Durham E-Theses Third parties in twentieth century American politics Sumner, C. K. How to cite: Sumner, C. K. (1969) Third parties in twentieth century American politics, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/9989/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk "THIRD PARTIES IN TWENTIETH CENTURY AMERICAN POLITICS" THESIS PGR AS M. A. DEGREE PRESENTED EOT CK. SOMBER (ST.CUTHBERT«S) • JTJLT, 1969. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. INTRODUCTION. PART 1 - THE PROGRESSIVE PARTIES. 1. THE "BOLL MOOSE" PROQRESSIVES. 2. THE CANDIDACY CP ROBERT M. L& FQLLETTE. * 3. THE PEOPLE'S PROGRESSIVE PARTI. PART 2 - THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF AMERICA* PART 3 * PARTIES OF LIMITED GEOGRAPHICAL APPEAL. 1. THE FARMER-LABOUR PARTI OF MINNESOTA. 2. THE DIXIECRAT REBELLION. 3. THE CANDIDATURE OF GEORGE C.WALLACE. CONCLUSION. APPENDIX. BOOK LIST, ELECTION RESULTS. She author wishes to thank the fall owing for permission to reprint extracts* APFLETCM^MTURYUJRQFIS, publishers of Henry Steele Cemnager'a "Doaamsnte of Amerloan History"* UNIVKUSIXY OF ILLINOIS PRESS, copyright holders of Document 26 from William B, Resseltine*e "Third Party Movements in the United States". 1. Throughout the twentieth centuxy the United States of America has had a twooparty system of government, as the Democrats and Republicans alternately jostled for the favours of the electorate. This is not to say however that the American people has only had a two-party choice, although it is true it has frequently so restricted itself. Throughout the century other parties have been born, fostered, floundered, end died, Socialists, Progressives, Prohibitionists, Union Reformers, Conservatives, Farmer labourites, and many more too numerous to mention. Indeed because of a surfeit of parties, it has been found necessary to limit this paper to a number of the more important parties, these being arranged into three groups. The first group are those parties Which have depended upon the Charismatic appeal of one man for their support. Their reliance upon this man often left a vacuum with regard to organisation, with the consequence that they fought one election and then disappeared from view. These are the Progressive parties of Theodore Roosevelt, Robert M* La Follette Snr., and Henry Wallace. Secondly, exemplified by the Socialists, and the Communist Party, which was formed in the years immediately following the First World War, but never attracted a large electoral following until its alliance with Henry Wallace, there is the party which possesses the organisation, but not the appeal to the electorate, so that in consequence this party achieves little at the ballot despite its comparatively long existence. Lastly there are the parties or interests which, whilst never achieving power nationally, did manage to secure a majority following in a small area, or state, of the union* Such organisations are the Farmer-i&bour Party of Minnesota; the States* Rights Democrats of Governor J.Strom Thurmond, and the present-day American Independence party of George C.Wallace. 2. Such a break~do*n ia purely personal, and arbitrary, some commentators indeed would even suggest that it does not go nearly far enough* Hilton C^Cumndngs. Associate Professor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University 1. considers there are not three but five types of minor party movement* as follows*** Parties of Economic Protest. Secessionist Parties, Doctrinal Parties. State Minor Parties, and Independent Candidacies. He lists the Populists and the la Follette Progressives as parties of eoanondo protest, and although he considers they possess the same salient characteristics as the secessionist parties*, being episodic*, having a weak organisational substructure, and whilst they may carry a number of districts for the presidency, they win no Congressional seats, their origins he asserts are different* The secessionists he argues are the Bull Moose and Dixieorat movements* However* could one place Thuxmond'e movement in this group? In many states he possessed a sound organisation, although not of his own making, being blatantly stolen from the national Democratic party, and whilst it is true that the Dixiecrats did not >nn any seats in Congress as a party, it was also true that they did not formally contest any. their supporters being already in control of the Southern Congressional seats, sitting as Democrats. Cumntngs' third category coincides with this paper's second grouping, and the old European doctrinal parties, of which the Socialist Party of imerica is the best example. Despite a lack of success at the Presidential or Congressional poll, the doctrinal party is nevertheless persistent, mainly due to a fairly well - developed organisational substructure in a number of selected areas; as late as 1952. the Socialists still had a large membership in the torn of Reading. Pennsylvania, so large as to warrant the organisation of Presidential campaign in order to boost the standing of the slate of candidates for local office. 1. In his book 'Congressmen and the Electorate'. Pf*<;£ /^Q 3. In the group designated 'State minor parties* Oumroinge places the Farmers-Labour Party of Minnesota, and the Progressive Party of Wisconsin. Due to a strong local organisation, like the doctrinal parties they are persistent, and whilst carrying no districts for President, Cumn&ngs asserts, many win a number of seats in Congress. Did not Senator la Follette himself carry the state of Wisconsin in the 1924 Presidential election, or was this an independent candidacy? Into this grouping might also be included the •American Labour Party, and the Liberal Party, in New York state* The American Labour Party was founded in 1936 with the intention of using it as a vehicle by which to deliver to President Roosevelt as many of Hew York's radical votes as was possible* This guide was maintained until 194# when the party came very much under the influence of the American Communist Barty in their bid to get Henry Wallace elected President* •As these two movements became one, another movement, the Liberal Party was bom. Again It was a satellite party, confining itself mainly to the endorsement of Democratic candidates, although in the 19&5 election for Mayor of New York, it did nominate its own candidate, Franklin D. Roosevelt Jnr., with disastrous results for both candidate and party. The independents are Cuinndngs' last grouping, and one which I would consider too small for the scope of this paper. They tend to be persistent, again because of a localised appeal, although charismatio appeal at times has to compensate for lack of organisation in the bid for what are usually congressional honours* Only twice since 1924 have independent candidates secured election to Congress, J.Percy Priest in 1940, and Frazier Reams in 1950 and 1952* Priest later joined the Democratic ranks, and in fact secured re-election as a Democrat, whilst Reams remained an independent and was defeated, running for a third term of office in 1954* Basically, however, a minority party can be judged by its intentions. Some such groups have sought merely to influence either party poliay, 4* or oholoe of party Isadora* examples of such political phenomena being the two offshoots of the Democratic party at the 194& Presidential election* She Wallace Progressives, or at least those vho voted for Wallace, sought by means of the ballot to show their dissatisfaction at the way in which the party vas being guided* It was in fact a genuine vote of protest, whereby the salient point is made, action is taken, and by the next election the wounds are healed, the enemies are allies once more* Thurmond1 s movement* however, like the American Independence Party of 196ft. the Presidential vehicle of George C. Wallace, was more probably motivated by the forever present Southern hope that they might, by their intervention, force the election of the President into the House of Representatives, thereby securing the election of a more amenable, to Sputherners, Chief Sxeeutive* Into this category of •influencing1 parties, one might also include the Socialists, whose major contribution to American polities has been the implementation of so many of the planks of their platform by one or other of the two major parties. The other parties in this paper might be considered to be those who deliberately set out to Influence not by compromise, political blackmail or mere generosity, but those who sought to influence lay actually attaining power* To the obvious Presidential aspirations of Theodore Roosevelt, and Robert H* la Follette, must be added the state •» wide hopes of Minnesota's Fajrmer-Iabour Party. Through these media it is the intention of this paper to attempt to show that third parties are not merely political havens for the malcontents, the dissidents, and the disenchanted in a predominantly two-party system, but that all are integral parts of the American body politic, and indeed of the American political tradition. 5.