THE BIG SWITCH THAT WASN’T: THE DIXIECRATS, RACE AND 1964
By Rick Chromey -March 3, 2021


It’s known as “The Big Switch.” That’s when Southern Democrat politicians converted to Republicanism and refashioned the G.O.P. into a r****t political party.

The only problem? It’s not true. But first a little history.

The general narrative of this “switch” is capsulized in a 2017 History.com article.[1] The 30-something author documented how the Democratic Party–known for its historic r****m–split in 1948 when Harry S. Truman (D-MO) first “introduced a pro-civil rights platform” into the Democratic Party. Strom Thurmond (D-SC) and a faction of Southern Democrats, consequently, bolted from Democrats to create the “States Rights” (Dixiecrat) party. The author then states these Dixiecrats eventually converted to Republicanism–along with Thurmond–in 1964. Later, Nixon’s “southern strategy” and Reagan’s conservatism moved the Democratic “blue” South to become a firm “red” Republican in the 1970s and 1980s.

Today, Democrats routinely finger Republicans as “r****ts,” pointing to occasional neo-N**i politicians (David Duke, a one-term Louisiana state legislator), obscure r****t organizations (Patriot Front) and Confederate f**g-waving MAGA types. In fact, just wearing a MAGA hat is considered “r****t” by many individuals on the left.

It’s a strong and d******e narrative…but what’s the T***H?

First of all, the “Dixiecrats,” under Strom Thurmond in 1948), did leave the Democratic Party…but for reasons more than racial. The Truman Administration–following sixteen years of Franklin D. Roosevelt–further desired to federalize and centralize government. The Southern Thurmond “Dixiecrats” believed in traditional “states’ rights” and segregation. The Northern and Western Democratic Party in the 1930s and 1940s was more “progressive” politically. President Roosevelt’s fascination with the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini and f*****t government programs in Europe guided many of his domestic policies.

Consequently, the 1948 Truman-Democratic platform reflected more centralized and socialist government, thus angering and distancing Southern libertarians. That’s what really split the Democratic Party in 1948. In fact, in a platform that boasted 4,256 words only 106 (2.4%) were even dev**ed to civil rights (for the black or anyone else).[2] Even more surprisingly was how the party of s***ery, segregation, Ku Klux Klan and Confederate secession was quick to pat itself on the back in 1948. In their summary on civil rights the Democratic Party actually claimed it alone was “responsible for the great civil rights gains” and committed to “continuing its efforts to eradicate all racial, religious and economic discrimination.”

However, such 1940s political posturing is contradicted by a Jim Crow Democratic South that still lynched b****s, refused school, hotel, restaurant, t***sportation and restroom facilities to “coloreds” and r****d v****g procedures to suppress the black b****t. Therefore, it’s hard to believe “great gains” were actually made by Democrats. Harry Truman was allegedly an inactive participant in the Missouri KKK, and biographers often noted his latent r****m against b****s, Jews, Chinese and Japanese throughout his life.[3] Meanwhile Franklin D. Roosevelt nominated a KKK member to the Supreme Court (Hugo Black), put Japanese-Americans into detention camps and refused to welcome black Olympians—including the famed Jesse Owens—to the White House.[4]

The Dixiecrat exodus was, again, more about progressive, f*****t, socialism than segregation and black civil rights. In the end, despite predictions of a Thomas Dewey victory, the Dixiecrat exodus produced little gain. Truman won the ’48 presidency in a landslide e*******l college v**e while the Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond mustered an inconsequential 2.4% of the popular v**e.[5]

Secondly, the Dixiecrats did NOT convert to Republicanism in 1964 (after Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act) as many historians and journalists now suggest. In fact, most of these r****t libertarians returned to the Democratic Party after 1948 and became a significant v****g block against civil rights and desegregation throughout the 1950s and early 1960s. According to one historical analysis, of the 1500+ r****t “Dixiecrats” only Strom Thurmond and about a dozen others left the Democratic Party for the GOP (less than 1%). Furthermore, Thurmond didn’t switch parties until 16 years after Truman forced him to create his “Dixiecrat” party.

Thirdly, Southern w****s (the people, not the politicians) did v**e more REPUBLICAN in post-1965 e******ns, but not for racial reasons. Again, the Democratic Party was moving left, toward socialism, nonreligious/atheism and adopting liberal planks on a******n, women and gay rights. The Bible Belt South in the 1970s and 1980s became less r****t as de-segregation and civil rights laws were enforced. Consequently, immigration to southern cities (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Nashville, Charlotte) by northern and western GOP conservatives rearranged the v****g demographic. Southerners are more conservative and that’s why dozens of Democrats switched parties. Did you know notable Republicans Trent Lott, Mike Pence, William Bennett and Rick Perry were all previously Democrat? It’s true. And race was not the reason they switched affiliations…it was due to liberal/socialist policies.

