Students at the University of Mississippi have started a campaign to replace the school’s longtime mascot Colonel Reb with Admiral Ackbar, leader of the Rebel Fleet in Star Wars. Colonel Reb was retired in 2003 because “coaches and athletic boosters concluded that C. Reb and other symbols of the Confederacy hurt the school’s recruiting prospects.” The movement has attracted national attention, and Lucasfilm says that they may license the use of Ackbar by Ole Miss.
Both science fiction fans and Confederacy-haters have reason to cheer this development. Given my view of the Confederacy (see here and here, and here), I fall into both categories. From a competitive standpoint, it also makes good sense to replace a mascot who represented an evil cause that failed with one that symbolizes a just cause that won. Winners make better mascots than losers.
The Ole Miss Rebel Alliance – the student group promoting Ackbar as the new mascot – originally did so as a joke. But they also acted for the more serious purpose of preventing the reinstatement of Colonel Reb:
Six days before the Ole Miss student body was called to vote on whether to accept the responsibility of developing a new mascot, four students came together to fill a void for those who were ready to lay Colonel Reb to rest.
Drawing comedic inspiration from a squid-like Star Wars character, Tyler Craft, Matthew Henry, Joseph Katool and Ben McMurtray launched the Ole Miss Rebel Alliance and unwittingly introduced Admiral Ackbar as a potential mascot candidate….
A Web site was created featuring the now-viral image of Ackbar dressed in a red hat and jacket similar to that of his predecessor….
“We started this as sort of a fun thing,” Craft said. “We did it with satire, fun and a little comedy. Admiral Ackbar represented the people who wanted to move forward, which apparently was a good portion of the campus.”
Ole Miss students got the joke, and through parody emerged another contender in the battle for a new mascot.
On one side stood the Colonel Reb Foundation, developed shortly after the former mascot’s removal in 2003, who launched a widespread advertising campaign in the days leading up to the vote encouraging students to oppose creating a new mascot.
McMurtray said it was obvious there was no organization pushing for the ‘yes’ vote.
“No independent organizations really voiced their support (for a new mascot), so that was our goal – to try to be that organization,” McMurtray said.
Those looking for an alternative to the colonel’s salvation suddenly had a common, albeit laughable, rallying point.
And rally they did. More than 2,500 students voted in favor of finalizing the university’s seven-year disassociation with its former mascot.
Suddenly, four jokesters found themselves at the forefront of not only a campus movement, but a national media blitz – one that removed focus from a university clinging to images representative of its divisive past to one where students were ready to move on.
Since the 1960s, scholars have spoken of the rise of a New South that is beginning to transcend the region’s legacy of slavery and segregation. The state of Mississippi was once one of the most segregationist of all, and the University of Mississippi was famously resistant to the admission of black students. This change is a small but interesting indication of the broader changes in the South over the last two generations. The legacy of segregation and the Myth of the Lost Cause certainly aren’t completely dead. But even at Ole Miss they are on their way out.
orca says:
Fewer than 10% of Mississippi’s white males voted for Obama:
http://forums.macresource.com/read.php?2,825968,827100
March 2, 2010, 1:32 amG. May says:
Because when you don’t have anything intelligent to offer, throw the race card out, right Orca? Why don’t you post a map of how many black men voted for McCain? Let me guess, that’s different right?
One would think a law blog would have better trolls.
March 2, 2010, 1:39 ampireader says:
Professor Somin wrote — The legacy of segregation and the Myth of the Lost Cause certainly aren’t completely dead. But even at Ole Miss they are on their way out.
Always glad to see signs that the cult of the Confederacy is losing ground. But, as Orca’s and G May’s comments point out, politics in Mississippi are still race-based. There’s a white party and a black party.
So “not completely dead” may be an over-optimistic assessment.
March 2, 2010, 1:57 amorca says:
The graph seemed appropriate in a thread about Mississippi’s changing racial attitude.
O.T.: That ditty that helps you spell Mississippi sure works.
March 2, 2010, 2:02 amIlya Somin says:
Fewer than 10% of Mississippi’s white males voted for Obama:
Given that Mississippi whites are far more conservative than the national average even on non-racial issues, and that men tend to be more conservative than women, I don’t think this proves that the state is still highly racist, though it may well be more racist than the national average.
March 2, 2010, 2:21 amJones' Cell Mate says:
I’m not sure how relevant it is, but I was surprised to hear that the old mascot was derived from an actual person. A blind black man, son of a slave, who was affectionately known as the Dean of Freshman. I believe his name was Jim, and he was also known as Blind Jim.
Does anyone know if that story is true?
March 2, 2010, 2:24 amG. May says:
Having grown up in rural Mississippi, and later lived in or spent a lot of time around the rest of the country, I’d say you’ll find just as much racism anywhere else as you’ll find in Mississippi. I always found it interesting to have grown up among and witnessed far more unforced integration and socialization in the South than that practiced by those would would lecture us about diversity from their lilly white communities in the North.
