History of political rancor, divisiveness, and violence in USA (WW2, bomb, general)

[JohnHAdams]

In honor of Grandstanders wish to pontificate, without hindrance, on his views of the history of American political rancor, I have devoted this thread.

In order to breathe some life into it while saving some precious time for the author, I have copied a recent Gs statement:


"Your political memory commences at the dawn of the McCarthy era, yet you found that brand of politics to be less offensive than today's spin wars.

I note that your golden era of civility incorporates the California Senate election of 1950, the year when Nixon defeated Helen Douglas for the Senate seat by painting her as a communist. Among his tactics, his campaign handed out copies of Douglas' voting record printed on pink post cards.

That same year, Florida's Senator Claude Pepper, an able and dedicated public servant, was ousted from his seat by the cheapjack little hustler, George Smathers. Smathers ran a 100 % negative campaign, charging Pepper with communist sympathies because Pepper had been foolish enough to support ideas such as civil rights for all races and univeral health care. Smathers took to referencing his opponent as "Red Pepper."

After Stephen Douglas got popular sovereignty accepted for determining whether Kansas was to be a free or slave state, in 1856 both sides of the issue immediately began rushing settlers, temporary squatters and undesirables, into Kansas in an attempt to out populate and out vote the other. Before too long, the sides began shooting at one another, as well as staging destructive raids on homes and settlements known to be occupied by pro or anti slavers. The activity expanded and "Bleeding Kansas" entered the history books.

Now, when the two sides in a political dispute begin murdering one another, that is where I will start my search for when American politics were at their worst. It is a general prejudice of mine that any political animosity which does not feature homicide as an instrument of ascendancy, is going to be better than one which does.

It seems bad now because we have much greater communications access to the exchanges of rancour, but it was never some Marquis of Queensbury rules affair, not at any time in our history. The form may have altered, but the hostility levels have remained constant."

[jtur88]

GS is an excellent and knowledgeable writer, always with an ear to the irony/whimsy of any event, and his mind is a constant reshuffling of historical minutiae, when not cringing over they trials of the Oakland As. I have nothing but admiration for him, although at times he elects to exasperate the hell out of me.

We have been clashing on other forums, since quite a few years before the birth of CD.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by JohnHAdams

In honor of Grandstanders wish to pontificate, without hindrance, on his views of the history of American political rancor, I have devoted this thread.

In order to breathe some life into it while saving some precious time for the author, I have copied a recent Gs statement:


"Your political memory commences at the dawn of the McCarthy era, yet you found that brand of politics to be less offensive than today's spin wars.

I note that your golden era of civility incorporates the California Senate election of 1950, the year when Nixon defeated Helen Douglas for the Senate seat by painting her as a communist. Among his tactics, his campaign handed out copies of Douglas' voting record printed on pink post cards.

That same year, Florida's Senator Claude Pepper, an able and dedicated public servant, was ousted from his seat by the cheapjack little hustler, George Smathers. Smathers ran a 100 % negative campaign, charging Pepper with communist sympathies because Pepper had been foolish enough to support ideas such as civil rights for all races and univeral health care. Smathers took to referencing his opponent as "Red Pepper."

After Stephen Douglas got popular sovereignty accepted for determining whether Kansas was to be a free or slave state, in 1856 both sides of the issue immediately began rushing settlers, temporary squatters and undesirables, into Kansas in an attempt to out populate and out vote the other. Before too long, the sides began shooting at one another, as well as staging destructive raids on homes and settlements known to be occupied by pro or anti slavers. The activity expanded and "Bleeding Kansas" entered the history books.

Now, when the two sides in a political dispute begin murdering one another, that is where I will start my search for when American politics were at their worst. It is a general prejudice of mine that any political animosity which does not feature homicide as an instrument of ascendancy, is going to be better than one which does.

It seems bad now because we have much greater communications access to the exchanges of rancour, but it was never some Marquis of Queensbury rules affair, not at any time in our history. The form may have altered, but the hostility levels have remained constant."

One can go back even further, to the time of the early Republic. Partisan rancor and divisions were extremely intense, with all sorts of insults being thrown about by all sides. The Federalists brought up the Sally Hemmings story against Jefferson (which turned out to be true), while the Jeffersonians accused Adams of wanting to restore British rule or to create an American monarchy. What was printed in the early American newspapers would make Fox News and MSNBC look mild by comparison. The culmination of this was the duel between Hamilton and Burr. (In today's terms, this would be like if Joe Biden fought a duel with Henry Paulson.) Not to mention that Charles Pickering and John Quincy Adams were both said to be pimps, and Andrew Jackson constantly got into duels and got called all sorts of nasty names, including being compared to Satan.

[slowlane3]

And there is the famous beating (attack with a cane) on the U.S. Senate floor, during the 1850's, of Senator Charles Sumner (famous abolitionist) by his fellow Senator Preston Brooks (slaveholder).

[j_k_k]

Our politics have always sucked, but it does seem to me that at certain times, there was a sense that the good of the nation should factor. Not the case now. The only rule is to beat the other side, no matter how badly it screws the country. That's why stopped voting outside city and county elections. There is no point; it means nothing.

[jtur88]

Originally Posted by j_k_k

The only rule is to beat the other side, no matter how badly it screws the country. That's why stopped voting outside city and county elections. There is no point; it means nothing.

Now that you mention it, there was, in my case, no point in voting at all. For Congress, I had only one name on the ballot (as did about 15% of all Americans, in most elections.) My choices were Ron Paul or . . . blank. Same number of choices that Iraqis had, last time Saddam was re-elected. A fact for which the culpability lies squarely on the shoulders of political party committees.

