What, on Earth, is your point? During the exact same time period, there were very liberal Democrats who swept civil rights under the rug (FDR) and very conservative Republicans who openly called for civil rights legislation (Coolidge), which is my point: you can't just put civil rights on a left-right axis. It crossed party lines and ideological ones, as well. You have just simply decided through any number of lazy rationalizations that supporting civil rights is "liberal" (I would guess some form of Blacks are liberals now, so liberals - regardless of party - must have been the only ones fighting for them or the comical conclusion that because you are a liberal and you would have supported civil rights that it must be an inherently liberal view).
There were liberals and conservatives who supported and opposed civil rights all throughout the movement's history; to decide supporting or opposing basic civil rights is liberal is PURE conjecture. Period.
My point is that, while neither party was particularly interested in expanding civil rights for black Americans between 1876 and 1948, FDR (and Truman, for that matter) were
far more responsive to black concerns than any President - Republican or Democrat - had been since the Grant administration. And it was the (Northern) liberal wing of the Democratic Party (including modern liberal icons like Eleanor Roosevelt and later, Hubert Humphrey) who were pushing them - in spite of the
Conservative Coalition of Republicans
and Southern Democrats in Congress doing their best to block most if not all of the New Deal (which for the Southern Democrats, included - but by no means was limited to - civil rights for black people).
For information re: modern conservatism's relationship to anti-civil rights white Southerner , read my post in another thread here:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=244964.msg5254176#msg5254176
