North Carolina's last liberal
Published October 12, 2014
By D. G. Martin
by D. G. Martin, One on One and host of NC Bookwatch on UNC-TV, October 12, 2014.
What was the greatest political upset in North Carolina political history?
Old timers will tell you that it was Kerr Scott’s victory in the Democratic primary for governor in 1948. Scott, a dairy farmer from Alamance County, beat the favored candidate of the conservative wing of the party.
Once in office, he adopted a liberal program of road paving, public school improvement, and expansion of government services. Hard-working and hardheaded, plain and direct spoken, he appointed women and African Americans to government positions. He disregarded criticism of his actions.
Future governors Terry Sanford and Jim Hunt were inspired by his success. Hunt says, “If not for Kerr Scott I would never have run for Governor. My family viewed Scott as our political savior. . . .He improved our roads, our schools, and our healthcare. He was our champion, and I hoped in my political career to be like him.”
But Kerr Scott was complicated. He was probably the last successful North Carolina politician to embrace the term “liberal.” His commitment to common people, fair and equal treatment for African-Americans, skepticism and antagonism towards banks, utilities and big business, and a pro-labor platform earned him a liberal reputation that was noted and praised in the national media.
On the other hand, he was a sincere advocate for segregation in the public schools. Elected to the U.S. Senate in 1954, he joined with other southerners in Congress to fight against civil rights legislation. He signed the infamous 1956 Southern Manifesto, which responded to the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board decision requiring the elimination of school segregation by urging “all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this decision which is contrary to the Constitution and to prevent the use of force in its implementation.”
Anyone who wants to understand North Carolina and its political history must try to figure out Kerr Scott and understand how in his day he, and others who lived in those times, could be both a liberal and a segregationist. Soon we will have a book that will help us. “The Political Career of W. Kerr Scott: The Squire from Haw River” by Julian Pleasants is scheduled for publication later this month.
Pleasants’ experience and professional interests made him an ideal choice to tell the Kerr Scott story. A native North Carolinian who returned here after a distinguished career as a professor of history at the University of Florida, he is the author or co-author of two books about North Carolina political figures during the period, “Frank Porter Graham and the 1950 Senate Race in North Carolina” and “Buncombe Bob: The Life and Times of Robert Rice Reynolds.”
Kerr Scott was a major actor in the Frank Graham-Willis Smith race that still defines North Carolina political traditions. Scott appointed Graham, the popular and liberal president of UNC, to the U.S. Senate. Scott was active in Graham’s effort to retain his senate seat When Graham lost to conservative Willis Smith, Scott took the loss harder than Graham. He resolved to run against Smith in 1954 to avenge Graham’s loss and reassert the power of the liberal wing of the party. When Smith died in office and Governor William Umstead appointed Alton Lennon, a conservative, to the seat, Scott ran against him.
When asked how he would defend himself and overcome the kind of racist campaigning that Frank Graham’s opponents used effectively in the Graham-Smith contest, Scott said, “I'll handle it, son. I'm not as good a Christian as Frank Porter Graham.”
With the help of his campaign manager, Terry Sanford, Scott beat the conservatives again. He died in office in 1958, leaving Sanford to pick up the mantle as the champion of the Scott political tradition in his campaign for governor in 1960.
October 12, 2014 at 2:16 pm
Norm Kelly says:
If my posts lead you to believe that I am a conservative, you are properly led. If my posts lead you to believe that I am a Republican, you are only half right. I am registered as a Republican, but am actually, at heart, a Libertarian. I'm too far right wing for the Republican party. But I'll still vote for a Republican over a demon every time because I am more aligned with Republicans than ANY demon. So, because I am NOT a lib, I get easily confused when reading or listening to demons write or speak. I can't listen to the occupier speak for 2 obvious reasons. First, because he has no concept of what the truth is, and I can't stand listening to someone who has the gall to lie directly to my face. It's what was one major problem with Billary. It was a problem with Gov Mike, and Gov Bev. Second reason I can't listen to the occupier is because his ramblings are not logical, can not be explained, and, like Joe and the ever senile Harry, are usually so confused as to be unintelligible by even the most staunch supporter. At least Ted Kennedy had the ability to mumble so even his supporters couldn't decipher what he said!
