Cumhuriyetçi Parti

Cumhuriyetçi Parti


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

"Cumhuriyet Partisi" terimi Amerikan tarihinde iki kez kullanılmıştır. İlk Cumhuriyetçi Parti, Thomas Jefferson tarafından, 1793'te Washington kabinesinden istifa ettikten sonra Federalist Parti'ye karşı örgütlendi. Andrew Jackson, 1830'larda basitçe Demokrat Parti haline gelen, ismin Cumhuriyetçi kısmını bıraktı. Henry Clay ve John Quincy Adams benimsedi. bir süre için "Ulusal Cumhuriyetçi" adını aldı, ancak Jackson'ın tüm büyük muhalifleri 1834'te Whig Partisi ile birleştiğinde, "Cumhuriyetçi" adı yirmi yıl boyunca askıda kaldı. Kansas'ın geçişini takiben 1854'te yeniden canlandırıldı. -Nebraska Yasası. Cumhuriyetçi Parti'nin kuruluş tarihi kesin olarak bilinmemekle birlikte, genellikle 28 Şubat 1854'te Ripon, Wisconsin'de yapılan bir toplantıya inanılır. Ohio Nehri'nin kuzeyinde köleliği yasaklayan 1787 Kuzeybatı Yönetmeliği. Aslında, "Cumhuriyetçi" kelimesinin kullanımı ilk Jefferson Cumhuriyetçi Parti'yi hatırlattı ve Jefferson, Kuzeybatı Nizamnamesi'nin kışkırtıcılarından biri olarak kabul edildi. Yeni Cumhuriyetçi partiye destek esas olarak ölmekte olan Whig Partisi ve Serbest Topraktan geldi. Parti ve bazı hoşnutsuz Kuzey Demokratlar. Cumhuriyetçi Parti'nin ilk başkan adayı 1856'da John C. Frémont'du. Kazanamasa da on bir eyalet taşıdı. Fremont'a destek bir Güneyli için tehlikeli olabilir. "Siyah Cumhuriyetçiler" ifadesi sıklıkla kullanıldı ve ırka atıfta bulunmadı. İstifa etmeyi reddedince, mütevelli heyeti onu görevden aldı. 1858'de Cumhuriyetçiler Kongre'deki temsillerini artırdılar ve 1860'ta Abraham Lincoln'ü başkanlığa aday gösterdiler. Kasım ayındaki dörtlü bir yarışmada Lincoln, çok sayıda halk oylaması ve Seçim Koleji'nde açık bir çoğunluk elde etti. Güney eyaletleri Lincoln'ün seçilmesinden kısa bir süre sonra ayrılmaya başladı ve İç Savaşın ilk gerçek muharebesi, Lincoln'ün seçilmesinden kısa bir süre sonra gerçekleşti. resmen işe başlama. Kongredeki Radikal Cumhuriyetçiler onu özgürleşmede yavaş ve Güneyliler üzerinde yumuşak olmakla eleştirdiler. 1864 Seçimleri için Cumhuriyetçi Parti, orijinal adları için "Ulusal Birlik Partisi" ni değiştirdi ve Lincoln'ü Demokrat Andrew Johnson ile eşleştirdi. Bu, Johnson'ın yeniden yapılanma tercihlerinin Kongre Cumhuriyetçileri ile keskin bir çatışmaya girdiği 1865'te Lincoln'ün suikastından sonra ciddi bir sorun oluşturdu. Johnson, Görev Süresi Yasasını hiçe sayarak Edwin Stanton'ı Savaş Sekreteri olarak görevden aldıktan sonra, Cumhuriyetçiler onun görevden alınmasını sağladı ve Senato'da onu mahkum etme oyu aldı. Ulysses S. Grant, Cumhuriyetçi Parti'nin 1868'de ve yine 1872. Popüler bir savaş kahramanı olarak ve güney eyaletleri Yeniden Yapılanma tarafından hala kontrol altında tutulurken, Grant, yönetiminin yaygın yolsuzluğunun yarattığı dehşet 1872'de alternatif bir Liberal Cumhuriyetçi hizip oluşturmasına rağmen, her iki seferde de kolayca kazandı ve bu sadece bir tane sürdü. Grant'ten sonra Cumhuriyetçi Parti, kamu hizmeti ve diğer rüşvet karşıtı önlemleri savunanlar (Melezler) ile karşıtlar (Stalwarts) arasındaki mücadeleyle sarsıldı. Bu eğilimin somut örneği, Mark Hanna'nın desteğiyle, 1896'da kesinlikle iş yanlısı bir platformda, popülist William Jennings Bryan'ı yenerek William McKinley'in seçilmesiydi. McKinley'in başkan yardımcısı Garrat Hobart 1899'da öldüğünde, Cumhuriyetçi Parti'nin 1900'de biletin yerini aldı. Büyük ölçüde rahatsız edici bir kişiyi nüfuz konumundan uzaklaştırma niyetiyle, parti liderleri New York valisi Theodore Roosevelt'e yerini alması için baskı yaptı. Başkanlığı döneminde Cumhuriyetçi Parti'yi ilerici bir gündemi desteklemeye teşvik etti. 1908'de yeniden aday olmayı seçmeyen Theodore Roosevelt, politikalarının devamı için yararlı bir araç olarak gördüğü William Howard Taft'a desteğini verdi. Taft'ın Roosevelt'i tatmin etmediğini kanıtlayınca, 1912 Seçimleri için Cumhuriyetçi Parti'ye Taft'tan ziyade Roosevelt'i aday göstermek için bir kampanya başlatıldı. Ancak, kongre Taft ile kaldı ve Roosevelt'in partizanları İlerleme Partisi'ni oluşturmak için cıvatalandı. Roosevelt o kadar çok Cumhuriyetçi oyu çekti ki Taft üçüncü oldu, ancak kazanan Demokratlardan Woodrow Wilson oldu. İlericiler çeteye geri dönse de, Wilson 1916 seçimlerini "Bizi savaşın dışında tuttu" sloganıyla yeniden kazandı. İkinci göreve başlamasından kısa bir süre sonra, Wilson ülkeyi savaşa soktu. Kükreyen Yirmiler sırasında, Cumhuriyetçi Parti yasağı destekledi ve ticaret yanlısı bir tavrı sürdürdü. On yılın ilk başkanı Warren G. Harding, cana yakın ve çekiciydi, ancak yönetimine yolsuzluğun bulaşmasına izin verdi. Ölümünden sonra Calvin Coolidge, halkın hükümetin bütünlüğüne olan güvenini yeniden tesis etti. 1928'de Coolidge, bayrağı, insani ve etkili bir yönetici olarak sağlam bir itibar getiren Ticaret Sekreteri Herbert Hoover'a devretti. Ne yazık ki Hoover için Cumhuriyetçi Parti ve tabii ki tüm ülke, Birleşik Devletler Büyük Buhran'a girdi. Hoover'ın yönetiminin ilk yılında. Hoover bunalım konusunda kayıtsız değildi, ancak 1932'deki Yeniden Yapılanma Finans Kurumu gibi çabaları, zenginlere ve güçlülere en çok ihtiyaç duyanlardan daha fazla yardım etmeyi amaçladı. 1932 seçimlerinde Cumhuriyetçiler, Franklin D. Roosevelt ve Demokratlar tarafından görevden alındı. 1936'da parti dibe vurdu ve Kansas valisi Alf Landon'ın arkasından sadece iki eyalet kazandı. Sonraki iki seçimde Demokratlar Roosevelt ile tekrar kazandı, ancak Cumhuriyetçiler onun kazanma yüzdesini elden çıkarmayı başardılar. Zaferin çantada olduğu inancıyla cesaretlenen aday Thomas Dewey, kampanyası için bir futbol "savunmayı önleme" eşdeğerini yürütürken, Harry S. Truman, kendisine popüler sempati kazandıran aktif bir "ıslık çalma" kampanyası yürüttü ve Kasım ayında Cumhuriyetçiler nihayet 1952'de II. Dünya Savaşı kahramanı Dwight D. Eisenhower'ın cumhurbaşkanı seçilmesiyle ulusal iktidara geri döndüler. Cumhuriyetçiler 1952 dışında Kongre'yi kontrol etmediler. 1956'da Eisenhower, Zachary Taylor'dan beri her iki meclisin de muhalefet kontrolüyle karşı karşıya kalan görevine başlayan ilk başkan oldu. Eisenhower'ın başkan yardımcısı Richard M. Nixon, 1960 seçimleri için Cumhuriyetçi Parti tarafından aday gösterildi. ve John F. Kennedy'ye kıl payı kaybetti.Kennedy'nin öldürülmesinden sonra Lyndon Johnson, 1964 tarihli Sivil Haklar Yasası'nı Kongre aracılığıyla zorladı ve Kennedy'nin programlarını sürdürme taahhüdünü yerine getirdi. muhafazakar Güney Demokratları yabancılaştırıyor. Cumhuriyetçi Parti, 1964 seçimlerinde Johnson'a karşı çıkması için aşırı muhafazakar Barry Goldwater'ı aday gösterdiğinde, Cumhuriyetçiler, Derin Güney'den bazıları dışında hemen hemen her eyalette desteği kaybetti. Cumhuriyetçilerin kırgınlığı uzun sürmedi. 1964'teki sandıklarda ezici bir yenilgiye rağmen, Cumhuriyetçiler kısa süre sonra kendilerini bir Demokrat Parti'nin Vietnam Savaşı'nda kendini parçalamasını izlerken buldular. Watergate Skandalı, Nixon'ın ikinci dönemini erken bitirdi ve artçı şoklar, 1974 ara sınavlarında ve 1976 genel seçimlerinde sandıklarda yenilgiye yol açtı. Bu arada muhafazakarlar kendilerini yeniden öne sürüyorlardı. Ronald Reagan'da yeni bir standart taşıyıcı ile muhafazakar kanat, 1976 kongresinde Gerald Ford'a şiddetle meydan okudu. Reagan, Goldwater'ınkinden pek de farklı olmayan programları, Amerikalıların çoğunluğunun kabul edebileceği şekilde ustaca paketledi. 1980'den 1988'e kadar olan Cumhuriyet zaferleri, bütçe açıklarına bakılmaksızın güçlü bir askeri ve vergi indirimleri politikalarına dayanıyordu. GOP terimi, Cumhuriyetçi partiye ilk kez Chicago tarafından uygulanan bir deyim olan "Grand Old Party"nin kısaltmasıdır. tribün 1888 Seçimlerinden sonra. "Grand Old Party" artık güncel değil, ancak GOP kısaltması gazete manşetleri için kullanışlıdır.Önemli Cumhuriyetçi parti tarihleri:İlk Toplantı Tarihi: Ripon, Wisconsin, 28 Şubat 1854İlk Toplantı Tarihi: Jackson, Michigan, 6 Temmuz 1854Birinci Ulusal Kongre Tarihi: Philadelphia, 17 Haziran 1856İlk Ulusal Seçim Kazanma Tarihi: 6 Kasım 1860