I don't get to vote for president. I get to vote for a slate of party partisan electors within the state who are committed to a presidential hopeful. If the Texas election for those electors is close enough for my vote to make a difference, the Dems would have already swept every other state and render the Texas electors meaningless, so there is no point making the trip to the ballot box for that exercise, either. (Unless you live in a media-designated "swing state".)

[Nighteyes]

Though I cannot recall the source, I recently read an article stating that the current divisiveness and rancour goes back the the 60's and 70's, and the Vietnam War. The author contended that the more liberal side is composed of those who protested against the war, managed to stay out of the military, etc. The more conservative side is composed of those who did serve.

I can think of several problems with, and exceptions to, this dichotomy, but still it is an intriguing idea. What do y'all think?

[Randomstudent]

There was the famous election of 1876 which gave us the political slogan "Tilden or blood." As a side bonus it also involved Florida's electoral votes being in dispute.

[slowlane2]

Originally Posted by Nighteyes

Though I cannot recall the source, I recently read an article stating that the current divisiveness and rancour goes back the the 60's and 70's, and the Vietnam War. The author contended that the more liberal side is composed of those who protested against the war, managed to stay out of the military, etc. The more conservative side is composed of those who did serve.

I can think of several problems with, and exceptions to, this dichotomy, but still it is an intriguing idea. What do y'all think?

That's what Republicans want you to think. However, consider the following:

Sen. Jim Webb, Dem. of VA: US Marine Corps Commander in Vietnam, awarded Navy Cross, Silver Star, 2 Bronze stars, 2 purple hearts

Sen. Max Cleland, Dem. of GA: triple amputee from land-mine injury as Army Captain in Vietnam. Lost both legs and right arm. Awarded silver and bronze stars.

Sen. Daniel Inouye, Dem. of HI: awarded Congr. Medal of Honor, amputated arm from WW2 combat in Italy (just like Sen. Bob Dole, Repub. of KS)

Vice Pres. Al Gore (Dem.): Vietnam service with Engineering Brigade as journalist

Sen. Bob Kerry, Dem. of NE: Navy SEAL in Vietnam, awarded Congr. Medal of Honor

high-ranking Rep. John Murtha, Dem. of PA: spent 37 years in US Marine Corps, Colonel, bronze star, 2 purple hearts

Rep. Charles Rangel, Dem. of NY: combat in Korea, awarded Bronze star

Sen. George McGovern, Dem. of SD (Pres. candidate): on bomber crew in WW2, awarded silver star and Dist. Flying Cross

Sen. John Glenn, Dem. of OH: WW2 and Korean War: 6 Dist. Flying Crosses, and Air Medal with 18 clusters

Sen. Fritz Hollings, Dem. of SC: in WW2, awarded Bronze star and 7 campaign ribbons

Gen. Wesley Clark : 38 years in Army. Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Democratic Pres. Primary candidate.

Pres. Jimmy Carter (Dem.): 7 years as Naval officer in nuclear submarine program. Won Nobel Peace Prize

Sen. and Vice-Pres. Lloyd Bentsen (Dem. of TX): pilot in WW2, squadron commander, Dist. Flying Cross, Air Medal w/ Oak Leaf Cluster

Pres. J.F. Kennedy (Dem.)- heroic actions, swam long distance to rescue his crew after his PT boat was torpedoed in WW2

David Stockman, former Fed. Budget Director (Republican): got a draft deferment for attending Seminary, but never became a minister

[goliadh]

Originally Posted by slowlane2

That's what Republicans want you to think. However, consider the following:

Sen. Jim Webb, Dem. of VA: US Marine Corps Commander in Vietnam, awarded Navy Cross, Silver Star, 2 Bronze stars, 2 purple hearts

Sen. Max Cleland, Dem. of GA: triple amputee from land-mine injury as Army Captain in Vietnam. Lost both legs and right arm. Awarded silver and bronze stars.

Sen. Daniel Inouye, Dem. of HI: awarded Congr. Medal of Honor, amputated arm from WW2 combat in Italy (just like Sen. Bob Dole, Repub. of KS)

Vice Pres. Al Gore (Dem.): Vietnam service with Engineering Brigade as journalist

Sen. Bob Kerry, Dem. of NE: Navy SEAL in Vietnam, awarded Congr. Medal of Honor

high-ranking Rep. John Murtha, Dem. of PA: spent 37 years in US Marine Corps, Colonel, bronze star, 2 purple hearts

Rep. Charles Rangel, Dem. of NY: combat in Korea, awarded Bronze star

Sen. George McGovern, Dem. of SD (Pres. candidate): on bomber crew in WW2, awarded silver star and Dist. Flying Cross

Sen. John Glenn, Dem. of OH: WW2 and Korean War: 6 Dist. Flying Crosses, and Air Medal with 18 clusters

Sen. Fritz Hollings, Dem. of SC: in WW2, awarded Bronze star and 7 campaign ribbons

Gen. Wesley Clark : 38 years in Army. Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Democratic Pres. Primary candidate.

Pres. Jimmy Carter (Dem.): 7 years as Naval officer in nuclear submarine program. Won Nobel Peace Prize

Sen. and Vice-Pres. Lloyd Bentsen (Dem. of TX): pilot in WW2, squadron commander, Dist. Flying Cross, Air Medal w/ Oak Leaf Cluster

There are also a fairly long list of "Chicken Hawks" - conservative politicians who talk tough on defense, but were not in the military when it was their time.