Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is a term used to refer to a number of past and present fraternal organizations in the United States that have advocated white supremacy, and promoted Protestant to the exclusion of other religions. In its original incarnation, the Ku Klux Klan sought to reestablish Democratic power in the South at the time when Radical Republicans and carpetbaggers dominated Reconstruction. It was founded by ex-servicemen of the Confederate States Army in 1866, led by Nathan Bedford Forrest. The original group opposed the reforms enforced on the South by federal troops regarding the treatment of former History of slavery in the United Statess, often using violence to achieve their goals. Forrest ordered the Klan to disband in 1869, but many of its groups in other parts of the country ignored the order and continued to function. A second distinct group using the same name was started atop Stone Mountain near Atlanta in 1915 by William J. Simmons. This second group existed as a money-making fraternal organization and fought to maintain the ways of the past by fighting against the increasing numbers of Roman Catholics, Jews, Blacks, Asians, and other immigrants into the United States. This group, although preaching racism, was a mainstream organization with 4 million members at its peak in the 1920s. Its popularity fell during the Great Depression, and membership fell again during World War II presumably because of mass enlistment or conscription to the Armed Forces. The name ''Ku Klux Klan'' has since fallen into the public domain. It was adopted in different forms by many different unrelated groups, including many who opposed the Civil Rights Act and desegregation in the 1960s. Today, dozens of organizations with chapters across the United States and other countries use all or part of the name in their titles. ==Etymology== The name Ku Klux Klan comes from κυκλος (''kyklos''), the Greek word for circle, and the Scots Gaelic-derived word "clan". Another etymology proposes an onomatopoeia of the loading of a gun (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle mentions this latter etymology in the Sherlock Holmes story The Five Orange Pips). ==Traditions== Members of the Klan wear white robes with hoods to represent the ghosts of Confederate soldiers returning from the dead to take revenge on their enemies, and to hide their faces. Another explanation of the white robes and hoods was the "anonymity of good works" – as the Ku Klux Klan members believe their works were given to them by God, they wear the robes and hoods as a symbol of humility. Yet another explanation of the costumes may have been to imitate the medieval Knights Templar. Much of the original leadership of the Klan were Freemasonry with the degree of "Knight Templar." Titles such as "Grand Wizard", "Exalted Cyclops" and "Kleagle" are used to indicate status. ==History== ===The original Ku Klux Klan=== [[Image:Misissippi ku klux.jpg|200px|thumb|Three Ku Klux Klan members captured in Tishomingo County, Mississippi, Mississippi in September 1871.]] The original Ku Klux Klan was first established in Pulaski, Tennessee after the end of the American Civil War on December 24, 1865 by Confederate veterans. It grew to prominence after a convention held in Nashville in the summer of 1866. At this convention, Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest presided as the Grand Wizard. The main goal of the Klan was to fight Congressional Reconstruction. During the Reconstruction the South was undergoing drastic changes to its social and political life. Whites saw this as a threat to their supremacy as a race and sought to end this process. Due to Congress enacting laws that promoted racial equality, southern whites could not turn to the law in order to regain their power through the Democratic Party. In addition, the Klan sought to control the political and social status of the freed slaves. More specifically, it attempted to curb black education, economic advancement, and voting rights. Violence came to be seen as the best way to accomplish their goals. However, the Klan's violence was not limited to African Americans; Southern Republicans also became the target of vicious intimidation tactics. The Klan became the violent arm of the Democratic Party. As federal control of the ex-Confederate states was withdrawn, the local Caucasian population re-established their power and with it segregation laws. Forrest ordered the Klan to disband in 1869, stating that its increasingly violent tactics were at odds with the original reason for which he founded it, which he stated to be the "protection of southern womanhood." It is important to understand that, in the context of the post-Civil War South, the "protection of southern womanhood" has implications beyond its literal meaning. In this society, violence and the threat of violence, including lynching, were tools of social control used, for example, to enforce Jim Crow etiquette, or to prevent economic competition from blacks. Protecting white women against black men was a common pretext for lynchings. Despite Forrest's order, many Klan groups around the country continued to function without a centralized organization. In 1871 President Ulysses S. Grant put what was believed to be the final nail in the Klan's coffin by signing The Klan Act and Enforcement Act. The Klan became an illegal group, and the use of force was authorized to suppress and disrupt the organization's activities. Hundreds of Klan members were fined or imprisoned, and ''habeas corpus'' was suspended in some counties in South Carolina. These efforts were so successful that the Klan was eliminated in South Carolina and decimated throughout the rest of the country. The Klan Act was declared unconstitutional in 1882, but the Klan was largely gone by then, and