Academic literature on the topic 'Republican Party. South Carolina'

Paralleling developments in other southern states over the past three to four decades, South Carolina’s political system has undergone dramatic change. One of the more significant components of this change has been the partisan realignment from a one-party system dominated by the Democrats to a competitive two-party system in which Republicans have come to hold the upper hand. This increased electoral competitiveness has been accompanied by an increased organizational effort by both parties in the state. An examination of local party activists in 2001 points to a continuation of this pattern over the past ten years. In comparison with data from the 1991 Southern Grassroots Party Activists Survey, the 2001 data show the following: (1) the Republican Party has sustained its electoral and organizational gains of recent years; (2) the parties continue to attract activists who differ across party lines on a number of important demographic and socioeconomic variables; (3) there has been a continued sorting of political orientations and cues marked by sharply different inter-party ideological and issue positions; (4) the Democratic Party has become more ideologically homogeneous and more in line with the national party than previously; and (5) since 1991 perceptions of factionalism have declined in both parties, but still remain higher among Democrats than among Republicans.

The wave of strikes that swept across the South Carolina rice fields in late 1876 offer rich material for revisiting the most compelling issues in the postwar Reconstruction of the US's former slave states. They expose sharp tensions between the Republican Party's black, working-class constituency and its mostly white, bourgeois leadership. Recent studies, based almost entirely on Northern published opinion, have made the case that Northern Republican elites were driven to “abandon the mid-century vision of an egalitarian free labor society” by assertive ex-slaves oblivious to the “mutual interests” that ostensibly bound them and their employers. This article, based on extensive archival research, asserts that similar fissures opened up between freedpeople and southern Republican officials. In a series of highly effective mobilizations against local planters and determined attempts to block party officials from betraying their interests, rice fieldhands demonstrated a clear understanding of the critical issues at stake during the months leading up to the collapse of Reconstruction. Their intervention contrasted not only with the feeble holding operation pursued by moderates in the upper levels of the Republican party, but also with the timidity of many locally rooted black officials nearer to the grassroots.

ABSTRACTIn a time of unprecedented racial polarization in partisan voting, and in a staunchly Republican Deep South state, one black Republican managed to reach the pinnacle of public office. This article examines Tim Scott’s rise by analyzing precinct-level data to better understand his 2010 election to the US House and data from the Winthrop Poll to explore his more recent US Senate victory. To better understand support for Scott, we also report results from an embedded-survey experiment to assess respondents’ favorability toward Scott when he is characterized by two different frames: (1) “Tea Party favorite,” and (2) “first African American Senator from South Carolina since Reconstruction.” We found that conservatives, evangelicals, and less-educated individuals respond more positively to Scott when he is described as a “Tea Party favorite.” More than an intriguing case study, Scott’s rise tells a broader story of the complicated relationships among race, ideology, and partisanship in the contemporary American South.

AbstractHistory has shown that voters tend to support candidates of their own race. This reality has proven particularly challenging for black candidates who have often had difficulty running for office in majority white electorates. However, the vast majority of research on this topic has focused on minority Democrats, not minority Republicans. In this study, we take advantage of a unique set of circumstances in South Carolina's (SC's) 2014 elections where voters had the opportunity to cast ballots for an Indian-American Republican Governor and an African-American Republican Senator. Additionally, the presence of a white Republican Senator seeking reelection provides an important comparison case for determining if there is significant variation in support of these candidates given their different racial profiles, but shared party affiliation. Using unique data from The Winthrop Poll, we find that the determinants of approving of, and voting for, minority Republican candidates, are quite similar to support for the white Republican candidate. It appears that party and ideology are foremost in guiding approval and vote choice decisions among voters in contemporary American politics. Hence, even in SC, support for minority Republicans approximates that given to a white Republican.

When political journalist William D. Workman, Jr., resigned from Charleston’s News and Courier and announced plans to run for the U.S. Senate in 1962, he said it would be “unethical” to combine “objective reporting with partisan politics.” Yet Workman’s personal papers reveal that, for three years, he and editor Thomas R. Waring, Jr., had been working with Republican leaders to build a conservative party to challenge Deep South Democrats. Workman’s story provides an example of how partisan activism survived in the twentieth-century American press, despite the rise of professional standards prohibiting political engagement.

In this article, we examine the role that in-migration played in contributing to the 2008 Democratic presidential victory in North Carolina. Prior to Barack Obama, the last time the Tar Heel State was carried by a Democrat was Jimmy Carter in 1976. Since the late 1980s, North Carolina has undergone tremendous demographic change. In addition to a growing Hispanic population that is primarily comprised of noncitizens, the state has witnessed a very large increase in the number of residents who were born and raised in Northern states such as New York. Historically, in much of the postwar South, Northern migrants helped grow the Republican Party. We find that in North Carolina this pattern no longer holds. In contemporary North Carolina, migrants born outside the South are more likely to identify and register as politically unaffiliated, and their growing share of the state’s electorate directly contributed to Obama’s narrow win.

The aim of those drafting the Southern Manifesto of 1956 was to coerce wavering Southern politicians into supporting a united regional campaign of defiance of the Supreme Court's school desegregation ruling. The Manifesto largely succeeded. Most Southern congressmen, including leading moderates, felt they had no alternative but to succumb to what they perceived to be mass popular segregationist sentiment and sign the Manifesto. This paper examines the cases of those who refused to sign: what were the sources of their racial moderation, did they face electoral retribution, or did their careers suggest there was a political alternative to massive resistance? The evidence from Texas, Tennessee, Florida, and North Carolina highlights the diversity of political opinion among the non-signers – from New Deal liberal to right-wing Republican ideologue – and the disparate sources for their racial moderation – national political ambitions, party loyalty, experience in the Second World War, Cold War fears, religious belief, and an urban political base. Their fate suggests, at the very least, that outside the Deep South there was room for political manoeuvre, especially if state political leaders took a united moderate stance. Nevertheless, the cautious and gradualist stance of the moderates did not offer a convincing alternative to the massive resistance strategy so passionately advocated by the conservatives.

In 2004 South Carolina continued to play an increasingly familiar role: a critical battleground state in the presidential nomination process but a minor, generally ignored player in the general election. South Carolina has become such a reliable source of eight electoral votes for Republican presidential candidates that the state no longer figures in presidential campaign strategies. Republican presidential candidates assume that the state will be a nearly fail-safe “red state” with little or no effort, and Democratic presidential candidates assume with a high degree of certainty that the state will once again be a Republican stronghold, regard-less of what happens elsewhere. In the 2004 presidential election these assumptions quickly turned into hard facts early on in the election cycle. Indeed, beginning with the 1964 presidential election, Republican presidential candidates have carried the state in ten of the eleven presidential contests to date, with only 1976 standing as the lone exception (when Georgia neighbor Jimmy Carter carried the state).

This article explains the failure of the Republican party to reproduce their dominance of the South in presidential elections at lower electoral levels. First, the foreign policy and social issues that have benefitted Republican presidential candidates have lower salience in state and congressional elections. Second, sustained Republican control of the White House has exposed the party to recurrent mid-term setbacks at lower electoral levels. Third, deficiencies of local party organization and a paucity of identifiers deprives the Republicans of candidates in sufficient quantity and quality to be competitive with Democrats.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--George Mason University, 2008.
Vita: p. 669. Thesis director: Jane T. Censer. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History. Title from PDF t.p. (viewed Jan. 11, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 657-668). Also issued in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2003.
Document formatted into pages; contains viii, 256 p. Includes bibliographical references (p. 247-256). Abstract available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center; full text release delayed at author's request until 2006 Aug. 12.

The traditional narrative of political party development in the United States of America during the latter half of the 1790s ascribes the decline in popularity of the Federalist Party in the Election of 1800 to that party's passage of controversial legislation, specifically the Sedition Act of 1798, prior to the election. Between the passage of the Sedition Act and the Election of 1800, however, the midterm elections of 1798-1799 transpired and resulted in a significant increase in Federalist popularity in four states – North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Virginia. This study seeks to ascertain why these four states increased their support for the Federalist Party in 1798-1799, despite the passage of the Sedition Act by the Federalist Party. By examining newspapers and election results, this study analyzes the reaction of these four states to the passage of the Sedition Act and finds that generally, these states did not react strongly against the Sedition Act in the immediate aftermath of its passage. Instead, all four states urged national unity and emphasized the need to support the national government because the United States faced the threat of war with France. This study employs a state-by-state formula to determine each state's individual reaction to the Sedition Act and the Quasi-War, finding that ultimately, the Sedition Act did not have as significant of an impact in these states as the popular narrative holds.