Fil Neden Cumhuriyetçi Parti'nin Sembolüdür?

Cumhuriyetçi Parti veya Büyük Eski Parti, ABD'deki en başarılı ve en büyük iki siyasi partiden biridir (diğer parti Demokrat Parti'dir). Parti, köleliğin ABD içindeki diğer bölgelere yayılmasına izin veren Kansas-Nebraska Yasasına karşı çıkanlar tarafından 1854'te kuruldu. Kuruluşundan bu yana, görevdeki başkan Donald Trump da dahil olmak üzere Cumhuriyetçi bir biletle toplam 19 kişi başkan seçildi. Cumhuriyetçi Parti'nin merkezi Washington DC'deki 310 First Street SE'dedir ve 30 milyonun üzerinde üyeye sahiptir.

parti sembolü

Dünyanın her yerinde olmasa da çoğu siyasi parti gibi Cumhuriyetçi Parti de ideolojileri ve inançlarıyla ilişkilendirilen bir parti sembolüne sahiptir. Partinin geleneksel sembolü bir fil. Bununla birlikte, New York, Indiana ve Ohio gibi eyaletlerde parti için alternatif bir sembol, Kentucky'de günlük kabin kullanılırken kel kartaldır. Genellikle parti fil ile eş anlamlıdır. Cumhuriyetçilere göre, bir fil güçlü ve onurludur, bu da partinin savunduğu şeyin bir parçasıdır. Uzun bir süre partide tutarlı renkler yoktu. Ancak, 2000 seçimlerinden sonra kırmızı renk Cumhuriyetçilerle ilişkilendirildi. Seçim haritalarında büyük medya kuruluşları tarafından kırmızı renk Cumhuriyetçi adayın kazandığı eyaletleri temsil etmek için kullanılırken Demokrat Parti mavi renkle temsil edildi. O zamandan beri Cumhuriyetçi Parti her zaman kırmızı renkle temsil edilmiştir. Renk ayrıca parti sembolüne de dahildir.

Fil Nasıl Parti Sembolü Oldu?

Fil, Cumhuriyetçi Parti'yi temsil etmesi için kasıtlı olarak kararlaştırılmamış veya seçilmemiştir. Sembol ilk olarak 1864'te Lincoln'ün kampanyası sırasında ve 1872'de Harper's tarafından siyasi bir sembol olarak kullanıldı. Bununla birlikte, Thomas Nest, sembolü popüler hale getirmekle tanınır. İlk kez 1874'te Harper's Weekly'de “Üçüncü Panik” başlığı altında yayınladı. Nast, çiziminde, “Cumhuriyetçi” olarak etiketlenen fil de dahil olmak üzere, hayvanat bahçesindeki hayvanları korkutup kovalayan aslan postuna bürünmüş bir eşeği tasvir etti. oy." Fil bir çukurun yanında dururken gösterildi. Karikatür, Nast'ın New York'ta ortaya çıkışından bu yana desteklediği parti olan Cumhuriyetçi partiye karşı duyduğu hayal kırıklığını yansıtıyordu. Partinin sosyal liberalizmden uzaklaştığını hissetti.

Mart 1877'de, tartışmalı bir cumhurbaşkanlığı seçiminin ardından Nast, Demokrat Parti'nin mezar taşına çömelmiş hırpalanmış ve yaralanmış bir fili tasvir eden başka bir makale yayınladı. Cumhuriyetçilerin cumhurbaşkanlığı seçimlerindeki zaferinin hem acı hem de zarar verici olduğuna inanıyordu. 1884'te Nast, Cumhuriyetçi Parti'nin geçmiş yıllarda olduğu kadar cesur olmadığına inanarak başka bir “korkmuş fil” karikatürü çizdi. Sonraki yıllarda, çoğu karikatür hayvanı Cumhuriyetçi Parti'yi temsil etmek için kullandı. Parti sonunda filin güçlü ve onurlu olduğunu söyleyerek hayvanı resmi parti sembolü olarak kabul etti. Nast, Demokrat Parti'nin sembolü ve Noel Baba'nın modern imajı olan eşeğin yaratılmasıyla da ilişkilidir.


Bu geçiş nasıl oldu?

Davis, California Üniversitesi'nde Amerikan tarihi profesörü olan Eric Rauchway, William Jennings Bryan adlı son derece etkili bir Demokratın, hükümetin sosyal adaleti sağlamadaki rolünü vurgulayarak parti çizgilerini bulanıklaştırdığı 20. yüzyılın başlarına geçişi sabitliyor. federal güç ve geleneksel olarak Cumhuriyetçi bir duruş.

