Although we tend to think of the Democrats and Republicans as these two unchangeable blocs of government, they haven’t always been there. The United States government has seen several parties with significant power rise and fall in its centuries of existence. How did these two parties with such distinct views emerge?
During our nation's tumultuous entry into statehood, two main political parties dominated the political landscape, the Democratic-Republican (which has no affiliation with either of today’s parties) and the Federalists. The Federalists, spearheaded by Alexander Hamilton, believed in a strong centralized government at the national level and helped to establish the union with the modern Constitution, as an alternative to the weak Articles of Confederation. They also supported reforms to urbanize and to grow the industrial sector of America. The Democratic-Republicans opposed a strong national government and wanted to see America continue as a mostly agrarian society with power held mostly by states. It could be argued that the Federalists had the most impact during the early 1800s: pushing through The Constitution, establishing a national bank, and influencing the state to stay out of European Affairs during the French Revolution. However, at the outbreak of the War of 1812, everything changed.
Many Federalists held pro-British sentiments and vehemently opposed the outbreak of the war. Ultimately this lead to the party’s downfall as when the US emerged victorious from the war many Federalists were labeled as traitors and the party no longer carried any meaningful support. The Democratic-Republicans became the only party in the US in what began to be known as the “era of good feelings”. During this era, four presidential candidates ran for office, all from the Democratic-Republican party. However, just like before, people began to polarize again over new issues. This lead to the creation of the Democratic Party with Andrew Jackson as its first president. This being the modern Democratic party, however, a very different one from the one we see today. This party actually opposed “big government” and many of its 20th-century viewpoints were forged during the heat of the Civil War and the Reconstruction era. To oppose the Democrats, the Whig party arose - it mainly took issue with Jackson and many of his polarizing actions. The legacy of this party would be the GOP (Republican party) that we know today. However, like the Democratic party, it would take a civil war to fully cement its position at the forefront of American politics.
The tension leading up to the Civil War was in part created by the polarization of Americans between these new political parties. However, slavery was a mixed issue. Some northern Democrats opposed its existence and some Whigs remained rather indecisive on the issue. However, after the Missouri compromise where at this point many argue that the Civil War became inevitable, it became clear that the political landscape would finally have to incorporate the controversial topic of slavery. Surprisingly, what we now think of as the more liberal party, the Democrats, actually sided with the South and accepted slavery. This left many disgruntled Northern Democrats along with the Whigs and several other parties joining forces to create the GOP. This new party gained traction and while at first not openly opposing slavery in the South, many abolitionists in the party later known as radical Republicans wanted to see the practice completely abolished. The party’s support was predominantly located in the North, where much of America’s industrial and corporate sectors were located. As a result, the party took many of its small government, low tax, and pro-business stances on issues from that remain to this day. With the election of Lincoln into office and the outbreak of the Civil War, the two Political Parties effectively solidified their stances. The GOP advocating small government and abolishment of slavery or the stopping of the expansion of slave states.The Democrats effectively became the pro-slavery party of the South. With the Confederate defeat and the abolishment of slavery, the Democratic Party took on a new role, representing disgruntled Southerners who wanted to see the rights of blacks reduced. With Democratic support many racist laws, such as the grandfather law, helped to suppress votes and limit rights for black citizens. These laws would be known as “Jim Crow” laws. But how did the party change so drastically?
The start of the 20th century ushered in a drastically new age for America, the Gilded Age. Gilded for a few otherwise known as robber barons. Robber Barons owned large corporations, enterprises, and effectively had the government in their pocket. This new ugly side of capitalism lead many Americans to push for reforms to strip away this immense power of the few, leading to the doctrine of progressivism. At first, both parties supported this new movement. However, due to Republican beliefs in smaller government and fewer taxes and a new Democratic and progressive president Woodrow Wilson coming to power, the Democratic party began to take on a new role: one of bigger government and limiting corporate power. This helped to solidify the GOP as a party for business and the Democrats as a progressive party. This trend continued throughout the 20th century, where the Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt pushed through many progressive reforms in order to combat the Great Depression and fight against the Axis powers. In doing so, he drastically expanded government power. But the true switch came over the issue of Civil Rights, where at this point Democrats a party of the Progressives and Southern Racists had some how coexisted. However with growing progressive support the democratic party finally flipped its political axis and switched to being a more liberal party socially. This lead to the Democrats not only becoming fiscally progressive but socially progressive as well. In the seventies, as the Democrats took on this new role, the Republicans took on a more socially conservative stance, as if to mirror them. It could be said that the GOP really took on its modern stance during the Reagan presidency, where the slashing of taxes and social benefits and an increased interest in the military became the norm for Republicans. This lead to the stances we know today. However, it’s hard to know what the future of the parties will be as Donald Trump’s new doctrine of conservatism and populism seems to be radically diverging from the ideals of the old Republicans in big business. The Democrats seem to be increasingly supportive of more wealthy states such as New York, California, and New England areas that seemingly need less social benefits and lower taxes. Like always, the parties will reform and change with the state of the nation. Sources:
Images from: http://www.martyduren.com/
https://www.vox.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8VOM8ET1WU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6R0NvVr164
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/fed.asp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Party
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic-Republican_Party
Liam, I really like your explanation of the evolution of American political parties throughout US History, and I admire your relatively neutral take on this. I also think that the graphics are really helpful to keep track of this evolution.
ReplyDeleteI would like to expand on the Democrats' and Whigs' different takes on slavery based on what we learned in class. Although we may consider Democrats to be the more political party today, the explanation for their seemingly contradicting support of slavery was in party because of the general Democrat support for states' rights. In particular, while Whigs were generally in favor of federal power, Democrats generally disagreed with the federal government having enough power to completely shut down slavery. Also recall that the Democratic party rose with Andrew Jackson, and Jackson himself was a large slaveowner. Of course, the leader of the party is not necessarily completely indicative of the party's supporters, but Jackson's position as one of the founders of this party likely did contribute to the Democrats' seemingly contradictory general support for slavery.