The 1961 general election has not received much publicity over the years possibly because it was overshadowed by the referendum of the previous year. It was regarded at the time as being a comparatively unexciting election with a predictable result and it did not produce any really great change in the number of seats held by the National Party (NP). Most of what excitement was engendered by the election lay in the conflict between the United Party (UP) and the Progressive Party (PP). There has also been comparatively little written about this election. Stultz and Butler wrote one short article on the 1961 election and Kenneth Heard also wrote a chapter about it in his study of South African general elections between 1943 and 197C. In his memoirs entitled My Lewe in die Politiek, Ben Schoeman devoted very little space to the 1961 general election, and much of what appeared on pages 281 and 282 dealt with Japie Basson and the performance of the National Union Party (NUP) as well as the way that English-speaking whites seemed to have accepted the idea of the republic. In his memoirs, Sir de Villiers Graaff devoted only two short paragraphs on page 185 to this election in which he mentioned the difficulties attached to fighting an elect on on two fronts against both the NP and the PP while simultaneously facing the reality of having lost much of the support of the English press. Sir de Villiers also discussed the way that the UP regained all but one of their seats lost to the Progressives in 1959. Memoirs and biographies of PP politicians give a much more comprehensive account of the 1961 general election, possibly because it was the first general election ever fought by that party as a separate political entity and also because it represented such a major political reversal. Ray Swart's Progressive Odyssey, Jeremy Lawrence's Harry Lawrence, and Helen Suzman's autobiography, In no uncertain terms, all provide interesting accounts of the 1961 general election although the account in Suzman's autobiography does not pay much attention to the Progressive campaign outside her own constituency of Houghton. Joanna Strangwayes-Booth's biography of Helen Suzman also provides very useful information on the formation and the early years of the PP. Dr FA Mouton's thesis on Margaret Ballinger is also very interesting and useful, and gives a lucid description of the dissension within the ranks of the Liberal Party. Terry Wilks's comparatively short biography of Douglas Mitchell describes Mitchell's frequent clashes with members of his own party. Some readers may, however, regard this biography as being rather skimpy on details and too flattering towards Mitchell at times. Catherine Taylor's autobiography, If courage goes, gives little detail on the 1961 general election. Unfortunately Nationalist politicians do not seem to be as prolific in writing their autobiographies as do opposition politicians. particularly Ben Schoeman's memoirs are interesting reading, as they describe the antipathy felt towards Dr Verwoerd by many Nationalist politicians in the early years of his premiership. DS Prinsloo's biography of PW Botha naturally focuses more on the years of his premiership and does not provide much new information on the NP during the period 1958 to 1961. Dirk and Johanna de Villiers' biography of Paul Sauer gives a very interesting account of the strained relationship between Sauer and Verwoerd. There are several useful publications on the history of the various parties, including Brian Hackland's thesis on the earlier years of the PP, and an Afrikaans study Die Verenigde Party Die Groot Eksperiment, edited by Barnard and Marais. This latter work is very informative on the dissension that was endemic within the UP for much of its existence. Also very useful were Dan O'Meara's Forty Lost Years and the book edited by R Schrire, Leadership in the Apartheid State. This dissertation has a threefold purpose. Its primary objective is to determine and describe the course, background and significance of the 1961 general election. Its second purpose is to analyse the relative position of the political parties in the years leading up to the 1961 general election. Thirdly it quantifies statistically some of the assumptions made about South African politics over the years e.g. the effect of delimitation on the successes or defeats of the National and the United Parties, the effect of the distribution of the support enjoyed by the UP on the fortunes of that party, the strength of the NP during various critical elections and the relationship between percentage turn-out of voters and support received by the UP and the PP. In many respects the 1961 general election was not as important for the NP as was the 1958 general election. The reason for this assertion is firstly that the gains made by the NP in 1961 were not nearly as significant or extensive as those made in 1958. Furthermore the 1958 general election was most probably one of the most decisive general elections contested by the NP as it was in this election that its position became virtually impregnable. The UP's hopes of ever being returned to office suffered a blow that can be seen as final and irreversible. However, the 1961 general election was important in that it was probably the first general election in which the NP could realistically be described as enjoying the support of more than half the white electorate. Despite the optimistic claims made by some sections of the Nationalist press after the results of the 1958 general election had been announced, the NP probably did not command the support of half the white electorate in 1958 although it came rather close to doing so. In addition the themes of the two elections do differ slightly in that in 1961 the Nationalists made a much more concerted effort to capture the votes of as many English-speaking whites as possible. Certain themes are prominent in any study of South African politics of this period. One of them is how the UP's numerical strength in parliament failed to reflect the full extent of its support among the electorate. This was to be a perennial source of discontent among UP supporters. In this dissertation certain statistical comparisons have been drawn with other general elections such as the influence of delimitation on the performance of certain parties and the percentage swings required to unseat the NP in some general elections. These comparisons provide a very interesting perspective on the growth and decline of various parties over nearly two decades. Another theme is how certain marginal seats made the position of the NP a trifle insecure in the early years of its rule and how this situation was remedied by the general election of 1958. Also interesting is the dilermna in which the UP found itself for much of its post-1948 history whether to adopt a more liberal approach or to attempt instead to fight the Nationalists on behalf of its traditionally conservative supporters who party loyalties. What was might have been also of great wavering interest in their was the relationship between the English-language press and the leadership of the UP. It was particularly striking how many editors appeared to dislike Douglas Mitchell intensely and how even in 1961 some editors already seemed disenchanted with the leadership of Sir de Villiers Graaff. It should be remembered that the voters in South West Africa were represented by six members of parliament. Their constituencies were, however, determined by a separate delimitation commission. This dissertation naturally pays much more attention to the 150 seats in which white voters in the Republic of South Africa cast their votes. The coloureds in the Cape Province were represented by three members of parliament, who