home

'New South' or 'New U.S.'?

By TChris, Section Social Justice
Posted on Wed Sep 14, 2005 at 10:42:23 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Douglas Dowd asks whether this description of the "New South," written in 1940, applies to the nation as a whole today:

Violence, intolerance, aversion and suspicion toward new ideas, an incapacity for analysis, an inclination to act from feeling rather than from thought, an exaggerated individualism and a too narrow concept of social responsibiity, attachment to fictions and false values..., too great an attachment to racial values and a tendency to justify cruelty and injustice in the name of those values, sentimentality and a lack of realism... .

Dowd's answer, informed by history and current events, is here.

< Coming to a Border Near You | Inmates Become First Responders in Louisiana >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    'New South' or 'New U.S.'? | 23 comments (23 topical)
    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    leftists usually find such dark portents when they realize that most of the people in the country don't agree with them. they pawn that off as evil without giving a thought to the possibility that they are the ignorant, not those who disagree with them. it's part of the elitist mindset central to their worldview. they make race their centerpiece-then, if others disagree, they must be racist. you find it in all areas of thought on the left.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Linkmeister on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    That's a fascinating article; I'd never have heard of it without your posting the link.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#3)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    Charley, Did you read Dowd's piece? Your comment has nothing to do with the heavily footnoted and researched history it illuminates. Or do you believe stuff like social crises just fall out of the sky, just happen, with no warning (like hurricanes of old), with no history to clue us in to their coming? As a white guy with blood relatives who are African-American, and having lived on welfare in the inner-city myself as a young kid, please don't spew back that empty, generalized b.s. from your first post. Notice also, I'm dealing with you directly, not making some inference about ALL right-wingers and ranting ignorantly. And I'm not accusing you of any racism, only of having an opinion I happen to find uninformed and, related to this specific thread, completely disregarding Dowd's quite insightful arguments. I recommend a book also on the same line, called "The Politics of Whiteness" by Michelle Brattain.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    sure I read it-it sounds deep to one indoctrinated in the claptrap of the modern left. if you disagree with his progressive views, you are ignorant, evil or both(most americans are). it's not that tough a piece to read. Ward Churchill could have written it-it would still be **ap.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    Charley, Ward Churchill, perfect. Alright, I'll give it one more shot: So...poor whites acted against their interests for so many decades because? And this history has nothing to do with today because? Just because? I'm curious, bud. I seriously doubt Dowd would call you a racist. I think, like me, he'd actually try to understand just what you're arguing FOR?

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    et al:
    Now our nation as a whole is well on its way to having a functional resemblance to that South; or worse.
    That “south” existed, if it ever did, 65 years ago. And, of course, the author doesn’t provide examples, just a list of “sins” that he spews out to condemn a region, and finally, a country.
    3) a dangerously fragile U.S. economy, whose once matchless but now weakening manufacturing sector (measured by millions of lost good jobs)
    This demonstrates the shallowness of the author. On one hand he condemns the US over loosing manufacturing jobs, but fails to note that these jobs have went to other countries who can do them at a lower cost. What would he do? Condemn these nations to colony like status, always to send us the raw material, and always buy our manufactured products? Does he think today's world will tolerate such?
    4) a set of rising and combined economic and political challenges to U.S.-guided globalization, whether in the already substantial and growing dissent from Latin America, the spreading weakness of European economies, and the spectacular rise in the strengths of both China and India;
    Again we see the shallowness of his thoughts. He decries the weakness of Europe without mentioning their huge tax burden and socialism guided economies and praises India and China without noting that neither have strong unions. Somewhere between the two lies the US. Perhaps the middle ground is better. But finally, as his bitter song winds down, we see him raise the flag of “fascism, and, of course, Germany. Perhaps before I die I will understand why the Left cannot make a complaint without first finding the corpse of Hitler and telling us ever more darkly that we must do as we are told else the old bogey man will stalk and kill us. It is nonsense such as this article that is why I left the Democrats in the late 60’s. I have no need for a return ticket until they are willing to dismiss such inaccurate writings for what they are.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#7)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    As someone who has lived in the South all my life I am well aware that 1)the old South to which Dowd refers definitely existed (duh) and 2)It is very much alive today (double duh). Anyway..... The short definition of fascism is what happens when the dominant economic interests (today, that would be corporations) become the government. Which is basically what we have today. As Bill Maher noted Friday, American fascism doesn't wear a brown shirt. It dons a smiley face.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    Posts that begin "leftists usually find..." yadda yadda have nothing to add to the discussion except reheated, and pompouse, liberal bashing. I read the article. I knew the facts already but I didn't understand the point of the article. That "the South" qua region has its myriad of problems, including ingrained racism; that "the South's" problems are increasingly becoming the nation's as a whole are not exactly new ideas. Yes, of course. And? Glanton is absolutely right. We are staring at the early stages of American fascism - some would argue that it is more than early, but I won't go that far. [Cue right wingnuts to initiate discussion on why fascism really wasn't that bad, after all.] Maher's remark is funny,cute and sassy, but it could only be made by a rich white boy. It's kind of hard to see smiley faces on the faces of authority in black neighborhoods. There, they are the same as they've always been. Unsmiling and white.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    I don't know where to begin other than to say that the responses from Charley and PPGoon just don't measure up. I really tried to see things from the local crumudgeon PPJerks point of view, I really did. It's just that his points are: 1) as if he was reading a completely different article and 2)completely rooted in a distinct anti-intellectualism. I just find it hard to believe that the folks on the "right" are still trying to use that tired old "elitist" meme. Hey Chuck, you can come and hang out with me and my "elitist" buddies. I think you would have to eat a lot of crow.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    the left definition of fascism is usually "whatever I disagree with" as opposed to a system where the State is in absolute control of everything, the dream of all good leftists(with them holding the strings). not in favor of gay marriage-fascist; problem with affirmative action-fascist; opposed to illegal immigration-ditto on down the line. shermbuck-come on, don't you think you're just a teensy bit better than everyone else because you hold the right views, be honest with yourself.

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#11)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    not in favor of gay marriage-fascist
    In favor of indefensible oppression - conservative? Maybe you oughtta rethink that, Charley...

    Re: 'New South' or 'New U.S.'? (none / 0) (#12)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST