Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Are conservatives against MLK
Executive Summary
Conservatives are not monolithic in their stance toward Martin Luther King Jr.; the record shows both opposition and appropriation within conservative circles, and scholars note that King's ideas also overlap with some conservative principles. Recent analyses document instances where conservative figures and groups have actively criticized or sought to discredit King and civil-rights legislation, while other conservatives invoke King’s rhetoric or argue his philosophy resonates with traditional values [1] [2] [3]. The truth is nuanced: critics within the conservative movement sometimes attack King’s legacy or the Civil Rights Act, even as other conservatives celebrate sanitized versions of King or emphasize elements of his thought that align with conservative moral or civic traditions [4] [5].
1. A political campaign to discredit King: what conservative activists have done and said
Investigations and reporting document targeted efforts by some conservative figures and organizations to challenge Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy, arguing that key civil-rights laws were harmful or misapplied. Notably, audio and reporting show that commentator Charlie Kirk labeled King “awful” and described the passage of the Civil Rights Act as a mistake used as an “anti-white weapon,” a position tied to broader campaigns by groups like Turning Point USA to recast civil-rights history [1] [2]. Critics portray these moves as part of a strategic effort to undermine consensus about civil-rights achievements; defenders within conservative circles frame their critiques as opposition to particular policies rather than to King himself, but the public rhetoric from some conservative actors is explicitly adversarial and has drawn scrutiny from fact-checkers and journalists [1] [2].
2. Appropriation and sanitization: the conservative use of selective parts of King
Multiple analyses identify a pattern of selective citation and sanitization of King’s rhetoric by conservatives, emphasizing his appeals to patriotism or his “dream” language while omitting his critiques of structural racism, economic inequality, and capitalism. Pieces documenting this trend argue that invoking King’s color-blind language has been used to oppose Critical Race Theory and other race-conscious policies, effectively reshaping King into a symbol for colorblind conservatism rather than for his full critique of American systems [3] [6]. This selective appropriation allows conservative politicians and commentators to claim King while simultaneously rejecting policy prescriptions grounded in King’s broader critique, producing a contested public memory of King that depends on which parts of his writings and speeches are foregrounded [7] [8].
3. Intellectual overlap: how King’s philosophy aligns with conservative ideas
Scholars have also argued that elements of King’s moral and philosophical framework share affinities with certain conservative traditions, such as appeals to natural law, moral conscience, community responsibilities, and civic virtue. Analyses point to authors who cast King as possessing a form of “transcendent conservatism” or a “conservative militant” posture that used American civic language to advance civil rights, showing that King’s rhetorical strategy won support among moderates and some conservatives during the movement [5] [4]. This intellectual overlap complicates blanket claims that conservatism and King’s thought are inherently opposed: some conservatives genuinely see parts of King’s moral vision as compatible with conservative principles, even while disagreeing with his economic or systemic critiques [5] [4].
4. Historical complexity: the conservative institutional record on King
The historical record demonstrates mixed institutional conservative responses to King. At times, Republican and conservative leaders opposed measures tied to King—some conservatives resisted establishing King’s birthday as a federal holiday historically—and others later invoked him rhetorically in different contexts [3] [9]. Analysts emphasize that King did not formally align with either major political party, leaving his reception to partisan reinterpretation; therefore, the conservative relationship to King is shaped as much by political expediency and cultural debates as by ideological consistency. The result is a set of contradictory practices: conservative entities have both contested King’s legacy and selectively celebrated parts of it, producing ongoing debate about motive and fidelity to King’s full record [9] [3].
5. What to take away: a nuanced verdict on the claim “conservatives are against MLK”
Summing the evidence yields a clear conclusion: the claim “conservatives are against MLK” is oversimplified and imprecise. Documented instances show that some conservative individuals and organizations actively oppose or seek to discredit King and civil-rights legislation, while other conservatives invoke, praise, or find philosophical common ground with King’s moral rhetoric [1] [4]. The most accurate statement is that conservatism contains both adversarial voices and appropriative supporters regarding King, and contemporary culture wars over race and education have amplified both tendencies into prominent public conflict. Any assessment must therefore distinguish between specific actors and broader ideological currents rather than treating conservatism as a single, uniform bloc [2] [7].