Martin Luther King was a Republican ?

[Quackers]

MLK was a republican and a closet white supremacist. History will affirm this...

 

[Miles Teg]

MLK was a republican and a closet white supremacist. History will affirm this...

Not true. History will affirm in fact, that MLK was secretly the love-child of Malcolm X, smuggled into Hawaii. Just like his little brother Barry.

 

[Cutlass]

If the democratic base is all poor people and minorities then why do conservatives caricature democrats as ivory-tower limousine liberals?

Have you read the book "What's the Matter With Kansas?"

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Have you read the book "What's the Matter With Kansas?"

No I haven't. I was merely pointing out an(other) inconsistency in conservative propagandistic logic.

 

[bhsup]

Um, who said MLK was a Republican?

 

[MobBoss]

Um, who said MLK was a Republican?

This. Kinda wondering what started all this hub-bub in the first place. Did someone actually say MLK was a republican? Or is this just some more of Otago stirring the pot?

 

[GoodGame]

Yeah, we all know that MLK was a liberal. Conservatives are appealing to his image as a national icon and a symbol of freedom, as opposed to the specific policies he supported. I personally think they're nuts, but they aren't ignorant (about this anyways)

MLK was pro-Union/Labor, as he was shot while trying to negotiate for some garbage-hauling strikers, I believe.

That doesn't mean he's not a Repub, but the % of Repubs that support labor are quite low.

Some perspective: though you might be a hater of modern Repubs, Abe Lincoln and leading abolitionists were Republicans. The Democrats of the 1860s were generally more interested in compromise with the South.


The CIA feared he was a Commie.
http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_truth/2007/11/why-martin-luth.html


I'd say MLK might have inheirited some republicanism but was probably an indie who was socialist.

 

[Leonel]

This. Kinda wondering what started all this hub-bub in the first place. Did someone actually say MLK was a republican? Or is this just some more of Otago stirring the pot?

For those that might have missed it:

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Billboards_Claim_Rev._King_Was_Republican_0705.html

Specifically the NBRA

 

[Cutlass]

No I haven't. I was merely pointing out an(other) inconsistency in conservative propagandistic logic.

You should read it. It's short, won't take you long. But it's a part of the answer to your question of how lower class middle America became brainwashed into thinking of liberals as elitists.

 

[bhsup]

That book description is almost insulting. Why can some people not comprehend that some of us out there in yahoo country just do not WANT the government to be responsible for our well being? THat's not the government's problem, that's our problem. It's not that we "don't get it" or are "confused" or whatever the hell else they want to claim...

 

[Cutlass]

That book description is almost insulting. Why can some people not comprehend that some of us out there in yahoo country just do not WANT the government to be responsible for our well being? THat's not the government's problem, that's our problem. It's not that we "don't get it" or are "confused" or whatever the hell else they want to claim...

I've never noticed you to miss the point quite so dramatically.

 

[Formaldehyde]

That book description is almost insulting. Why can some people not comprehend that some of us out there in yahoo country just do not WANT the government to be responsible for our well being? THat's not the government's problem, that's our problem. It's not that we "don't get it" or are "confused" or whatever the hell else they want to claim...

As the Amazon.com review of the book makes clear about the book written by a Republican, why do you support a political party that is essentially just the opposite of what you claim you want? Because it is the "lesser of two evils" to do so?

The largely blue collar citizens of Kansas can be counted upon to be a "red" state in any election, voting solidly Republican and possessing a deep animosity toward the left. This, according to author Thomas Frank, is a pretty self-defeating phenomenon, given that the policies of the Republican Party benefit the wealthy and powerful at the great expense of the average worker. According to Frank, the conservative establishment has tricked Kansans, playing up the emotional touchstones of conservatism and perpetuating a sense of a vast liberal empire out to crush traditional values while barely ever discussing the Republicans' actual economic policies and what they mean to the working class. Thus the pro-life Kansas factory worker who listens to Rush Limbaugh will repeatedly vote for the party that is less likely to protect his safety, less likely to protect his job, and less likely to benefit him economically. To much of America, Kansas is an abstract, "where Dorothy wants to return. Where Superman grew up." But Frank, a native Kansan, separates reality from myth in What's the Matter with Kansas and tells the state's socio-political history from its early days as a hotbed of leftist activism to a state so entrenched in conservatism that the only political division remaining is between the moderate and more-extreme right wings of the same party. Frank, the founding editor of The Baffler and a contributor to Harper's and The Nation, knows the state and its people. He even includes his own history as a young conservative idealist turned disenchanted college Republican, and his first-hand experience, combined with a sharp wit and thorough reasoning, makes his book more credible than the elites of either the left and right who claim to understand Kansas. --John Moe

 

[bhsup]

repeatedly vote for the party that is less likely to protect his safety

Beyond defending against invasion, not the federal government's job.

less likely to protect his job

Not the government's job (regardless of level...municiple, state, federal)

and less likely to benefit him economically.

Not the government's job

 

[Ajidica]

So they are motivated by idealism? I thought for most blue-collar people everyday needs trump idealism. They would for me.

 

[Earthling]

Doctor?

Actually, yes, I think that is the interpretation being sought, due to previously stated "beliefs" that the majority of highly-educated people are very conservative.

 

[MobBoss]

For those that might have missed it:

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Billboards_Claim_Rev._King_Was_Republican_0705.html

Specifically the NBRA

Link doesnt work for me for some reason.

So we are discussing this because it was on a billboard?

Seriously?

 

[Cutlass]

Beyond defending against invasion, not the federal government's job.

Not the government's job (regardless of level...municiple, state, federal)

Not the government's job

Again, that's completely missing the point. This is not in the least about what you wish for government to do or not to do. This is about how you sell what you want government to do or not to do.

Originally Posted by Cheezy the Wiz
If the democratic base is all poor people and minorities then why do conservatives caricature democrats as ivory-tower limousine liberals?

There was a distinct sales and marketing campaign used to make liberals appear to be elitists in order to help further divide liberals from working class whites in middle America. Now you may agree or disagree with the various policies of liberals, but that's besides the point. The point is that the liberal policies are populist, not elitist. And the Republican policies are elitist, but dressed up as populist. So when liberals are called elitist, and by people who came from very elite socioeconomic backgrounds, then there is fraud going on.

What the book describes is that there was a concerted effort to set economic populism and economic elitism, economics as a whole, outside of the liberal-conservative divide. Only by dismissing the economic arguments as a whole can you make conservatives look good to the working class. And liberals bad to middle American whites.

And yet it is the economic elite, not the social liberals, who control Hollywood and New York, which are the targets of the "elitist" argument. So these people, when they have a complaint about all these things that are "going wrong with America", when they buy this liberal elitist argument, actually vote for the people who are perpetrators of the changes in the country that they oppose.

Yes, they are voting, not against some elitist version of what their interest should be, but actually against what they themselves claim to be their desires.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Beyond defending against invasion, not the federal government's job.

Then wouldn't it also not be the government's job to engage in activities which will obviously result in even more blowback and enmity thoughout the world?

Not the government's job (regardless of level...municiple, state, federal)

So it would be OK if you got fired because you were white or maie? You don't really care about those rights guaranteed to you by amendments to the Constitution? What if you became disabled and needed a wheelchair? Not the government's job to assure you still had access to businesses and elsewhere?

Not the government's job

But is it the government's job to make richer Republicans even richer? isn't that what you claim to be against?

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

Exactly. And that's entirely understandable. What isn't so much understandable is moving from calling him a socialist in order to discredit him in the eyes of many to calling him a Republican to co-opt his memory. It's quite a leap.

The thing that truly amazes me, is that the sheeple that might believe this are already true believing zombies. So something like this does not increase the number of people who may vote for the Republicans. Waste of effort.

I doubt that's the same people. The small-government conservatives are Dr. King fans. The racists hate him because they have to drink from the same water fountain and compete with the brothers on a level playing field. But those people want a large, intrusive government. There's always tension between the two groups.

 

[GinandTonic]

In terms of modern paradigms, wouldnt MLK be best considered in terms of the christian democratic mold?