I wonder what the ratio dem /gop is in the black panthers. The local Farm baseball team "the iron pigs" has a bigger fan roster than the KKK. 1 Klansmen is 1 too many but as far as killings go, the avg minority is more likely to be killed by a gang member or drug dealer. Tuskegee inst said there have been about 3-6k killings since 1865 to date, mostly black, Jewish , catholic and Republican victims . How many have the gang bangers in chicago killed alone since then?
I'm sure the black panthers are super Dem-heavy. There are extremists on all sides, and extremism in any form is wrong. Extremism based on race is a special kind of stupid.
There was an ideological swap in and around the 60s (most notably with Strom Thurmond's move from Democrat to Republican) in which Democrats who happened to be racist abandoned the party en masse for the Republican party. So in the history of killings, the first hundred years of killings of Republicans makes sense - they were the party of Lincoln, of freeing the slaves. The switch of the 1960s changed that. I imagine there haven't been more than a handful of killings of Republicans after that point, though I haven't done research on the subject.
Gang violence in Chicago is a whole different animal than race-fueled hate crimes in the South. Please don't compare the two, let along equate them. A more appropriate comparison to gang crime is mob crime during the early 20th century, while a more appropriate comparison to KKK crime is the Holocaust (though still not fully appropriate due to scale and societal differences, at least it's violence for the same basic reason).
You cant compare the 2 at least mathematically because the clan has killed way way less.1 death from either group is 1 too many but the numbered alone are staggering.Yes the Clan is hateful, the klan hated most of my families heritage and religion (Catholic, Italian and small part Lenape Indian) But the clan is almost non existent in the scope of things. Nobody takes them seriously . You cant compare them top the holocaust , Hitler killed more ppl in 1 day than the klan did in its entire existence. I only know 1 victim of the klan and its my buddys dad, a white Irish man of 75(then 5) who's mom had catholic statues in the front yard and someone burned a cross on the yard. (could have been a poor prank). It was the suburb of Philly circa 1950. What I am getting at is. Black ppl were not the only victims of the KKK . I dislike them but they are a smaller threat compared to Gangs, Drugs,Criminals, drunk drivers etc to most Americans . There are more Race fueled Hate crimes perpetrated by Blacks than the clan in this country now. I had 2 friends personally killed in Chester pa. 1 was beat to death, 7 vs 1 . Old lady as eye witness told cops they kept shouting racial slurs at him as they stomped him to death. he was 1 week past his 21st b day. of the 7 only 2 or 3 got jail time and were out in less than 3 yrs. This was circa 1991. The other friend was a child hood pal (who i later disliked) was killed by being stripped nakid, Curbed and thrown off an overpass of I-95 in Chester pa in front of a Mac truck (circa 1993 ish). My Bff's father was killed oct 93 coming back from a world series game. He was killed at 52nd and warren in Philly.He was a surveyor and starting a new road construction job there the next morning. Witnesses said he stopped at his work site area scoping out the area and a black man accosted him shouting slurs at him and shot him.His killer was never caught. father of 5. To kill anyone for no reason is wrong no matter the skin color but the way i see it . the Klan does it in smaller numbers.
That's a whole lot of awful, and I'm so sorry that you've encountered any of it.
I agree that the klan isn't a major threat, violence-wise, and is significantly less of a threat to the average American than gangs are. I also agree that we, as a nation, should be pouring a lot more of our energy and resources into fixing the gang violence problem than we do the white supremacy problem. We may disagree on the right use for those resources, but we can absolutely agree that the problem needs to be addressed.
This idea that the KKK is a Democrat institution, however, is ridiculous. They were founded largely by Democrats, of course, but the KKK doesn't swear allegiance to any party. They support issues that favor white Protestants, and their stance on those issues is more in line with the current Republican party. Can that change? Absolutely, if Dems decide to fall in line with them down the road. Politics are funny like that.
thanks, it was bad time.
Evil is evil, wrong is wrong.
I think most ppl realize the Klan was(past tense) a dem institution a long time ago and most ppl dislike them, What I hate is being compared to one because I am no longer a democrat.The dems may want to learn something, they are pushing ppl farther and farther way
The KKK in general is silly to bring up, and completely unhelpful in healthy debate.
The more polarized the parties become, the more alienated people in the middle feel - they choose which pole to drift toward (or away from), or they drop out. I both hope and fear that the Trump presidency is going to be a catalyst for the rise of third and fourth major political parties, with a party of Trump and a party of Bernie splitting off from the establishment. We'll see.
“We are determined to take our country back,” David Duke said in Charlottesville, calling it a “turning point.” “We are going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. That’s what we believed in. That’s why we voted for Donald Trump, because he said he’s going to take our country back.”