Regarding Ole Miss and their ties to the Confederacy, it’s not quite as simple as dredging up one of the last few remaining acceptable stereotypes and slapping it on the entire state. Say whatever you want about what the old mascot represented, the fact is that that the entire state of Mississippi was devastated by the war, and the student population of the University of Mississippi and its faculty was literally almost wiped out by it. Though self-inflicted, those wounds were deep and personal and not easily healed by decades of abject poverty and humiliation. The loss incurred by the University itself was tragic, and I find it hard to believe that all those students could have been evil.
Thankfully it looks like those wounds are healing, but I doubt that they have lingered from any devotion to some “lost cause” but simply because so many families endured such loss and hardship. If the University and its students are now ready to move on, I think most Mississippians will welcome the change. Sadly it is the vocal holdouts, a small minority, who will get the attention. It fits the “everyone in the south, especially in Mississippi is a racist” narrative too well worry about putting a proper perspective on things.
Reading this article, I might as well get an accurate picute of life in Mississippi from Hollywood depictions where all the men wear white suits, Boss Hogg hats and apparently air conditioning technology still hasn’t made its way down south to this very day.
Seriously, the problem you’ll find regarding race in our country today is not from the overt southern racist, at least you can easily identify that person as a problem and act accordingly. No, the trouble lies in the hushed conversations behind closed doors of the closet racist, which doesn’t seem to know any geographical bounds.
March 2, 2010, 2:26 amG. May says:
And just how do you arrive at this idea?
March 2, 2010, 2:29 amLegalCookie says:
It’s a trap!
March 2, 2010, 2:30 amIlya Somin says:
The loss incurred by the University itself was tragic, and I find it hard to believe that all those students could have been evil.
I don’t claim that the students were evil, merely that the cause of the Confederacy (which the old mascot symbolized) was.
Thankfully it looks like those wounds are healing, but I doubt that they have lingered from any devotion to some “lost cause” but simply because so many families endured such loss and hardship.
The ideology of the Lost Cause was extremely influential in the South (and to a lesser degree in the North) for many decades after the Civil War. It’s true that many families in the South endured great loss in the Civil War. But they did not have to respond to that loss by exalting the Confederate cause.
March 2, 2010, 2:33 amIlya Somin says:
I don’t think this proves that the state is still highly racist, though it may well be more racist than the national average.
And just how do you arrive at this idea?
Because, as I said before, there is a strong alternative explanation for white Mississippians voting for McCain over Obama: that most of them are conservative Republicans. They don’t vote for white liberal Democrats either (Obama actually got a higher percentage of the Mississippi vote (43%) than Kerry did in 2004 (40%), with the 3% increase being roughly in line with the national increase in the Dem vote between the 2 elections (from 48% to 53%).
March 2, 2010, 2:36 amG. May says:
Perhaps I wasn’t specific enough:
March 2, 2010, 2:39 amG. May says:
Thread winner.
March 2, 2010, 2:40 amttc says:
You’d think that transcending slavery and segregation would be a good thing.
While I don’t think people should turn a blind eye to history, it’s not really appropriate to insist that a whole demographic must break out the sack cloth and ashes when they wish to engage with their cultural history.
As a side note, my high school got sued by some native american because we our logo was the Brave.
March 2, 2010, 2:44 amLTR says:
Now that evil Colonel Reb is off and gone somebody should really take out the Michigan State’s mascot, the Spartan. Since Sparta was an evil, slave-owning society too, right?
March 2, 2010, 2:49 amG. May says:
Yes, I know you’ve read a book or two on the subject, but I think you would have had an easier time talking to the older generations who could still recall their parents and grandparents bitter over their treatment after the war, or lamenting the loss of family during the war than you would find people “exalting the lost cause”.
Well, at least that was my personal experience interviewing the many elderly I used to engage on the subject back in the 1980s.
March 2, 2010, 2:50 amdshoe says:
Hate to go off topic, but I read the 7/2008 link re: secession and I had to get two cents in: you should really take down that article. Of course any State has right to secede from the United States. You argue the Civil War was justly fought because it “ended the evil institution of slavery.” obviously this is a good thing -slavery being, along with the holocaust, perhaps the most despicable act of evil ever perpetrated. Were it being practiced today anywhere in the world on the scale of the American south circa-1860, I would wholeheartedly call for the destruction of such a society.
But this moral dimension to the Civil War has nothing to do with secession.
You talk about a State’s “purpose” in seceding, stating things would be “very different” if a State were seceding for, in effect, a “good” reason (like say I, as a liberal Californian, no longer want to associate with, e.g., southern racists, snake handlers, and gun enthusiasts). So aren’t you conceding secession is permissible, at least in some circumstances?
