Political Thought and Political Behavior in the South
| Author | Marian D. Irish |
| Published date | 01 June 1960 |
| Date | 01 June 1960 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/106591296001300208 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
406
POLITICAL
THOUGHT
AND
POLITICAL
BEHAVIOR
IN
THE
SOUTH
MARIAN D.
IRISH
Florida
State
University
OLITICS
IN
THE
SOUTH -
as
everywhere
-
is
the
struggle
for
power
among
organized
groups.
The
solid
South
simply
does
not
exist
except
in
JL
the
vapid
imagination
of
&dquo;professional
Southerners.&dquo;
Southern
political
thought
resembles
a
kaleidoscope
of
rapidly
shifting
rationalizations
affected
by
many
groups
struggling
for
power
within
the
region.
And
southern
political
be-
havior
simply
compounds
the
activities
of
these
numerous
and
various
groups,
each
trying
to
protect
and
promote
its
special
interests
through
governmental
action.
The
most
realistic
analysis
of
southern
political
behavior
is
V.
O.
Key’s
South,
ern
Politics,
published
in
1949.
Key
discovered,
what
was
already
rather
gener-
ally
known,
that
&dquo;the
question
of
race
overshadows
all
other
factors
conditioning
the
politics
of
the
South.&dquo;
1
But
Key
wrote
almost
exclusively
about
southern
white
politics,
giving
only
passing
reference,
for
example,
to
the
NAACP,
the
Negro
organization
which
would
explode
the
&dquo;Solid
South&dquo;
within
less
than
a
decade.
At
the
end
of
his
study,
in
&dquo;portent
of
trends,&dquo;
he
notes
that
&dquo;the
growth
of
cities
contains
the
seeds
of
political
change
for
the
South.&dquo;
In
this
connection
he
mentions
that
&dquo;a
significant
expansion
of
labor
influence
may
be
expected&dquo;
and
&dquo;concurrently
with
the
growth
of
urban
workers
there
are
coming
into
being,
of
course,
industrial
and
financial
interests
that
have
a
fellow
feeling
with
north-
ern
Republicanism.&dquo;
2 Key,
however,
was
so
preoccupied
with
the
impact
of
the
Negro
on
southern
white
politics
that
he
was
not
particularly
concerned
with
other
aspects
of
pressure
politics
in
the
region.
Pressure
groups
in
the
South,
as
elsewhere,
focus
their
efforts
primarily
on
the
legislators
who
are
at
the
center
of
policy-making.
The
legislature
is
respon-
sible
for
reconciling
within
the
&dquo;public
interest&dquo;
the
several
competing
and
con-
flicting
special
interests.
State
legislators
are
usually
under
pressure
of
time;
they
have
perhaps
sixty
days
in
which
to
enact
legislation
for
the
next
biennium.
Also
turnover
in
state
legislatures
is
generally
high
which
means
that
many
of
the
legislators
have
had
no
previous
experience
in
law-making.
Thus
they
tend
to
rely
to
a
considerable
extent
upon
lobbyists
to
tell
them
what
organized
groups
in
the
state
want
and
need.
The
assumption
is
that,
if
all
the
major
groups
can
be
satisfied
the
commonwealth
will
flourish
and
prosper.
The
fallacy
is
that
not
all
interests
are
represented
among
the
lobbies;
of
those
that
are
represented
some
carry
more
weight
than
their
numbers
or
proposals
would
seem
to
warrant.
1
V.
O.
Key,
Southern
Politics
(New
York:
Knopf,
1949),
p.
664.
Key
is
a
native
Texan,
who
taught
in
Texas,
Alabama,
and
Maryland,
before
he
crossed
the
Mason-Dixon
line
first
for
Yale,
then
to
Harvard.
Key
was
teaching
at
Johns
Hopkins
at
the
time
that
he
acted
as
director
of
the
field
studies
for
Southern
Politics.
His
method
is
largely
statistical,
supported
by
extensive
field
interviews.
2
Ibid.,
p.
673-74.
To continue reading
Request your trial