Aside from the fact that he's dead and couldn't have supported Clinton in 2016, he stated that his involvement with the klan was his "greatest mistake" years before he died. Does that make his involvement ok? No. Does that mean Clinton was ok to associate with him? Not really. But by the time she was a presidential contender in 2000, Byrd had cut his ties to the klan. Try again with another klan member, preferably one who's alive and publicly holds the klan's values.
"almost exclusively Republicans" means there are a handful of Dems, yes, because people are shitty. However, if you look at a group of 100 klansmen, 99 of which are Reps, you can't say "look at all the Democrat racists" with any amount of sincerity.
Lol, putting on blackface because you find racist stereotypes funny doesn't make you a klan member, sorry. Don't get me wrong, dude should resign because of said racism (and a miserable failure to show that he has different attitudes now), but that's a different form of racism than what the klan does.
The Democrats that created the KKK are all dead. Blatant racists (such as the KKK) vote Republican now. Those who perpetuate systemic racism (such as Ralph Northam and yes, Donald Trump) aren't tied to any particular party - they're all over.
"In government" and "not in government" aren't exactly races, but sure, haha.
The other two are only racist if they're at the expense of another race. That's a whole other discussion that we can absolutely have on another thread, but to simplify - there's a lot of oversimplified sound-byte-ing on the Dem side and overreaction on the Rep side on these issues. The actual thought is akin to the saying, "a high tide raises all boats", but the problem is that people with power (who happen to be predominantly white people as a result of a long history of systemic racism) actively oppose having to share that power.
The entire basis of this ideology is not based in the superiority or inferiority of any specific race (which is what would make it blatant racism). It is based in providing equal opportunity, regardless of skin color.
I'll play the liberal card and demand proof of your statement, A photo of Republicans wearing Klan outfits, A recording of a Republican admitting they are a Klansman.
Hell...Show me a recent photo of 100 Klansmen. Just because you believe that lie doesn't make it true.
Klan members generally don't make themselves known, for obvious reasons. Those that have came out very publicly for Trump (most notably David Duke).
A better sense of the political alignment for the klan, though, is in their political stances. They are strongly in favor of a closed southern border, which places them in the highly-likely-to-vote-Republican camp. They are strongly opposed to gay marriage (+1 Republican), and support extreme measures to crack down on urban crime (+1 Republican).
In fact, the current Democratic party platform is in direct opposition to the klan's aims writ large. A klansman who votes Democrat is in essence shooting himself in the foot from a political standpoint. The Republican platform isn't exactly klan-friendly altogether, but at least there are enough commonalities to make a vote worthwhile.
Oops, There goes your narrative
So wanting secure borders makes you a Klan member. Got it
The Democratic party platform is the same as it's always been, Division and identity politics, A klansman who votes Democrat is in essence shooting himself in the foot, But.. A klansman has no problem shooting himself in the foot by voting Republican (Liberal logic).
The Republican platform isn't exactly klan-friendly, After all, Republicans freed the Democrats slaves, Fought to give blacks the right to vote, Stood against The KKK created by Democrat Nathan Bedford Forrest, And Repealed Jim Crow laws instituted by Democrats. I totally see the commonalities now.
Hey, Since you are a fount of knowledge on the subject of the Klan, I'll bet you know Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson said "I'll have those n*****s voting Democrat for two-hundred years" My math tells me roughly 140 years to go, Is my Math & knowledge of History correct? I'll wait while you ask SIRI or fact check on Snopes.
Quigg endorsed Trump for what he said he would do, then endorsed Clinton because she secretly would promote white supremacist policies despite what she said she would do. So Trump talked a good game for white supremacist policies but wouldn't follow through, and Clinton talked a good game against white supremacist policies but is a secret klan supporter? Cuz that makes sense. Read the last paragraph and you've got the truth of the matter.
Deliberate misinterpretation. Wanting closed borders is a specific stance on a specific issue that the klan just happens to hold as well.
Oh my god, please let go of the "Reps freed the Dems' slaves" ridiculousness. That was 150 years ago, and a whole lot of political and social change has occurred since then. Neither political party supports a platform of white supremacy - a true believer among the KKK has to grit their teeth while they vote, because the know they're not going to get everything they want from any political candidate. So yes, it doesn't matter who they vote for, they're shooting themselves in the foot. That said, several of the specific issues that the KKK supports (for racist reasons) are issues that the Republican party promotes (for economic and national security reasons), while the KKK's priorities and the Democratic party platform don't line up AT ALL, in any way.
Seriously, do you go around also saying that the KKK is endorsed by the Methodist, Lutheran, and Baptist churches?
The Democratic party has a LONG list of racist people and actions. There is no denying this. However, the Democratic party has and continues to evolve, just like the Republican party and American society in general. Insisting that the KKK is a Democrat institution is about as accurate as saying Germany is a Nazi regime.