When Exactly Did the Political Paradigm Shift Happen?

Earlier this year, I shared a meme about what Republicans and Democrats supported during historic political moments. It went over the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the constitution and compared them to Obamacare in terms of who supported what. I quickly got some angry friends who said, “Hey! We all know that this is ridiculous because there was a political paradigm shift. The south used to be Democratic and now they’re Republican! The parties switched!”

While the part about the south is true, I’ve been asking myself this question for years: When exactly did the political parties shift and switch its ideology? I decided that it’s time to look into it and figure it out.

First, we need to know if anything in the meme took place before or after this paradigm shift. The 13th amendment to the constitution was fully adopted on December 18th, 1865. The 14th amendment to the constitution was adopted July 9th, 1868. The 15th amendment to the constitution was adopted March 30th, 1870.

Next, we need to know who was president during those times. When the 13th amendment was adopted, Abraham Lincoln (R) was president. When the 14th amendment was adopted, Andrew Johnson (D) was president. When the 15th amendment was adopted, Ulysses S. Grant (R) was president.

History of the Democratic Party

Before the Democratic Party was formed, there was the Democratic-Republican Party. Before that party was the Anti-Administration Party and the Anti-Federalist party. It’s important to understand this because they were founded by the anti-administration movement led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and the anti-federalism movement, which favored the Articles of Confederacy (essentially, Confederates).

The Democratic-Republican Party called themselves the “Republican Party.” However, the Republican Party that we have today is not related to them other than the fact that they were once a part of the Democratic-Republicans. I personally believe that it was a way to shorten their party’s name. Democratic-Republicans were classically liberal. This, believe it or not, does not mean that they were conservative.

The Democratic-Republicans split into two parties: The Democratic Party and the National Republican Party. This is the Democratic Party that we all know today. However, this National Republican Party is not the GOP that we have today. The main difference here was that the Democratic Party was a supporter of Andrew Jackson while the other party was Anti-Andrew Jackson. The Democratic Party hasn’t had much change since its creation. It started out liberal and it still is liberal for the most part.

Brief History of the Republican Party

So when the heck did we get the Republican Party we know today? We left off with the National Republican Party, which was a merger of the Anti-Jackson Democrats and the Federalists. Eventually, it got together with the Anti-Masonic Party and merged into the Whig Party. The Anti-Masonic Party is when we started seeing more conservative views coming in, but the ideology was mostly the same.

Then, we got the Republican Party that everybody knows today when the Whig Party merged with the Free Soil Party, a party that was anti-expansion of slavery and had advocated for a “true democracy.” The party has been always been more conservative than the Democratic Party, which has always been more liberal than the Republican Party.

Democrats Either Don’t Know or Are Ashamed of Their Political History

Much of the time, when Republicans praise Abraham Lincoln for the things he did or point out that Democrats were originally the ones with slaves, Democrats are quick to say, “Oh, everything was different back then. That means that Democrats back in the day were actually Republicans!” Not so fast! The Democratic Party likes to talk about Andrew Jackson the same way that Republicans talk about Abraham Lincoln. Why does this matter?

It matters because Andrew Jack was the seventh president of our nation when Abraham Lincoln was the 16th. This means that the Republican Party really was against slavery, just as it is today. The party was founded by anti-slavery activists. Many from the Democratic Party (especially Free Soilers) joined the newly formed Republican Party. So why is it that Democrats like to say that there was a paradigm shift in party ideology? It’s probably because of a shift that actually happened within the people, not the parties.

The South is Recently Republican (People Change, Not Parties)

One thing many people seem to think is that the south is fairly conservative, so the Democratic Party must have been conservative at one point. Well, not really. The Democratic Party’s ideology is mainly liberalism and progressivism. It’s been that way since it was formed in 1828. If the Democratic Party has been fairly similar since it’s founding, then there wasn’t really a paradigm shift within the political parties themselves.

The best explanation that I can think of is that people have changed their minds over time. This isn’t anything new. The south used to be predominately Democratic. Now, they’re mostly Republican. But this isn’t a change in the ideology of political parties. It’s a change in the minds of the people. Again, this isn’t anything new. Look at the west coast. Washington, California, and Oregon are all considered blue states. They used to vote Republican until the 80s.

If the political parties haven’t really changed all that much in terms of general ideology, then, of course, it only makes sense that the people have changed. So the answer to our question really is that the parties haven’t changed as much as the people have. Unless you can give an informative period of time, with sources, then the answer I’ve found is absolutely irrefutable.