were not elected on the same day as their 156 fellow parliamentarians representing white voters in South Africa and South West Africa. In researching this dissertation I have found the newspapers of the period to be invaluable as well as certain periodical publications such as Round Table, African Digest, and Forum. Much useful material has also been found in the archival collections of Harry Lawrence, Oscar Wollheirn, Sydney Waterson, and Colin Eglin in the University of Cape Town Library as well as the collection of Dr Eben Donges in the provincial archives in Cape Town. Useful and interesting information was also gleaned from the various United Party collections in the UNISA library. The Progressive Party collections and the Liberal Party papers in the William Cullen library at the University of the Witwatersrand were also well worth consulting, as was the Liberal Party Collection in the Alan Paton Centre at the University of Natal. Most archival information concerning the National Party during this period came from the various collections at the Institute for Contemporary History at the University of the Orange Free State. My thanks are due to the staff of all these archival repositories for their assistance and to my two supervisors, Professor JCH Grabler and Mrs BM Theron, for their guidance. Some readers might regard general elections as being a trivial or inconsequential topic of study, particularly as some people might regard white politics or parliamentary politics as being somewhat irrelevant in the light of contemporary historical events. Nevertheless general elections are a very interesting and fruitful field of research as they provide fascinating revelations on the attitudes held at various times by certain political parties as well as the white population of the time. Thus, even though while not nearly as momentous as, for example, the 1948 general election, the 1961 general election was an interesting contest. In the late 1950s, Professor GHL le May of the University of the Witwatersrand regarded the state of election analysis in South Africa as "abysmal", but hopefully this situation is in the process of being remedied. politicians. particularly Ben Schoernan'::; memoirs are interesting reading, as they describe the antipathy felt towards Dr Verwoerd by many Nationalist politicians in the early years of his premiership. DS Prinsloo's biography of PW Botha naturally focuses more on the years of his premiership and does not provide much new information on the NP during the period 1958 to 1961. Dirk and Johanna de Villiers' biography of Paul Sauer gives a very Page (iii) interesting account of the strained relationship between Sauer and Verwoerd. There are several useful publications on the history of the various parties, including Brian Hackland's thesis on the earlier years of the PP, and an Afrikaans study Die Verenigde Party Die Groot Eksperiment, edited by Barnard and Marais. This latter work is very informative on the dissension that was endemic within the UP for much of its existence. Also very useful were Dan O'Meara's Forty Lost Years and the book edited by R Schrire, Leadership in the Apartheid State. This dissertation has a threefold purpose. Its primary objective is to determine and describe the course, background and significance of the 1961 general election. Its second purpose is to analyse the relative positcon of the political parties in the years leading up to the 1961 general election. Thirdly it quantifies statistically some of the assumptions made about South African politics over the years e.g. the effect of delimitat on on the successes or defeats of the National and the United Parties, the effect of the distribution of the support enjoyed by the UP on the fortunes of that party, the strength of the NP during various critical elections and the relationship between percentage turn-out of voters and support received by the UP and the PP. In many respects the 1961 general election was not as important for the N? as was the 1958 general election. The reason for this assertion is firstly that the gains made by the NP in 1961 were not nearly as significant or extensive as those made in 1958. Furthermore the 1958 general election was Page (iv) most probably one of the most decisive general elections contested by the NP as it was in this election that its position became virtually impregnable. The UP's hopes of ever being returned to office suf ered a blow that can be seen as final and irreversible. However, the 1961 general election was important in that ic was probably the first general election in which the NP could realistically be described as enjoying the support of more than half the white electorate. Despite the optimistic clains made by soma sections of the Nationalist press after the results of the 1958 general election had been announced, the NP probably did not command the support of half the white electorate in 1958 although it came rather close to doing so. In addition the themes of the two elections do differ slightly in that in 1961 the Nationalists made a much more concerted effort to capture the votes of as many English-speaking whites as possible. Certain themes are prominent in any study of South African politics of this period. Ono of them is how the UP's nQmerical strength in parliament failed to reflect the full extent of its support among the electorate. This was to be a perennial source of discontent among UP supporters. In this dissertation certain statistical comparisons have been drawn with other general elections such as the influence of delimitation on the performance of certain parties and the percentage swings required to unseat the NP in some general elections. These comparisons provide a very interesting perspective on the growth and decline of various parties over nearly two decades. Another theme is how certain marginal seats made the position of the NP a trifle insecure in the early years of its rule and how this situation was remedied by Page (v) the general election of 1958. Also interesting is the dilemma in which the UP found itself for much of its pcst-1948 history whether to to fight adopt a more liberal approach or to attempt instead the Nationalists on behalf of its traditionally conservative supporters who might have been wavering in their party loyalties. What was also of great interest was the relationship between the English-language press and the leadership of the UP. :t was particularly striking how many editors appeared to dislike Douglas Mitchell intensely and how even in 1961 some editors already seemed disenchanted with the leadership of Sir de Villiers Graaff. It should be remembered that the voters in South West Africa were represented by six rr rnbers of parliament. Their constituencies were, however, determined by a separate delimitation commission. This dissertation naturally pays much more attention to the 150 seats in which white voters in the Republic of South Africa cast their votes. The coloureds in the Cape Province were represented by three members of parliament, who were not elected on the same day as their 156 fellow parliamentarians representing white voters in South Africa and South West Africa. In researching this dissertation I have found the newspapers of the period to be invaluable as well as certain periodical publications such as Round Table, African Digest, and Forum. Much useful material has also been found in the archival collections of Harry Lawrence, Oscar Wollheim, Sydney Waterson, and Colin Eglin in the University of Cape Town Library as well as the collection of Dr Eben Donges in the provincial archives in Cape Town. Useful and interesting information was Page (vi) also gleaned from the various United Party collections in the utHistory
M.A. History

