Skip to comments.Why Martin Luther King was a Republican
Posted on 03/16/2013 1:38:22 PM PDT by Epsdude
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 Ss: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.
It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.
Read more: http://www.humanevents.com/2006/08/16/why-martin-luther-king-was-republican/
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Stuff like this needs to be promoted at every opportunity. It’s all historical fact, so none of it can be refuted.
Party labels then didn’t necessarily mean what they mean today.
A Texas Democrat in the 1950s was a heck of a lot more conservative than a Rockefeller Republican from that era.
JFK would be a Republican today. The Democrat party has gone over to the dark side. It is the party of evil, pure and simple.
...and it was Democrat JFK and RFK’s justice department that had him wiretapped, arrested, and attempted to set him up with prostitutes. He only switched to Democrat after he was arrested in a deal for both his release and for LBJ to promote the civil right’s act (calculated political move that went against what the D’s stood for).
MLK did delve into some Marxist groups at the time as the Communists were teaming with any anti-establishment groups they could such as the Civil Rights movement and Anti-War movement to upset the power structure.
I actually think of the two, Malcolm X (his choice of religion, notwithstanding), was the more conservative of the two. He preached self-reliance, and railed against white liberals, proclaiming their policies would do much more damage to black people...and he was right.
People cannot handle the truth. Not only elected politicians, but random people on and off the streets.
The Left are to make that point in an effort to anchor conservatives with the evils of segregation, and slavery.
The problem with that argument is quite simple, even know modern democrats advocate for segregation and effective slavery to the State. They just do it under the auspices of advancing minority couture and protecting people form themselves.
Ironically their 19th century counterparts often made the exact same argument.
When minorities begin to realize that liberals who deny them vouchers for schooling, condemn and force minority students into failing union controlled urban public schools while they themselves send their own kids to good private schools, and somehow always seem to situate their abortion clinics in minority neighborhoods, then perhaps 20 to 30 percent will return to the Republican Party and the Democratic death grip on the country will be broken.
The demos w/LBJ brought the War on Poverty and Great Society, which increased poverty and put generations of poor blacks...and whites on the government teat.
Then, when this machinery has taken over major segments of the electorate, and generationally created all the voters it could reap... the democrats and rinos propose amnesty for illegal aliens— a ready slave wage work force.... who will be immediately eligible for healthcare for life, and ALL the other giveaways as they vote their pocket for the largesse dished out by the rinos, dinos and democrat ruling class to maintain their private club.
Result: destroy what is left of America, by making all, everyone, dependent on government, and increase venture socialists into the club.
This is why a black conservative business owner with Christian family values who does not buy into the homosexual (male or female) agenda, and preserve his hard fought family, is a huge threat to the entire ruling class (not just RINO repubs).
While this is a well written article— the actual records of ML King are sealed, to verify his beliefs, actions and complete record of associations. For balance it would be good to know this vs. useful propaganda.
However, it is not entirely accurate. The Civil Rights measures of the 1960’s and prior were regional matters with almost all Southern congressmen and senators voting against the Civil Rights bills.
In fact, while a few southern Democrats voted for the Civil Rights bills, not one of the southern Republicans voted for the Civil Rights bills.
For example, Sen. John Tower of Texas voted against the Civil Rights bills and Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights bills while LBJ supported the Civil Rights bills.
For the most part, Civil Rights has always had huge region devisions regardless of party.
He was a communist
That is nonsense. JFK wanted to destroy America and replace it's voting population with something different.
Democrats wrote a law to replace the American voter.
From unionizing government, to Vietnam, to the 1965 Immigration Act, JFK was the end of us.
However, if there is one man who can take the most credit for the 1965 act, it is John F. Kennedy. Kennedy seems to have inherited the resentment his father Joseph felt as an outsider in Bostons WASP aristocracy. He voted against the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, and supported various refugee acts throughout the 1950s. In 1958 he wrote a book, A Nation of Immigrants, which attacked the quota system as illogical and without purpose, and the book served as Kennedys blueprint for immigration reform after he became president in 1960. In the summer of 1963, Kennedy sent Congress a proposal calling for the elimination of the national origins quota system. He wanted immigrants admitted on the basis of family reunification and needed skills, without regard to national origin. After his assassination in November, his brother Robert took up the cause of immigration reform, calling it JFKs legacy. In the forward to a revised edition of A Nation of Immigrants, issued in 1964 to gain support for the new law, he wrote, I know of no cause which President Kennedy championed more warmly than the improvement of our immigration policies. Sold as a memorial to JFK, there was very little opposition to what became known as the Immigration Act of 1965.
I thought that this has been put to rest and that MLK was NOT a republican?
Malcolm X, for all his faults, absolutely hated the Democrat party. I think the legend of him is more radical than who he really was. I know it was his own NOI people who killed him for not being radical enough and wanting a martyr.
His wife, daughter, and niece all say he was. I heard his niece on Hannity several years ago giving a lot of detail on his history that isn’t told (some of the stuff I posted above).
In his book Hysteria 1964: The Fear Campaign Against Barry Goldwater (New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House, 1967), Lionel Lokos, citing the New York Times, quotes King as forecasting "a dark night of social disruption" and "violence and riots" if Goldwater were elected president, and he warned that Goldwater's program contained "dangerous signs of Hitlerism."
So he would have been a John McCain/Mitt Romney Republican instead of a Ted Cruz/Louie Gohmert Republican. :)
Here is a video with his niece who said he was and, being family, knew him a lot better than all of those writing histories about him for their own agenda.
He did have a house full of guns, though. Mostly for self-defense of course.
I Know I would have voted against the civil rights act too, although not because I have anything against civil rights or any minority.
The problem with these acts is how they “attempted” to restore and protect said rights was not only entirely unconstitutional, it was offensive to the very idea of union between theses States that a law would be made that applies only to some and not to all.
