Fun & Humor
News & Politics
Add Photos & Videos
I have been around lots of "clannish" folks. I was in Neosho, Missouri in 2000 when I had the tires shot out of my rental car twice because it had Minnesota license plates!
I am white but I got a car in Kansas City with Minnesota plates. I was sitting in a restaurant in McDonald County when I overhead a man next to me say to the waitress, "He's a damned yankee, I better get my gun." When I went out to my car the rear tire was flat a bullet through it. It happened a second time while I was driving. Just across the border near Bentonville was a KKK training center. Here is a photo commemorating the secession of McDonald County from the union.
I was run off the road in with a child in the back seat when I was visiting Florida. They screamed damn Yankee because I had Michigan license plates. I'm European and didn't have dual citizenship at the time.
It's a GOOD thing they didn't find out that were European!
Uhmmmm - this poll was sent to me - is this a poll about the KKK or is it a poll by the KKK?
In ref to the org:
Until they are disbanded or disbarred, all who cry about a race card need to get a grip and a clue. You can't claim that minorities use ANYTHING in the face of allowing an organization BASED on inequality to exist - esp in modern times.
Thats why it's sadly humerous to read WHITE PEOPLE (The dimmer ones ) howl about the current "new black panthers" numbering less than twenty while openly saying nothing about the KKK and the other 300+ white racist orgs that OPENLY exist in this country.
In ref to the movie:
Didn't like it - it sets race relations back by existing. Yeah,.. great filming for the begining of the 1900's,.. so was King Kong - put it away.
I actually rented that movie from Netflix, after hearing that is was one of the 100 greatest movies of all time. Postwar, the Klan is portrayed as being heroes and blacks are criminals.
______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______
The following was listed in the opening credits:
A PLEA FOR THE ART OF THE MOTION PICTURE: We do not fear censorship, for
we have no wish to offend with improprieties or obscenities, but we do
demand, as a right, the liberty to show the dark side of wrong, that we
may illuminate the bright side of virtue - the same liberty that is
conceeded to the art of the written word - that art to which we owe the
Bible and the works of Shakespeare. See more »
Guess who rated it one of the greatest movies of all time? Racists.
The movie was rated for its groundbreaking cinematography, not its content. It was made in 1915. I never even heard the word "racist" until the mid 1960s. Prior to then, it was just the prevailing attitude.
Sorry, but the NAACP was created in 1909, and they saw fit to protest the movie widely in several cities and released all sorts of re-education efforts against the film's major ideas regarding black folk and the KKK. It might've had some great war scenes in there, but it was still racist EVEN at that time.
Racialist or racialism are the words you most likely heard in 1915. I know it's big stretch to imagine they mean roughly the same thing.
You also have to remember that this movie dealt a lot with reconstruction era mentality, playing into the minds of those that felt slighted at the hands of the union. It played to America's biggest weaknesses and that's why it gained such popularity in its day. Unfortunately, it had some decent war scenes.
The NAACP just didn't have a whole lot of clout until MLK and his skillful use of the media, launched it into the national spotlight. In both the North and the South, the prevailing attitude was against black equality. Blacks protesting movie theaters in 1915 would not be very effective, because they were not allowed in most of those theaters. Whites had radically different perceptions of what was racist. Amherst, Ohio had a sign, similar to the one below, until 1969. In Sandusky, OH, in 1965-6, I worked in a skating rink that barred black people from entering on Friday nights.
At the end of Civil War, Punitive laws, passed during the reconstruction era, disenfranchised the former ruling elite, slave owners, and Civil War officers, as well as civilian office holders. Estates valued at over $20,000 were subject to confiscation. Many corrupt local governments were formed by carpetbaggers and scalawags. The KKK was the Democrat's system of "checks and balances".
You must also remember that Birth of a Nation was based on The Clansman written as a counterpoint to Uncle Tom's Cabin. It set race relations back, if anything.
WOW Matt, That statement you just made was widly historically inaccurate. The NAACP had in your words "a whole lot" of clout prior to MLK.
Given everything you have written here I see you have very little understanding of historical context of race relations in the country before 1964. Do yourself a favor and take a black history college level class before you embarass yourself any further.
I usually like reading your comments but these don't shed a good light on your grasp of American History.
I said "didn't have a whole lot of clout". As televisions became more widespread, in the 1960s, people could actually see that peaceful protesters were being attacked with dogs and high pressure fire hoses. They could actually hear MLK's message of non-violence. I grew up and spent almost all of my adult life in Northern Ohio. It was dotted with white only, segregated, and "sundown towns". I bought a new house in Vermilion, OH in 1976. The city council told the builder; "If you ever sell or rent a house to blacks, you will never get a building permit again."
Believe me, a class is no substitute for having lived through a lot of history.
I now live in Middle Tennessee, about 35 miles from Pulaski, where the Klan was founded in 1866. I have been shown a couple of trees that were used for lynchings.
You may have been alive during that time it doesn't mean you payed attention or even bothered to see a world view beyond the narrow world in which you grew up in as evident by your own words.
You should "do yourself a favor" and get to know someone who lived through this period of our history, rather than reading a book and listening to a college prof who probably got his information from a book. The NAACP did NOT have a "lot of clout" prior to Martin Luther King's leadership. From what I've read concerning the large municipal areas where Jewish leaders pushed and supported the NAACP, there was certainly more progress, but throughout the South and the Mid-West, the same could not be said. I wonder how many of your college courses point out that the people who were instrumental in forming and growing the NAACP were predominently white, Jewish, and Republican?
Oh trust me I know and knew plenty of people who lived through it including elders in my family who have first hand accounts of the struggles they experienced in during the 50's-60's. I also personally know and by marriage now related to families that during that time were staunchly against integration and civil rights.
In fact one of my close relatives is included in Norfolk 17..... But I'm sure you have no clue who they were given that you somehow think that the NAACP was nothing before MLK. ((( FYI.... Your ignorance is showing)))) MLK headed up the SCLC or the Southern Christian Leadership Confrence. In fact at the time the NAACP's executive director, clashed repeatedly with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights leaders over questions of strategy and leadership within the movement, as the NAACP was primarily focused on making change through court litigation. I can only conclude that you are so daft you thought all black groups fighting for civil rights the same as the NAACP.
Without the NAACP we would not have had important supreme court decisions brown v board of education along with numerous other cases that were brought leading up to that monumental decision, including Davis v county school board of prince William county & Gebhart v Belton. NAACP was also the reason why we also had the monumental supreme court decision of Lochner v NY.
And these cases and the changes they ushered in happened LOOOOONNNGGG before MLK was a prominent member and voice of the civil rights movement! The NAACP is where Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall got his start and on their behalf tried most of his landmark cases and where he made his bones in law that resulted in his SCOTUS appointment by LBJ.
And if you seriously think MLK was the "national" voice that got the NAACP on the map, I can only conclude that you have no clue who the great WEB DuBois is!
So you can keep you ignorant revisionist history..... I'll stick to the factual & historically accurate info I already have! Thank you!
I didn't say that the NAACP didn't have accomplishments. Perhaps to make what I meant more clear, I should have said that MLK brought every action, in every part of the United States, into the daily limelight. I think there was more blood shed by black Americans prior to his time in the spotlight. But the newspapers and the local politicians in each area kept a conspiracy of silence. Since you do have all these family connections, you know about the philosophy of not covering any stories of violence involving black resistance. They had full page headlines if there was a crime involving a white victim, but nothing about black opporession or injury.
That is what changed with all the young college students and professionals who joined MLK. He had a way of enlisting the members of the press in his cause. That's the big difference, in my mind.
I really would enjoy a discussion with you without the insults and heavy sarcasm; my knee-jerk reaction is to respond in kind and it serves no purpose.
Ask a Question
Create a Poll Widget
Ask a Question
Create a Poll Widget
News & Politics Opinions
Fun & Humor
Code of Conduct
Advertise with us
Poll Widget Samples
WordPress Poll Plugin
@SodaHead on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
2014 SodaHead.com All Rights Reserved