Republicans Are Still Less Likely to do What Democrats Did

Want to know what will also have Democrats responding with, “Oh, the parties used to be very different back then” but then praise a Democrat from before that time period? Bring up Japanese internment camps during World War II (WWII). FDR and Harry S. Truman, both Democrats, were the two presidents that we had during WWII. It’s no secret that our country rounded up a lot of Japanese people, even those who plead no allegiance to Japan, and stuck them in camps to keep people safe. This was sometime after the Pearl Harbor attack.

What Japan did could be considered an act of terrorism. Then again, terrorism doesn’t usually involve the conquering of another nation as much as it involve’s crippling it. 9/11 was a horrible attack that instilled fear into the souls of many. I was in the 7th grade when that happened. I lived close to an airport. I remember asking myself, “Is this when I’m going to die?” every time an airplane flew over my house. A lot of muslims were persecuted and humiliated by the public. But the question is simple: Were there ever any internment camps for muslims? None that we ever heard of. If there had been any, the media would’ve been all over it. Who was president during that time? George W. Bush. A Republican.

While Republicans were partially responsible for what happened to the Japanese-Americans during WWII, it was ultimately the Democratic president, FDR, who created the internment camps. He could’ve said, “No. It’s not right to do that.” But he didn’t. He could’ve said, “It infringes on the freedom of Americans.” But he didn’t. He could’ve said, “This is no better than slavery was in the south.” But he didn’t. The point is just clear and simple: He never did that. If he did, he would’ve scrapped the idea. Were the parties so different during this time, too?

Denial vs Ignorance

Many Democrats say that they don’t really watch the news or talk about politics because they don’t really care. They tend to say things like, “I inform myself” or “I don’t really care to know about it.” This kind of self-inflicted ignorance is what I believe is keeping the Democratic Party alive today. The issue is that it’s not really ignorance if you’re inflicting it upon yourself. That’s called denial.

Why deny the past? If Republicans had some dark history like the Democrats do, I would’ve probably just said, “Yeah, it happened. But the people in the party have changed since then.” That’s not what’s happening at all, though. What’s happening is an a la carte disowning of the dark spots in the past. Slavery was most common in the south, like the Democratic Party. Disown. Internment camps filled with Japanese people during WWII. Disown.

There’s a la carte praise and denial when it comes to past presidents, too. JFK is the richest president we’ve ever had; Democrats belittle Republican candidates that are rich. Democrats talk trash about Donald Trump being the richest candidate in our nation’s history; They tend to ignore the fact that Hillary is pretty rich, too. It really doesn’t make sense.

In my experience, Republicans claim it all. George W. Bush went into Iraq: “Big mistake.” Richard Nixon lied to the people: “Yeah, it happened. But people like that are ousted now.” Ronald Reagan: “Yes, he did some bad things, too.” It doesn’t matter who it is or what they did. Republicans aren’t denying it or saying, “The political parties were very different back then.” Maybe this is because Republicans haven’t had the dark history of people tainting their party’s name with the KKK, internment camps, and slavery.



  1. Kind of a dumb, simplistic, look at thing.

    You claim that dems were always liberal and that southerns were liberals that just changed their minds??? Really?

    I’m thinking southerns never changed their minds, suddenly evolving from liberals to conservatives, rather, they switched parties when their party no longer represented their views (Strom Thurman and Jesse Helms).


    1. People don’t change, they’re brain washed by both parties. They go along with what the party believes. Only independents which have attracted both democrats and republicans go with their gut feeling, together with we the People and the silent majority. That’s why Trump won and has accomplish more in one year then any other President in political history. This is what a paradigm shift is.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Everyone is welcome to try to pinpoint the time when the paradigm shift happened. However, if it did happen, it was very recent. From the times of Andrew Jackson to LBJ, what we consider extremely racist today are views these presidents all had.


    1. Look at the way the parties were held in the 1950’s. The Republicans, fought for civil rights, desegregation, right to vote etc. Then look at the vietnam war, during and after this time is when the paradigm shift happened. If you look at Confederate states, say like NC the were Democratic until 1928, a short sabbatical and back to Democratic State Governance, on a federal level, they began voting Republican in 1964, which is attributed to the Republicans stance on Gay rights, abortion, God in school. Shortly after voting Republican state wise as well. If you think that the Democrat’s are this civil rights fighting party, look at the inner city politics in all Major US cities. Majority are Democrat, and I bring this up because this is where you find the most underpriveledged minority groups. Take a look at how many times Democratic President Clinton vetoed a Republican bill to create equal opportunity scholarships and funding for innercity schools. Or how many times the Democrats voted down fair pension legislation for the Black community. (2004 was the most recent)


    2. Presidents personal beliefs don’t necessarily reflect the overall views of a political party or the views of a majority of members of his party. LBJ’s use of the n word privately within his inner circle doesn’t mean the majority of his party shared that behaviour. LBJ was a product of a different time in the south.

      As far as “pinpointing” a shift, it did not occur overnight. The Republicans began to shift within a generation of the civil war. The republican’s expulsion of black office holders from their party during the Lilly White Movement is just one example the incremental shift that took place over more than 100 years.

      We could easily make the case that trump’s rise is yet another wave of dems, with somewhat racist views, leaving their party drawn by the 144 character tweets.


    1. But the point is can you disprove any of it using a legitimate source? It doesn’t matter what point in history you choose under a Democratic president before Carter: The reaction I’ve almost always gotten was, “The parties were way different back then. They swapped ideologies.”


      1. Yes actually you can. The fact that you would draw upon Andrew Jackson to state you’re point is one of the absolute dumbest things I’ve ever heard. Sorry, I wish I could put it in another way but any progressive who tried to say Andrew Jackson should be looked upon the same way as Abraham Lincoln has never read a thing about the man. Jacksonian politics didn’t even have anything to do with what policies he was going to put into place. It had to do with the man himself, a larger than life figure with a resume of military success. In fact, the very idea that any of our elections prior to the last maybe 50 years (and that’s even being generous) came down to more than one single issue or just who people tended to like better is complete nonsense. Also, the Whig party and the “Know nothings” fell apart prior to the rise of the Republican Party. But the truth is though there were some people who definitely used this new party as a means to political prominence, these parties were not the combined embodiment of the Republican Party as you’ve made it seem. In the southern states especially, elections between whigs and democrats around 1840-1850 went something like this. “I’ll do a better job of making sure you can keep your slaves”-democrats “that’s a lie, I’ll do a better job”-whigs. Read any academically accepted textbooks and you’ll find that out. Literally any of them. Don’t spew this nonsense when you haven’t the slightest clue of what you’re saying. And ideologies of the Democratic Party didn’t change? Really? Because im pretty sure that the entire reason for the south seceding from the union had to do with democratic politicians pounding “southern states rights” into the head of anyone who’d listen for like 30 years prior to secession. If you really want to know when the paradigm shift occurred as far as racial progress goes you’ll just have to look at around the 1970’s & 80’s. Research Regan’s southern strategy. He’ll just watch the documentary 13th. Then fact check with somewhere not called breitbart news or Wikipedia or Some BS website with a name like Dixie land republican press. Truth be told though, there isn’t a paradigm shift as far as racial progress goes. People began to think the southern strategy was no longer going to work. Trump just proved it still does. Now democrats will in all likelihood adjust their platform accordingly like in the past (see the election between Bush senior and Clinton, which was won based off clintons oppressive crime bill) the paradigm is still exactly as it was… convince enough white people that there’s a threat to them (black people, drugs(or should I say black people again), “Super predators”(see first two), Mexicans, Obama, Isis, etc.) and they eat that shit up because being scared and angry provokes more of a response than taking the time to think into things, or god forbid inform yourself. I really don’t care if you’re a conservative or a liberal either. I do care that you have some sort of platform and you don’t even care to educate yourself before posting something completely misleading with said platform.


      2. Hmmm… check any accepted textbook? Well, since every institute of “higher learning” is dominated by elite, intolerant, hateful liberals that actively and physically quash free speech, is it any wonder that the textbooks favor the liberal narrative by rewriting history? Sure, check textbooks… Why not just put your hands over your ears like liberals have always fone?

        Liked by 1 person

  3. You failed to address that the terms “liberal” and “conservative” have meant drastically different things in the past. You know what hasn’t changed? Geography. The same people who were on the wrong side of history in 1860 are on the wrong side again. IDEOLOGY, and its behaviors and mindset is what matters. Like George Carlin said, “people think that if you change the name of the condition, then you change the condition.” Calling a progressive person a Republican or Democrat at a certain point in history is irrelevant. Consistency of behavior is paramount. Conservative (in the current definition of the ideology) people today are against the progressive principles that grant equal rights to the disenfranchised.

    Ask a racist, white supremacist, Neo-Nazi, or KKK member whi they voted for, tgen come back and try to make the case that Republicans are currently on the right side of history.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s