had in fact achieved many of its original goals, such as denying political rights to blacks. ===The second Ku Klux Klan=== The second Ku Klux Klan was established during World War I, a feat which arguably would not have been possible without President Woodrow Wilson's influence and D. W. Griffith's controversial classic film, ''The Birth of a Nation''. Upon seeing the film, Wilson remarked, "It was like writing history with lightning. It is all so terribly true." [http://www.woodrowwilson.org/content/articles/48130001/file_2196.pdf](Portable Document Format) Griffith's film was based on the book and play ''The Clansman (book)'' and the book ''The Leopard's Spots (book)'', both by Thomas Dixon who intended "to revolutionize northern sentiment by a presentation of history that would transform every man in my audience into a good United States Democratic Party!". This was consistent with the new Klan's greater success at recruiting in the US Midwest region of the United States than in the South. Many poor whites were drawn to the idea that their economic woes were caused by African American, or by Jewish bankers, or by other such groups, similar to the Nazi party's propaganda in Nazi Germany. An important event in the coalescence of the second Klan was the lynching of Leo Frank, a Jewish factory manager. Frank had been accused of the brutal rape and strangulation of a 13 year old employee named Mary Phagan. Allegations arose that the motivation was due to the story being taken up of the crime by Thomas E. Watson who was the editor for The Jeffersonian magazine at the time and later a leader in the reorganization of the Klan who was later elected to the U.S. Senate. The Frank lynching demonstrated both the Klan's continuing violent nature and its relatively new emphasis on anti-semitism. This Klan was operated as a profit-making venture by its leaders, and participated in the boom in fraternal organizations at the time. It differed from the first Klan; the first Klan was United States Democratic Party and U.S. Southern states, this Klan boasted members from both the United States Democratic Party and to a lesser degree United States Republican Party parties and was influential throughout the United States, with major political influence on politicians in several states. It collapsed largely as a result of a scandal involving D. C. Stephenson, the Grand Dragon of Indiana and fourteen other states, who was convicted of the rape and murder of Madge Oberholtzer in a sensational trial (she was bitten so many times that one man who saw her described her condition as having been "chewed by a cannibalism"). The second Klan dwindled in popularity throughout the 1930s. It was disbanded in 1944 and the name Ku Klux Klan fell into the public domain. In the 1920s and 1930s a faction of the Klan called the Black Legion (murder cult) was very active in the Midwest region of the United States Rather than wearing white robes, the Legion wore black uniforms reminiscent of pirates. The Black Legion was the most violent and zealous faction of the Klan, and were notable for targeting and assassinating Communists and Socialists. Stetson Kennedy, folklorist and author, infiltrated the Klan after World War II, and provided information, including secret codewords, to the writers of the ''Superman (radio)'' radio program, resulting in a series of four episodes in which Superman took on the Klan. Kennedy intended to strip away the Klan's mystique, and the trivialization of the Klan's rituals and codewords likely did have a negative impact on Klan recruiting and membership. ===Later Ku Klux Klans=== After World War II, several organizations using the name Ku Klux Klan were established to counter the American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968) of the 1960s. These are the Klans that are still seen today, though as American society has become more racially inclusive, the Klan has once more shrunk dramatically. Vulnerability to lawsuits has encouraged the trend away from central organization, as when, for example, the lynching of Michael Donald in 1981 led to a civil suit that bankrupted one Klan group, the United Klans of America[http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkkk.htm]. Klan activity has also been diverted into other racist groups and movements, such as Christian Identity, Neo-Nazism groups, and racist subgroups of the skinheads. KKK organizations currently in operation include the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, the Imperial Klans of America, and the Knights of the White Kamelia. ==Political influence== The second Ku Klux Klan rose to great prominence and spread from the South into the Midwest region of the United States and Northern states and even into Canada. At its peak, most of the membership resided in Midwestern states. Through sympathetic elected officials, the KKK controlled the governments of Tennessee, Indiana, Oklahoma, and Oregon in addition to those of the Southern Democratic legislatures. Klan publications from the 1920's even claimed to have inducted Republican President Warren Harding at the White House, though the evidence of this event actually happening has never been substantiated. Klan delegates played a significant role at the 1924 Democratic National Convention in New York City, often called the "Klanbake Convention" as a result. The convention initially pitted Klan-backed candidate William McAdoo against New York Governor Al Smith, who drew the opposition of the group because of his Catholic faith. After days of stalemates and rioting, both candidates withdrew in favor of a compromise. Klan delegates defeated a Democratic Party platform plank that would have condemned their organization. On July 4, 1924 thousands of Klansmen converged on a nearby field in New Jersey where they participated in cross