The Ocoee Massacre

[Tommy Tainant]

A fascinating film about a little known massacre. It illustrates the difficulty faced by black folks faced with white violence.
People were killed because they wanted to vote.Their survivora were purged and their land stolen.
The current mayor is desended from the mob leaders. The story is not told in local history.

I wonder why ?

 

[lg325]

A fascinating film about a little known massacre. It illustrates the difficulty faced by black folks faced with white violence.
People were killed because they wanted to vote.Their survivora were purged and their land stolen.
The current mayor is desended from the mob leaders. The story is not told in local history.

The story iss well known. I grew up in the same county on the east side Ocoee is on the west side. I reconise some of the people thanks for posting. Do I think these black families should be compensated for their stolen land and murdered family members? Yes!

 

[whitehall]

Around 1920 when the South including Florida was predominantly democratic. It's a shame 50 people were killed but if you want to talk about massacres you could consider the 1919 British massacre of Indian citizens who were protesting the right to vote and anywhere from 360 to 1,500 innocent people were killed by British soldiers.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Around 1920 when the South including Florida was predominantly democratic. It's a shame 50 people were killed but if you want to talk about massacres you could consider the 1919 British massacre of Indian citizens who were protesting the right to vote and anywhere from 360 to 1,500 innocent people were killed by British soldiers.

You should start a thread about that. The evnets are a lot more familiar than the Ocoee massacre. Its a shame that you choose to make minr partisan points about this,

 

[SweetSue92]

You should start a thread about that. The evnets are a lot more familiar than the Ocoee massacre. Its a shame that you choose to make minr partisan points about this,

"The sun never sets on the British Empire"....how did that happen, Tommy?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

"The sun never sets on the British Empire"....how did that happen, Tommy?

Do you think that the victims of Ocpee should get reparations ? Easy to trace the property that was stolen from them.
Is it taught in school ?

 

[whitehall]

You should start a thread about that. The evnets are a lot more familiar than the Ocoee massacre. Its a shame that you choose to make minr partisan points about this,

You opened it up. Maybe you should start a thread in the U.K. and stop bothering the Colonies.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

You opened it up. Maybe you should start a thread in the U.K. and stop bothering the Colonies.

I accept the empire was shit. What else do you want ?

 

[whitehall]

You can bet that Hollywood never included the fact that the Ocoee mob consisted of democrats. You can say that with confidence because the rural South was solidly democrat for decades after the Civil War. FDR nominated a (former) KKK member to the Supreme Court. So what do we make of it? With the cooperation of the mainstream media the democrat party was able to turn it's image around on a dime and Hollywood is able to keep the dirty little secret.

 

[lg325]

You can bet that Hollywood never included the fact that the Ocoee mob consisted of democrats. You can say that with confidence because the rural South was solidly democrat for decades after the Civil War. FDR nominated a (former) KKK member to the Supreme Court. So what do we make of it? With the cooperation of the mainstream media the democrat party was able to turn it's image around on a dime and Hollywood is able to keep the dirty little secret.

Gossip I heard for years was a certain ''Florida boy'' actor celebrity wanted to do a movie about all that sort of thing The Ocoee massacre wasn't the only thing that happened here in my home county. It seems local government lawyers lobbied hard to make sure he didn't get permits to do so. You see my home town bills itself as ''The City Beautiful'' and orange county it sets in wants to be tourist friendly.

 

[Mushroom]

With the cooperation of the mainstream media the democrat party was able to turn it's image around on a dime and Hollywood is able to keep the dirty little secret.

Hell, they even made a movie that in many ways tried to rehabilitate the image of Governor George Wallace.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

You can bet that Hollywood never included the fact that the Ocoee mob consisted of democrats. You can say that with confidence because the rural South was solidly democrat for decades after the Civil War. FDR nominated a (former) KKK member to the Supreme Court. So what do we make of it? With the cooperation of the mainstream media the democrat party was able to turn it's image around on a dime and Hollywood is able to keep the dirty little secret.

The southern democrats all joined the GOP around the time of theccivil rights act. The folk who massacred the Ocoee people were all conservatives. Their descendants all live in stolen houses.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Gossip I heard for years was a certain ''Florida boy'' actor celebrity wanted to do a movie about all that sort of thing The Ocoee massacre wasn't the only thing that happened here in my home county. It seems local government lawyers lobbied hard to make sure he didn't get permits to do so. You see my home town bills itself as ''The City Beautiful'' and orange county it sets in wants to be tourist friendly.

That area around the lake looks very nice.

 

[Mushroom]

The southern democrats all joined the GOP around the time of theccivil rights act.

Actually, they did not. Damned few Democrats "switched" to become Republicans.

If one looks at the demographics, it was the younger generations that were Republicans. And a great many simply because it was the only way of getting the corrupt and racist Democrats out of office. What you had at that time was the older pre-depression population starting to die off, and by 1972 the voting age had lowered from 21 to 18. So the "Baby Boomers" were finally able to vote, and most did not have the same racist views of their parents and grandparents.



The video above from 1967 is a perfect example. People in their 30s and 40s speaking out in support of George Wallace. But the younger generation was not the same and could not fight that kind of entrenchment inside the party. That was how all of the South was in that era, the Democratic "Good Old Boy" network was so deep that it could only be broken up from outside the party. Kind of the reverse of say California today. The Democrats will never change unless people have had enough and start voting in the other party and forcing them to change.

But almost nobody "switched", that has always been a lie. George Wallace, Robert Byrd, Bull Connor, Lester Maddox, and others.

However, there were a few that switched parties, often multiple times. Two that spring to mind are Lester Maddox and George Wallace Jr. That was because they were essentially kicked out of the Democratic Party, and moved over to the Republican Party (or in the case of Maddox it was the reverse as that was his first time and the Republicans had no candidate). And ironically, in both of those instances the Republicans mostly campaigned for the Democrats in the election as they did not want them in office either.

Old George Jr. is kind of a sad joke in Alabama now. The Democrats will not let him into their party, as the way it is set up they get to pick who runs in it and who does not. The Republicans accept anybody as it has an open party system. But whenever he does try to run, the Democrats will support his opponent in the primary, and if it comes to an election the Republicans will support the Democrat. Just so long as it keeps Junior out of office. We used to joke that if he ever ran for dog catcher, the dogs would vote for the other party just to keep him out even if the opponent supported fixing all dogs and 24 hour killing in the kennels. I think the last time he was actually on a ballot was over a decade ago, where he lost as State Treasurer to a guy named Young Boozer. And he lost by over 30%, as even most of the state Republicans supported Boozer over their own candidate.

And David Duke was the same way. originally a Democrat until he changed to Republican so he could run in a special election for State Representative. After only a single term he tried to run for Senate, where like George Jr. most of the Republicans supported the Democrat and he was trounced. He has changed parties many times since then, and runs for almost any office in any party he thinks he has a chance in. But has run many times since and always lost. The last time he was highly active he supported his old bodyguard and friend in the effort to be a Congressman. Once again both sides campaigned against him and he got less than 7% of the vote.

Very few changed, and those that did were normally quickly ostracized by the Republicans also. But to many like that it remains popular as a party to go to because without the super delegate type systems of the Democrats to control who gets to run, anybody can declare themselves to be a Republican and run for office. Such as the lifelong Democrat real estate guy from a few years ago.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Actually, they did not. Damned few Democrats "switched" to become Republicans.

If one looks at the demographics, it was the younger generations that were Republicans. And a great many simply because it was the only way of getting the corrupt and racist Democrats out of office. What you had at that time was the older pre-depression population starting to die off, and by 1972 the voting age had lowered from 21 to 18. So the "Baby Boomers" were finally able to vote, and most did not have the same racist views of their parents and grandparents.



The video above from 1967 is a perfect example. People in their 30s and 40s speaking out in support of George Wallace. But the younger generation was not the same and could not fight that kind of entrenchment inside the party. That was how all of the South was in that era, the Democratic "Good Old Boy" network was so deep that it could only be broken up from outside the party. Kind of the reverse of say California today. The Democrats will never change unless people have had enough and start voting in the other party and forcing them to change.

But almost nobody "switched", that has always been a lie. George Wallace, Robert Byrd, Bull Connor, Lester Maddox, and others.

However, there were a few that switched parties, often multiple times. Two that spring to mind are Lester Maddox and George Wallace Jr. That was because they were essentially kicked out of the Democratic Party, and moved over to the Republican Party (or in the case of Maddox it was the reverse as that was his first time and the Republicans had no candidate). And ironically, in both of those instances the Republicans mostly campaigned for the Democrats in the election as they did not want them in office either.

Old George Jr. is kind of a sad joke in Alabama now. The Democrats will not let him into their party, as the way it is set up they get to pick who runs in it and who does not. The Republicans accept anybody as it has an open party system. But whenever he does try to run, the Democrats will support his opponent in the primary, and if it comes to an election the Republicans will support the Democrat. Just so long as it keeps Junior out of office. We used to joke that if he ever ran for dog catcher, the dogs would vote for the other party just to keep him out even if the opponent supported fixing all dogs and 24 hour killing in the kennels. I think the last time he was actually on a ballot was over a decade ago, where he lost as State Treasurer to a guy named Young Boozer. And he lost by over 30%, as even most of the state Republicans supported Boozer over their own candidate.

And David Duke was the same way. originally a Democrat until he changed to Republican so he could run in a special election for State Representative. After only a single term he tried to run for Senate, where like George Jr. most of the Republicans supported the Democrat and he was trounced. He has changed parties many times since then, and runs for almost any office in any party he thinks he has a chance in. But has run many times since and always lost. The last time he was highly active he supported his old bodyguard and friend in the effort to be a Congressman. Once again both sides campaigned against him and he got less than 7% of the vote.

Very few changed, and those that did were normally quickly ostracized by the Republicans also. But to many like that it remains popular as a party to go to because without the super delegate type systems of the Democrats to control who gets to run, anybody can declare themselves to be a Republican and run for office. Such as the lifelong Democrat real estate guy from a few years ago.

And yet the gop works so hard to keep blacks from voting.
I think wallace snr ran on a dem tickeet in the 70s. It seems that anyone can run for any party they want to. Wasnt trump a dem ?

 

[lg325]

And yet the gop works so hard to keep blacks from voting.
I think wallace snr ran on a dem tickeet in the 70s. It seems that anyone can run for any party they want to. Wasnt trump a dem ?

Wallace ran at different times as a Democrat and also American Independent Party. Trump supported the Clintons at one time.

 

[whitehall]

The southern democrats all joined the GOP around the time of theccivil rights act. The folk who massacred the Ocoee people were all conservatives. Their descendants all live in stolen houses.

Southern democrats joined the GOP during the LBJ administration? What difference does that make? FDR appointed a KKK member to the Supreme Court and the KKK was the political muscle of the democrat party for decades after the turn of the 20th century.

 

[Mushroom]

And yet the gop works so hard to keep blacks from voting.

That was never true. The Voting Rights Act of 1964 (which among other things mandated bilingual ballots) was supported much more by the Republicans than it was the Democrats. With every single Democrat run Southern State voting against it. In the senate 16 Democrat Seantors voted against it compared to only 2 Republicans.

I think wallace snr ran on a dem tickeet in the 70s. It seems that anyone can run for any party they want to. Wasnt trump a dem ?

Wallace was a lifelong Democrat. And ran for President as one multiple times (originally under the American Independent Party in 1968 and won no states). In 1972 he tried again as a Democrat and won in Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, North Carolina, Texas, Maryland, and Michigan. And all of those but Maryland came under the coverage of and had monitored and supervised elections under the Voting Rights Act, which as part of his campaign he swore to overthrow as President. In 1976 he only won Alabama, Mississippi, and North Carolina.

And yes, President Trump was indeed a Democrat and a big player in the New York Democratic circles. He was a huge supporter of President Clinton as well as Senator Clinton. Simply looking at his circle of friends in New York and you saw the likes of Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, and the other prominent Democrats. The Clintons were both guests of honor at his wedding in 2005. as was Katie Couric, Star Jones, Barbara Walters, and others in the New York Democratic elite. None of which would look out of place at a wedding for a prominent Democrat, but all would look very out of place of say a wedding for a member of the Bush family.

And yes, for the most part anybody can run in just about any party they want. But when there is the primary system, that is where it gets interesting. The Democrats use a "Superdelegate" type system, which can and has actually seen the person who got much less votes win the nomination. This gives around 15% of the ultimate votes in a primary to the leadership of the party and in general they are really the ones that determines who actually gets to run in the election (rarely do primaries see somebody win by more than 10%). That is why Bernie Sanders twice had to bow out, because even though he was winning the popular vote, the Superdelegates were almost universally voting against him so he lost state after state that he won the popular vote in.

This is why if you look at the last century, the two political outsiders who rose to become President (Eisenhauer and Trump) were both Republicans. No Superdelegate system that ensures that only the "Approved Politicians" win the nomination. The only other was Teddy Roosevelt, who was picked to replace a deceased Vice President in President McKinley's reelection. He left in 1909 after he finished McKinley's term and one that he won on his own in 1904. But he also was very much a populist and followed the Washington Precedent of only serving two terms (his cousin was the only one to break that).

That was something that Trump was aware of, and as a political outsider he knew he never had a chance in that party of getting the nomination. However, as the Republicans do not have that kind of system the nomination is secured by popular vote and nothing else. Why do you think that even so much of the Republican Party was against him? They saw him as a "Democrat Carpetbagger" that was simply gaming the process hiding behind a cloak of populism.

Me? I am a moderate that does not hold to either party politically. But one thing I have never trusted are "Populists". They will say and do anything simply because they think that is what their voters will like, and not what is the best for the country (or even actually do when in office). George Wallace was a populist, as was Donald Trump, Ross Perot, Ron Paul, Jessie Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Juan Peron, Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Rodrigo Duterte, Justin Trudeau, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Vladimir Putin, and the more recent incarnation of Daniel Ortega (he was unquestionably a hard leftist his first term but became a moderate populist later).

 

[Mushroom]

Wallace ran at different times as a Democrat and also American Independent Party. Trump supported the Clintons at one time.

He ran under the AIP once, and when he won no states he returned to the Democrats for his final two runs. Then he did at least win several states.

 

[Mushroom]

Southern democrats joined the GOP during the LBJ administration? What difference does that make? FDR appointed a KKK member to the Supreme Court and the KKK was the political muscle of the democrat party for decades after the turn of the 20th century.

Which never really happened. As I already said, the powerhouse of the Republicans in the South from the 1960s was not the old die-hard hardliner Democrats but the younger demographic that hated that system. My Aunt who is a hard core Democrat today was one of them, and an active member of the "Young Republicans" in Alabama in the 1960s. Like most of the Baby Boomers who were just coming of age in that era, they saw that as the only way to remove them as it was impossible to remove the racists who ran the Democrats in their own primaries.

And George Wallace has an interesting history there even today. When I lived there in the early 2000s, I had a friend who was a hard core Democrat. But after she finished her third year at the local Community College she transferred to another one 60 miles away because she refused to get a diploma from "George Wallace Community College". Like most on both sides of the political line today she detests the man and all he stood for. That is why as a resident of Dothan she got her diploma from Enterprise State Community College. Which is not as well regarded educationally, but it did not have the name "George Wallace" on the diploma.

Most of the shift in the era was not "racists" changing parties, but simply the younger demographic rising to prominence in the 1960s and 1970s who had very different beliefs from the "Greatest Generation" they were replacing. Much like today where those from the 1990s are commonly the biggest movers in both parties and not those from the 1980s and before.