Finally, the Civil War: your history is way off. The Civil War did not begin because of secession – it began because several days after South Carolina seceded, the “general” of the state “militia” blockaded a United States military base called Fort Sumter. When the soldiers refused to turn over the base, this “general” proceeded to bombard the fort for 34 consecutive hours. Unsurprisingly, the Civil War followed, as war would likely follow if the locals in any of the many sovereign nations around the world where U.S. troops are stationed decided to follow the example of South Carolina and lay siege to the local military base.
But again, what does this have to do with secession?
Do you really believe a State which sought to peacefully withdraw from the U.S., with the support of a majority of its residents, couldn’t undertake to secede from the Union? Sure, there would be logistical issues, land use/ ownership issues, citizenship issues – it would be a big pain in the ass, and I can’t imagine any possible benefit to any state that would try it, but you’re not arguing right or wrong – you’re arguing about power, specifically whether states have the power to secede.
And you’re saying anyone who disagrees with you is “shockingly ignorant” – though not “stupid” (how charitable). Explain yourself.
March 2, 2010, 3:38 amA New Rebel Mascot for a New South — Admiral Ackbar May Replace Colonel Reb at Ole Miss | Liberal Whoppers says:
[...] post: A New Rebel Mascot for a New South — Admiral Ackbar May Replace Colonel Reb at Ole Miss [...]
March 2, 2010, 5:41 amOrenWithAnE says:
If they want to do it peacefully, the should seek the consent of Congress.
March 2, 2010, 5:51 amLysander Spooner's ghost says:
“One would think a law blog would have better trolls.”
The quality seems to be dropping lately, actually.
March 2, 2010, 6:27 amDG says:
Why is there so much discussion of racism here, and so little discussion of Admiral Akbar? The man..err, shrimp-creature…is a hero of the Rebel Alliance and led the victory at Endor!
March 2, 2010, 7:46 ambbbeard says:
I think it will be a cold day in Mississippi when Ole Miss adopts an uppity alien with an Arabic name as a mascot…. ;-)
BBB
March 2, 2010, 8:03 amJ. Reif says:
Did you know that, in addition to its quaint accents and past (emphasis on past) transgressions, the South is becoming the national leader in business, industry, science, culture, and quality of life? Sure, there’s still cotton, but we also built your fancy Mercedes-Benz and some of the Air Force’s new toys. We’re a generation removed from segregation and a century and a half removed from slavery. Let’s stop stereotyping an entire region for the sins of its fathers’ fathers. The old picture of a parochial, racist, Gone With the Wind South is a tired portrait indeed.
March 2, 2010, 8:24 amHarry O says:
The Confederate Air Force (its real, look it up) changed its name to the Commemorative Air Force several years ago for the same reason. That also allowed it to keep all the CAF logo stuff they had on hand.
March 2, 2010, 8:29 amStephen Lathrop says:
G. May offers a picture of the white South circa 1980 that feels right to someone who grew up in Virginia and Maryland in the 1950s. By that I mean he offers a view white southerners would recognize as their own. As an active influence, the notion of the Lost Cause pretty much died with the immediate descendants of Civil War veterans, or in a few cases with their grandchildren. The resentments that then remained did, in some places, have much to do with the destruction wrought by the war. May is also right about racism existing outside the South.
What May leaves out is Jim Crow and lynch law. Racial segregation was practiced nationwide, of course, but for those accustomed to the mores of the non-South the virulence of southern customs could still shock. Right through the first half of the 20th century some southern politicians did not shrink from public defense of lynching. Now that seems done with, and another 30 years or so should take down those few who remember it favorably.
What’s most astonishing about all this is the length of the shadow cast by slavery down through history. For my generation the Civil War looms larger in memory and meaning, I think, than World War I. For my son, born in 1987, you might extend that generalization to the Korean War. What can account for that abiding mindfulness but the magnitude of an extraordinary evil once wholly embraced, and the dark tragic difficulties in unraveling it afterwards? May’s comment would have been better had it addressed that subsequent history.
Admiral Ackbar’s time has been a long time coming, but I don’t think it’s a trap.
March 2, 2010, 8:38 amgreg says:
He’s a Mon Calamari, not a shrimp-creature. Geeze, talk about racism!
March 2, 2010, 8:40 amSandy MacHoots says:
Winners make better mascots than losers.
This is a very 21st century idea — “Always back the winner.” Traditionally, noble losers were seen as better role models than winners, which is why “Trojans” are much more popular mascots than “Greeks” and “Cavaliers” are more popular than “Roundheads.” Before the political correctness movement, “Indians” (and variants) were far more popular than “Cowboys.” There’s even a “Maccabees,” although not a single U.S. college to my knowledge uses “Romans.”