Ancak Cumhuriyetçiler, sınırlı hükümeti tercih etmenin tam tersi bir pozisyonu hemen benimsemediler.

Rauchway, Chronicles of Higher Education için 2010 yılında arşivlenmiş bir blog yazısında, "Bunun yerine, birkaç on yıl boyunca her iki taraf da sosyal adalet davasına çeşitli şekillerde adanmış güçlendirilmiş bir federal hükümet vaat ediyor" dedi. Cumhuriyetçi retorik ancak yavaş yavaş karşı savlara yöneldi. Partinin küçük hükümet platformu, 1930'larda New Deal'a karşı ateşli muhalefetiyle sağlamlaştı.

Peki Bryan ve yüzyılın başındaki diğer Demokratlar neden büyük hükümeti savunmaya başladılar?

Rauchway'e göre onlar da Cumhuriyetçiler gibi Batı'yı kazanmaya çalışıyorlardı. İç Savaş sonrası dönemde yeni batılı devletlerin birliğe kabulü yeni bir oylama bloğu yarattı ve her iki taraf da dikkatini çekmek için yarışıyordu.

Demokratlar, kendilerini batılı seçmenlere sevdirmenin bir yolunu benimsediler: 1860'larda ve 1870'lerde Cumhuriyetçi federal genişlemeler, bankalar, demiryolları ve imalatçılar gibi kuzeydoğuda yerleşik büyük işletmeler için olumlu sonuçlanmıştı. batı çok az aldı.

Her iki taraf da, küçük adama daha önce iş sektörüne giden federal yardımın bir kısmını vaat ederek, bunun yarattığı hoşnutsuzluktan yararlanmaya çalıştı. Bu noktadan sonra, Demokratlar bu duruşa bağlı kaldılar ve federal olarak finanse edilen sosyal programları ve faydaları destekliyorlar ve Cumhuriyetçiler yavaş yavaş el değmeden hükümetin karşı pozisyonuna yönlendirildi.

Rauchway, iş açısından bakıldığında, tarafların sadakatlerinin gerçekten değişmediğine dikkat çekti. "Partilerin söylemleri ve bir dereceye kadar politikaları yer değiştirse de," diye yazdı, "onların çekirdek destekçileri değişmiyor, yani, Cumhuriyetçiler baştan sona daha büyük işletmelerin partisi olarak kalıyorlar. erken dönemde daha büyük işletmeler daha büyük bir hükümet isterken, sonraki dönemde istemiyorlar."

Başka bir deyişle, daha önce işletmeler altyapı geliştirme, para birimi ve tarifeler gibi yalnızca daha büyük bir hükümetin sağlayabileceği şeylere ihtiyaç duyuyordu. Bu şeyler yerine getirildikten sonra, küçük, uygulamadan uzak bir hükümet iş dünyası için daha iyi hale geldi.

Ek kaynaklar:

Başlangıçta WordsSideKick.com'da yayınlandı. Bu makale ilk olarak 24 Eylül 2012'de yayınlandı ve 2 Kasım 2020'de güncellendi.


Evcil Hayvanlarda Ayrılık Kaygısı

Evcil hayvanlarda ayrılık kaygısı gerçek bir şeydir ve uyarı işaretlerini tanımak önemlidir.

Mart ayından bu yana Covid-19, dünyanın çoğunun evlerinde karantinaya alınmasını gerektirdi. İnsanların çoğu, yaklaşık beş ay boyunca evden çalıştı. Bu, evcil hayvan sahiplerinin sürekli olarak evcil hayvanlarıyla ilgilenmeleri, onlarla oynamaları, onları dışarı çıkarmaları vb. anlamına geliyordu. Bu nedenle, dünya yavaş yavaş tekrar açılmaya başladığında ve evcil hayvan sahipleri evden uzakta normal yaşam çalışma programlarına dönmeye başladığında, evcil hayvan sahipleri evcil hayvanlarının davranış biçiminde bir fark fark etti. Birçok evcil hayvan, özellikle çoğu insanın evden zar zor ayrıldığı bu çılgın zamanda ayrılık kaygısı geliştirir.

Evcil Hayvanlarda Ayrılık Kaygısı Şunlara Yol Açabilir:

Çiğneme, Kazma ve İmha

Ayrılık Kaygısının Sebepleri:

Bir dizi şey evcil hayvanlarda ayrılık kaygısına neden olabilir. Şu anda açık bir neden, bireylerin uzun süre evde kalmasını gerektiren covid-19'dan kaynaklanmaktadır. Daha sonra bu bireyler, evcil hayvanları uzun süre yanlarında bırakarak günlük hayatlarına dönebildiler. Diğer bir neden de, evlat edinilebilir bazı köpeklerin, ilk evlat edinildiğinde, vasilerinin ayrılabileceğinden korktukları için ayrılık kaygısı yaşayabilmeleridir. Diğer bir neden ise, eğer bir evcil hayvan normal rutininde ani bir değişiklik yaşarsa, örneğin covid-19, karşılığında onlarda ayrılık kaygısına neden olabilir. Hareket etmenin de ayrılık kaygısına neden olabileceğini unutmayın, bu nedenle köpeğiniz ve siz çok hareket ederseniz, evcil hayvanınızda ayrılık kaygısını tetikleyebilir.

Ayrılık Kaygısı Nasıl Korunur:

Evcil hayvanınızın hafif bir ayrılık kaygısı varsa, ayrıldığınızda evcil hayvanınız için heyecan verici bir şeye dönüşmeyi deneyin. Bu, ayrılmadan önce onlara ikramlar sunmak anlamına gelebilir, böylece ayrılmanızı bir ikram almakla ilişkilendirmeye başlarlar. Ayrıca onları, KONG markasının içine fıstık ezmesi veya peynir gibi yiyecekler koyabileceğiniz veya içine şeker koyabileceğiniz oyuncaklar sunduğu gibi oyuncaklar gibi bir yapboz bırakmak da yardımcı olabilir. Bu oyuncak evcil hayvanınızın dikkatini bir süreliğine dağıtır ve ne zaman bir ödül alır oyuncakla oynuyorlar. Bu oyuncaklar, siz evden çıkarken sadece evcil hayvanınıza sunmaya çalışır. Bu, evcil hayvanınızı, ayrılacağınız zamanın tadını çıkarmaya başlaması için eğitecektir, çünkü kendilerine bir ödül verileceğini bilirler.

Evcil hayvanınızın orta düzeyde bir ayrılık kaygısı varsa, ayrılmanıza alışması daha fazla zaman alabilir. Bu, onları daha yavaş bırakma sürecini almak anlamına gelir. Evcil hayvanınızı bir seferde yalnızca kısa süreliğine terk etmeye başlayın ve onları ödüllendirmeye devam edin. Onlar alışmaya başladıkça, gittiğiniz süreyi artırın. Zamanla evcil hayvanınız, ödül aldığı için gittiğinizin meşe olduğunu anlamaya başlayacaktır. Özellikle ayakkabı giydiğinizi veya anahtarlarınızı kaptığınızı fark ettiklerinde şiddetli kaygı yaşayan köpekler için. Bu evcil hayvanlar için, her zaman ayrılmadan bu öğeleri sizinle ilişkilendirmeye çalışın. Bu eşyaları kullanmaya çalışın ama evcil hayvanınıza bu eşyalardan korkmamaları gerektiğini göstermek için bırakmayın. Genelde sizi takip eden bir evcil hayvanınız varsa, o odaya girerken köpeğinize banyo kapısının dışında oturmasını ve kalmasını söylemek gibi şeyler yapmaya çalışın. Evcil hayvanınızı kapının diğer tarafında bırakma sürenizi kademeli olarak artırın. Bu, bir evcil hayvanı kendi başına olabilecekleri ve iyi olacakları konusunda eğitir. Bu işlem biraz zaman alacaktır, bu nedenle evcil hayvanınızla sakin ve sabırlı olun. Bu süreç bir odada başlamalı, ancak fazla mesai, evcil hayvanınızın peşinden gitmeden evden çıkabilmeniz ve dışarı çıkabilmeniz için fazla mesai yapmalıdır. Evcil hayvanınızdaki hızlanma, titreme, nefes nefese kalma gibi stres belirtilerini izlemeye devam edin. Bu belirtilerden herhangi biri ve diğerleri görünürse bir adım geri atın ve daha yavaş hareket edin. Bu genel süreç boyunca, yavaş yavaş almanız önemlidir, bu nedenle evcil hayvanınızı gerçekten hiç bırakmamaya çalışın ki bu çok zor olabilir. Bir arkadaş gibi birinin evcil hayvanınızla birlikte olabileceği bir yere gitmeniz gerekip gerekmediğini ayarlamaya çalışın veya evcil hayvanınızın tamamen yalnız kalmaması için bir köpek bakım hizmeti kullanmayı deneyin.