This chapter sheds further lights on the dynamics of Delany’s controversial views on social equality and racial reconciliation; his prescriptions and strategies for attaining justice and equality; his views on the shortcomings of Radical Reconstruction; his persistent critique of the Black-Radical Republican Party alliance, his growing alienation from the party; and reactions of ideological opponents and former associates to his controversial and provocative political ideas. The documents expound on the circumstances leading to Delany’s brief alliance with South Carolina State Conservatives, Independents and Ex-Confederates. The alliance symbolized the utilitarian and conflicted nature of his political thought. The documents highlight as well Delany’s political and social conservatism and rationale for the decision to switch to the conservative Democratic Party. They attest to his commitment to racial cooperation, compromise and belief that severing ties with the Radical Republicans, deemphasizing social equality, and embracing the Democratic Party would advance the interests of blacks.

Documents in chapter three introduce readers to the intricacies and challenges of the first phase of Martin Delany’s entry into the politics of Reconstruction in South Carolina. They elucidate his political philosophy and visions; his advice to blacks on how best to maximize the benefits of their newly acquired citizenship rights; his ambivalent views on black political rights; his controversial stand on social equality; his scathing rebuke of black political aspirations and demands; and insistence that blacks attained some pre-qualification before aspiring for certain political positions. The documents also underscore the conflicting reactions of contemporaries to Delany’s controversial and at times provocative critiques of Radical Reconstruction. Ultimately, his advocacy of compromise, accommodation and racial reconciliation alienated him from the ruling radical Republican Party, prompting his decision to switch party allegiance and join the Democratic Party. The documents represent the conflicts Delany’s ideas provoked and the essential pragmatism of his thoughts.