March 2, 2010, 8:45 amjukeboxgrad says:
g may:
People “exalting the lost cause” are not hard to find. Here’s one place to look: the Amazon reviews of the book Somin cited:
March 2, 2010, 8:50 amBama 1L says:
That belonged in the original post.
March 2, 2010, 8:51 amBama 1L says:
And they became conservative Republicans because . . . .
March 2, 2010, 8:52 amHouston Lawyer says:
Nothing survives so strongly as the liberal stereotype of the average southerner as a racist. Eddie Murphy did a good skit on coming down south to confront racists.
In 1979, my college honor society took a trip to Boston. We were genuinely concerned for the safety of the Black members of our group, given the recent rioting up there by whites concerning forced integration of the schools. Nothing like that had ever happened in our neck of the woods.
March 2, 2010, 8:54 amfalafalafocus says:
I humbly object to the bolded statement. Nor am I alone. The Confederacy had significant moral failings and should not be defended. However, at least Colonel Reb knows the cause he supports. Admiral Akbar blindly led billions to an interstellar Bosnia and we should support him? I think not.
March 2, 2010, 8:58 amDG says:
For that matter, there are places in the South where there is genuine black political power, unlike the North. Atlanta is a great example.
March 2, 2010, 8:59 amjukeboxgrad says:
somin:
I think this 2008 election map is helpful. It shows that there is basically one part of the country where McCain did better than Bush: the rural south. What are the causes of this phenomenon? I guess there are multiple reasons, but it seems likely that racism would be an important element.
On the other hand, it’s interesting to notice that Mississippi is one of the places where the pattern is weak or absent.
March 2, 2010, 8:59 amJoe T. Guest says:
Since the quality of trolls and sci fi/fantasy references has been dropping lately, I feel the need to step up on their behalf.
March 2, 2010, 9:11 amThatGuy says:
I’m so sick of the false Jedi-Sith dichotomy in interstellar politics. There’s no substantive difference between the Jedi who want to tax and regulate our planets into submission and the Sith who want to crush us under their heel. Join the Hoth Tea Party, and together we can rule the galaxy.
March 2, 2010, 9:21 amAdam B. says:
The name “Ole Miss” itself was the epithet which slaves used to describe the mistress of the plantation. It, too, should go — why not just call it The University of Mississippi exclusively?
March 2, 2010, 9:25 amAngus says:
The problems with this story:
March 2, 2010, 9:36 am1. There is mention of Blind Jim Ivy in relation to Colonel Reb in the historical record, even though the process of selecting Colonel Reb is well documented.
2. If this were true, why wasn’t Colonel Reb black?
flyovertard says:
In current times, racism is not nearly as pronounced in the south as in other parts of the country. The biggest reason is numbers and energy. The percentage of blacks is on average, higher in the south than other part of the country. Racism has mostly died in the south because white folk became tired of being racist. It takes a lot of anger and energy to maintain a racist attitude. To be racist means you can’t do anything (car repair, groceries, new tires, fishing bait, drivers license, dry cleaners, etc.) without being pi$$ed-off and having to use excess energy. Most white folk have long given-up and through time developed congenial relationships with the black guy at the tire store, DMV, dry cleaners, etc. Human nature breeds commonalities (love of sport or food, frustrations of parenting, etc.) and relationships strengthen toward mutual respect and sometimes admiration.
In my travels, I believe the most racist part of the country is New England and the Rust-Belt. But that’s just me.
March 2, 2010, 9:38 amProf. S. says:
I hear that this will have a major effect on other teams’ offenses. Teams will no longer be able to run trap plays. Admiral Ackbar always knows a trap when he sees one.
March 2, 2010, 9:41 amAnderson says:
I don’t think this proves that the state is still highly racist, though it may well be more racist than the national average.
I live in Mississippi, and that is about right.
Oxford, MS lawyer Tom Freeland has been blogging this as well; from him I learned that the “it’s a trap!” meme above has been anticipated: notatrap.org.
… Personally, I fear that our football-worshipping Ole Miss fans will respond to the mascot with virtual worship, leading to a new Ole Miss cheer:
Allahu Ackbar!
(George Lucas’s insidious support for Islamofascism — renaming insurgents as “rebels” for instance — is too well known to require citation, support, or other evidence.)
March 2, 2010, 9:57 amPhil Smith says:
That’s an awfully broad brush, there, and one that isn’t at all supported by the map you linked. Arkansas and Tennessee plus the Ozarks and Appalachians do not comprise “The Rural South”.
March 2, 2010, 9:57 amJosh says:
If you were a real Star Wars nerd, you would know that the Tea Party already has it’s name: The Malandorians. They’ve survived millennia of inter-stellar strife between the Jedi and the Sith. Join with the Malandore Boba Fett and free all the little people from the terrorism of the religion of the Force.
March 2, 2010, 10:00 amAndy Krause says:
“I don’t think this proves that the state is still highly racist, though it may well be more racist than the national average.”
