right to prevent another hiccup again to reduce repeat infanticides. I'd rather there be a legal monitor-able framework than force women to use coat-hangers in their homes.
    LGBTQ: Just let them get married legally, make it illegal for them to force priests to marry them. Concept? Your rights stop where mine begins, and we split 50/50. Let businesses have the right to refuse service, because those that a more tolerant business or don't have religious beliefs will get even more business and cater to the LGBTQ community. More research into mental disorders and being trans, just to make sure it's not the mental disorders that cause the transition, and to have data to support medical and professional help for them from psychiatrists etc.

    Education: Stop with the racist AA policies and award them based on economic strata instead. It's fairer that way, and still meets the goals. Also, the summer programs mentioned above, as well as mentorship programs to allow older children attain extra credit for tutoring younger academically challenged children. Encourage successful people of minorities to go back to their communities and mentor the kids too, at least by interacting. Keeps them in schools if they have someone to look up to personally and strive to be like.
    Media: While you can't stop them from lying about not having a bias (CNN) and lying in general (CNN, FOX, MSNBC), there should be multiple transparent watchmen. Not biased groups like Newsguard that have their own agendas.

    Reply

  21. Player uses "that's not correct" on prager U

    Prager U uses strategically placed black lady

    It's super effective – you can't criticise us

    Reply

  22. Moral of the story…. Anyone with conservative views is usually not a very nice person, full of fear and not very open to new ideas or treating people as fellow humans. It dosn't matter what party or country its in

    Reply

  23. Your statement on LBJ’s recalled statement by the flight attendant should be applied today for the Supreme Court nominee instead of the media hanging of him.

    Reply

  24. Climate does change that is a real thing but still this term “climate change” has not been not proven to be caused by humans actions but natural shifts in the weather. Example why is the Nile region a desert today but a lush garden in the past? Only alot of theories with no real historical accurate data to prove it.

    Reply

  25. I believe the dems are still the racists. They treat black people and other minorities like perpetual children. They are tougher than you think. Telling them they are a victim at every turn doesn’t give them hope. Sure there are pieces of garbage out there that may be racist. I’m not giving my children a defeatist attitude. I tell them that they are literally responsible for every feeling and thought that they have. If someone calls them a piece of garbage it is up to them how to respond to that. They can feel sorry for themselves or can know their worth and keep working at their goals.

    Reply

  26. The thing is. Is the point of a dog whistle that you can deny that it is a dog whistle since it doesn't come out and say what they are being accused of or is it that it doesn't matter if you deny it the point is that you are accused of using something harmless in place of something you are accused of intending with no way to actually prove that claim false.

    Reply

  27. who cares about the parties, they end up doing the same thing anyway. whynot focus on the actual policies that destroyed the black community-WELFARE.

    Reply

  28. LOL CRITICIZES PRAGER FOR THE ENTIRE VIDEO. RUNS AD THAT REVEALS IT'S BECAUSE THEY"RE A COMPETITOR. holllly sh!t that's hilarious. gonna be some real mental geniuses signing up for these classes LOL

    Reply

  29. Ooh Prager……..you know you're in for a good old dosage of complete bullshit when that barely coherent pasty pale mess of an intellect gets involved.

    Reply

  30. LBJ pushed the CRA of 1964 to get blacks to vote democrat.
    "Give me that Civil Rights Bill – which will change little – and I will have those niggers voting democrat for next 200 years."
    – LBJ

    Reply

  31. Regarding dog whistling: If a claim can't be falsified then you shouldn't make it, or at least make it very clear it's speculative. I mean, I could argue that this video is a dog whistle for flat earthers because of some weird phrase or image in there and there would be no way to disprove that either.

    Reply

  32. Just a suggestion…it’s…somewhat inaccurate to use Trump quotes too liberally, he has a habit of saying one thing and doing another. He might be “the most military president in history” but he’s systematically ridding himself of hawks, trimming foreign military aid, promising negotiation partners that military intervention is only a last resort, and removing troops from the Middle East….that being said, he also increased domestic military funding and reversed many Obama era military changes, which many have said hampered military effectiveness. This meant reinstating many officer openings(which is serious business if you understand how military promotion/dismissal works) which had been cut and ramping up arms/ammo/materiel production due to, among other things, an ammo shortfall in 2016-2017. I just tend to not listen to the man, mostly because of his atrocious, horrible, idiosyncratic way of speaking(not always, but generally), but also because he often changes his mind and it’s much more informative to watch what he does. He thinks out loud, not a bad thing, just a truth of his persona.