Indeed taken as a whole I am quite certant that the Civil Rights acts did far more harm the civil rights than good. I would have voted against them on all 3 accounts and I will fight implementation on the Constitutional account.
This act is indeed a very mark upon both the Republican and Democratic parties.
Not that I was a fan of the movie, but I love the one scene where the lily-white liberal coed goes up to Malcolm, obviously fawning over him and asking, “What can we do to help your cause?” And Malcolm just looks at her and says, “Nothing.”
If the 1949 version of JFK came to our era through a time warp, he might be speaking at CPAC. However, by 1960, Kennedy had become a supporter of big government, big labor and welfare-state socialism, so if that version of JFK came here through a time warp and registered Republican, he would be part of the Karl Rove/John McCain/Susan Collins faction of the party.
JFK was a democrat from America’s leading democrat family, and he was a lefty, and his election was the end of America.
Bayard Rustin later moved off of that reservation. In 1979, I saw him lead a demonstration in Washington, DC on behalf of refugees from Vietnam's Communist government--a rally that was condemned by Jane Fonda.
I think both of them would have if you ask me. Given what I know about JFK(did a few reports on him) I don’t think most people have any idea what kind of rotten guy JFK really was.
He is idealized primarily because he was a democrat and he died at a special time.
People forget that without the JFK presidency, the government would not be unionized, Vietnam never happened, liberal democrat immigration never happened, the 1960s never happened, even the homeless never happened.
In other words, America, the GOP, and even the democrats would all be far less lefty today.
So comparing apples to oranges doesn’t work well, without the tectonic shift of the democrats controlling all government during the 1960s, a typical politician would be more conservative in speech and agenda, and answering to an entirely different electorate than this last 100 million people gave us.
Why is this being posted again ? This was a notoriously bad article and poorly researched (the title alone was factually inaccurate). This has been debunked many times since it was posted here... 7 years ago.
It was, yet some well-meaning FReepers keep reposting it. It gives me a headache every time it shows up.
How would things be different today if Nixon had shaved on September 26, 1960, before he debated JFK?
Watergate would of happened 8 years earlier! And so would everything else that followed, including Obammie.
So...how do we know King was a Republican? Voter registration card? Did he endorse a Republican for office? King’s writings? How?
How would things be different today if Nixon had shaved on September 26, 1960, before he debated JFK?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Gotta be careful with the ‘what if’n’ UNLESS you are a D.
Trent Lott got ‘fired’ for asking what if Jesse Helms had been elected in 1948.
Of course it was OK to eulogize “Sheetz BYRD” D(WV) for his long and fruitful life of service to the people.
Including (?) his tours in the KKK or was that just a ‘youthful indiscretion’..... At his age one may plead he had no other ‘way to go’ IF he was in MS, AL etc but wasn’t WV ‘invented’ because they didn’t want to go the way of the South?
Conservative media has, or is well on it’s way to becoming as fake and dishonest as liberal media, everyone just says what sounds good for their team or that gets the juices flowing.
I am really discouraged with all of it.
Very revealing JFK on mass immigration. Is this from a book in your home library?
Strom Thurmond, not Jesse Helms.
It’s not the fault of “Conservative media.” This was a sloppy column written by Frances Rice. What’s unfortunate is that it did have some valid points to make, but it was marred by a title that simply wasn’t accurate (at least, not after 1960 or 1956) and by other mistakes (another individual she identified as a Republican was a candidate for and member of the New York Socialist Party).
No, I don’t own the book.
JFK was what finished us, the destruction of 1935 to 1960 could have been dealt with during the cycles of political change over the generations, but the 1965 Immigration Act ended all of that, and has made us a people’s being colonized by exotic foreigners who will run this piece of geography as they see fit, after first bleeding the old infrastructure for short term gain and self enrichment, millions of whom will return home after making their fortunes here and plugging into the retirement system, having retained citizenship both here and in their home nation with it’s still intact culture.
If we could break the race barrier we would win in land slides.
If we fail to break the race barrier and soon, our party, and country will cease to exist.
That is a fact that we don’t have the ability to avoid.
I was counting Human Events among conservative media, and this tale shows up in a lot of conservative media.
I already detest liberal media and it has been one of my big passions starting in the 1960s, but I am coming to despise and distrust conservative media as well.
Thanks. I know most of what you are talking about and have seen it first hand right in front of me. Only a nation that has become weak and living off past accomplishments. Only that kind of nation goes along with the 1965 immigration act and never tries to nullify it. Ever since that act our immigration has been 90% from the 3rd world. Many nice hard working individuals but not from the European stock who made America
All of the Negroes freed by Abraham Lincoln preferred the Republican party even if they could not vote.
One of Lyndon Baines Johnson's tactics was to move the south entirely into the democratic camp, "for the next 100 years."
Why would it be a stretch to think that Martin Luther King had at least some affinity for the Republican party?
When he was fighting the racists in the democratic party the only ones who were supporting him were the Republicans, way before JFK and LBJ ever thought about it.
Strom Thurmond, not Jesse Helms
= = = = = = =
Imagine the furor if say Byrd were an R and Ronald Reagan even went to his wake/memorial/funeral, much less ‘praise him’ for his public service....Of course to certain people KKK was considered (at least in their ‘weak’ minds) serving the public in general.
Yet BO and clintoon both laid it on for Byrd and they were ‘cheered’ for it.
Of course. Nevermind that Thurmond was never a member of the KKK, let alone held a leadership position in it like Byrd did. It’s the great thing about being a Democrat. You never have to have standards.
It was King himself who denounced Goldwater as a tool of the Southern racists in the 1964 contest.
But without JFK, would we still have set foot on the moon?
We landed on the moon? No way!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.