13

An earlier mass killing against a political affiliation is the Coushatta massacre in 1874. Members of the White League, a white supremacist organisation composed of white Southern Democrats, assassinated six white Republicans and five to 20 freedmen who were witnesses. Their goal was to overturn Republican rule and install Democrats in their place.


12

Until the 1960s, the Republican party was the centrist, "Establishment" party, and the Democrats were an unlikely mixture of right and left, including George Wallace and George McGovern. This was because after the Civil War, the Democratic party housed almost everyone who was not a Republican, including northern laborers, the rural poor and Southern landed ...


12

I don't think they were particularly unusual in that regard. At the time of Andropov, all the other nations with permanent membership on UN Security Council (USA, England, France, and China) were lead by WWII-era politicians. All were WWII veterans, with the obvious exception of Margaret Thatcher. The USA wouldn't get its first post WWII-generation ...


11

Reagan's weakness was that he was not a member of the "Eastern Establishment." Ford was, as well as the incumbent President. That fact led many "established" Republicans to support him "automatically". Reagan needed a "breakthrough". He came close in New Hampshire, with something like 49.5% of the two-candidate vote. Topping Ford there would have been huge. ...


9

The correct question would be "Why the Chinese manage to change their leaders smoothly?" Lifetime leadership is typical for Communist dictators, not only in Soviet Union. Cuba, Yugoslavia, East Germany, Roumania,... you can continue yourself. The two leaders of Communist Russia who stepped down, Khrushchev and Gorbachev, stepped down as a result of coup d'...


9

The big difference is right there under your nose: The Presidency. Its a very powerful office under the US system, and its (more or less) directly elected in a (more or less) first-past-the-post manner. France does have a similar system with its presidency, but it is (only?) a semi-presidential system, not the full-blown one the US has. Under the French ...


8

Yes, they did (that is, the quoted assertion is not true) Some members of this party indeed called themselves "Democratic-Republicans", although not consistently. The Wikipedia article for this party states (in its main text) what I was taught in grade school, namely that the party was called "Republican" during the period it was in existence. Yet further ...


8

An under-appreciated reason for the collapse of the Federalists is that they were, essentially, a neo-mercantalist party. Hamilton and others were pro-industrialization not so much because they wanted to see individuals get rich through manufacturing, but because industrialization made the United States a more powerful nation in the international system (...


7

I would date the "turning" of the Republican party into a pro business party to William McKinley 1897-1901. The Republicans dominated the Presidency for 72 years between 1861-1933. But this can be subdivided into two 36 year sub periods 1861-1896, and 1897-1932. It's true, as one of the other respondendents pointed out, that the Republicans absorbed the ...


7

Both the US and British legislative bodies underwent transformations in the last half of the 18th and first half of the 19th century, and it is useful to study them together. At the beginning of the period, neither had "political parties" as we understand them. They evolved political parties as a way of forcing a diversity of viewpoints into actionable ...


7

I searched the internet, and found no reference to Hitler's being a Reichstag deputy or sponsoring legislation up to 1933. This tallies with my personal recollection of no such activity. A commenter found a source (John Toland's biography of Hitler) that supports an inference that he was a deputy up to 1928 (in the early days, before the Nazis' power became "...


7

In addition to the "patrician" Optimates and "plebeian" Populares, there was also a third group - the Equites - which today we might think of as a kind of 'upper middle class'. To complicate matters still further, by no means all members of the Patrician class were associated with the Optimates faction. Perhaps the best-known example is Julius Caesar, who ...


6

Due to the way party alignment works, neither party was uniformly left or right leaning until about 40 years ago. Under the USA 2-party system, what would be parties elsewhere become "wings" in the existing two parties. What wings identify and support which of the two parties is called "alignment". Under the previous alignment (the "New Deal" alignment of ...


6

Not till 1933. Germany Wikipedia has lists of all Reichstag members; Hitler only became a member in 1933 after he was already chancellor. In the Weimar Republic the chancellor didn't have to be a member of the Reichstag (contrary to the Federal Republic, where the chancellor must be a member of the Bundestag).


6

You are missing the trees for the forest. Congress and the Presidency are two very different beasts, elected in two very, very different ways. The dominance of two political parties in presidential races is because all of the larger and medium sized states are winner take all at the Electoral College. Many of these, the so-called swing states, will be ...


