owebo
Gold Member
You're a hard core klansman democrat.....there are fewer and fewer of you each passing year as people become more educated as to your kkk evil....
151 years ago today: Democrats founded and staffed the Ku Klux Klan
- Thread starter Little-Acorn
- Start date
Pumpkin Row
Platinum Member
- May 26, 2016
- 5,694
- 2,814
- 1,095
I didn't remove any context, dude. Didn't distort anything, either.
I see you completely ignored Pogo's post, since he disproved your statements entirely. Here, let me help:
He had to be right about something eventually, even by accident~
I'm just playing, Pogo, you know I like you<3
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 308,766
- 264,378
- 3,615
Translation:
"I still have no links whatsoever for what I know full well is absolute bullshit partisan hackery".
Yeah, no shit. I knew that way before I got here.
owebo
Gold Member
owebo
Gold Member
Translation: it's your choice to be a klan democrat....
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
Isn't it fascinating what myths conservatives have to cling to in some bizarre attempt to validate their own existence?
Conservatism, as a whole, is like a huge science project.
Conservatism, as a whole, is like a huge science project.
Political Junky
Gold Member
- May 27, 2009
- 25,793
- 3,996
- 280
Before 1964 the South was solid blue.
Political Junky
Gold Member
- May 27, 2009
- 25,793
- 3,996
- 280
Nope
owebo
Gold Member
Awww....klansman snowflake.....
Derelict_Drvr
Gold Member
- Nov 11, 2016
- 1,115
- 205
- 140
"As Dr. Foner wrote:
In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired the restoration of white supremacy. It aimed to destroy the Republican party’s infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life.
In 1868, the Klan elected its first Grand Wizard, Nathaniel Bedford Forrest. Decades later, his grandson wrote in the September 1928 issue of the Klan’s Kourier Magazine:
I have never voted for any man who was not a regular Democrat. My father … never voted for any man who was not a Democrat. My grandfather was …the head of the Ku Klux Klan in reconstruction days…. My great-grandfather was a life-long Democrat…. My great-great-grandfather was…one of the founders of the Democratic party.
...
Democrats. Not Republicans, not Tea Partiers. Democrats.
It seems Chris Hayes and Alan Grayson and anyone else confused about the nature of the KKK’s political affiliation simply doesn’t know their history."
The Democratic Party and the KKK | Common Sense Central | News/Talk 1130 WISN
Last edited:
Read your own text. "In effect serving the interests of" is not the same as "being".
Vladimir Putin's hacking of the US election may have "served the interests of" Donald Rump. Does that mean Donald Rump is Vlad the Imputiner?
Further, you don't provide context around the quote. What segment of the Democratic Party is he talking about before he sets this up? We do not know, for we are not told.
On to Forrest. First of all the year is wrong. Forrest was drafted (he wasn't consulted or even present) by the Klan in April of 1867 as a figurehead in hopes his respected name would rub off on what was already becoming a negative image. Less that two years later (January 1869) Forrest issued his first and only General Order Number One, officially disbanding the Klan and ordering its robes and assorted paraphernalia destroyed, specifically on account of that reputation for violence. Who he may have voted for along the way is irrelevant -- this was not a political movement. In the post-war white South everybody was a Democrat, whether racist or not.
Finally, all of this is irrelevancy as Forrest was not a founder of the Klan. The founders were Capt. John Lester, Capt. John B. Kennedy, James Crowe, Frank McCord, Calvin Jones and Richard Reed, and there is, for the 576th time, NO documentation of any political affiliation or activity for any of them. Not a one. By the time local vigilante groups had commandeered it they had lost control and it was well out of their hands.
NOR, if we speak of the second iteration in 1915, the one that spread by far to be the biggest, is there any record of any political affiliation or activity on the part of that iteraion's founder, William J. Simmons. They simply do not exist. I keep inviting anyone and everyone to prove me wrong and come up with one. No one ever has.
owebo
Gold Member
Awwww......denial snowflake....
Again --- the Klan (original) was one of literally dozens of groups practicing various levels of insurgent continuance of the war, terrorism and/or coercion, vigilantism and social order-keeping, including but not limited to:
- '76 Association (Louisiana 1869)
- Caucasian Club(s) (Louisiana 1869)
- Constitutional Union Guard (North Carolina 1868-70)
- Heggie's Scouts (Mississippi)
- Heroes of America (South Carolina)
- Knights of the Black Cross (Mississippi)
- Knights of the Rising Sun (Texas 1868)
- Knights of the White Camellia (Louisiana 1867-69)
- Knights of the White Carnation (Alabama)
- Native Sons of the South (Mississippi)
- Order of Pale Faces (Tennessee 1869 or 1867)
- Red Caps (Tennessee)
- Red Jackets (Tennessee)
- Red Strings (South Carolina)
- Robertson Family (Mississippi)
- Society of the White Rose (Mississippi)
- Seymour Knights (Louisiana)
- White League (Louisiana 1874)
- White Brotherhood (North Carolina 1868-70)
- Yellow Jackets (Tennessee)
These sorts of activities were going on in more- or less-organized fashion from the close of the Civil War, often in ad hoc posses pulled together for a specific occasion, sometimes formed into more or less formal groups such as above. When this element became aware of the mysterious garb and regalia of the Klan they jumped on it like a horse. But that had nothing to do with Crowe, Reed, Lester, McCord, Jones and Kennedy. They were well out of the loop by then.
francoHFW
Diamond Member
It had to do with the fears of southern aristocrats and their dupes. The usual conservative bigot operation.
francoHFW
Diamond Member
BS. Stupid southern aristocrats and the usual dupes...Fear mongered dupes.
Pumpkin Row
Platinum Member
- May 26, 2016
- 5,694
- 2,814
- 1,095
You must be missing the part where they weren't conservatives, but Democrats that were keeping slaves. Hence your party being the one that filled the KKK and passed the Jim Crow laws~
R
rdean
Guest
There is really only one thing Republicans don't seem to explain.
This is how it goes so far. The South was mostly Democrat, and the north Republican. The Civil War happened and the Republicans in the north won. Since that time, the south is mostly Republican and the north mostly Democrat. So how did that happen? How did the northern Republicans move south and the southern Democrats move North? And how did the KKK, the Alt Right, the Confederates and the Aryan Nation end up part of the Republican Party?
Can the USMB's "new history" explain these outcomes?
This is how it goes so far. The South was mostly Democrat, and the north Republican. The Civil War happened and the Republicans in the north won. Since that time, the south is mostly Republican and the north mostly Democrat. So how did that happen? How did the northern Republicans move south and the southern Democrats move North? And how did the KKK, the Alt Right, the Confederates and the Aryan Nation end up part of the Republican Party?
Can the USMB's "new history" explain these outcomes?
francoHFW
Diamond Member
Southern conservatives did it. Mainly Dems but also GOP or whatever- whigs. Both parties had conservative and liberal wings until RAYGUN, Newt, and Rush, dupe.
The South has always been conservative throughout. You can't have slaves and not be conservative. It demands a hierarchical view of humans. You're perhaps too young to have seen enough of the world to know this but trust me. I grew up a child of parents from each side of the Mason Dixon line. I was immersed in both from an early age. White Southerners, while as a group conservatives, weren't Democrats because they were conservative but in spite of it. To get this you have to grasp something of the emotional history.
When the Civil War began there was no Republican Party in the South. Lincoln's name didn't even appear on ballots there in either election he ran in. The party was only six years old and concentrated its efforts in the North and Midwest, where it knew its support would be. Consequently in 1861 there were no Republicans in the South.
When the War was over the Republicans were seen culturally as the heavy hand of federal gummint (they were after all largely Whigs) and most deeply as the "party of Lincoln", the man who had defeated and humiliated it. Consequently it became unthinkable for white Southerners, who very much saw themselves as playing defense, to be a Republican, for a long long time. 99 years to be exact. As a result of that, the South was in effect a one-party State. You wanted to run for office, your choices were: (1) run as a Democrat, or (2) lose. That had to do much more with tradition than with any ideology. Tradition and the emotional baggage of Lincoln's name.
But that conservatism was always at odds with the rest of the Democratic Party's base, which was to its shame trying to be all things to all people to amass votes (which is after all what a political party exists for). Case in point, George Wallace in the 1960s constantly railing against "Liberals" -- he's talking about the other side of his own bipolar party. Case in point, the Dixiecrats who walked out of the Democratic convention in 1948 and ran their own candidates --- even got Harry Truman pulled off the ballot in at least one state. They did that because they were hearing way too much Liberalism from Truman and from then-Minneapolis Mayor Hubert Humphrey who made an impassioned speech for civil rights.
This bipolar tension was always there, even back to 1860 when Southerners also walked out of that year's convention and again ran their own ticket.
The short version --- "conservative" doesn't necessarily mean "Republican", even when Republicans became conservatives.
That all didn't change until 1964 (there's your 99 years) when Strom Thurmnd did the unthinkable and became a Republican. And he did that because the Democrats just weren't conservative enough and he couldn't hack it any more. It was a big step at the time because it was a huge break with tradition.
(Thurmond was a bit of a maverick though --- after he endorsed Eisenhower in 1952 the state Democrats kicked him off the ballot and he had to run as a write-in ..... which he won.)
The last part of your post ---- no, the Klan wasn't founded by or comprised of "Democrats" except to the point where they may have been coincidental. But it required no political party. Were some of the Klan also Democrats? Almost certainly. If you were white and registered with a party at all, you were usually a Democrat, whether you were a racist or not. Just as in Maine (the largest chapter outside the South) if you were a Klanner you were probably a Republican, again simply because they dominated Maine for the same hundred year period (1855-1955). But that doesn't make either party a causation.
Last edited:
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
Was Bolshevik Lenin a German Spy? Germany Sealed Train for the Bolshevik gang- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 2
-