Bazı Diğer İpuçları:

Evcil hayvanınızı gittikten sonra selamlarken sakin bir şekilde merhaba deyin ve sakin kalmaya başlayana kadar onları görmezden gelin. Hoşçakal demekle aynı şey, sakin olun ve onların vahşi ve çılgın olmalarına izin vermeyin. Sakinleşmek için oturmak ya da oturmak gibi bildikleri bir görevi yerine getirmelerini sağlayın. Başka bir ipucu, evcil hayvanınızı mümkün olan sandık eğitimidir. Evcil hayvanınız sandığını güvenli bir yer olarak ilişkilendiriyorsa, bu, siz ayrılmaya gittiğinizde kaygılarını hafifletebilir. Ayrıca, evcil hayvanınızın genellikle en rahat olduğu güvenli bir oda sağlamak için evcil hayvanınızı kafese koymamanız da yararlı olabilir. Başka bir ipucu, evcil hayvanınız için ikramlar ve oyuncaklar gibi bol miktarda zihinsel uyarı sağlamaktır. Ayrıca her gün ayrılmadan önce köpeğinize bir tür egzersiz yapmayı deneyin. Evcil hayvanınızın gün boyunca bulması için gizli ikramlar ve yiyecekler bırakmak da onları meşgul edecek ve eğlendirecektir. Yukarıdaki ipuçlarından hiçbiri yardımcı olmazsa, evcil hayvan davranışları konusunda bir profesyonelden yardım almayı deneyin. Size ve evcil hayvanınızın iyileşmesine yardımcı olacak bir rejim belirleyebilecekler. Evcil hayvanınız için farklı seçenekler hakkında bir veterinerle konuşmak için ciddi vakalar için ilaç da gerekli olabilir.

Özellikle herkesin yaşadığı bir yıldan sonra evcil hayvanlarda ayrılık kaygısı yaygın olabilir. Evcil hayvanlarınızda ayrılık kaygısı belirtileri arayın ve evcil hayvanınızın iyileşmesine yardımcı olabileceğiniz farklı yolları fark edin. Ayrıca herhangi bir endişeli davranış için evcil hayvanınızı asla cezalandırmamayı unutmayın. Disiplin etmemek için elinizden gelenin en iyisini yapın ve bunun yerine gelecekteki davranışlardan kaçınmak için bu ipuçlarını kullanın. Ayrılık kaygısı sabırla korunabilir.


Cumhuriyetçi Parti Hakkındaki Uygunsuz Gerçek

Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi denilince aklınıza ne geliyor? Birçok Amerikalı gibiyseniz, GOP'u ırkçılık, cinsiyetçilik ve genel eşitsizlikle ilişkilendirebilirsiniz. Bu, sol eğilimli medya ve akademi tarafından yaygın olarak itilen bir anlatı, ancak eski Vanderbilt Siyaset Bilimi Profesörü Carol Swain'in açıkladığı gibi, Cumhuriyetçi Parti, ABD tarihinde azınlıklar ve kadınlar için neredeyse her ilerlemeden sorumluydu ve eşitlik şampiyonu olmaya devam ediyor. bugün.

İki partinin popüler nitelendirmelerinin aksine, Cumhuriyetçi Parti, Demokrat Parti'den daha uzun bir sivil haklar mücadelesi geçmişine sahiptir.

Cumhuriyetçi Parti'nin 1854'te kurulmasından sonra, ilk platformu “barbarlığın ikiz kalıntılarını: çok eşlilik ve köleliği” yenmeyi vaat etti.

Cumhuriyetçiler, batı bölgeleri eyalet haline geldikçe, erkeklerin birden fazla kadınla evlenmesine izin veren çok eşliliğin ve köleliğin yaygınlaşabileceğinden korkuyorlardı.

İlgili video: “Demokrat Parti Hakkında Uygunsuz Gerçek” – Carol Swain

Uygunsuz gerçek: Cumhuriyetçi Parti kısmen kölelikle savaşmak için kuruldu ve Demokratlar buna engel olmaya çalıştı.

İlk Cumhuriyetçi başkan Abraham Lincoln 1860'ta seçildi.

Lincoln'ün seçilmesinden altı hafta sonra, Demokratların egemen olduğu bir eyalet olan Güney Carolina, birlikten ayrılmak için oy kullandı.

Takip eden İç Savaş, Cumhuriyetçilerin köleleri serbest bırakan 13. Değişikliği kabul etmesine yol açtı.

Republicans next passed the 14th Amendment, which gave African Americans citizenship.

Republicans then passed the 15th Amendment, which gave African Americans the vote.

Related video: “Why Did the Democratic South Become Republican?” – Carol Swain

The Republican Party was the first to include minority candidates and was more diverse than the Democratic Party for a century.

Shortly after the Civil War, the first black senator, Hiram Revels, and the first black congressman, Jefferson Long, were sworn in. Both of them were Republicans.

The first female member of Congress, Jeannette Rankin, was a Republican.

The first Hispanic senator, Joseph Hernandez, was Republican.

The first Asian senator, Hiram Fong, was Republican as well.

Related video: “Who Are the Racists: Conservatives or Liberals?” – Derryck Green

The Republican Party has a long history of fighting for women’s rights, including the right to vote.

In 1862, the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act was passed by the Republican-controlled Congress to put an end to polygamy, which threatens women’s rights.

In 1868, the Republican Party Platform included a plank calling for a woman’s right to vote.

In 1920, after 52 years of Democratic Party opposition, the 19th Amendment was ratified thanks to the Republican Congress.

Republicans have also always advocated for free economies, which provides more wealth and opportunity for women and minorities.

Women in free economies earn nearly ten times the income as women in non-free economies.

It was the Republican Party, not the Democratic Party, that led the charge for a woman’s right to vote.

Republicans supported women’s suffrage since the party was founded in the mid-1800s.

In 1868, the Republican Party Platform included a plank calling for a woman’s right to vote.

In 1920, after 52 years of Democratic Party opposition, the 19th Amendment was ratified thanks to the Republican Congress.

In the final tally, only 59 percent of House Democrats and 41 percent of Senate Democrats supported women’s suffrage.

The new women voters helped elect Republican Warren G. Harding in the 1920 election.

Susan B. Anthony partnered with Republicans, not Democrats, to write the text of what would become the 19th Amendment.

Activist Susan B. Anthony helped the Republicans write the text of what would eventually become the 19th Amendment.

In 1920, after 52 years of Democratic Party opposition, the 19th Amendment was ratified thanks to the Republican Congress.

In the final tally, only 59 percent of House Democrats and 41 percent of Senate Democrats supported women’s suffrage.

The new women voters helped elect Republican Warren G. Harding in the 1920 election.

The Republican Party’s views on economic freedom have encouraged the promotion of civil rights.

Republican views on economic freedom encouraged the promotion of civil rights.