    Reply

  33. The "people" that live in the south are worthless trash. Kick the confederacy out of the country.

    Reply

  34. 11:28 Peopla take this seriously? Like are there actually people who believe LBJ said that? Even the onion couldn't make this shit up

    Reply

  35. I reckon this is the only channel which is generally better judged by how many dislikes it has. You Americans and your zany politics, never change. The world would be a duller place without ye.

    Reply

  36. You forgot to add one thing to your video.you forgot to talk about the New deal when African-Americans left the Republican Party based upon a promise of hardship

    Reply

  37. "That's kinda the point of a dogwhistle, that you can deny a dogwhistle" Sweet so you are saying, heads I win, tails you lose. You may believe X policy or X ideal, but if we deem it a dogwhistle we can poison the well against you. If you say it's not a dogwhistle, well then that's clearly evidence it was a dogwhistle for sure. Have you stopped beating your wife? Only yes or no answers please.

    Reply

  38. The EPA though like everything else in this video has changed dramatically since it's inception. It's now an agency that can draft major rules that affect wide swaths of the economy with no direct feedback from voters. Saying the EPA is for or against something doesn't mean that if you disagree you are for or against the Environment. You can even agree with a policy, but believe that is should be instituted by elected officials and not unelected bureaucrats, so your Republicans supported the creation of the EPA vs. Republicans 40+ years later don't support the bureaucratic and massive overreach of unelected officials are not massive shifts in policy necessarily on the Republican party. it's a massive shift in what the EPA was imagined as and what it actually does.

    Reply

  39. My dumb ass just realized that the country song "song of the south" it says "daddy was a vet'ran a southern democrat" that mofo was saying that his dad wished the south won the civil war. This is just now hitting me… that is a pretty popular song

    Reply

  40. I really like your facts, but then you leak your opinions with laughter at opposition, and use mocking voices, all towards a skewed, idiot from pragerU. If you want the center, stay pure logic. I don't wanna swerve right but…

    Reply

  41. When I hear welfare queen i think of obese trailertrash with kids covered in bruises.

    Mostly because that's what my mom is.

    Reply

  42. Gotta say, this whole "dog whistle" thing is pretty dubious. The economic policies pushed my Nixon were completely in line with typical Republican policy and wouldnt be out of place in any other part of the country. Asserting that their "true intention" is racially motivated is something you simply cant know without being a mind reader. It's a pretty ridiculous standard to assume someone's motivations are simply simply what you believe them to be. And no, saying "the point of a dog whistle is that you can deny it's a dog whistle" doesnt grant you mind reading abilities.

    Reply

  43. it is somewhat disingenuous to say the parties flipped in my opinion though. while the demographics of who voted for which party have irrefutably flipped since the 60s; the party platforms and beliefs haven't. they aren't what they used to be obviously but they didn't flip. they simply moved on to the next political issues of the era. not everything in politics is that black and white. (or should i say red and blue)(haha that wasn't funny)

    Reply

  44. Prager U may not be a real “university” but she is way more educated, and is a college professor at a legit university full time. So I don’t think this is the best video to convince me that the party switch is not a myth by simply attacking two people of color you personally don’t like.

    Reply

  45. As a Canadian, I still think it is absurd to continue to resist laws that require voter registration or identification. The solution isn't to allow people to vote without identification, it's to institute modern systems that provide federal ID for all citizens. State's rights is one of the founding principles of the union, just because politicians abuse this idea to infringe upon human rights, doesn't mean states with differing opinions shouldn't be allowed to operate independently.

    Reply

  46. I can't believe I just sat here and watched a detailed dissection of PragerU (or as I like to call them, Preggers U, due to their anti-abortion, anti-birth control, and antifemale autonomy stances).
    Excellent work, Knowing Better!

    Reply

  47. You mentioned neoliberalism in this video. Could you make a full video on neoliberalism, the tea party, libertarianism, and other less well known parts of the political spectrum? A tall order, I know

    Reply

  48. This is not one of the better videos on knowing better. It's a rationalization of a rationalization. The Democrat Party has always subjugated the black community through their policies. So the side track of arguing about color flips in Regional cultural changes, The Core theme the Democrat Party is not the best friend of the black community was abandoned in this video.

    Reply

  49. Sorry kiddos, and it's a nice try – but I'm over 15 minutes in and noticing some gaping blind spots.

    No mention of religion's influence on the shifts in U.S. politics(!) – while simultaneously overusing and oversimplifying 'states rights' as a sort of catch-all wrap-it-up – isn't helping for clarity here. The history is also compounded by shifts in federal, independent and global financial arrangements pre-dating WWI (largely a capital restructuring via post-monarchical gvts.), through the U.S.' post-WWII status, which had effectively shifted Republican priorities.

    It doesn't bode well for your arguments to selectively sound-bite a professor, cry foul along the lines of omission, and then make a far longer video that itself omits such key factors.

    My apologies if this is coming across as harsh, as this topic sort of demands at least a couple of hours just to come to grips with what is at play – and perhaps years of study to get anywhere near a complete sense of all of the relevant factors.
    It's only just ~slightly~ more complicated than the Dune series, or the the five A Song of Ice and Fire books, after all…. innit?
    Cheers!

    Reply

  50. 12:38 from 21 Democratic Senators, only 1 Switched Party and became a Republican. (less than 5 %)
    17:29 only 1 Congressman out of 435 Congressman Switched Party during the 1960´s (less than 0,2%)
    Therefore we all should assume that this proves the famous historical "Switch"…lol

    Reply

  51. Just found this channel, and I have an answer for you. You asked, who the KKK votes for? Democrats. I know where the local KKK chapter meets, and EVERY member is a Democrat. They even voted for Obama. The modern KKK isn't about race but control. They still spew the racist crap, but none of them believe in anything more than segregation. They don't want to kill all blacks any more, just keep them in their own neighborhoods. Who else does that, through economic policy? Look no further than the nearest big city. Blacks, and all other minorities, are segregated to specific neighborhoods in every large city, the majority of which are controlled by Democrats.

    Reply

  52. One thing that didn't change is that Democrats were always more obsessive over race. They used it to hurt people of color before the switch and then to hurt whites afterwards (affirmative action, social justice)

    Reply

  53. Yep you are definitely a leftist not just because of the narrative but many of the examples you give, like the fake news narrative, you gave example of how you believe the media disenfranchised Hillary yet you blatantly ignore the fake news narrative of Russian collusion steal the election when infact the DNC and Hillary paid Perkins Coie who paid Christopher Steele who paid Russians to create salacious unproven report on Donald Trump, when Hillary Clinton lost because she in fact got out perform by Trump.

    Reply

  54. The Kkk was almost wiped out until Woodrow Wilson, dem. And he fired all the black people put in office by republicans.

    Reply

  55. Malcolm X called democrats chumps. Study more real history. Democrats never voted for blacks to be free or even vote, not a one.

    Reply

  56. My mother, a southern Republican, denies the switch happened. She’s also a holy roller, bible thumper who believes she’s better than everyone else so I don’t believe much from her.

    Reply

  57. I agree with some points, but the fact that you made is that there was not a party switch. America as a whole basically told the south to stfu with the racism. Democrats just never got around to realizing that they are in fact racist and have racist policies that don't help low income people, namely low income minorities get out of the social welfare system. the LBJ quote and the previous references to the black vote are broken down quite well by PragerU and although they are quite conservative they are also very right in this regard. Outside of the south and everywhere I've lived the most racist people I have met have all been liberals. BAR NONE.

    Reply

  58. Prager U is conservative, and the worst crime of all, Islam critical. Funny that they are de-monetised and have to sue YT, yet you aren’t. Might want add something about free speech?

    Reply

  59. The South which was over 90% Democrat, which were keeping the blacks in the south from voting, enacted the Jim Crow laws the feds were trying to overrule with civil rights legislation.

    Reply

  60. Cutting taxes is a racist dog whistle? Lol! Welfare Queens are literally welfare Queens, what you picture when someone says these phrases says much more about your personal prejudice.

    Reply

  61. Well KB, not that I think you bother reading any of the gibberish comments, but you need to get your boy profipoliti to talk a lot faster, so your audience won`t even attempt to listen to what he is saying.

    Reply

  62. Maybe I missed it but I'd be curious about how much the rise of the Evangelical Right played into the party switch. Seems to me that the social ramifications that the movement created are still being felt and fueled conservative policies in the 80's, 90's & 2000's. I would say this also played a major roll along with the generational differences mentioned in the video.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *