Tuesday, 1 November 2016


In 1860, the Democrats strength was in the Southern States.

Between 1860 and the early 1930s, the Republican Party was seen as being the 'liberal, progressive' party.

It  had its main strength in the North of the USA.

In the 19th Century, the Democrat Party was the 'racist', conservative party.

William Henry Seward

William Henry Seward, Republican United States Secretary of State from 1861 to 1869, described the Southern States as being backward.

Seward described the South's slave masters as being lazy and sinful.

In the South, prior to the Civil War, Seward found "exhausted soil, old and decaying towns, wretchedly neglected roads ... an absence of enterprise and improvement."

Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, who 'abolished slavery'.

Abraham Lincoln led the United States through its Civil War which lasted from 1861 to 1865.

After the Civil war, the Republicans made some attempt to reconstruct the South.

But, there was a recession, and the money ran out.

The South returned to being backward and a place with racial segregation.

The Republican Theodore Roosevelt was the President of the United States from 1901 to 1909.

He was seen as being a 'progressive'.

The Republicans controlled the North of the USA.

1936 election. Franklin Roosevelt was a Democrat.

In the 1960s, the Democrats were seen as being the 'liberal, progressive' party, and their main strength was in the North of the USA.

The Republican Party criticised the civil rights reforms of the 1960s.

Romney - Republican.

Today, the Republican Party is a nearly all-white party, with its main strength in the South and Midwest.


If the Republicans want to be certain of a win, what should they do?

1. Tell the people that the 9 11 attack was the work of a Republican government?

2. Tell the people that, under the Republican Eisenhower, the CIA carried out the mind control of Americans?

3. Tell the people that the military and CIA run the child abuse rings?

4. Transfer money from the rich 1% to the ordinary citizens?


  1. I'm not sure where to begin. This reads like a US high school history textbook.

    Perhaps I'll try from the bottom to the top.

    'If the Republicans want to be certain of a win' they'll take the loss like the bratty spoiled candy-covered children they are and await the inevitable shit show Hillary will present the world with, all the while hollering and raising a ruckus that nothing bad would have happened had they been elected to power.

    They'll soon enough 'alter' their base membership's beliefs. I mean look, the moronic Christian Right is supporting Trump for God's sake. Even 20 years ago no television conman would have had the temerity to tell his flock 'Trump is God's choice to lead America'.
    They already have 3rd generation Mexican Americans supporting Trump because they feel the sting of being lumped in, due to surname, with the bigotry directed at first generation Mexicans and those who reside South of the Rio Grande.

    The R's have already accepted (if not outright endorsed) pansexuality which was anathema for the mainstream and bible belt republicans 2 short decades ago.

    They will still focus on division, just division of people based upon more minute and exacting fault lines. May God Bless the poor of America and the the world in general, because that's one divisional fault line that ain't gonna heal anytime soon. There's still way too much to be gained by republican hatred towards the poor and democrat pandering to the poor while stabbing them in their collective backs.

    And because both parties are wholly owned and controlled by the very same taskmasters, when the time is right, like the South, the Republicans will 'rise again'.

    I do not know what sort of effort Republicans made in their failed attempt to 'reconstruct the South' after waging war upon it, but a major reason for the South's continued misery were the 'carpetbaggers' who descended like locusts and stripped what little wealth the poor had procured and hidden before the war, treating the shell shocked families in a similar manner as the Natives were treated by Columbus's forces: 'here - this slightly moth eaten blanket will keep the cold off you much better than those 5 ounces of gold in your jar. I'll even toss in this genuine oil burning lamp for that mule of yours outside. What? No oil you say? Why just 2 miles back outside of Raymond Mississippi I witnessed a great convoy of men and mules headed your way, giving great supplies of oil to anyone with a lamp or heater to burn it. Course they'll have to pass you by if you don't have at least this lamp here....'

    Desperate helpless and hopeless the poor of the South traded what little wealth they had for cheap and poor quality supplies. Many if not most carpetbaggers were self described Jews, but that's very likely just a coincidence of history.


  2. Good basics girls. For a more detailed (devil in the details)glimpse of deep New York City politics of the 1840's -60's have a look at Martin Scorcese's film, Gangs Of New York. Critical fissures to divide and conquer were set into motion by the Anglo American Establishment. The Civil War being the grand daddy of divide and conquer strategies. But within the New York City and New York State Republican Party divide and conquer strategies were set into motion as well. Socio economic divides complicated any grass roots efforts to heal wounds. Small town big city cultures grew further apart. One could almost see a social engineers finger prints on these changes. Gangs of New York! A pretty decent look at that time period and place.