In the 1920s, Republican President Calvin Coolidge declared that the rights of African Americans are “just as sacred as those of any other citizen. It is both a public and private duty to protect those rights.”

By contrast, Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt snubbed famed black sprinter Jesse Owens, a staunch Republican, after he won four gold medals at the 1936 Berlin Olympics.

It was a Republican president, Dwight Eisenhower, who sent the 101st Airborne Division to escort black students into Little Rock’s Central High when Arkansas’ Democratic governor refused to integrate the state’s public schools in 1957.

WATCH: “The Inconvenient Truth About the Democratic Party” – Carol Swain

Inconvenient fact: The Civil Rights Act of 1964 survived a filibuster by Democrats thanks to overwhelming Republican support.

Democrats have tried to remove themselves from their own racist history while propagating the myth that the Republican Party became racist during the 1960s.

The Civil Rights Act of 1960, which outlawed poll taxes and other racist measures meant to keep blacks from voting, was supported by Republicans.

Its follow-up bill, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, survived a filibuster by Democrats thanks to overwhelming Republican support.

Democrats during the 1960s combined liberal economic views with racist views on African Americans.

Related video: “Why Did the Democratic South Become Republican?” – Carol Swain

Related reading: “The Party of Civil Rights” – Kevin D. Williamson

These words are virtually interchangeable—at least, according to most professors, journalists, and celebrities. So, are they right? Let’s take a look at history.

The Republican Party was created in 1854. The first Republican Party platform, adopted at the party’s first national convention in 1856, promised to defeat, quote, “those twin relics of barbarism: polygamy and slavery.”

Those “twin relics” were spreading into the western territories. Republicans feared that as those territories became states, polygamy and slavery might become permanent parts of American life. Polygamy—the marriage of one man to multiple women—devalued women and made them a kind of property. Slavery, of course, did the same to blacks. Literally.

The Democrats were so opposed to the Republicans and their anti-slavery stance that in 1860, just six weeks after the election of the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, South Carolina, a state dominated by Democrats, voted to secede from the union. The Civil War that followed was the bloodiest war in US history. It led to the passage, by Republicans, of the 13th Amendment, which freed the slaves the 14th Amendment, which gave them citizenship and the 15th Amendment which gave them the vote.

In 1870, the first black senator and the first black congressman were sworn in—both Republicans. In fact, every black representative in the House until 1935 was a Republican. And every black senator until 1979 was, too. For that matter, the first female member of Congress was a Republican the first Hispanic governor and senator were Republicans. The first Asian senator? You get the idea.

Republicans also kept their pledge to defend women’s rights. In 1862, the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act was passed by the Republican-controlled Congress to put an end to polygamy.

In 1920, after 52 years of Democratic Party opposition, the 19th Amendment was ratified thanks to the Republican Congress, which pressured Democratic President Woodrow Wilson to drop his opposition to women’s rights. In the final tally, only 59 percent of House Democrats and 41 percent of Senate Democrats supported women’s suffrage. That’s compared to 91 percent of House Republicans and 82 percent of Senate Republicans. There certainly was a “war on women”—and it was led by the Democratic Party.

But while Republicans had won a major battle for women’s rights, the fight for blacks’ civil rights had a long way to go. In the 1920s, Republican President Calvin Coolidge declared that the rights of blacks are “just as sacred as those of any other citizen.”

By contrast, when famed sprinter Jesse Owens, a staunch Republican, won four gold medals at the 1936 Berlin Olympics, he was snubbed by Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt. Roosevelt only invited white Olympians to the White House.

Two decades later, it was a Republican President, Dwight Eisenhower, who sent the 101st Airborne Division to escort black students into Little Rock’s Central High when Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus—a Democrat—refused to honor a court order to integrate the state’s public schools.

The Civil Rights Act of 1960, which outlawed poll taxes and other racist measures meant to keep blacks from voting, was filibustered by 18 Democrats for 125 hours. Not one Republican senator opposed the bill. Its follow-up bill, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, is one of the landmark pieces of legislation in American history. That, too, survived a filibuster by Democrats thanks to overwhelming Republican support.

But, you might be thinking, all that’s in the past. What have Republicans done for women and blacks lately? The answer you’d hear from professors, journalists and celebrities is. “not much.” And this time, they’d be right. They’d be right because the Republican Party treats blacks and women as it treats everyone: as equals.

The Democratic Party never has, and it still doesn’t. Today’s Democrats treat blacks and women as victims who aren’t capable of succeeding on their own.

The truth is, this is just a new kind of contempt.

So, there is a party with a long history of racism and sexism. but it ain't the Republicans.


How the Republican Party Became The Party of Racism

According to Pew Research, 83 percent of the registered voters who identify as Republican are non-Hispanic whites. The Republican Party is whiter than Tilda Swinton riding a polar bear in a snowstorm to a Taylor Swift concert.

Why isn’t anyone laughing? Is this thing on?

And not only is the Grand Ole Party unapologetically white, recently it has been disposing of its dog whistles in favor of bullhorns, becoming more unabashedly racist every day. Aside from its leader excusing a white supremacist murder, calling Mexicans “rapists,” referring to “shithole countries” and settling multiple discrimination lawsuits, there is an abundance of evidence that shows the party’s racism.

Nearly half of the country (49 percent) believes Donald Trump is racist but 86 percent of Republicans say he is not, according to a recent Quinnipiac University poll . The same survey shows that 79 percent of Republicans approve of the way the president handles race. Other data points include:

  • 52 percent of voters who supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election believed blacks are “less evolved” than whites, according to researchers at the Kellog School of Management .
  • In a 2018 YouGov poll , 59 percent of Republicans agreed: “If blacks would only try harder, they would be as well off as whites.”
  • The same YouGov poll revealed that 59 percent of self-identified Republicans believe blacks are treated fairly by the criminal justice system.
  • 70 percent of Republicans agreed that increased diversity hurts whites.
  • Republican-appointed judges give black defendants longer jail sentences, according to a Harvard study released in May .
  • 55 percent of white Republicans agreed “blacks have worse jobs, income and housing than white people” because “most just don’t have the motivation or willpower to pull themselves up out of poverty” according to the Washington Post’s review of data from the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center.
  • Nearly twice as many Republicans than Democrats (42 percent versus 24 percent) believe that blacks are lazier than whites, according to the same NORC poll.
According to Republicans, Black People Are Stupid and Lazy

In the latest round of “studies confirming stuff we already knew,” newly released opinion-poll data

Some would argue that having a racist as the head of a party doesn’t necessarily make the entire party racist, which is true. But there is not a single significant poll that shows Republican voters with lower negative feelings about non-white populations versus Democrats or independents. They have become the party of racism.

But how did the party get that way?

Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: The Democrats are the real racists because the GOP is the party of Lincoln and Martin Luther King, Jr. Surely you’ve read the oft-repeated anecdote about how the Republican Party ended slavery and most importantly, fought for the passage of the Civil Rights Act.

They say the best jokes are based in reality. So when accusations of racism enter into any political debate, conservatives invariably regurgitate those previously-mentioned bullet points from the recurring, well-rehearsed Republican comedy routine.

What they fail to mention, however, is that the party to which they refer to no longer exists. The only thing that remains of the original Republican P arty is the name. And how the Grand Ole Party transformed itself from the party of Lincoln into the current version—a white, Southern party rife with racial resentment—has become a forgotten tale that takes advantage of America’s lack of historical knowledge and abundance of short-term memory when it comes to race.

It is true that the Republican P arty was founded on the principles of anti-slavery. They were so in favor of ending America’s peculiar institution that they were often called “Black Republicans” as a slur. They also believed in welcoming immigrants with open arms, elected the first woman to Congress and supported black suffrage.