burnings, burned effigies of Smith, and celebrated their defeat of the platform plank. At its peak in the 1920s, Klan membership exceeded 4 million and counted many politicians among its members. In many places, such as some counties in Missouri during Harry Truman's youth, Klan membership was considered a ''de facto'' prerequisite for entering politics. Truman, a Democrat, is believed to have paid the membership fee to join the Klan during his youth, but never formally joined because of the Klan's anti-Catholicism. (When Truman became President of the United States, he had an extensive civil rights record and was much-hated by the Klan.) In Saskatchewan, Canada the KKK was seen as having a dramatic effect on the provincial election of 1929, which defeated the James G. Gardiner Liberal government and installed the 1929-1934 Progressive Conservative Party of Saskatchewan government of James T.M. Anderson. Another former Klansman to rise to national prominence was the Democratic Senator and later Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, who later repudiated the organization. Early in his political career Black defended one of the group's members for the assassination of Father James Coyle, an Alabama Catholic priest, and obtained a "not guilty" verdict through a Klan-controlled jury. David Duke served as a Republican state representative and ran for office in Louisiana in both Democratic and Republican primary elections. He served until 1978 as the National Director of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, and resigned from the Klan in 1980. West Virginia's Democratic Senator Robert Byrd was a recruiter for the Klan while in his 20s and 30s, rising to the title of Kleagle, and defended the Klan in his 1958 U.S. Senate campaign when he was 41 years old. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8272822/] He has since called joining the Klan his "greatest mistake." ==Today== [[Image:KKK holocaust a zionist hoax.jpg|thumb|right|KKK members calling the Holocaust a "Zionist hoax"]] Although often still discussed in contemporary American politics as representing the quintessential "fringe" end of the far right spectrum, today the group only exists in the form of a number of very isolated, scattered "supporters" that probably do not number more than a few thousand. In a 2002 report on "Extremism in America", the Jewish Anti-Defamation League wrote "Today, there is no such thing as the Ku Klux Klan. Fragmentation, decentralization and decline have continued unabated." However they also noted that the group's supporters' "need for justification runs deep in the disaffected and is unlikely to disappear, regardless of how low the Klan's fortunes eventually sink." As of 2003, there were an estimated 5,500 to 6,000 dedicated Klan members, divided among 158 chapters of a variety of splinter organizations, about two-thirds of which were in former Confederate States of America states. The other third are primarily in the Midwest region of the United States. [http://www.adl.org/backgrounders/american_knights_kkk.asp] Individuals who consider themselves members of the Klan tend to conceal their affiliation. They may use the acronym ''AYAK'' ('Are you a Klansman?') in conversation to surreptitiously identify themselves to another potential member. The response ''AKIA'' ('A Klansman I am') completes the greeting. The ACLU has provided legal support to various factions of the KKK, including defense of First Amendment rights to hold public rallies, parades, marches, and field political candidates. ==Related articles== *KKK Costume *Jim Crow laws *League of the Holy Court *Silent Brotherhood *Neo-Nazism *History of the United States (1865-1918) *Knights of the Ku Klux Klan ==External links== * [http://reactor-core.org/original-kkk.html The History of the Original Ku Klux Klan] * [http://www.splcenter.org/center/splcreport/report.jsp The Southern Poverty Law Center Report] * [http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/KKK.asp?xpicked=4&item=18 The ADL on the KKK] * [http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkkk.htm Spartacus Education about the KKK] ==References== ''[http://www.rickross.com/reference/kkk/kkk12.html SC City Labels KKK Terrorist Group]'', and ''[http://www.uua.org/actions/racial-justice/81kkk.html General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association Condemning the Ku Klux Klan]''. The KKK is also included in the ''[http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=62 MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base]''. # Southern Poverty Law Center. Active U.S. Hate Groups in 2004. ''Intelligence Report''. Retrieved April 5, 2005 from [http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp]. * Levitt, Stephen D. and Stephen J. Dubner. ''Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything''. New York: William Morrow (2005). Anti-Semitism Ku Klux Klan Terrorist organizations based in the United States White supremacist groups in the U.S. Reconstruction Racism Secret societies Fascism
