Skip to main content

History of the American Political Parties

First party system:

inception to 1836


Federalists - broad central power - Hamilton. supported England in French- England war. Stronghold in New England.


Anti-federalists - limited federal power. anti-national bank. supported the French revolution. Thomas Jefferson. supported France in 1793 French English war.

...also called democrat-republicans.


Second party system:

1837 to 1852


Federalists disappeared.


Anti-federalists split into multiple parties- [1] Jackson democrats who were against the bank of the united states b/c it was too centralized and too corporate. farmers and common/poor man were in this party from the start. Believed in appointing friends/supporters of like mind when becoming president instead of letting the previous executive employees stay in tenure. [2] bankers and businessman therefore fell together into the Whig party. They supported public works programs and subsidies to businesses and high taxes on imports to protect American businesses.


Third party system:

1853-1895


Democrats remain. A lot of white racists in the south joined the party having left the republicans who wouldn't tolerate their racism. These new democrats were pro business but didn't agree with the republicans on race so they found a home with the democrats instead. Lots of unskilled laborers and catholic immigrants in party also. Generally wanted govt to stay out of moral/social issues like prohibition. On slavery democrats were split in that some were racist and pro slavery and some were against slavery- mostly the northern democrats. They supported low tariffs on imported goods to keep costs low for common people and wanted less federal spending overall so that the common man could keep more of his own money.


Whigs dissolve. Some Whigs come together-mostly middle class anti-Catholics to make the American party (which eventually dissolved as most 3rd parties do). Many other former Whigs come together to form the Republican party and put up Abe Lincoln for president. Businessman and white collar workers flock to the Republican party. Freed slaves also in the party. Mostly protestant. Wanted the government to condemn sin - supported prohibition and other heavy handed govt intrusion into moral decisions. Still wanted high tariffs to protect business owners and lots of federal subsidies to businesses.


Fourth party system

1896-1932


More of the same from both parties, except that republicans became even more business oriented as some republicans thought the party went too far in supporting business over environment and commoners and left for the Democrat party. Also most of the poor immigrants coming into the country joined the Democrat party. Democrats are generally anti-war, anti-imperialism and anti-world policing and definitely anti-business. They support direct democracy versus electoral college and support broadening the vote to as many as possible except the blacks. Began to support strong govt regulation over business to protect people from businesses.


Fifth party system

1933-?? (some same 1960s, some say 1990s, some say still under this system today)


More people begin to support Democrats as the Republicans were in charge near the depression and some see them responsible somehow so the Democrats got even more poor, immigrants, and minorities to come over to their side. Republicans still support business and subsidies to business. Republicans FINALLY adopt free trade platform under Reagan, realizing that their previous anti-trade policies hurt the nation and businesses ultimately. Besides, now that US businesses were selling more and more overseas, free trade was more beneficial for them so they were now happy to support it too. Ironically, this is about the time that most Democrats driven by the labor unions- come out against free trade b/c it risked their jobs. Job security suddenly became more important than the little people being able to buy things affordably. Here we have a reversal of both party platforms on free trade.


Important notes:


From my research, it seems that since their inception, Democrats have always held tight to pushing direct democracy and having the common man become very involved in and directly benefiting from the federal government including govt funds. Republicans have always been pro-business and push representative democracy and the electoral college. A healthy debate that is likely to continue in perpetuity.


On the other hand, the parties switched ideology on free trade. I'm glad the Republicans finally came around to the winning strategy of supporting free trade. I believe its best for the global economy and will eventually lift most countries out of poverty. It's too bad the democrats adopted the anti-trade stance. Would have been nice to have unity on the issue.


Clearly on the black race issue, democrats have the longstanding pattern of being on the wrong side. This does make me feel good about my Republican party.


Finally, I don't see how democrats have the audacity to claim Thomas Jefferson as *their* president (go look at dnc.org - they state he was a democrat) when really he was the father of the party that BOTH Democrats and Republicans ultimately branched off from. I dare say that Jefferson, had he been alive, would have been more likely to go off with the Whigs than the Jackson Democrats when the split occurred.

Comments

Anonymous said…
er.

"Clearly on the black race issue, democrats have the longstanding pattern of being on the wrong side. This does make me feel good about my Republican party."

I'm guessing you didn't pay much attention to the era you describe as the 5th party system? Noting which side of the fence Republicans were on during the Civil Rights Movement [and many times, still today] might give some enlightenment as to why *your* Republican party remains yours. And not black people's [for the most part].

Everybody [both parties] was on the wrong side until the Civil Rights Movement came along, because no one wanted to give black people the right to participate in society as full, equal human beings.

The Democratic party is the party of most minorities today because it is the party that chose to *include* minorities. It is the party that chose to step up when it came to civil rights. It is not saintly in any way, but of the two, if you're going to choose one that did right by black people more than the other? Hands down: Democrats.
Anonymous said…
You're ignoring the current Democrat efforts to enrol non-white people to vote and the Republican efforts to disenfranchise them!

Popular posts from this blog

Board Game Review: Brass Birmingham

Here’s a story of a lovely lady (spoiler: it’s me) and her pride and how it has led to the discovery of the single greatest board game I have ever played. It’s probably also a good primer for other reviewers on increasing your reach. At GenCon this year, I was perusing the wares of the various booths and my eyes caught a glimpse of two beautiful game boxes. Each had crisp metallic lettering with an old world feel and artwork that radiated European class. I made my way to the booth and waited patiently to speak to to the team manning it as there were many buyers lined up to purchase the games. I didn’t know anything about the games (Brass Birmingham and Brass Lancashire), or the publisher – Roxley Game Laboratory – but I knew I wanted to review one or both of the games. Almost every board game love story I star in in can be summed up this way: I am seduced by the artwork or theme and then I stay for the right mechanics. When the lead rep spoke with me, he gently rejected my request. He

Board Game Review: Brass Lancashire

A few months ago, I fell in love with Brass Birmingham (you can read that review HERE ). I fell hard. It was an all time top 10 best games ever kind of love and so when Roxley Game Laboratory offered to send me Brass Lancashire to play and share my thoughts, I was a bit hesitant.  Is there even a chance I could enjoy it as much as Birmingham ? Lancashire was the original game designed by Martin Wallace, and while it’s been updated for the most recent release, I was concerned it might prove to be an older, tired version that couldn’t compete with Birmingham . My concerns were unfounded. Brass Lancashire is fantastic. Playing Lancashire after playing Birmingham is a bit like dating someone and then dating their sibling. Sure, there’s a resemblance, but the kissing feels different. The artwork for Brass Lancashire is beautiful, radiating a classic style evocative of the theme (industrial era production). The artists have shown great attention to detail such as the raised gold letter

Board Game Review: Machi Koro Legacy

M achi Koro   was one of the first games my husband Chris and I played together. It was released in 2012 and when we started gaming together in 2013, it was still a popular game on reviewer blogs and videos as we sought guidance in what to play and what to buy. Once Machi Koro   was in our collection, I spent every game trying my best to outthink Chris and acquire the best combination of establishment types to ensure victory. As we were enticed by other new games coming out and were drawn deeper into heavy Euros, we left Machi Koro on the shelf more frequently, with an occasional wistful comment about how we should play again. At GenCon earlier this year, Machi Koro Legacy   was the talk of the town. Designed by Rob Daviau, JR Honeycutt, and Masao Suganuma (Masao is the original designer of Machi Koro ), it promised to breathe new life into Machi Koro through a campaign style series of ten games, revealing new aspects of gameplay in each session at the table. We love legacy games, s