In fact, most blacks identified with the GOP from Reconstruction until the election of Franklin Roosevelt. Until Carol Mosely Braun’s election in 1992, every African American who served in the United States Senate belonged to the Republican P arty. Twenty-one black men served in the House of Representatives before a black Democrat was elected. It was the party of progressive values.

The Democratic Party, on the other hand, was the party of the South. It was the party of social conservatism. It wanted to preserve slavery and segregation. It opposed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. It was the party of states rights, small government and Jim Crow.

The Democrats wouldn’t even allow blacks at the convention until 1924 , mostly to appease the Southern base of the party still butthurt about losing the Civil War (they still haven’t gotten over that one). After the Civil War, the Democrats in the “Solid South” blamed Republicans for ending slavery and refused to vote for them.

That something was racism.

After Democratic President Harry Truman’s desegregated the Army and the Democratic Party said they would support laws that ended Jim Crow, 35 delegates from the Deep South walked out of the 1948 Democratic National Convention and formed the Dixiecrat Party. They elected Strom Thurmond as their leader, who would never identify as a Democrat again.

In 1957, Republican President Dwight Eisenhower sent f ederal troops into Arkansas to desegregate Little Rock Central High School. In 1963, John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, broke with the party ideology and used Eisenhower’s playbook to federalize the Alabama National Guard and force the desegregation at the University of Alabama.

Then came the breaking point that would basically change the party affiliation of Southern voters. Shortly before the election of 1964, Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act.

The “Solid South” would never vote for a Democrat p resident again.

If Ku Klux Klan members started wearing Black Lives Matter T-shirts, would that automatically make them a civil rights organization? Suppose Donald Trump changed his name to Malcolm X. Would he immediately become a human rights activist?

That’s what happened to the Republican P arty.

Republicans would like you to believe that Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Democrats opposed it, which is only partially true. To understand the change in both parties’ ideology, all one has to do is count the votes .

  • There were 94 Southern Democrats in the House of Representatives. 7 voted for the bill.
  • There were 10 Southern Republicans in the House of Representatives. Zero voted for the bill.
  • Northern house Democrats voted in favor of the bill 145-9
  • Northern House Republicans favored the bill 138-24
  • Of the 21 Southern Senators (Democrat or Republican), only 1 voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act (A Texas Democrat).

As you can see, it wasn’t the Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights Act and the Republicans who favored it. Everyone supported the Civil Rights Act except the South. Oldu Southern politicians from both parties who voted against the legislation. The reason Republicans say they supported the bill is that there weren’t very many Southern Republicans in Congress in 1964.

The Civil Rights Act was signed on July 2, 1964. In the presidential elections that year, 94 percent of nonwhite voters voted for Johnson boosting him to a win over Barry Goldwater.

But Goldwater, a Republican, managed to win five Southern states in that election, which was unheard of for a Republican. How did Goldwater do that? He won those states by opposing the Civil Rights Act.

After the bill passed, Strom Thurmond left the Democratic P arty, as did many Southern w hites. In 1968, he teamed up with Richard Nixon, the 1968 Republican p residential candidate, and convinced Nixon that a Republican could win the South if he was willing to dog-whistle racism to the Southern voters.

Along with H.R. Haldeman, they developed the “ Southern Strategy ,” by emphasizing to white voters in the South that: “[T]he whole problem is really the blacks. The key is to devise a system that recognized this while not appearing to.”

Nixon won the 1968 election by carrying seven southern states, a remarkable feat for a Republican. In the 1972 election, he doubled down on the racist rhetoric and won every single state in the South.

Since that election, no Democratic candidate has won a majority of the old Confederate states formerly known as the “Solid South.” The old Confederate states fused into a Republican voting block few Democrats have been able to penetrate.

In 1981, Lee Atwater, the political campaign architect who refined the Southern Strategy for Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, described the Republican party’s winning template:

You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968, you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites. . “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”

Not only did the pro-segregation, anti-black Southerners switch sides, but they brought their political ideology with them. The Democratic P arty is now the progressive party that welcomes immigrants and the Republican P arty has become the party of small government, law and order and conservatism. In 2016, 73 percent of white voters in the South voted Republican.

It is now the party of the alt-right. It is the party of the Willie Horton ad and birtherism. It is the party of Donald Trump, the “Muslim ban,” the border wall, David Duke and all the other white supremacists running for election on the Republican ticket in the midterm elections.


Republican Party Platform

The Republican Party was formed in 1854, the same year the Missouri Compromise was repealed under the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Two years later, during the election of 1856, the Republicans drafted their first presidential party platform, declaring the right and the duty of Congress “to prohibit in the territories those twin relics of barbarism—polygamy and slavery.” (Polygamy was a reference to the Mormons in the Utah territory, created in 1850 as part of the laws that made up the Compromise of 1850.) The Republican candidate for president that year, John C. Fremont (1813–1890), narrowly lost to James Buchanan (1791–1868), the Democratic candidate. In 1860, the Republicans drafted a party platform dominated by the slavery issue and, after several ballots, nominated Abraham Lincoln for president and Hannibal Hamlin of Maine for vice president.

Source: Republican Party Platform of 1860, online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project, https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/273296.

Resolved that we, the delegated representatives of the Republican electors of the United States, in convention assembled, in discharge of the duty we owe to our constituents and our country, unite in the following declarations:

First. That the history of the nation during the last four years has fully established the propriety and necessity of the organization and perpetuation of the Republican party, and that the causes which called it into existence are permanent in their nature, and now more than ever before demand its peaceful and constitutional triumph.

Second. That the maintenance of the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence and embodied in the federal Constitution, “That all men are created equal that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” is essential to the preservation of our Republican institutions and that the federal Constitution, the rights of the states, and the Union of the states, must and shall be preserved.

Third. That to the Union of the states this nation owes its unprecedented increase in population its surprising development of material resources its rapid augmentation of wealth its happiness at home and its honor abroad and we hold in abhorrence all schemes for disunion, come from whatever source they may and we congratulate the country that no Republican member of Congress has uttered or countenanced the threats of disunion so often made by Democratic members, without rebuke and with applause from their political associates and we denounce those threats of disunion, in case of a popular overthrow of their ascendency, as denying the vital principles of a free government, and as an avowal of contemplated treason, which it is the imperative duty of an indignant people sternly to rebuke and forever silence.

Fourth. That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, and especially the right of each state, to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depends, and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any state or territory, no matter under what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

Fifth. That the present Democratic Administration has far exceeded our worst apprehension in its measureless subserviency to the exactions of a sectional interest, as is especially evident in its desperate exertions to force the infamous Lecompton Constitution[1] upon the protesting people of Kansas in construing the personal relation between master and servant to involve an unqualified property in persons in its attempted enforcement everywhere, on land and sea, through the intervention of Congress and of the federal courts, of the extreme pretensions of a purely local interest, and in its general and unvarying abuse of the power entrusted to it by a confiding people.

Sixth. That the people justly view with alarm the reckless extravagance which pervades every department of the federal government that a return to rigid economy and accountability is indispensable to arrest the systematic plunder of the public treasury by favored partisans while the recent startling developments of frauds and corruptions at the federal metropolis, show that an entire change of administration is imperatively demanded.

Seventh. That the new dogma that the Constitution of its own force carries slavery into any or all of the territories of the United States, is a dangerous political heresy, at variance with the explicit provisions of that instrument itself, with cotemporaneous exposition, and with legislative and judicial precedent, is revolutionary in its tendency and subversive of the peace and harmony of the country.

Eighth. That the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom that as our Republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no “person should be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law,”[2] it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it and we deny the authority of Congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any territory of the United States.

Ninth. That we brand the recent reopening of the African slave trade, under the cover of our national flag, aided by perversions of judicial power, as a crime against humanity, and a burning shame to our country and age, and we call upon Congress to take prompt and efficient measures for the total and final suppression of that execrable traffic.

Tenth. That in the recent vetoes by the federal governors of the acts of the legislatures of Kansas and Nebraska, prohibiting slavery in those territories, we find a practical illustration of the boasted Democratic principle of non-intervention and popular sovereignty, embodied in the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and a demonstration of the deception and fraud involved therein.

Eleventh. That Kansas should of right be immediately admitted as a state, under the Constitution recently formed and adopted by her people, and accepted by the House of Representatives.

Twelfth. That while providing revenue for the support of the general government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interests of the whole country, and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the workingmen liberal wages, to agriculture remunerating prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence.

Thirteenth. That we protest against any sale or alienation to others of the public lands held by actual settlers, and against any view of the free homestead policy which regards the settlers as paupers or suppliants for public bounty, and we demand the passage by Congress of the complete and satisfactory homestead measure which has already passed the House.

Fourteenth. That the Republican party is opposed to any change in our naturalization laws, or any state legislation by which the rights of citizenship hitherto accorded by emigrants from foreign lands shall be abridged or impaired and in favor of giving a full and efficient protection to the rights of all classes of citizens, whether native or naturalized, both at home and abroad.

Fifteenth. That appropriation by Congress for river and harbor improvements of a national character, required for the accommodation and security of an existing commerce, are authorized by the Constitution and justified by the obligation of government to protect the lives and property of its citizens.

Sixteenth. That a railroad to the Pacific Ocean is imperatively demanded by the interests of the whole country that the federal government ought to render immediate and efficient aid in its construction and that, as preliminary thereto, a daily overland mail should be promptly established.

Seventeenth. Finally, having thus set forth our distinctive principles and views, we invite the cooperation of all citizens, however differing on other questions who substantially agree with us in their affirmance and support.


History of the Republican Party

The Republican Party was the result of a movement against the Kansas Nebraska Act, which extended slavery further across the United States. The first meeting against this Act, and where the term ‘Republican’ was suggested as the name for the new party, was conducted in Ripon, Wisconsin, on March 20, 1854. From thereon in, the Republican Party rapidly rose on the back of its radical beliefs and anti-slavery position.

The American Midwest saw the most number of Republican Party tickets, followed by the Eastern states. Within six years, every Northern state had a Republican governor. The South saw very few efforts in organizing the Republican Party, apart from a few areas that were close to the Free states.

The party came into the foray as a major political force with the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860. The American Civil War soon followed as pro-slavery southern Democrats objected to the anti-slavery views of Lincoln. In the years during and after the Civil War, the Republican Party headed by Lincoln went on to pass a number of laws and make significant constitutional amendments that banned slavery and attempted to give more rights to the blacks. This was also the era of the Radical Republicans, a faction of the Republican Party that demanded harsh measures against the Confederates and slavery. Lincoln was able to hold them off, but this changed with his death and the arrival of Andrew Johnson as President.

Although Johnson seemed favorable to the Radicals at first, he soon took the path of moderation and formed an alliance between Democrats and Republicans. By 1866, the Radical Republicans won a sweeping victory and took over the Reconstruction era, which included a number of key laws being passed and the impeachment of Johnson.

Two years later, Ulysses S. Grant became President and the Congress was under the control of the Radicals. This era was marked by aggressive attempts by the party to build their base in the South with the help of the United States Army detachments. There were clashes between local Republican groups, called Union Leagues, and Ku Klux Klan members, leading to the death of thousands.

For the next century or so, the South continued to be dominated by Democrats. In fact, the entire South was called the Solid South in reference to the strength of the Democratic Party in the region. In contrast, the Republican Party only controlled small parts of the Appalachian Mountains and occasionally competed for office in Border States. The status quo, however, changed in 1948 when the Democrats alienated its Southern base in two ways.

The first was the adoption of civil rights by the Democratic National Convention and the second was the signing of the Executive Order 9981, signifying the racial integration of the U.S. armed forces. The Deep South formed a regional party with J. Strom Thurmond at the head, but the outer South remained with the Democrats and President Truman.

The Civil Rights movement, in fact, was the turning point for the Democrats and the Republican Party. As hardcore Democratic governors like Lester Maddox (Georgia), George Wallace (Alabama), and Ross Barnett (Mississippi) resisted integration in their states, an increasing number of Democrats began to go against their policies of racial separation and embraced integration. The Civil Rights Acts was passed in 1964 and 1965, freeing the South from centuries-old barriers that prevented them from joining the Republican Party and liberating them from old racial issues. Nevertheless, the South did not immediately transition to the Republican Party. It took decades, starting from voting Republican during presidential elections and moving on to voting for Republican senators for seats in the Congress.

After 1980, the Republican Party began to attract a majority of the Evangelical Christians, who had been political neutral until then. This was due to the increasingly liberal stance of the Democratic Party, especially on controversial issues like abortion. As more conservatives went from the Democrats to the Republics, the Republican Party became more conservative and liberal Republicans joined the Democratic Party.


Eisenhower & Nixon

Dwight Eisenhower, an internationalist allied with the Dewey wing, challenged Taft in 1952 on foreign policy issues. The two men were not far apart on domestic issues. Eisenhower's victory broke a 20 year Democratic lock on the White House. Eisenhower did not try to roll back the New Deal, but he did expand the Social Security system and built the Interstate Highway system.

The conservatives in 1964 made a comeback under the leadership of Barry Goldwater who defeated Nelson Rockefeller as the Republican candidate in the 1964 presidential convention. Goldwater was strongly opposed to the New Deal and the United Nations, but he rejected isolationism and containment, calling for an aggressive anti-Communist foreign policy.

In 1968, using growing voter disgust at Johnson's Great Society programs, Civil Rights, urban violence, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions that ended school prayer, liberalized pornography laws, and restricted police action, and the Vietnam War Richard Nixon played to a vast section of American middle-class voters he called the Silent Majority. He won the 1968 Presidential election, but it was another close race.

Any long-term voter movement toward the GOP was interrupted by the Watergate Scandal, which forced Nixon to resign in 1974 under threat of impeachment. Gerald Ford succeeded Nixon and gave him a full pardon--much to the disappointment of most Americans and thereby giving the Democrats a powerful issue they used to sweep the 1974 off-year elections. Ford never fully recovered from the political fallout of this pardon (even within his own party), and in 1976 he barely defeated Ronald Reagan for the nomination. The taint of Watergate and the nation's economic difficulties contributed to the election of Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976, running as a Washington outsider.

Strength of Parties 1977

How the Two Parties Stood after the 1976 Election:

Parti Cumhuriyetçi Demokratik Independent
Party ID (Gallup) 22% 47% 31%
Congressmen 181 354
House 143 292
Senate 38 62
 % House popular vote nationally 42% 56% 2%
in the East 41% 57% 2%
in the South 37% 62% 2%
in the Midwest 47% 52% 1%
in the West 43% 55% 2%
Governors 12 37 1
State Legislators 2,370 5,128 55
31% 68% 1%
State legislature control 18 80 1 *
in the East 5 13 0
in the South 0 32 0
in the Midwest 5 17 1 *
in the West 8 18 0
States' one party control
of legislature and governorship
1 29 0

*The unicameral Nebraska legislature, in fact controlled by the Republicans, is technically nonpartisan.