'Scott appointed ... the popular and liberal ... Graham ... to the US Senate'. One has to believe that Scott did this because they were peas from the same pod. Which would strongly indicate that Graham was also a racist, maybe not to the extent that Scott was a devout racist, but more than likely quite close.
Why do we need to make sure libs no longer control political office? Because they will force their mixed up 'minds' on the rest of us. I know how to handle MY money better than ANY pol does. I know how to care for MY family better than ANY pol does. I know how to feed MY family better than any pol does. I know how to choose MY health insurance provider and MY health care provider better than ANY pol does. I know how to choose where I live better than ANY pol does. I know how to get along with my neighbors, ALL of my neighbors, better than ANY pol does. But worse than being directed in MY life by any pol is being directed by a LIB POL, who has no concept of reality and whose mind is so confused. Which describes the average lib pol today, and way too many lib pol supporters. The lib pol supporters are what's called 'low information voter' for the simple reason that no matter how confused the drivel is that spews forth from lib mouths or pens, these 'low information' types continue to accept what they say/write as truth. There is very little questioning of what libs say BECAUSE they are libs, therefore trustworthy. Was a devout RACIST trustworthy when it came to telling the truth about segregation? Yes, absolutely. Kerr Scott clearly showed he was a racist! Without doubt. Yet it was his opponent who was labeled the racist, and continues to be today, by the confused, mixed up, 'minds' of the lib supporters.
Before the author tells us that Kerr Scott was a dedicated, devout racist, hell bent on segregation, he writes 'His commitment to common people, fair and equal treatment for African-Americans' was undeniable and praiseworthy. Talk about confused. Libs make my points for me. All mixed up and permanently set. Illogical to the core. Incapable of recognizing truth. Choosing to ignore facts because facts usually prove everything about liberalism to be false and failure. I guess the author was hoping that most people would do the lazy, low-information normal thing of only reading part way through the post, accepting that libs like Kerr Scott were committed to equal treatment for all citizens. Unfortunately, this is probably what happened with most people. Read part way, get disgusted with racist Republicans, stop reading. Never get to the TRUTH of the matter about Kerr Scott, never get to the truth about a concerted effort by the Socialist Party of the US, formerly known as the democrat party, to prevent equal rights for blacks. Again, to reinforce the false belief that demons are FOR equal rights and equal opportunity for all. I'd like to chalk up this misleading post to lazy research. It's more likely that this misinformation is purposeful. And dedicated to prolonging the lie of Republicans & conservatives being the racists. Someday, it's possible that enough blacks will break out of the government monopoly school indoctrination of accepting lies, but until then all we have is Hope. Real hope. Not that made up garbage coming from the occupier. Hope in individual freedom, not hope in social engineering with misery spread equally among the commoners. Hope in free will, not regulation by dictatorial central planners. In other words, REAL HOPE! A concept misunderstood by libs everywhere.
October 13, 2014 at 11:07 am
Rick Barton says:
Scott and Sanford were enthusiastic supporters of eugenics. They were especially gleeful as they learned how many African American women they had forced to be fixed via weekly reports forwarded to the Governors office. It is hard to understand why our state would honor these two criminals against humanity by naming state buildings in their honor. Think how hard it must be for a relative of a person who Scott or Sanford forced to be sterilized, and then have to work or go to school in a building named for them. It would be like a Jewish person being sent to Hilter High School. Next time D.G.!
October 13, 2014 at 12:49 pm
CJ Small says:
Thank you for the article D.G. Past NC political notables were men of their times, which included views on race that are unacceptable today. Robert Glenn, Aycock and Zeb Vance also come to mind. I guess forced sterilizations were happening through the Sanford years, and his reputation is a liberal one. Makes you wonder how we will look 100 years from now. Abortion, for example. Will they shake their heads and wonder how otherwise nice people could tolerate infanticide?