Finally, the Republican Party and its leaders have consistently denounced and resisted the “alt right” ultra-conservative r****t organizations. It’s why these r****ts formed their own political party in 2009 (The American Freedom Party). Republicans, historically, have always championed civil rights for the black and all ethnicities. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed thanks to widespread Republican support (who had proposed similar legislation in the Eisenhower administration). All Southern Democrats (including those Dixiecrats) v**ed against it. Oh, and David Duke? He only identified as Republican when politically expedient. Otherwise, he’s been in the Democrat, Populist or Reformed camp.

Maybe instead of looking at the anomaly of Strom Thurmond, we should investigate the political expediency of another Democrat: Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) who spent 62 years in public office. Byrd served for over half a century at the national level, as a Representative and, later, a powerful Senator. Byrd died in office (2010) at the ripe age of 92. Hillary Clinton called Byrd a “friend and mentor.” Barack Obama noted how “the arc of his life bent toward justice.” The press gave him a blessed pass.

That’s because Robert Byrd proved a quintessential post-WW2 Democrat. Originally a member and leader of the Ku Klux Klan in West Virginia (an affiliation he later disavowed), Byrd refused to fight in World War 2 because it meant serving alongside b****s. He routinely v**ed with other segregationists in the 1950s. As a senator, Byrd filibustered and v**ed against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He abstained his v**e for the 1965 V****g Act. He also v**ed against the confirmation of Thurgood Marshall, the first black Supreme Court justice.

This same Robert Byrd then politically t***sformed from a known r****t to a beloved mentor. How? Simple. He towed the party line…for nearly 57 years! It’s possible to argue Byrd didn’t lose his r****m but rather, like most good politicians, shelved it. He enjoyed his power and position. It wasn’t the first time Byrd did what was necessary. In fact, the whole reason Byrd initially joined the KKK was for “political power.” To his credit, he did leave the organization, but still it showed Byrd to be a political opportunist. Once in national office, at least until 1967 (when being a segregationist went out of fashion), he retained his r****t roots. Byrd told a reporter: “Don’t get that albatross [the KKK] around your neck. Once you’ve made that mistake, you inhibit your operations in the political arena.”[6]

Inhibit indeed.

It’s all politics. And it still is, for those who really listen close. It’s why we need to flip the script and tell the real story of what happened in 1948 and 1964.

I also believe America needs to echo, once again, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream and “look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Dr. Rick Chromey is an author, historian and theologian who speaks and writes on matters of religion, culture, history, technology and leadership. He lives in Boise, ID. www.rickchromey.com

[1] “How The ‘Party of Lincoln’ Won Over the Once Democratic South” by Becky Little, August 18, 2017: https://www.history.com/news/how-the-party-of-lincoln-won-over-the-once-democratic-south

[2] Read the 1948 Democratic Platform: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1948-democratic-party-platform

[3] Harry S. Truman’s r****m was noted by historians and biographers. See “Truman’s R****t Talk Cited by Historian” (Seattle Times, November 3, 1991: https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19911103&slug=1314805) and “The Best Kind of Bigot: Harry Truman and His Hatreds” by Eric Fettman (New York Post, July 3, 2003: https://nypost.com/2003/07/31/the-best-kind-of-bigot-harry-truman-and-his-hatreds/).

[4] “Why Was Jesse Owens Deprived of P**********l Recognition,” The Telegraph, May 27, 2016: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/race/how-america-snubbed-jesse-owens/

[5] The 1948 P**********l E******n: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_United_States_p**********l_e******n

[6] “The Democrats’ Lott”. The Wall Street Journal. December 23, 2002: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1040607367889016753

You are incorrect.

On February 10, 1964, the House of Representatives v**ed in favor of the bill, HR 7152. When the House-passed bill arrived in the Senate on February 26, 1964, Democrats and Republicans 𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑺𝒐𝒖𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒏 𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒔 opposed it and launched a filibuster against the bill. The Senate debated the bill for sixty days. 67 senators' v**es were required to invoke cloture and cut off debate. Finally, a coalition of 27 Republicans and 44 Democrats ended the filibuster when the Senate v**ed 71 to 29 for cloture, thereby limiting further debate. Nine days later, the Senate passed it. The v**e was 290–130 in the House and 73–27 in the Senate, and you, sir, are a veritable fountain of misinformation.

Fact: The same Southern "Dems" who v**ed against it and had championed Jim Crow, as well as their supporters, then abandoned the Democratic Party in droves - many became Republicans - and completely changed the politics there. Those states have been "red" ever since. The "Party of Lincoln" is no longer the Party of Lincoln. Hasn't been for years now.