View Poll Results: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln?"

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, Lincoln's policies were ideologically equivalent to the modern GOP's

    7 22.58%
  • No, Lincoln's policies were not consistent to the modern GOP's

    24 77.42%
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 76

Thread: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

  1. #51
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,693

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    I think assigning MLK to the Republican Party needs some clarification in the interest of intellectual honesty.

    Firstly, what is a Republican? I think there are three possible definitions:

    1. Someone who has in some way officially associated with the Republican Party. This could include running for office as a GOP candidate, becoming a GOP campaign worker in some capacity or registering as a republican in a closed primary state. Georgia, MLK's home state is an open primary state that does not ask party affiliations of voters and to my understanding he never ran for office or worked as a GOP employee or volunteer. I do remember now MLK lived in Massachusetts, Alabama and Illinois for short periods and unlike Georgia might be closed primary states. I am unaware of any declaration of party affiliation by MLK while living outside of Georgia.

    2. Someone who votes for republican candidates along strict party lines. For MLK this would have to mean he voted against the two presidents who did more for Civil Rights than any others, JFK and LBJ.

    3. Someone who self-identifies as a republican. This one is in my opinion is possible but dubious. People who are highly involved in activism that benefits from having as few political foes as possible, often are wise with their political associations and either keep their political leanings secret and/or if they do live in a closed primary state say they're independent. This is done specifically to have friends and not enemies in the interest of what they see as a greater cause. I have not been able to see anything conclusive from MLK himself where he self-identified as a republican. The only evidence of which I am aware regarding an MLK GOP party affiliation is MLK's niece Alveda King, herself a GOP activist, is on record as saying her uncle was a republican coupled with no one in the civil rights leadership nor other members of the king family denying it.

    Here's what I think is probably the most honest answer. MLK was politically independent who voted for republicans in southern state and local races were segregationists ran the democrat party at the time and voted for democrats in presidential elections where at the federal level the democrats were the biggest allies in the quest for racial equality.

    An fun extra credit exercise would be to look into the history and see where MLK stood on the issues.

    - obviously, he supported civil rights for minorities.
    - he was against the Viet-Nam War
    - he supported anti-poverty programs
    - as a champion of non-violence he probably would have been for gun control
    - he was in Memphis on that fateful day because he was helping in a worker action where black sanitation department employees were acting as a type of labor union and were on strike demanding better compensation and conditions.

    ...cant think of anything else off the top.
    We know he stated he had traditionally voted for Democrats, if I recall correctly, for national office, as of 1956. In the following election, we have apparently some piece of evidence that he may have voted for Eisenhower by way of a meeting MLK had with Nixon the subsequent year (I haven't been able to quickly track that one down yet either). We know he had felt personally snubbed by Nixon in 1960, which makes it difficult to sell the idea that he would then vote for the man that he felt snubbed him. We know that MLK later stated that had Kennedy lived through the next election cycle, he would have publicly endorsed the candidate. We then know on top of that in 1964, MLK felt it urgent to publicly campaign against Barry Goldwater, not because Barry was somehow seen as a racist, but because his philosophy and platform seemed too congenial for racists. Then, in his final years we do know that he was very much moving toward the Left, perhaps always was, in the remaining years before his assassination.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  2. #52
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,693

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    Really?

    In '64, around 80% of the republicans voted YES for the civil rights act. Only around 60% of the democrats did.

    Just one reason MLK would align himself with many republican. He has stated he normally voted democrat, but that was before the Civil rights act, and just voting "mostly for" should tell us he was likely not partisan. Still, she claims he had registered as a republican. He may have previously been registered as a democrat. Without digging up the archives, we really don't know, and I haven't seen such work done.
    We can use the outside world as a backdrop, but we can't use it to rely on what one man's intellectual trajectory was. We have additional primary source documentation along with a long body of work on behalf of scholars that was able to get hold of the man's explicit views.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  3. #53
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,264

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    We can use the outside world as a backdrop, but we can't use it to rely on what one man's intellectual trajectory was. We have additional primary source documentation along with a long body of work on behalf of scholars that was able to get hold of the man's explicit views.
    I've never seen it. Care to link it?

  4. #54
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,693

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    I've never seen it. Care to link it?
    I can link to some of it, but frankly, other stuff is off limits to the easily accessible public and/or behind publication.

    http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/primar...56_ToSloan.pdf

    King Encyclopedia

    King Encyclopedia

    King Encyclopedia

    The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. - Clayborne Carson - Google Books

    For even some research into his radical few years:

    Adam Fairclough: "Was Martin Luther King A Marxist" History Workshop April 1983, p. 117-125.