4

What led to the rise to political parties was the fact that Hamilton and Jefferson had conflicting views. Also the fact that Washington favored Hamilton’s ideas which made Jefferson very mad because he wanted to have his ideas favored also. Last but not least the two parties fought over governmental issues also played a part in the rise of political parties.


4

Note that the first Congressional nominating caucus was in 1796, and was only to select a VP nominee. Thus the "King Caucus" system really only operated for POTUS candidates for 6 election cycles (1800-1820). In the USA, the presidential election is essentially a set of separate elections where every state simultaneously votes for its state's choice of ...


4

. . . . The election of 1824 brought an end to both the Democratic-Republican-dominated “era of good feeling” and the use of a congressional caucus as a nominating device. Although the Democratic- Republican caucus nominated William Crawford of Georgia as its candidate, three other candidates (John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, and Andrew Jackson) were ...


4

I could not find any positive references, which does not, of course, prove that this has never happened. However, I think this is not very likely because ratting a party member would expose his cell members to the risk of arrest (if the ratted member rats them).


4

I assume your interest is primarily in Marxist social democracy as opposed to Marxist bolshevism or Marxist council communism. Regarding social democracy: "Welfare" is a suspicious term for an avowedly Marxist party like the 1925 SPD (Germany). The Heidelberg Program (1925, http://www.marxists.org/deutsch/geschichte/deutsch/spd/1925/heidelberg.htm ) ...


3

National symbols are always non-partisan; but from time to time one party or another may wish to disassociate itself from them. In 2012 the Democrats were not the least shy about use of the American flag, because they were in power. Since the 2016 election, Democrats have deliberately shied away from using the flag. This is a means of expressing displeasure ...


3

Justcal has noted that the actual trial (not the memoirs) took place in 1813-15. This is important because Indiana was not a state until 1816. That's why the citation would be hard to find, because it would be "pre-statehood." In 1813-15, it was the Indiana territory, with a seat of government at the city of Corydon on the Ohio River, the most likely place ...


2

This question is factually silly. Deng Xiaoping was in the same generation as Mao Zedong. Deng Xiaoping was present in Guangxi and Jiangxi, and he was present for the long march, the anti-Japanese war, and the fight against the GMD. He was born in 1904, and was just 9 years younger than Mao Zedong. Officially, he was only in office between 1981 and 1987, ...


2

The Dixiecrats and the AIP were not really the same party, because they were led differently. But they had somewhat the same ideologies, geographies and voters. The Dixiecrats were led by Strom Thurmond, an aristocrat. He was pro-business and particularly popular among business owners in the coastal regions the south, and won his native South Carolina, plus ...


2

For the most part yes, as their fundamental issue in both cases was support for segregation and white supremecy. They were a bit different in theory, in that the AIP was founded as a conservative (far right) party that then courted southern whites, while the Dixiecrats were formed out of the southern Democratic party. However, in practice they both drew all ...


2

Both parties were pro-business for most of the 19th century. As one example, in 1894 Democratic President Grover Cleveland sent in Federal troops to break up the Pullman Strike. The question, then, is is when did Republicans become the sole beneficiaries of business support? The turning point was 1896, when the Democrats nominated the populist William ...


2

The 2011 Tucson shooting also seems to be such a case. The shooting took place at a constituent meeting held by Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords. While the shooter was insane his specific form of insanity included some sort of political mania.


2

The Democratic-Republican Party was a term used mainly by historians and political scientists. It was initially called the "Republican" party by its founders. Only rarely was it called the Democratic-Republican party by its own members. The party consisted of the people who weren't "Federalists," the party of a strong central government. The "Republicans" ...


2

National flags represent the country... or the state? Ok, in the books it is the country, but the state is who actually manages the country. And of course, patriotism and nationalism are powerful tools, so it makes sense to use them. If you are lucky, the state (and those who support the status quo) will not use those tools in a partisan way, but for the ...


2

Let me present a specific example from Central Europe. The Árpád-stripes: Originally it was the heraldic device of the Árpád-dynasty. Of course there were no nations of the modern sense in the medieval times, and the Kingdom of Hungary had a different flag, but still, considering that the Árpáds ruled Hungary for more than 300 years, it became quite a ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible