Talk:Ku Klux Klan

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

BY any reasonable standards, the KKK are terrorists.

Dunno...don't terrorists actually, you know...DO stuff? The think about the klan is they're not a centralized organization...just a lot of tiny splinter groups...they're no longer the powerful machine they were in the twenties. Czolgolz 09:34, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I think this article is completely biased against the KKK. Ever since the Lincoln Administration, the South and by extension the KKK has been demonized for fighting against the Negrophile policies of the Democracts. CatholicKing 3 March 2016

Not even. The KKK has always been associated with the Democrats, and the Democrats have never been "Negrophiles" (they only publicly pretend to be while using policies to keep blacks under their control and have since the LBJ administration). Northwest (talk) 09:03, 31 March 2016 (EDT)

Democratic link

I explained it in context. If the context is removed, so must be the link.-AmesGyo! 16:31, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

More fantasy

I think this is pure fantasy:

Prior to the Reagan Realignment, the Democratic Party was the party of the South - it overwhelmingly controlled the South. Especially prior to Strom Thurmond's "Dixiecrat" splinter movement, the Democratic Party was responsible for a good deal of racist legislation, and was perceived to be connected to the Klan. However, such a causal connection is over fifty years old and the Klan bears no connection with any modern mainstream political party.

Facts are, the Democratic party still controls the South at all levels of government, and any so-called "re-alingnment" was fictional or imaginary. But you get an "E" for "effort", putting Reagan's name on the KKK page. And the claim "the Klan bears no connection with any modern mainstream political party", we would have to actually ask Klansman what thier party preference is for this claim to be valid; anyone willing to wager what the result would be? RobS 17:06, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, Rob, you could ask David Duke, who served as the chairman of the Tammany Parish Republican party for a while.
Sorry, but the GOP's Southern Strategy is no fantasy, as anyone old enough to remember the '60s and '70s will tell you. And before taking me up on this wager I should warn you, in fairness, that I am from the south, and can remember the exodus of southern racists from the Democratic Party to the GOP.

--PF Fox 17:08, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Actually, RobS, I could cite you to a dozen books about Southern politics describing the Reagan Realignment (they're all by Earl or Merle Black, one of which I studied with, so... got anything better?), but if you want to delete that whole paragraph, I'll remove the cartoon too. Seems a good compromise, ne? I'm shocked, though, that you don't care to understand your own party's history.-AmesGyo! 17:10, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

It's incredible. All I can guess is that a lot of these people unaware of the GOP's famous "southern strategy" are too young to remember that time and haven't read much on the subject. --PF Fox 17:14, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

I choose to believe willful blindness - its practice is rampant on this site. Radiocarbon dating?! Lalalalala I can't hear you.-AmesGyo! 17:16, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Facts are, the Democratic party still controls the South at all levels of government, and any so-called "re-alingnment" was fictional or imaginary.
Yet they have a hard time getting Southerners to vote for Democratic presidential candidates. How odd. It must be the same way the Liberals control the media, yet can't seem to get their candidates and policies show in a good light. --BDobbs 17:19, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
PF Fox, wow, una.
AmesG & BDobbs, yes we've read much of that, too. Crossover Democrats who voted for Reagan were not restricted to Southerners; many Nothern Cartholic (whom according to the article, the KKK wants to supress), labor union Democrats also voted for Reagan. All this so-called "re-allignment", which was proven to be fiction in 1992, 1996, and 2006, tells us more about the quality of Democratic Presidential candidates (and probably the method they are chosen, too), over past decades than anything else. Facts ares, Democrats remain in control of Southern legislatures, governorships, municipal elected postions, judges, not to mention appointed regulatory positions, etc. Then we have the "blue dog coallition". In Reagans & FDR's day, they were called Democratic "bollweavils".
What is particularly objectionable about these falicious claims is the KKK is known for terrorist activities which have resulted in murder; there is absolutley no connection whatsoever between the name of Ronald Reagan, and/or Strom Thurmond to murder and lybnchings. This is particularly reprehensible editing activity, IMO. Now, on the other hand, a link can be forged between the name of a prominant living person, Sen. Robert Byrd, and the KKK. Yet you have not done this. In my personal view, where in the case of Byrd we have such a basis to include his name on this page, other factors need to be considered first. Whereas this standared you've totally ignored in a blatant & naked attempt to paint Reagan, Thurmaond, and hence the Republican Party as racist.
I would suggest you stop this, now. RobS 17:54, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
RobS, if you read the full paragraph, it SAYS THAT MUCH. LOOK AT THE BOLDED TEXT now that it'll be bolded, once I revert it. My concern is that I have no desire for the KKK to be linked to the Democrats by that cartoon, and if they are linked, then it must be fully explained byt he paragraph that you just deleted. So pick it: cartoon AND explanation, or neither. Which is it?-AmesGyo! 17:58, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
You address the problem of Sen. Byrd first before impugning Thurmond, Reagen, or the GOP. RobS 18:03, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

