The Southern origins of modern conservatism, 1945--1976

In the dissertation I argue that what now appears as a coherent conservative politics is in fact the product of a contingent, highly mobile and fragmented political exchange through which southern segregationists and northern conservatives forged a common political project. I show how these groups, which formerly had little in common beyond opposition to New Deal imperatives, linked distrust in government, racism, social traditionalism and economic conservatism into what would become a hegemonic political discourse. By demonstrating that the emergence of modern conservatism was less reactive and static than proactive and creative, I challenge the conventional assumption that a ‘backlash’ against the excesses of racial liberals and radicals in the 1960s catalyzed the Right. The backlash narrative, which locates Republican ascendancy in the failures of the left, is now broadly accepted. This narrative has greatly helped shift the Democratic Party to the right in the last two decades, and as such has authorized a retreat from social policies aimed at eliminating racial inequality. The implications of this historical interpretation are intellectual as well as political, as it demonstrates the way that the present always reflects an account of history. By giving a different explanation of the rise of the Right, my work offers a new context for understanding contemporary U.S. politics. Using primary source material, I analyze the influence of the South on the rise of the modern Right through the ideas and strategies of representative political figures, including: the public writings and private correspondence of Charles Wallace Collins, an intellectual and strategist in the Dixiecrat Revolt of 1948; the attempts of conservatives to connect Republican Party to southern segregationism in the Goldwater campaign; the national emergence of racial populism in George Wallace's presidential campaigns; and Nixon's institutionalization of the Southern Strategy and attempt to link race, populism and antistatism into a “new majority.” This qualitative method allows me to foreground the dynamic relationship between discourse and institutions, which is a central yet under-theorized aspect of political development.