Yeah, but do you really want that counterweight to be provided by a bunch of ultrareactionaries who support Jim Crow?
It seems like civil rights is so far ahead past the point of being rolled back. In fact, it seems like most things are so far ahead of being past the point of being rolled back. For goodness's sake, unions are constitutionally protected! With Socialists running California and Communists rising in Minnesota, I'll take what I can get for counterweight.
 
It seems like civil rights is so far ahead past the point of being rolled back. In fact, it seems like most things are so far ahead of being past the point of being rolled back. For goodness's sake, unions are constitutionally protected!

They said the same thing about reconstruction too.

Of course a healthy opposition is vital to any democratic process, but not all oppositions are equal.
 
He's saying there's precedent for Americans to ignore constitutional amendments.
I mean, that's completely different circumstances. Unions are here mostly liked by everyone or at least seen as not a problem. Jim Crow happened because while the majority agreed that slavery was bad, there wasn't an agreement that black people were just the same as white people which is why something like Jim Crow could happen with the rest of the nation not caring. There was no strong movement to block female suffrage for instance.
 
There's an old saying about counting eggs that is applicable here.
I just think a small party with its base in only part of the south and without any Committee seats or whatever is hardly any real threat if they get a little bigger, especially when Bob Taft doesn't even want to associate with them. They're too toxic to get anything done, and the party system is fragmented enough that this be contained much like the Socialists who are still stuck in their strongholds.
 
I just think a small party with its base in only part of the south and without any Committee seats or whatever is hardly any real threat if they get a little bigger, especially when Bob Taft doesn't even want to associate with them. They're too toxic to get anything done, and the party system is fragmented enough that this be contained much like the Socialists who are still stuck in their strongholds.

If there's anything that this timeline should tell us it's that the established facts of politics are not fixed. Things change and shit happens.
 
If there's anything that this timeline should tell us it's that the established facts of politics are not fixed. Things change and shit happens.
It seems like the two party duopoly has basically held in this timeline with the non Progressive and Republican Parties being on the sidelines (Commonwealth being an exception but they mostly acted as an occasionally antagonistic sister party of the Progressives). So that's remained consistent and I don't see that changing. The other parties mostly just compete for which can be a bigger minor annoyance for the past decade.
 
I just think a small party with its base in only part of the south and without any Committee seats or whatever is hardly any real threat if they get a little bigger, especially when Bob Taft doesn't even want to associate with them. They're too toxic to get anything done, and the party system is fragmented enough that this be contained much like the Socialists who are still stuck in their strongholds.

There's probably better opposition to back.
 
Out of interest @Emperor Julian, have you considered publishing The Ruins of an American Party System on Sealion Press?
I haven't actually considered publishing this is any form; while something like Sealion Press might publish something that's such a niche interest, or I could self-publish it, I don't really know if this work in its current form is actually in a good format to be published. What with the Wikiboxes and the wide variety of writing styles, etc. I'd have to basically rewrite the whole timeline if I wanted to make it into a novel format.
 
I haven't actually considered publishing this is any form; while something like Sealion Press might publish something that's such a niche interest, or I could self-publish it, I don't really know if this work in its current form is actually in a good format to be published. What with the Wikiboxes and the wide variety of writing styles, etc. I'd have to basically rewrite the whole timeline if I wanted to make it into a novel format.

Maybe not. You could write an overarching structure of a researcher going through a variety of different media for a book or paper and as such that leaves much of it alone. Hell, the parts with dialogue in private could be credited to TV shows or movies.
 
Maybe not. You could write an overarching structure of a researcher going through a variety of different media for a book or paper and as such that leaves much of it alone. Hell, the parts with dialogue in private could be credited to TV shows or movies.

Some of the other published timelines play fast and loose with mixing narrative and text sections.
 
I haven't actually considered publishing this is any form; while something like Sealion Press might publish something that's such a niche interest, or I could self-publish it, I don't really know if this work in its current form is actually in a good format to be published. What with the Wikiboxes and the wide variety of writing styles, etc. I'd have to basically rewrite the whole timeline if I wanted to make it into a novel format.

For the wikiboxes, all that you'd realistically need to do is replace them with maps (election boxes) or sidebars or differently-shaded sections to provide a clean break for the reader (plus it would give you a chance to slip in new information that personal infoboxes couldn't convey).
 
Top