RobS, you clearly misunderstand my intent in that paragraph. Re-read it with particular emphasis on the bold text. Our goals are the same. Don't get mad at me over nothing.-AmesGyo! 18:00, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

I read it clearly; it says the KKK is not married to the Dems anymore but maybe a bunch of "Reagan Democracts", and other Southerners who vote GOP, are klansman. RobS 18:03, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
You're finding something that's not there. The bolded text could not be clearer. However, I think we both agree that associating the KKK with ANY party is bad bad bad bad bad. Accordingly I've removed the "comic." I'm sure you agree with this decision, and I'm glad we've reached a consensus.-AmesGyo! 18:06, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Too late now; you put Reagan & Thurmund's names in there and never bothered to address facts. RobS 18:09, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
I'm trying to follow this now... are we trying to say that Strom Thurmon was not a segregationist? Myk 21:28, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Are we trying to say Strom Thurmond was a klansman? RobS 22:09, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Reverted text placed here

A political cartoon depicting the KKK and the Democratic party as continuations of the Confederacy

Prior to the Reagan Realignment (after which point the Democratic Party became the "liberal" party, and the Republican Party the "conservative" party), the Democratic Party was the party of the South - it overwhelmingly controlled the South. In this era, the Democratic Party was responsible for a good deal of racist legislation, and was perceived to be connected to the Klan. However, such a causal connection is over fifty years old and the Klan bears no connection with any modern mainstream political party.[1][2]


  1. Earl Black, The Vital South: How Presidents are Elected (1992, Harvard University Press)
  2. Earl Black, The Rise of Southern Republicans (2002, Harvard University Press)

David Duke & Robert Byrd

I don't suppose mentioning David Duke's run for governor of Louisiana would help this at all, would it. --BDobbs 18:16, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

It IS one of the most notable instances of the KKK in the news in the past 15 or so years. MountainDew 18:16, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

I would suggest we discuss both Duke & Byrd before proceeding down this path. RobS 18:19, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
And the fact that no prominent Republicans supported Duke (Reagan condemned him) MountainDew 18:21, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

We must either tar all party's names or tar none. I tried to tar all, but it honked RobS off, for some reason. I personally think not even engaging in this kind of finger-pointing is better practice; leave the article as it is without the comic. That way, it provides a minimum of offense.-AmesGyo! 18:22, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

I think these kind of efforts that we've seen will fail. While in popluar media you can get some milage out of this fraudulent garbage, it's just not gonna work here. Seriously, you need a new, fresh approach. RobS 18:26, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
You stopped making sense about an hour ago, but this crosses the line of nonsense. Can you explain, please?-AmesGyo! 18:33, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Yep, David Duke was pretty embarrasing to the Republican Party, and it's to Reagan's credit that he denounced Duke. The problem is, the Republicans in St. Tammany Parish liked Duke enough to make him their party chairman. --PF Fox 18:41, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

And David Duke is now supporting Cindy Sheehan.Jaques 14:16, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Moving forward

Two possible routes to a solution

mindless partisan solution

Turn this article into an arms race, each side piling up more attack pieces on the other, which ultimately will backfire against Dems trying to imply the GOP is the home of the modern KKK, or—The preceding unsigned comment was added by RobS (talk)

For the record, I NEVER IMPLIED that the GOP is the home of the modern KKK; my bolded line specifically denounced that -AmesGyo! 20:55, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Exactly who has claimed that "the GOP is the home of the modern KKK?" --PF Fox 21:10, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

He read my statement above as suggesting that (!?!). Frankly, I was offended. I would never slander a political group like that.-AmesGyo! 21:12, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Projection. --PF Fox 21:14, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

encyclopedic solution

Write a clean history if this organizations first 100 years, roughly from the mid 1860s down to about circa 1964; how its membership peaked circa 1927 at about a 1,000,000, etc., and the political influence it once had at both the state and national level, etc. Then finish it off with a few paragraphs about how the organization hsa declined since the mid 1960s to what remains of it today. RobS 20:50, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Sounds fun. Get on it.-AmesGyo! 20:55, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Truth be told, US domestic history is outside my purvue (I'm only in the McCarthy junk as it relates to Comintern activities). So I'm really not the lead man here. RobS 21:21, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
You're not that big on US domestic history and you revert my political history statements.-AmesGyo! 22:16, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
It wasn't a history statement; it was the recycled DNC program agenda from recent years. RobS 22:20, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

The Reagan Realignment is history buddy, and I provided two books written by conservative Republican political scientists, but I can see why those would be within your area of expertise to refute. But again, no problem. The article's wound up free of anything controversial.-AmesGyo! 22:22, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, we got the cites how groups like the SPLC go out at night and paint swastikas on tombstones, then they call in the local media to take pictures, then they cut the pictures out of the local newspaper and put them in national fund raising letters to allege the Klan is alive, active, and a big threat. All for the purpose of running a fundraising scam. Sorry, but the emphasis on writing this article to support fundraising scams, rather than accurate historical reporting, is where the probelm started. Let's put all those stupid games behind us, cause they just aren't going to go anywhere. RobS 22:36, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
I'd like to see those cites. Where are they? --PF Fox 22:46, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Here's one. [1] Wikipedia has an interesting write up about this group, <Ásatrú#Politics >,
"While Ásatrú is generally a tolerant religion, it is sometimes erroneously identified with neo-Nazi and "white power" organizations which also use the same symbolism.[6] The three largest American Ásatrú organizations have specifically denounced any association with racist groups.[7][8][9] "
Amazing. You'd think WP would be bending over backwards to smear these folks. RobS 23:12, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

I checked the cite.

Are you serious? --PF Fox 23:37, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

They are just repeating information that's available elsewhere; and there is a list of cites. Personally, I recall the WCCO cause I saw it on TV in Minneapolis. Some of the cast of characters reapppeared in the 1991 San Fransicso spying case. [2]

In other words you have no evidence to offer that members of the SPLC have been dressing up as klansmen and defacing Jewish Cemetaries. So why should we believe such nonsense? --PF Fox 03:52, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

I have no idea what you just said, RobS. -AmesGyo! 22:47, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Just a little grammar issue...

Should "Homosexuals" really be capitalized? MykalG 15:30, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

American Terrorists

I may be a little late to the party, but why does "terrorist organization" not appear anywhere in this article. They used fear, killed innocents, covered their faces and only a few of them ever disclosed who they were to the national public. Yet, they are not considered to be terrorists? How is that?

good point and i'll fixit now. RJJensen 10:12, 22 May 2009 (EDT)
! Part of this article was copied from Citizendium and Wikipedia but the copied text was originally written by me, RJJensen (under the name Richard Jensen and rjensen) and does not include alterations made by others on that site. Conservlogo.png
RJJensen 11:14, 22 May 2009 (EDT)


The SPLC published malicious slanders by Chip Berlet against David Horowitz. They also trashed The bradley foundation and a few others. Rob Smith 23:34, 6 July 2009 (EDT)

SPLC listed the American Enterprise Institute as a "Hate Group." [3] Rob Smith 00:22, 7 July 2009 (EDT)


Found a few typos and grammatical mistakes; nothing major. Any chance we could unlock this article for an hour? -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 17:44, 9 November 2009 (EST)

sure --I will do so now. RJJensen 18:41, 9 November 2009 (EST)
Still under [[Edit=sysop]] ((indefinite))]], RJJensen. No rush! -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 18:43, 9 November 2009 (EST)
try again. :) RJJensen 18:46, 9 November 2009 (EST)
All done now. You can go ahead and re-protect it. Thanks a lot! -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 18:56, 9 November 2009 (EST)
we can leave it open--the problem was an old edit war. RJJensen 19:01, 9 November 2009 (EST)


The SPLC has been involved in numerous questionable fundraising practices relating to groups it claims "make bigoted and discredited ideas respectable ", [4] like the American Enterprise Institute, the Bradley Foundation, or David Horowitz's organization. [5][6] They are lacking in credibility given the record of these abuses. Rob Smith 22:57, 9 November 2009 (EST)

that is an appropriate criticism about some other article, such as one on Center for the Study of Popular Culture. but their KKK coverage has not been challenged to my knowledge. We must watch out for moral relativism here--evil institutions like the KKK deserve exposure of the sort SPLC has provided for decades. RJJensen 23:18, 9 November 2009 (EST)
Are you familiar with the Wilcox Report? Wilcox, who publishes an annual guide to the Extreme Left aqnd Right [7] claims SPLC grossly inflates the number of Klan groups for fundraising, and mainstream sources do not question thier figures. I can send you a copy of it if you'd like. Rob Smith 23:45, 9 November 2009 (EST)
thanks for the tip, I'll check it out. What it does well is give a very useful digest of news reports of all KKK activities.RJJensen 00:09, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Here's an excerpt from the intro to the SPLC section:

In February 1992 USA Today reported that Klanwatch, a division of Morris Dees' Southern Poverty Law Center, had identified a total of "346 white supremacy groups operating in the USA, up an alarming 27% from the past year." Included were 97 Ku Klux Klan and 203 alleged neo-Nazi groups.
What Klanwatch apparently did was list any group they could find mention of, including groups only rumored to exist. These included the large number of "post office box chapters" maintained by Klan and skinhead organizations. Some Christian Identity "ministries" consist only one person and a mailing list and many "patriot groups" consist of but three or four friends. They also listed many groups whose actual affiliation is neither KKK nor neo-Nazi'and who would argue with the designation of "white supremacy." In short, they misleadingly padded their list. When the SPLC releases their list, either in print or on the internet, it fails to contain actual addresses that might be checked by journalists or researchers. Several listings refer to "unknown group" and the name of a city or town.
This writer publishes an annual directory (with addresses) of the American Righh as well as a companion directory of the American Left, and can attest to this irresponsible inflation of figures by Klanwatch. In terms of viable groups, i.e., groups that are objectively significant, are actually functioning and have more than a handful of real members - not post office box "groups" or two man local chapters, the actual figure is about 50 - a far cry from 346!
It's not atypical for a couple of guys to begin a "new" Ku Klux Klan by photocopying some flyers and renting PO boxes in several cities to create the image of a viable movement. Most inquiries to these PO boxes go unanswered or are returned when the rent expires. In point of fact, a large number of "groups" in both Klanwatch files and my directories are either unconfirmed or they consist of a single individual.
One example is the Farmer's Liberation Army which received considerable press after the Oklahoma City bombing. Subsequent news accounts established that this "army" was the creation of one man - Keith Shive - and had no other "members." The SPLC still lists it as a "hate group." Unfortunately, this kind of exaggeration is typical.
A good example of SPLC disinformation occurred in June 1998 when SPLC spokesman Mark Potok responded to a newspaper request for background information on three accused cop killers. According to news reports
'Alan "Monte" Pilon, one of the men suspected of killing a Cortez police officer and wounding three other officers, is a member of a local militia group linked to an extreme right-wing religion, a militia expert said Thursday.
Pilon, 30, of Dove Creek, is a member of the Four Corners Patriots, according to Mark Potok, spokesman for the Southern Poverty Law Center, a nonprofit organization that monitors hate groups: The Four Cotners Patriots is an underground militia linked to the Christian Identity religion, a faith Potok described as "viciously racist and anti-Semitic.
Potok further claimed to have been tracking the group since 1995 and estimated the group had 25 members. These claims, along with this detailed information, clearly gives the impression that the SPLC knows what it's talking about. Potok's claims were, picked up by wire services and repeated nationwide, including NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw One small problem: There apparently is no "Four Corners Patriots" organization. It doesn't exist. Nobody in the broader militia and patriot movement had ever heard of them. My own efforts to pin down the organization were without success. Even local law enforcement couldn't vouch for their existence and no evidence has developed that any of the suspects ever belonged to a militia organization.
The interplay between the SPLC and the media that depends upon them for information is complex and corrupt. Potok, a former writer for USA Today, was a consistent public relations agent for the SPLC during his tenure at the newspaper. Apparently pleased by Potok's performance, SPLC recruited him into their direct employ where he engages in an endless litany of "linking and tying" people with one infamous doctrine or another.
Dees is the classic example of an opportunist waging a holy war against unpopular foes and profiting from it, both financially and ideologically. His primary talents have always been in the area of fundraising and promotion. According to a 1989 article in the Atlanta Constitution:
In 1972, he raised $24 million as George McGovern's finance director, then used the campaign's donor list of 700,000 liberals for the law center. (He also recommended Richard Viguerie, the conservative direct-mail whiz, to friends in the Wallace campaign.) The law center now raises more than $5 million a year and has a $34 million endowment [in 1989]...
The harshest critic is Millard Farmer, the Atlanta death penalty lawyer who teamed up with Mr. Dees before ending their relationship with a lawsuit. "It's a Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker operation," he says flatly. "You read his letters and you'd think he's on his last penny." The article also quoted a former employee to the effect that Morris Dees marketed social consciousness in the same detached way that he once marketed cakes. "The Center is something he can sell. People want to contribute something to relieve their conscience."

Comment: given the record of this organization, and the MSM's role as dupes in these scams, why should CP perpetuate myths about it? Rob Smith 00:50, 10 November 2009 (EST)

We need a link to up-to-date 2009 reports. (The complaints seem to come from the early 1990s--over 15 years ago.) RJJensen 01:08, 10 November 2009 (EST)
Wilcox maybe semi-retired. Here's his site, Who's Watching the Watchdogs? and the Wilcox Collection of Contemporary Political Movements at the University of Kansas. An arfticle in the Military Law Review, a DOD publication, refers to John George and Laird Wilcox as "two of the foremost analysts of right and left-wing extremism." (pg. 7 pdf). A more recent article states, "After years of fighting to clear its name, a small Kansas town [has finally been] taken off a list of hate group homes," ...The town of 2,500 "was once named as a home of Ku Klux Klan members....The Southern Poverty Law Center has finally relented and removed Lakin from its national "hate group" map, which had listed the town as hosting the "Imperial Klans of America" since 2000." [8] Wilcox wrote, “What happened in this case is that someone rented a PO box for a bogus Ku Klux Klan group and then kept the rent paid on it for years, thus allowing the Southern Poverty Law Center to list Lakin, Kansas as having a ‘KKK presence,’" Wilcox (a Kansas resident) explains. “This was pure disinformation and an example of the terrible things the SPLC does in its campaign to keep the money rolling in from frightened liberals and blacks. Several years ago with a minimum of effort I went through a list of some 800-plus ‘hate groups’ published by the SPLC and determined that over half of them were either non-existent, existed in name only, or were inactive.”

Personal comment: and after examining some of the information Mr. Wilcox has uncovered, it would not be surprising at all if SPLC itself rented the PO Box in another fundraising scam. This personal comment attributable to myself, Rob Smith 02:23, 10 November 2009 (EST)

P.S. See Oklahoma_City_Bombing#Media_reporting. Rob Smith 02:42, 10 November 2009 (EST)

I was wrong about the 1920s KKK terms of opposing Federal policies--my bad, I misread the Prohibition thing. But the article certainly undersells activities like the lynching of returning black servicemen and the Leo Frank case. Is there a reason for that? MichaelHWC 23:24, 9 November 2009 (EST)

yes, the KKK was not involved in either. RJJensen 00:09, 10 November 2009 (EST)
Alright, then. Who lynched those servicemen? MichaelHWC 00:15, 10 November 2009 (EST)
Good question. The servicemen were lynched in 1919; the Klan got going about 1921-22. In general, local lynch mobs were not part of any organized group--they formed spontaneously for the moment. There are a few cases of possible KKK involvement in lynchings in the 1920s but the evidence is very thin. (the Klan was not involved in Tulsa either) There was no KKK anywhere when Leo Frank was lynched. Lynching declined sharply in the 1920s in the South. RJJensen 00:24, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Three incarnations of the same racist group

  • The name Ku Klux Klan has been used by three entirely different organizations in the U.S. While these copied the same name and regalia, they had very different goals and activities.

What was very different about them? Weren't they all pro-white and anti-black? --Ed Poor Talk 18:34, 8 May 2012 (EDT)