One of the most prominently held urban legends of our time is that Senator Barry Goldwater, the GOP candidate for president in 1964, was against civil rights because he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This vote of Goldwater marked the start of when “the GOP began to go against civil rights” according to CNN’s Roland Martin’s version of the legend.
The truth is, the GOP has always been in favor of civil rights. From the creation of the party, which opposed slavery; to this present day, you cannot find a single plank on the GOP platform that indicates anything otherwise. In fact, it was Republican President Eisenhower who proffered the first civil rights act of 1957, which was watered down by White Southern Democrats [
In the 1964 civil rights act, Republicans in the house voted 138 for and 34 against; Democrats voted 152 for and 96 against. In the Senate, the Republicans voted 27 for and 6 against; the Democrats voted 46 for and 21 against. Clearly, from these numbers, there was no apparent anti-Civil Rights movement in the GOP as Roland Martin, and others, suggest
COMMUNITY
URBAN LEGEND: GOLDWATER AGAINST CIVIL RIGHTS
Urban Legends article-Goldwater
One of the most prominently held urban legends of our time is that Senator Barry Goldwater, the GOP candidate for president in 1964, was against civil rights because he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This vote of Goldwater marked the start of when “the GOP began to go against civil rights” according to CNN’s Roland Martin’s version of the legend.
The truth is, the GOP has always been in favor of civil rights. From the creation of the party, which opposed slavery; to this present day, you cannot find a single plank on the GOP platform that indicates anything otherwise. In fact, it was Republican President Eisenhower who proffered the first civil rights act of 1957, which was watered down by White Southern Democrats [see Eisenhower on Civil rights].
This bill, however, was responsible for jump-starting the process of civil rights legislation with protection for voting rights; establishing the Civil Rights Division in the Justice Department; and among other things, establishing a six-member Civil Rights Commission.[1] In addition, a second Civil Rights bill was passed in 1960. Senator Goldwater supported both bills.
The problem arises in 1964. The new Civil Rights bill championed by President Johnson, who has now ironically had an epiphany about Civil Rights, comes to the Senate. The Southern Democrats oppose the bill as they had opposed similar legislation along with Senator Johnson. Now as president, Johnson realizes the bill will not pass the Senate without Republican help so he approaches Everett Dirksen. Dirksen garners Republican support, and the bill passes.
Of note, “The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats by the civil rights issue. Only one Republican senator participated in the filibuster against the bill. In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes.”[2]
In the 1964 civil rights act, Republicans in the house voted 138 for and 34 against; Democrats voted 152 for and 96 against. In the Senate, the Republicans voted 27 for and 6 against; the Democrats voted 46 for and 21 against. Clearly, from these numbers, there was no apparent anti-Civil Rights movement in the GOP as Roland Martin, and others, suggest.
As a matter of fact, as one of the six voting against the 1964 Civil rights act, Senator Goldwater, on principle, disagreed with the idea of Federal government intervention regarding this matter. “His stance was based on his view that the act was an intrusion of the federal government into the affairs of states and, second, that the Act interfered with the rights of private persons to do business, or not, with whomever they chose.”[3]
More specifically, Goldwater had problems with title II and title VII of the 1964 bill. He felt that constitutionally the federal government had no legal right to interfere in who people hired, fired; or to whom they sold their products, goods, and services. He felt that “power” laid in the various states, and with the people. He was a strong advocate of the tenth amendment. Goldwater’s constitutional stance did not mean he agreed with the segregation and racial discrimination practiced in the South. To the contrary, he fought against these kinds of racial divides in his own state of Arizona. He supported the integration of the Arizona National guard and Phoenix public schools.[4] Goldwater was, also, a member of the NAACP and the Urban League.
https://freedomsjournalinstitute.org/uncategorized/urban-legend-goldwater-against-civil-rights/
... I would agree on principle with Goldwater on intrusion of the federal government.
BUT it doesn’t change the fact that a higher number of GOP supported civil rights.
***NIKK was looking for facts to argue with a liberal, not to argue conservative principles with another conservative.
P.S. everyone hated LBJ, he being a racist was only one reason. So why side with the liberals on this one?
Thank you Rusty for all your hard work in explaining and getting this info together.
I am so sick of the left revising history.
As someone old enough to remember the 60’s and the Civil Rights movement, I’m sick of the dims trying to co-opt and take credit for something they opposed.
Dims cannot accept their own history because it is despicable.
The Republican Party has always been the Republican Party, they did not switch with the Democrat Party.
This LIE drives me nuts.
Waiting for the lie that Hanoi Jane is a pubbie!!
Lots of good information and history there THanks
“P.S. everyone hated LBJ, he being a racist was only one reason. So why side with the liberals on this one?”
I’m old enough to have watched LBJ’s entire presidency and despised him in real time. But not for the BS that you’re spouting.
You’ll have to try selling your line to someone who knows as little about what went on then as you do.
LBJ was a protege of FDR, he was a leader of the liberal wing of the Democrat Party, he had allies among GOP liberals, the very ones who helped him pass his programs.
The one siding with liberals is you. At least you’re siding with ‘60s liberals, but seeing how many of today’s conservatives seem intent on conserving LBJ’s legacy maybe LBJ is an honorary 2019 conservative. In your case you have the bad manners to accuse LBJ of being a racist while cheering his legacy. Back then only the Left would have done that.