Issue 223– March 13, 2013
Editor: I found your “Conservative Civil Rights” illuminating. For what it’s worth, I was opposed to the 1964 and ’65 acts for a whole variety of reasons, but largely because I was a devout believer in state’s rights and thought, as you convincingly argue, that both laws overreached and became alarmed at the relentless drive by the Johnson Administration to greatly expand the powers of the central government. I also believed the Democrats were intent on ballooning the black vote to their advantage. Even in retrospect, I probably would not have supported either of those laws, but I do think they had a positive effect on middle and upper middle class blacks, enabling them to become far more integrated into American society and secure far better paying jobs then they could have before these acts were passed. But I also think they had a detrimental impact as well. Keep me on your list of readers. Allan R
Editor: Thanks for writing “Conservative Civil Rights.” You might be interested in Peter Berkowitz’ “The Flawed Case of Tying Conservatism to Racism” that appeared in Politico recently http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/03/05/the_flawed_case. It is a very able defense of the conservative movement, the GOP, the old National Review, and Goldwater against Sam Tanenhaus’s PC cover-story hit piece in the Feb. 10 New Republic. David F.