This chapter chronicles the effort by white editors in South Carolina to battle northern public opinion supporting civil rights reform in the South. As the black community’s interpretations of public events received greater attention in the mainstream white press, Charleston editor Thomas R. Waring Jr. led the campaign to break through the so-called “paper curtain” that he claimed northern media used to silence the voices of white southerners who supported segregation. As 1960 approached, Waring and and political reporter William D. Workman Jr., worked to build a new political home for white racial conservatives in a revamped Republican Party. In 1962, Workman left journalism to run for the US Senate as a Republican. The effort failed narrowly, yet his campaign signaled the arrival of the conservative Republicans as a new force in Deep South politics.

In 1927, Austin purchased the Carolina Times and transformed the newspaper in to a vital part of the black freedom struggle in North Carolina. He prioritized printing the truth and giving a voice to the black community in Durham and throughout the state. He never focused on the newspaper as a moneymaking enterprise, as he attacked any one, who, he believed, stood in the way of freedom and equality for all people. As a result, black and white businesses often withdrew advertisements from the paper, leaving the paper in precarious financial condition. In 1933, Austin helped bring the Hocutt case, the first legal attempt to integrate southern higher public education. He also co-founded the Durham Committee on Negro Affairs in 1935, which sought to increase black political participation and improve black life in Durham. Austin was elected justice of the peace in 1934, a victory that was hailed by the Pittsburgh Courier as the beginning of the New Deal in the South. He helped expand black voter registration and moved blacks from the Republican to the Democratic Party, a strategic move to increase black political influence in the one-party state.

In April 1861, newly elected president Abraham Lincoln found himself in a precarious situation. Although he had won the presidency in the November elections, his victory was by no means a mandate from the people for the Republican Party platform. The nation was perilously divided. Winning less than half the popular vote in 1860, the tall, gaunt lawyer from Illinois looked on as his nation teetered on the brink of civil war. To keep the nation together, the new commander in chief drew support from a rather tenuous alliance of political rivals openly divided in their opinions about the actions of their southern brethren. The attack on Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina, however, galvanized public opinion throughout the north and fostered, at least momentarily, a powerful wartime alliance between Republicans and Democrats that allowed Lincoln to carry out a war to preserve the Union. As Federal troops lowered the Stars and Stripes in surrender from the ramparts of the bastion in Charleston Harbor, banners were hoisted in towns and cities across the North as men of all ages, ethnicities, classes, and backgrounds rushed to the defense of their flag and their nation....

This book examines the democratization of authoritarian enclaves in America's Deep South during the period 1944–1972. Through a comparative historical analysis of the experiences of Georgia, Mississippi, and South Carolina, it shows how the cohesion of elites and party–state capacity contributed to differences in modes of democratization across the Deep South. It suggests that the advancement of Republicans was in part a consequence and a cause of these democratization processes. This introductory chapter discusses some of the alternative perspectives on postwar southern political culture, along with the role of the political economy and black insurgency in southern political development. It also describes the phenomenon of authoritarian enclaves and offers some intuitions about how they might be democratized, focusing on subnational authoritarianism and subnational democratization. Finally, it provides an overview of the book's research design and summarizes the findings to come.

A biracial Republican-Populist coalition gained power over state and local governments in the 1890s, and North Carolina’s Democratic Party responded with a vicious white-supremacy campaign. Meanwhile, a small group of old-time, elite, white businessmen launched what they called the “Wilmington Revolution” to end “Negro Domination” at the local level. Mulrooney contends that the 1898 Wilmington massacre and coup d’état were not aberrant events in the city’s history; rather, the instigators consciously replicated old patterns of behavior as a way to resolve mounting conflicts over race, place, and memory. Grounded in local elites’ interpretations of the 1770s and 1860s, the Wilmington revolution of 1898 occurred after lynching emerged in the 1880s as a spectacle of organized racist violence, while the mass media (newspapers, popular fiction, advertising, film) were shaping a national color line, and before southern progressives crafted their coherent vision of a modern, economically diversified, and racially segregated South.