    Kenneth Smith: "The Radicalization of Martin Luther King, Jr.: The Last Three Years" Journal of Ecumenical Studies Winter 1989, p. 270-288.

    From Civil Rights to Human Rights: Martin Luther King Jr. and the Struggle for Economic Justice, Thomas F. Jackson, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  5. #55
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,264

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    I hate it when people link "information overload" and don't point out the relative quotes.

    I don't think you have anything that trumps the words of his niece.

  6. #56
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,693

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    I hate it when people link "information overload" and don't point out the relative quotes.

    I don't think you have anything that trumps the words of his niece.
    Lord, I gave it to you so you can read it for yourself. I am not going to dig out quotes for everything I thought pertinent. I combed it so you can dig the entire context of the sources I used, including the search query in the book (I couldn't figure out how to properly display it for another person).

    In reality, I gave you far more than most posters will give you, and I was very selective in the process.

    If you do not want to spend the time reading it, then that is your business.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  7. #57
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,264

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Lord, I gave it to you so you can read it for yourself. I am not going to dig out quotes for everything I thought pertinent. I combed it so you can dig the entire context of the sources I used, including the search query in the book (I couldn't figure out how to properly display it for another person).

    In reality, I gave you far more than most posters will give you, and I was very selective in the process.

    If you do not want to spend the time reading it, then that is your business.
    Fine.

    I see this too often.

    Information overload. Since you didn't search a relevant phrase, I say you have nothing.

  8. #58
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,264

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    Especially since what you linked, I have already seen.

  9. #59
    Advisor aberrant85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Last Seen
    10-04-15 @ 04:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    594

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    YIKES! Where to start? Let's start with the Dixiecrats.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    The constant liberal lie.
    You are saying that Dixiecrats did not join the Republicans after 1968? The south was known as the "Solid South" since the Civil War because it was reliably Democrat. After 1968 there's been only one Democratic presidential candidate to win a majority in the south, Carter. Either these Democrats switched their votes to Republican, or they all moved out of the South. Which was it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    Racism still exists in both parties, but even today. More democrats are racist than republicans.
    I'm not sure what statistics would support that. Anecdotally, during the Democratic primaries in '08 there were no publicized instances of racist remarks against Obama by voters. By comparison, there are countless YouTube videos of Republican primary voters and rally goers in '08 making racist and Islamophobic remarks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    More republicans as a percentage voted for the 1964 Civil Rights act than democrats.
    Yes, and as you see, 1964 came before 1968 when the Southern Strategy realigned the parties. Indeed Republicans voted for it more than Democrats, but if you look at it by region it was overwhelmingly Southerners who voted against it. So we agree with the facts here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    Too many democrats believe in quota systems even today, which means they think blacks are inferior, and need help. That they can't compete equally.
    Every statistic on unemployment, incarceration, single parenthood, and education shows Blacks at a disadvantage to Whites. There's only two ways to explain this. Either you have to accept the fact that a legacy of slavery and discrimination have a long-lasting impact on the Black community (like Democrats do), or you believe that there are no outside factors that should account for Black underperforming, so they must be lazy or naturally inferior. What do you think?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    Think about it. Prejudice is not racism. Racism has to do with believing another race is inferior.
    These opinions demonstrate to me exactly why modern Republicans do not deserve to call themselves "The Party of Lincoln." Lincoln believed that God created all people equal and worked to repair a system that treated them otherwise. Republicans today cannot claim to do the same.

  10. #60
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,693

    Re: Is it fair to call Republicans "The Party of Lincoln"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    Fine.

    I see this too often.

    Information overload. Since you didn't search a relevant phrase, I say you have nothing.
    Alright, if you consider this information overload, then you must have had a very hard time in public school and left in the dust in college.

    Did you click the first link? It is a very very short letter. I gave you it, because I thought you could skim to find the sentence in the paragraph that is relevant. Did I overestimate your capability?

    Are you capable of reading a wikipedia article entry about the size of half a page? If so, then you would be able to find the relevant quotes.

    Are you capable of clicking on the first image that pops up in MLK's autobiography, and see the highlighted text? If not, we have problems.

    Do you like reading books? If not, why bother studying history at all?
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 09-06-13 at 01:40 AM.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •