Why Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican

[Flea]

National Black Republican Association - DYK-Why MLK was a Republican

Well, was MLK a Democrat or a Republican?

 

[talloulou]

I'd guess he had problems with both parties. And he may have been more republican early on but apparently that changed later:

In 1960, King was arrested for trespassing during a sit-in and held in Georgia's Reidsville prison. Fearing for his son's life, Martin Luther King Sr. appealed to presidential candidate John F. Kennedy to secure his release.

When King was freed, his father vowed to deliver 10 million votes to the Democrat, even though Kennedy was only a reluctant supporter of civil rights. That began four decades of black people voting for liberals.

Controversial Ad Links MLK, GOP - washingtonpost.com

I myself don't believe a man like King would have been a "loyalist" to any party.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

Considering the tripe he spewed about Barry Goldwater, I would NOT consider him a Republican.

 

[Gibberish]

Considering the tripe he spewed about Barry Goldwater, I would NOT consider him a Republican.

Tripe eh? Interesting.

Martin Luther King Jr. definitely had no political ties other then to pro-civil rights groups. He was obviously more democrat on the basis that he was very outspoken to the Religious conservatives that dominated the Republican party at the time.

 

[Flea]

It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.

National Black Republican Association - DYK-Why MLK was a Republican

 

[Spartacus FPV]

Tripe eh? Interesting

Yes, absolute tripe. His misrepresentation of Goldwater's political views was for the sake of the Civil rights movement, and he attempted to paint Barry as an anti-black elitest bigot.

I call it tripe because his statements were uninformed, uneducated about conservatism, a blantant use of the "race card" and may have very well cost Barry Goldwater the presidency.

When it came to Goldwater, MLK didn't know what the f*** he was talking about. I know we almost deify him as a country, but the man was wrong about a great many things. He tried to make too many issues "a civil rights issue" that just weren't.

 

[Gibberish]

It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.

National Black Republican Association - DYK-Why MLK was a Republican

I Hope your joking. Frances Rice? Really?

An Open Letter to Frances Rice and the National Black Republican Association

 

[Gibberish]

Yes, absolute tripe. His misrepresentation of Goldwater's political views was for the sake of the Civil rights movement, and he attempted to paint Barry as an anti-black elitest bigot.

I call it tripe because his statements were uninformed, uneducated about conservatism, a blantant use of the "race card" and may have very well cost Barry Goldwater the presidency.

When it came to Goldwater, MLK didn't know what the f*** he was talking about. I know we almost deify him as a country, but the man was wrong about a great many things. He tried to make too many issues "a civil rights issue" that just weren't.

I don't know enough of Goldwater to lean one way or the other. I will say that I do agree with this view of abortion:
"Goldwater viewed abortion as a matter of personal choice, not intended for government intervention. He did not believe that abortion was murder if the baby had not taken the breath of life as said in the King James version of Genesis, chapter 2, verse 7: "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.""

 

[bigsmitty]

Goldwater, putting him to today's interpretation of political ideology, is actually more libertarian than Republican/Democrat. He was a free market economist, but a social liberal.

 

[conserv.pat15]

I believe Martin Luther King Jr. would have been against affirmative action...

 

[DeeJayH]

are we judging him by the Rep/Dem labels of today, or than?
cause as i have learned here, they tend to flip flop over time

 

[Gibberish]

I believe Martin Luther King Jr. would have been against affirmative action...

I would hope so. Affirmative action, as it is used today, is just another form of segregation.

 

[jfuh]

Goldwater, putting him to today's interpretation of political ideology, is actually more libertarian than Republican/Democrat. He was a free market economist, but a social liberal.

Goes to show how far to the right this country has fallen.

 

[BodiSatva]

MLK was not a Republican. This chick and Utah are confusing him being a Republican with the Democrats of that time being the anti-black. The Republicans of that time were more open than they are now. Now neither is really for the Black's of this nation, they are all lip service. The Democrats are a Straw House Party full of dependents and false promises. The Republicans are almost more selfish than the Dems... Amazing

 

[Flea]

I don't think that I am confusing hime with anything, stop assuming. Ms. Rice might be though. :2razz:

I am asking a question that might interest people. Get them thinking. I want to see what people have to say.

 

[niftydrifty]

The article Utah posted is extremely dishonest, and the either/or question is a fallacy. He was neither this or that, he was a free thinker, whom made choices.

The article neglects to mention that the two parties have sorta flip-flopped in the south, since MLK's day.

The article mentions racist speak by Democrats, but not by Republicans.

The article neglects to mention that most of the opposition in congress to a MLK holiday was from Republicans.

The article neglects to mention that King had close ties to known Communists and that he even lied about those connections.

The article neglects to mention that King spoke about a “glaring contrast of poverty and wealth" in the United States.

The article neglects to mention that in 1967, King said that the United States was “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world.”

The article neglects to mention that King said our country was on “the wrong side of a world revolution” of oppressed peoples.

The article neglects to mention that MLK sought to upend the status quo in this country. He said that “a reconstruction of the entire society” was necessary in the United States. He regularly spoke out against the institutions of white America. How is it possible to say that he would've have, or that he did, align himself with one of these institutions?

This disengenuous attempt to get young blacks to vote Republican by using these distortions is disgusting.

More quotes:

"I never intend to adjust myself to the madness of militarism."

"Every man of humane convictions must decide on the protest that best suits his convictions, but we must all protest."

"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."

"We in the West must bear in mind that the poor countries are poor primarily because we have exploited them through political or economic colonialism."

"Every person must decide whether to walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness. This is the judgment. Life's most persistent and urgent question is, 'What are you doing for others?'"

MLK was certainly neither a Democrat or a Republican. He was too radical for either party. It seems clear to me that it would've been impossible, then or now, for King to align himself with either of these parties.

 

[Flea]

Interesting post nifty, but the article does not mention most of those things that you state since they are irrelevant to whether or not MLK was a Republican. The political parties are very different now. The New Deal Liberalized many Democrats.

Initially though, the Democrats were the oppressive ones:

Strom Thurmond
George Smathers
Herman E. Talmadge
Hugo Black
Robert Byrd

George Wallace
George Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."

Harry S. Truman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A 1947 report by the Truman administration entitled To Secure These Rights presented a detailed ten-point agenda of civil rights reforms. In February 1948, the President submitted a civil rights agenda to Congress that proposed creating several federal offices devoted to issues such as voting rights and fair employment practices. This provoked a firestorm of criticism from Southern Democrats in the time leading up to the national nominating convention, but Truman refused to compromise, saying: "My forbears were Confederates... But my very stomach turned over when I had learned that Negro soldiers, just back from overseas, were being dumped out of Army trucks in Mississippi and beaten"

I think you need to take another look at who the true racists were back in the day. Now is not then.

Southern Democrats - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Southern Democrats are members of the U.S. Democratic Party who reside in the U.S. South. Initially they were the definitive pro-slavery wing of the party, opposed to both the anti-slavery, left-wing early Republicans and the more liberal Northern Democrats. After the loss of their territory in the United States Civil War and the Radical Republican-led Reconstruction which followed, Southern Democrats regrouped into various vigilante organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and the White League; eventually "Redemption" was finalized in the Compromise of 1877 and the ensuing institutionalization of Redeemers throughout the South. As the New Deal began to liberalize Democrats as a whole, Southern Democrats largely stayed as conservative as they had always been, with some even breaking off to form farther right-wing splinters like the Dixiecrats. But after the civil rights movement successfully challenged Jim Crow and other forms of institutionalized racism, and Democrats as a whole became the symbol of the mainstream left of the United States, the form, if not the content, of Southern Democratic politics began to change. Most defected to the Republican Party and helped accelerate the latter's transformation into a much more conservative organization.

Southern Manifesto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dixiecrat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ku Klux Klan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[niftydrifty]

Johnny_Utah, you neglected to acknowledge most of my points. The main point being that there other things besides Republicans and Democrats. There wasnt, isn't, nor will be, much room in either mainstream party for radical iconoclasts.

 

[Flea]

well, other than the MLK Holiday one, most of your points are not Political, they are social.

My responding post is to show how the Democrats were the racist pro-slavery group and that would back King being a Republican since they supported the Civil Rights Movement along with some Liberal "New Deal" Democrats.

Truman did great things as did FDR. Kennedy is given far to much credit, as we Johnson.

I agree with you though, that he was more of an Independent Free thinker than anything. That is kinda what I am. I get you.

I also do not agree with frances Rice just because I posted her article, some things I just think are interesting to talk about.

 

[niftydrifty]

My responding post is to show how the Democrats were the racist pro-slavery group and that would back King being a Republican since they supported the Civil Rights Movement along with some Liberal "New Deal" Democrats.

How much of your responding post is about pre-1964 Democrats?

I think you need to take another look at who the true racists were back in the day.

"back in the day" = 1930? 1950?

I don't think King would've been a Democrat. But the Democratic President was in favor of Civil Rights legislation in 1964. This was happening while King was alive and active, no?

If you're going to make an honest assessment of the parties, racism and support for Civil Rights, you really need to look at southern Democrats, northern Democrats, southern Republicans, and northern Republicans. Not just Republicans and Democrats.

You linked to a wiki article about southern Democrats. but did you know that 0% of southern Republicans in the House AND Senate voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Percentage-wise, the votes looked pretty much the same in terms of the parties. The real difference then was not Republican vs Democrat, it was North versus South.

Voting totals, Civil Rights Act of 1964

The original House version:
* Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)
* Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
* Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:
* Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%)
* Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%)
* Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%)

Interesting post nifty, but the article does not mention most of those things that you state since they are irrelevant to whether or not MLK was a Republican.

Of course the article does not mention those things. If it had, it would have hurt, not helped, Rice's "argument." MLK was not a Republican.

 

[dragonslayer]

Heck Even I was a Republican back in those days. Republicans supported civil rights then. That was before the Label "Republican" was stolen and corrupted to mean death, corruption.

Both Neo cons and Democrats are corrupted to some extent, but the Neo Conservatives(new- version of Republican) are totally corrupt

 

[dragonslayer]

National Black Republican Association - DYK-Why MLK was a Republican

Well, was MLK a Democrat or a Republican?

we need to remember that a Republican in the 1960s was a totally different animal than the Neo conservative, or Republican of 2007.

 

[Flea]

Originally Posted by dragonslayer
we need to remember that a Republican in the 1960s was a totally different animal than the Neo conservative, or Republican of 2007

Right dragonslayer, that is the pont that I have been trying to make. My post with the Southern Democrats shows how thry too, have changed. Times change. People just switch teams and meanings of things, but people stay the same.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

we need to remember that a Republican in the 1960s was a totally different animal than the Neo conservative, or Republican of 2007.

What ever happened to Fiscal Accountability, and actual CONSERVATISM?

 

[Flea]

Originally Posted by Lachean
What ever happened to Fiscal Accountability, and actual CONSERVATISM?

It was with the Democrats and then it switched to the Republicans, but now it is devolving as all parties are sliding more and more left.