Source: Everett Carll Ladd Jr. Where Have All the Voters Gone? The Fracturing of America's Political Parties (1978) p.6


Summary of Platform Shifting – An Issues-by-Issue Breakdown

The platform switching, evidenced in the above sections, can be explained a few ways. Below we summarize it by contrasting key platforms of each major party in the First to Third Party Systems with the Fifth Party systems onward:

  • Federalists/Whigs/Third Party Republicans: Strict on immigration, pro-tradition, anti-slavery, no need to separate church and state or offer a bill of rights, pro-globalization, and trade, a central bank, big government, big business, pro-foreign-military-policy. Regulated economy based on the finance industry and global economy.
  • Anti-Federalists/Democratic-Republicans/Third Party Democrats: Pro-immigration, anti-tradition, separate church and state, want bill of rights, limited government, no central bank, pro states’ rights (even if it means slavery), pro-farmer, and anti-war. An unregulated economy based on production at home and farming.
  • Modern Post 64′ Democrats: Pro-immigration, anti-segregation, separation of church and state, want bill of rights (today a second bill of rights for education and healthcare for example), big government, pro central bank, pro subsidization (be it to farmer or corporation), and anti-war in sentiment (albeit generally pro-defense). Regulated economy based on finance industry and global economy.
  • Modern Post 64′ Republicans: Strict on immigration, pro-tradition, no need to separate church and state or offer bill of rights, pro-farmer and certain big businesses, small government, pro-south, and pro-strong military. Unregulated economy based on production at home and farming.

As you can see the Third Party Republicans essentially become Post 64′ Fifth Party Democrats, and the Third Party Democrats essentially become Post 64′ Fifth Party Republicans on many (not all) key issues.

It is worth more than a note to mention that fitting all America’s factions into two parties will always cause some splitting on issues. For instance, some modern Democrats favor private industry, are laissez faire and pro-foreign-military-policy, and some Republicans favor trade-based big business and are pro-foreign-military-policy. This pro-private industry and globalization is largely what the terms neocon ve neoliberal denote. [37] [38] In other cases environment or religion is the primary issue for a voter, and this can result in third parties (like the Green party for instance).

With the above said, ignoring minor factions, today we can break down the current major American political factions into a few basic groups (see a more detailed model here):

  • Neoliberal Democrats: Big business Democrats who favor the private market as a means to achieve social justice, tend to favor big government.
  • Populist Social-Liberal Democrats: Favor a less privatized version of social liberalism, social justice and environmental issues take precedence over free-market economics and big business.
  • Neocon Republicans: Big business Republicans who favor the private market and traditional conservative values and aspects of free-market libertarian ideology.
  • Libertarian Republicans: Limited government classical liberals who tend to organize around right-wing ideology. As noted in the first section, sometimes a classical liberal position is seen as socially conservative today.
  • Modern Conservative Republicans: Social and classical conservatives who are voting only on modern conservative issues of religion, immigration, gun laws, etc.

Exactly what party has taken which stance on each issue has changed over time, but as displayed above and detailed below, some common threads can be traced throughout history to clearly illustrate “switching.” Of course, the exact changes that occurred are complex, and involve many third parties.

We can’t always trace a neat line between issues or major parties, but the underlying arguments of “how authoritative should government be?” and “should we sacrifice individual liberty for collective liberty?” will always remain the same. This is what ultimately allows us to spot the factions and platform switching in any era so we can compare that to today.

If we make the above summary into one simple chart, it might look something like this:

A left-right spectrum showing how Lincoln and Reagan are both Republicans, and comparing that to the stances of Hamilton and Jefferson.

“I have just one purpose … and that is to build up a strong progressive Republican Party in this country. If the right wing wants a fight, they are going to get it … before I end up, either this Republican Party will reflect progressivism, or I won’t be with them anymore.” [39] – Eisenhower on being a moderate Republican and “progressive” friend to the New Deal Coalition, a stance that harkens back to Lincoln, but isn’t found again after Republicans like Nixon or Reagan.


Democratic-Republican Party

Editörlerimiz, gönderdiklerinizi gözden geçirecek ve makalenin gözden geçirilip değiştirilmeyeceğine karar verecektir.

Democratic-Republican Party, originally (1792–98) Republican Party, first opposition political party in the United States. Organized in 1792 as the Republican Party, its members held power nationally between 1801 and 1825. It was the direct antecedent of the present Democratic Party.

During the two administrations of Pres. George Washington (1789–97), many former Anti-Federalists—who had resisted adoption of the new federal Constitution (1787)—began to unite in opposition to the fiscal program of Alexander Hamilton, secretary of the treasury. After Hamilton and other proponents of a strong central government and a loose interpretation of the Constitution formed the Federalist Party in 1791, those who favoured states’ rights and a strict interpretation of the Constitution rallied under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson, who had served as Washington’s first secretary of state. Jefferson’s supporters, deeply influenced by the ideals of the French Revolution (1789), first adopted the name Republican to emphasize their antimonarchical views. The Republicans contended that the Federalists harboured aristocratic attitudes and that their policies placed too much power in the central government and tended to benefit the affluent at the expense of the common man. Although the Federalists soon branded Jefferson’s followers “Democratic-Republicans,” attempting to link them with the excesses of the French Revolution, the Republicans officially adopted the derisive label in 1798. The Republican coalition supported France in the European war that broke out in 1792, while the Federalists supported Britain (görmek French revolutionary and Napoleonic wars). The Republicans’ opposition to Britain unified the faction through the 1790s and inspired them to fight against the Federalist-sponsored Jay Treaty (1794) and the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798).

Notwithstanding the party’s antielitist foundations, the first three Democratic-Republican presidents—Jefferson (1801–09), James Madison (1809–17), and James Monroe (1817–25)—were all wealthy, aristocratic Southern planters, though all three shared the same liberal political philosophy. Jefferson narrowly defeated the Federalist John Adams in the election of 1800 his victory demonstrated that power could be transferred peacefully between parties under the Constitution. Once in office, the Democratic-Republicans attempted to scale back Federalist programs but actually overturned few of the institutions they had criticized (e.g., the Bank of the United States was retained until its charter expired in 1811). Nevertheless, Jefferson made a genuine effort to make his administration appear more democratic and egalitarian: he walked to the Capitol for his inauguration rather than ride in a coach-and-six, and he sent his annual message to Congress by messenger, rather than reading it personally. Federal excises were repealed, the national debt was retired, and the size of the armed forces was greatly reduced. However, the demands of foreign relations (such as the Louisiana Purchase in 1803) often forced Jefferson and his successors into a nationalistic stance reminiscent of the Federalists.

In the 20 years after 1808 the party existed less as a united political group than as a loose coalition of personal and sectional factions. The fissures in the party were fully exposed by the election of 1824, when the leaders of the two major factions, Andrew Jackson and John Quincy Adams, were both nominated for president. Meanwhile, William H. Crawford was nominated by the party’s congressional caucus, and Henry Clay, another Democratic-Republican, was nominated by the Kentucky and Tennessee legislatures. Jackson carried the popular vote and a plurality in the electoral college, but because no candidate received a majority of the electoral vote, the presidency was decided by the House of Representatives. Clay, the speaker of the House of Representatives, finished fourth and was thus ineligible for consideration he subsequently threw his support to Adams, who was elected president and promptly appointed Clay secretary of state. Following the election, the Democratic-Republicans split into two groups: the National Republicans, who became the nucleus of the Whig Party in the 1830s, were led by Adams and Clay, while the Democratic-Republicans were organized by Martin Van Buren, the future eighth president (1837–41), and led by Jackson. The Democratic-Republicans comprised diverse elements that emphasized local and humanitarian concerns, states’ rights, agrarian interests, and democratic procedures. During Jackson’s presidency (1829–37) they dropped the Republican label and called themselves simply Democrats or Jacksonian Democrats. The name Democratic Party was formally adopted in 1844.



Yorumlar:

  1. Shakalrajas

    Anlıyorum, bu konudaki yardımınız için teşekkür ederim.

  2. Hinto

    Bunda bu kadar komik olan ne?

  3. Reaves

    Size nasıl teşekkür edebileceğimi desteklediğiniz için teşekkür etmek için özel olarak bir forumda kaydedildi.

  4. Dayne

    Bu konuyla ilgili birçok bilgi içeren ünlü siteyi ziyaret etmenizi öneririm.

  5. Dolphus

    Zevkle kabul ediyorum.



Bir mesaj yaz