Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Abraham Lincoln would not have been elected president had the Democrats not split in 1860 along sectional lines. The Party was the only sectional moderating force in the nation and as such its rupture was a decisive blow to union. Valuable insight into this rupture may be gained by applying the party criteria articulated in James Ceaser's work Presidential Selection to the major factions in the Democratic Party represented at Charleston. Ceaser, drawing on Tocqueville and historian Richard Hofstader, articulates three party types; the Great party, the Burkean party, and the Small party. Great parties hold views about the fundamental manner society should be ordered. Analysis reveals that Southern Democrats pursued a vision of "great" party politics in their efforts to shape the Democratic Party. In contrast, "small parties" exist simply to gain power and distribute largess or political patronage. In this sense, Northern Democrats tended to act in a manner consistent with a "small" party and as such they provided little principled resistance to the passionate secessionists. Evidence for these classifications will be drawn from actual floor debates of the 1860 Democratic Party Convention in Charleston.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The Great Walkout: An Examination of the 1860 Democratic Conventions

What happens when a national political party is no longer able to heal opposing divisions deep within its ranks? When members of a political party lose their belief in the legitimacy of their movement? In one instance, the break down of a national party led directly to Civil War. An examination of the 1860 Democratic Conventions reveals what happened when the Democratic Party was no longer able to foster a compromise in regards to the volatile issue of slavery. This study sheds light on the importance of a national party’s ability to successfully broker national issues and the perils of a party who can no longer reconcile deep divisions within its own ranks.
Furthermore, this study contradicts the work of many scholars who have tried to ignore the question of slavery as the root cause of the conflict. For example, Michael Holt, in his book The Political Crisis of 1860 argues that though slavery was significant, there were greater social, cultural, and economic factors that led to the fighting. In contrast, this study shows that careful research of the debates of the 1860 Charleston and Baltimore Democratic National Conventions reveal that slavery was the cause of the party breakdown and the spark that ignited the nation.
An equally important finding is that the split did not happen with Lincoln’s election or the failure of the Crittenden Compromise, but the national split actually occurred in Charleston. If the Democrats, the only party who could possibly develop a national consensus, could not compromise in Charleston, the country was too divided outside the party to maintain the delicate balance that previously existed.
The study of the conventions also grants some insight into our contemporary politics. The 1860 contest was the first great election between the Republicans and the Democrats. It was also the end of an era of serious third party candidates. The study of the Democratic Party’s breakdown also reveals a great deal about current minority politics. Also, the Democratic Split offers a glimpse into how political debates are formed and argued.
In sum, the work argues, that the Civil War began with Charleston. Though the fighting started nearly a year later, there was no turning back after Charleston. The split in the Democratic Party clearly came because of the issue of slavery. The words they spoke, and the ideas they promoted that caused the Southern walkout all pertained to slavery either directly or indirectly.

Publication Type: Single Paper Format
Abstract: Explore ways of using HBO feature film, "Walkout," as an instructional resource for providing future teachers knowledge of Latino history and appreciation for the educational value of culturally relevant pedagogy.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper presents preliminary findings from our ongoing research on the Dallas walkouts in March of 2006. Drawing on journalistic accounts of the events of March 27-28 and data from in depth interviews with students involved in the protests, we outline four major themes highlighted by the student walkouts protesting legislation to criminalize undocumented immigrants and their supporters: the role of rapid communication mediated by social networking software, the spontaneity of the events, and the stirring emotions that attended the walkouts and lingered long after the events. These themes recall insights from the collective behavior tradition and support more recent calls by social movement scholars to attend to the role of emotions, ambiguity, and mystery in protest mobilizations.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper presents findings from our ongoing research on the pro-immigrant student walkouts in March of 2006. Drawing on 30 in-depth interviews with students, educators, and community activists involved in half a dozen walkouts across four Texas cities, we reconstruct students’ actions and experiences just before, during, and after the walkouts. In our reconstruction of the events, we highlight four interrelated social and psychological processes that have a long, if checkered, history in the sociology of collective behavior and social movements: 1) the role of anxiety as a collective mood shaping protests; 2) the centrality of non-normative or rule-breaking collective action; 3) the spontaneous, undirected, and fluid nature of the protests; and 4) the symbolic and emotional significance of the walkouts to the students involved. These themes recall insights from the collective behavior tradition and support more recent calls by scholars to resist normalizing protest and to attend to the role of emotions and ambiguity in social protest.