Where can I find this national average for racists?
March 2, 2010, 10:05 amKen Arromdee says:
This is circular reasoning; it assumes the South had no right to secede. If the South did have a right to secede, then former US government territory now belonged to it; Fort Sumter was a foreign base on its own territory. Attacking an unauthorized foreign base on your own territory isn’t an act of war, because having the base there in the first place is an act of war.
It’s true that attacking a US base somewhere else would be an act of war, but that’s because those bases were put there with permission of the current government.
March 2, 2010, 10:05 amKen Arromdee says:
David Brin’s essays are usually quoted to provide citation on that matter.
http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/1999/06/15/brin_main/
March 2, 2010, 10:07 amColin says:
“Malandorians?” Turn in your “real Star Wars nerd” card, which will be burned immediately.
March 2, 2010, 10:13 amMark Field says:
The numbers you give are for Mississippi as a whole, i.e., including black voters. What percentage of the white vote did Obama get compared to Kerry?
People have been claiming a “New South” for 130 years now. It’s time to walk the walk.
March 2, 2010, 10:14 amTracy Johnson says:
Uhm, won’t the use of Admiral Ackbar from SW have copyright issues with Lucas Films?
March 2, 2010, 10:14 amMark Field says:
On what theory? SC expressly ceded Ft. Sumter to the US as provided under the Constitution. Did it pay to get it back?
March 2, 2010, 10:16 amAnderson says:
Uhm, won’t the use of Admiral Ackbar from SW have copyright issues with Lucas Films?
I am guessing Lucas is not that dumb.
March 2, 2010, 10:17 amAdam B. says:
Lucasfilm issued a statement last week:
March 2, 2010, 10:17 amU.Va. Grad says:
It’s worth noting that the straw that broke the camel’s back with respect to Colonel Reb wasn’t liberal faculty members or administrators. Rather, it was the football coaches, who said that the continued presence of Colonel Reb was being used against them in negative recruiting, and that having him on the sidelines hurt their chances of landing the best black players in the South. I haven’t heard Mark Dantonio complain about “Spartans” hurting him on the recruiting trail.
March 2, 2010, 10:19 amMark Field says:
Ok, answering my own question, Kerry got 14% of the white vote in Mississippi and Obama got 10%. That’s despite Obama’s significantly superior showing overall, and the fact that Kerry is more liberal than Obama.
Thus, I don’t think the evidence supports Prof. Somin’s assertion that the overall vote in Mississippi is evidence that voters there simply dislike liberals.
March 2, 2010, 10:24 amTracy Johnson says:
If Lucas Films is delighted, then I can only guess money may change hands. I wonder what the license fee will be? And will it be invoked for the duration of the 95 year copyright since publication?
March 2, 2010, 10:26 amKen Arromdee says:
The assumptions you need to make in order to make that argument are equivalent to “the South could not secede without permission” (since the argument is possible for all Federal land, not just for a fort, and the US government could always refuse to negotiate payment). So it’s still circular reasoning. *If* secession without permission is possible, then former Federal property goes to the new country without payment. It has to, because that’s the only way to have secession without permission.
Besides, when the 13 colonies became independent of Britain, the new government didn’t say “we’re now independent, but you can keep all British military bases here until we pay you for them”.
March 2, 2010, 10:29 amDave N. says:
certain portions of the country viscerally reacted to Democratic liberalism, which also explains Utah and Idaho.
March 2, 2010, 10:30 amBama 1L says:
Because that would be racist!
March 2, 2010, 10:35 amBama 1L says:
That’s how a protocol droid says, “We’re flattered, but we’re holding on to our IP.”
March 2, 2010, 10:38 amSome dude says:
Admiral Ackbar’s species, the Mon Calamari, persecuted the Quarren (“squid-heads”). They may want to research if Ackbar himself did any persecuting before they choose him as their mascot.
March 2, 2010, 10:50 amDave N. says:
George Lucas is obviously forgetting his own mythology.
More likely, Admiral Ackbar is dead. After all, Star Wars happened “long, long ago, in a galaxy far, far away.”
March 2, 2010, 10:54 amMark Field says:
No, the only assumptions I need to make are (1) that SC made no attempt to resolve the issue; and (2) that there’s a difference between revolution (what we did with the British) and secession, the latter meaning a claim of permission under the Constitution. But in that case the Constitution still controls even in the case of separation.
March 2, 2010, 10:54 amjukeboxgrad says:
phil:
The map shows a pretty contiguous area, and it’s all below the Mason-Dixon Line, and it coincides nicely with another map showing the Confederates States of America. So this shoe happens to fit.
And it’s not that this area covers the entire South (and that probably has to do with the distribution of the black population there), but that virtually the entire area is contained in the South.
March 2, 2010, 10:55 amG. May says:
I didn’t address it because I felt it would have lengthened an already overlong post. Sure we can dig up Jim Crow and lynching and talk about it. I don’t mean to suggest that there was/is no racism or institutionalized racism in the South, however it doesn’t take much digging to find rampant racism in other areas of the country as well. The most notable example that comes to mind is the KKK at the height of its power was in Indiana in the 1930s where it had over 200,000 members, one of whom was the sitting governor.
Other commenters have made this same point. Yes, there are countless examples of racism that have occurred in the South. Each and every example is abhorrent, but I’ll welcome the day when our country will acknowledge that the problem is nationwide, rather than just conveniently using the South as a sort of moral cleanser of all things race in the United States. Watch the national headlines of the last 10, 15, even 20 years and you’ll see racial violence or motivators in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, New York, along with many more major American cities outside the South. This is reported as unfortunate in the media, but let what seems to be a less frequent racially charged event occur in the South, and we must hear about the South’s “legacy of slavery, Jim Crow and segregation”.
As another commenter already pointed out – it’s tiresome. The only people really concerned with the South’s “legacy of slavery and segregation” are those from elsewhere who feel the need to hector and accuse before they see a need to clean their own house.
March 2, 2010, 11:01 amiawai says:
Now if we could change everything named after Lincoln to Darth Vader, we’d be making some process in not glorifying past tyrants.
March 2, 2010, 11:04 amG. May says:
Congratualtions, you found one person on the internet with an opinion. This is about as intelligent a remark as claiming a 4% margin of votes between Kerry and Obama among white voters is a clear indication of racism.
March 2, 2010, 11:09 amravenshrike says:
FTFY
March 2, 2010, 11:17 amOrenWithAnE says:
I assume you mean a traitor to the Republic (he was originally one of our Fleet Admirals) before allying with those scum.
March 2, 2010, 11:18 amChrisHo says:
What percentage of eligible white males voted in Miss?
Why do people always dismiss bigotry when it comes from one side and not the other?
March 2, 2010, 11:21 amjukeboxgrad says:
g may:
You would have a point if other opinions like his were hard to find. Trouble is, they’re not. You can start by looking at the comments responding to his comment.
If I manage to increase my support among whites from 10% to 14%, that’s an increase of 40%. An increase from, say, 60% to 64% is also “a 4% margin of votes” but that’s a very different phenomenon. Glossing over this by calling it “a 4% margin” is not particularly “intelligent.”
March 2, 2010, 11:26 amRealist says:
Racism is evil bad evil, and anything that slightly could remind a person of racism must be banned…
But if white girls win a black sport that is racism, and Coke affirmative actions up the highest scoring black team. That is good, becuase racism against whites is good.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g0CiyQnstLPTPGAIas816aHbqqCQD9E42R581
March 2, 2010, 11:41 amPhil Smith says:
You’re right, the correlation is exceptionally strong. All the Confederacy is well represented – except for Georgia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Mississippi, and some other places. Other than those few exceptions, you’ve got a real strong case. Oh, and except for the fact that Oklahoma wasn’t a state at all. And never mind that Kentucky never seceded.
But other than those minor details, you’re absolutely correct.
March 2, 2010, 12:00 pmjukeboxgrad says:
phil:
Where did I say “all the Confederacy is well represented?” I didn’t. And as I said, I think it has to do with the distribution of the black population. This map is based on counties. In any county with a substantial black population, that county is likely to be blue on this map (because of enhanced turnout for Obama), even if the whites in that county favored Bush over McCain.
The red counties are probably places with a very low black population, which would also tend to coincide with a relatively more racist white population.
Kentucky was a dual-government state. You’re splitting hairs.
March 2, 2010, 12:18 pmDerHahn says:
Jbg – If I manage to increase my support among whites from 10% to 14%, that’s an increase of 40%.
President George W. Bush’s 11 percent of the black vote was up from the 8 percent he received in 2000…
and, ya know, I just don’t remember the increase being considered an indicator that the GOP wasn’t racist anymore.
March 2, 2010, 12:28 pmPhil Smith says:
There it is.
You have no idea what you’re talking about, and are just making it up! You don’t know anything about the places and people you slander. It sounds good to you, so you spew it. But that’s all it is – spew.
Look, you started off with the argument that “the Rural South” shifted to McCain, ergo those Southerners are racists. I pointed out that, in actual point of fact, that phenomenon is very localized. The r2 for ‘rural south’ and ‘increased republican vote’ is small, as the map you posted demonstrates. You’re the one who brought up the confederacy. More importantly, you’re the one imputing motives in the absence of any actual data. But whatever. You’re boring.
March 2, 2010, 1:03 pmsecond history says:
The legacy of segregation and the Myth of the Lost Cause certainly aren’t completely dead.
Sympathy for the Lost Cause is certainly not dead…and may be increasing. For example, on Free Republic, you can find over the top support for the Lost Cause and Lincoln Derangement Syndrome.
March 2, 2010, 1:18 pmWhadonna More says:
Apparently, in an anecdote. It probably includes some sterotype or another of the middle class being observed by some elitist/landowner.
March 2, 2010, 1:24 pmXenocles says:
Of course racism was a factor in the last election. I seem to remember being bombarded with man-on-the-street interviews in which we heard how people were so excited to be able to finally vote for a black man.
There was also a lot of coverage about more progressive union members trying to convert their benighted colleagues into voting Obama despite his race, so of course it cuts both ways. I
March 2, 2010, 1:24 pm‘m shocked that nobody mentionsjust wanted to point out the noticeable impact of black racism in the election.Jeff R. says:
Admiral Akbar knows a trap after it is painfully obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together, and far too late do actually do anything about it. The other teams don’t have anything to worry about…
March 2, 2010, 1:58 pmDG says:
{You have no idea what you’re talking about, and are just making it up! You don’t know anything about the places and people you slander. It sounds good to you, so you spew it. But that’s all it is — spew.}
I see you have not run into JukeBoxGrad before. This is pretty typical, though. Here’s how the thought process works with her and certain other of our very liberal commentators. First, find a position. Then, beat data into some semblance of “proof” and present, hoping folks don’t look too hard.
At least the loony right wing people who post here actually admit they have no data or knowledge.
March 2, 2010, 2:10 pmNMissC says:
I’m in Mississippi, and in fact, in Oxford, where Ole Miss is located. A couple of things:
1) Any way you slice the voting data, it strongly appears that for some reason white voters voted for Obama in substantially lower numbers in Mississippi than they’ve voted for other Democrats in other recent elections. There was a measurable shift away from Obama, and I’ve only heard one reason suggested for it. “Conservatism” might be a nice euphemism, but that won’t be the first time it was used that way. (I’m sure I live in an odd community, but I’ve had trouble getting my mind around the 10% number, which I’ve seen elsewhere. Does this mean I personally know all the white males who voted for Obama?)
2) Reading the student newspaper and online discussions, I think that the Ackbar = get rid of Colonel Reb idea gets it backwards. The recent student vote was over whether there should be student input in a new mascot, not whether to get rid of Colonel Reb. The “pro” Old South vote split between a sort of tea-party mentality (Vote no! Always vote no! Yes means change!) and some of the Ackbar supporters, who thought that student input would make it harder for the administration to get rid of Colonel Reb. (Other factions of the Ackbar supporters were largely folks who thought it made a good joke. Some of them may have wanted rid of Colonel Reb). There is a substantial sentiment in the student body that there’s going to be a new mascot and the students might as well help pick it, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Colonel Reb won a straight up vote if held today. The frat and sorority folks come to football games with expressions of loyalty to the old mascot– e.g. girls with a colonel reb temp tatoo on their check.
3) I think the Blind Jim / Colonel Reb story is a fairy tale (or to use the word as used in Stephen Jay Gould’s writing about evolution, a Just So Story). I have a great deal of respect for Dr. David Sansing, the historian who is the source for this, but I think he’s got this one wrong. As someone noted up in the thread, the origins of Colonel Reb are well documented and have nothing to do with Blind Jim.
March 2, 2010, 2:14 pmTracy Johnson says:
Too bad there was no Admiral Ackbar manning the CSS Arkansas when it ran past the Union fleet at Vicksburg. There would have been so many double entendres here.
March 2, 2010, 2:16 pmConnie says:
Probably, because the overall white average was 10%. I’m guessing (I think I read it on Nate Silver’s site) that white women voting for Obama helped offset the even lower white male vote for him in MS, AL, and LA.
March 2, 2010, 2:30 pmEMB says:
What makes you think that the copyright on Star Wars will ever expire?
March 2, 2010, 2:52 pmTracy Johnson says:
You’re probably correct, the law was upped to from 75 to 95 years in 1998. I suppose the law can be increased again. Perhaps forever, by invoking the throne of Darius or something.
March 2, 2010, 3:01 pmJaimeInTexas (Jam) says:
Too many in Mississippi have lost their spine and are attempting to accomplish what will never succeed; to be accepted by the North.
Too many reconstructed, Yankee-ass kissers.
Shame on Ole Miss.
March 2, 2010, 3:21 pmanon says:
” I believe the most racist part of the country is New England and the Rust-Belt. But that’s just me.”
No, it isn’t just you. Same observation after living all up and down the eastern seaboard and in the deep south.
March 2, 2010, 6:51 pmanon says:
“What makes you think that the copyright on Star Wars will ever expire?”
Eldred v. Ashcroft.
March 2, 2010, 6:52 pmbbbeard says:
“No Democratic candidate for President since Lyndon Johnson has won a majority of white votes….”
But if the candidate happens to be black, then obviously it’s due to… well, yeah! Racism!!!
Is it any wonder that Americans of all stripes are tiring of the ceaseless race-baiting?
BBB
March 2, 2010, 7:54 pmDesiderius says:
anon,
“No, it isn’t just you. Same observation after living all up and down the eastern seaboard and in the deep south.”
Fits with JBG’s theory that less blacks = more racist.
As for why Obama did so poorly among Mississippi whites, liberal and conservative, I think it’s his closer affinity with the Old Guard progressives who have declared war on both the Old and New South, for various reasons, mostly more cultural than political. The unpopularity of this approach is obscured somewhat by the dragon’s treasure of black/liberal goodwill justly earned by the Old Guard for slaying Jim Crow, but two-front wars have historically had a way of burning through treasure, however large.
Southern liberals know that the New South/too-busy-to-hate positive sum approach is the best bet for keeping the Old South resentment-mongering down, and want nothing to do with the negative sum class warfare on offer from the
March 3, 2010, 12:03 amNewOld DealProregressives, even if they’re peddling a new set of resentments these days.Arthur Kirkland says:
Wouldn’t it be unrealistic not to expect some problems when you fight for the wrong side in a moral battle, get your butt kicked doing it, and then spend more than a century treating educational attainment like it were polio and bigotry like it were the key to heaven?
March 3, 2010, 12:07 amjukeboxgrad says:
derhahn:
That might have something to do with the fact that GWB had never been generally viewed as a racist.
=============
phil:
Since you know so much about things like R2, hopefully you’ll explain how the map demonstrates what you claim it demonstrates.
If you have another explanation for the large red area on this map, that is mostly concentrated in the South, then I hope you’ll let us in on the secret and tell us what it is.
=============
dg:
Are you going to explain the red mark, or are you one of “the loony right wing people who … have no data or knowledge?”
March 3, 2010, 12:18 amSarcastro says:
Way to confirm the JaimeInTexas‘s victim narrative, Arthur Kirkland
March 3, 2010, 9:06 amricky says:
Self-governance is an evil cause?
March 3, 2010, 3:51 pmjukeboxgrad says:
ricky, you’re interfering with the narrative. We’ve been told that it’s no longer easy to “find people ‘exalting the lost cause.’ “
March 3, 2010, 4:20 pmSmallholder says:
Bbeard, without apparent irony. Wow.
The reason that Democrats stopped winning in the South was because Johnson pushed through the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, flipping racist Southern whites into the “R” column. Nixon’s Southern strategy directly appealed to this.
This is historical fact. White racists who previously voted for Democrats now voted Republican. This was more pronounced in the South because many Northern racists maintained the Democratic voting pattern because of unions, despite their racism.
It’s also a historical fact that racism’s importance in elections has declined tremendously; appeals to racism are now liable to backfire (which is why they are now so much subtler – you want to capture that small percentage without seeming to do so). McCain, to his credit, did not appeal to racists. Bill Clinton did so hamhandedly and it backfired.
The map linked in this thread is partially representative of the greatly reduced, but still lingering Southern and industrial Northern racism. The red is more prevalent in the Appalachian and Butternut regions. In the parts of the South where there are more black people, Brown v. Board has worked – it is harder to be racist when you know people as individuals, so the whiter areas have kept their racism longer.
For those who deny the racism, the explanatory factor cannot be conservatism – the map shows the difference between a more liberal candidate (Kerry) and Obama. The fact that Obama, who did much better with moderates got a smaller percentage of the votes in a particular area is clearly not a liberal-conservative issue. Given the cultural history of the Appalachian and Butternut regions, the fact that the black candidate got less support from whites than a white liberal candidate got four years previously, it is reasonable to attribute the difference to race lacking another explanation.
And no, pointing to the racism of blacks who voted for Obama because he was black doesn’t disprove the racism of the percentage of whites who voted for Kerry last time and voted for McCain this time. I think that claim is harder to make anyway – the fact that 90 odd percent of blacks voted for Obama doesn’t make them racist – if 90 odd percent of them voted for Kerry too.
March 4, 2010, 10:55 amjukeboxgrad says:
small, thank you for saying all that better than I did.
Bigotry and racism are a key part of how the GOP attracts votes. “We have 50 years of evidence that racial prejudice predicts voting. Republicans are supported by whites with prejudice against blacks.”
March 4, 2010, 1:32 pmdshoe says:
How do you figure? Secession is a divorce – not a military conquest. You’re thinking of secessionist South Carolina as an invading force claiming fresh territory. The Federal government were, in effect, married for many years. Property changed hands. By 1860, the U.S. gov’t had acquired a legitimate property interest in Ft. Sumter. SC doesn’t just inherit Federal property (for which it has presumably received due compensation) simply because it decides to break things off.
March 5, 2010, 4:33 am