Leadership Heierarcy? I'd be very interested to see a list of how the klan is structured. Wizards and Dragons and what not. --User:69.9.212.229 03:04, 5 May 2005 (UTC) :INSERTED ON D-DAY, 6/6/05 The second group of 1915 introduced the "Kl" tradition. "Klavern" and "Kleagle" and such weren't a part of the original KKK. 17:40 Zebra This may be off topic for the discussion here, but the Klan was not started by Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, he was made the Grand Wizard in 1867 when the Klan re-formed itself in light of the Reconstruction Acts. The costumes of the Klan were extremely similar to those worn by slave patrollers before the Civil war, (for further reading see Gladys Marie Fry ''Italic text''Night Riders in Black Folk History''Italic text'') and it is also noteworthy that the pre-1867 Klan was not simply an organization for bored aristocrats as is often reported. There is indication that even in its earliest days the Klan would ride out to black settlements to intimidate and assault their newly freed neighbors. The Klan has always been a violent organization, but has masked this with a language about being reluctant warriors. To clarify another point, the Klan officially died in 1869, but lynch law ruled the South well beyond the turn of the century. The official re-birth of the Klan was in 1915, but it had few adherents until 1920. the "No true Scottsman" fallacy?? I seem to recall that they also used a name Knights of something or other? Yes, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), or Grand Knights, and so forth. There have been hundreds--literally--of these groups, which go out of business or split into fractions when the leaders quarrel.--AMT :Knights of the White Camilla How is KKK related to the white supremist groups today? In movies, the KKK was first portrayed as staunch defenders of decency and morality (c.f. ''The Birth of Nations''--a film considered beautiful but racist by many late 20th Century African Americans and European Americans, but later portrayed as a film full of hatred and bigotry.) But were the KKK legitimate in their actions according to the laws then? For example, was public linching a legal thing to do back then? Any historian to comment? :::Oh crap! is this legal?! I just edited someone else's remarks. Please undo this if this is unfair. I apologize!!! (I don't remember the original). I, for a moment, thought I was editing a wikipedia main page--where they encourage me to "Edit Boldy!". but i don't mean to rob anyone of their voice. If I screwed up, please fix it!! I'm no historian, but I believe lynching was always illegal. But police, prosecutors and judges would often turn a blind eye to it. -- User:Simon J Kissane The Southern Poverty Law Center, which has a website, documents a lot of the shifting of personnel among white supremacist groups. The various Klans are related/not related to the others--the groups split up and form alliances largely on the basis of personal quarrels and legal difficulties. Also there are various ideologies and gurus that come into fashion and pass. As to the Klan: the original groups were formed to intimidate free blacks and middle-of-the-road whites during Reconstruction. They continued through at least the 1930s with the support of many influential people. The main thing to keep in mind is that they were political terrorists--lynching has always been illegal, as SJK says, but lynchings do not always come from political motives. In San Jose, California, for example, some kidnappers were dragged from the jail and hanged in the town square in the late 30s. A certain social prejudice may have been involved--they were drifters or less reputable members of the community. But the mob was just angry. On the other hand, Klan actions were undertaken for political ends: to prevent blacks from voting, to prevent labor organizing, to prevent votes against candidates that the Klan favored, to intimidate juries, and so forth.--AMT ---- This An organization in America dedicated to opposing civil rights for blacks, Jews, and other disadvantaged groups. does not strike me as how ''they'' would describe their primary purpose. I don't know how ''they'' would describe it, but in an article about them, how they describe themselves would seem to be a key fact, which it is essential to mention in the article itself. --User:LMS ---- I believe that the timeing of the KKK's re-emergence in the 20th century precedes the Great Depression by at least a decade. I seem to recall that it was a powerful force in Indiana politics in the 1920s, for example, and certainly "Birth of a Nation" was much earlier (1915 or so, as I recall). Egern ----- It is often heard that the name represents the sound of a gunman chambering a bullet. I've never heard of "kuklos" before. Can someone document this? --User:Dmerrill ---- :The :COINTELPRO program of the :FBI has also been credited with decimating the :KKK in the 1960s, leaving many anti-COINTELPRO liberals in a philosophical conundrum about the powers that should be granted to government. I think this is point to make, but it needs to be in a better NPOV. I'd do it myself, but I don't know much about the KKK and nothing at all about COINTELPRO. ---- :opposing [civil rights]? for Blacks, Jews, and other disadvantaged groups Since when were Jews in US 'disadvantaged' ? --User:Taw :well, Jews in America were legally disadvantaged - excluded by legal covenant or by silent consent from home ownership in many communities or neighborhoods and stated or tacit quotas were established for admission to universities. I don't much like the formulation as it is, but Jews were certainly not assimilated into broader American society before the 2nd quarter of the 20th century, with the process accelerating after WWII. --MichaelTinkler ---- (I'm not sure what this means in a sociological sense, but I think it's interesting...) My mother grew up in a very small, all-white Minnesota town in the 1930s and 1940s. She never even saw a black (or latin or Asian) person until she went to Minneapolis, half-a-day's drive away. Yet still, her town held Ku Klux Klan meetings regularly. One wonders, "Why?" User:firepink --- Removing "Christian." Do they profess to be Christian? Then state that they profess it, not that they are. :-)] : The KK has always been a Protestant Christian organization. In the United States, millions of Protestant Christians viewed the KKK as a valid Christian organization. (less do today, obviously!) This statement makes some people feel uncomfortable, but is the historical truth. In the USA from the late 1800s to World War II, hating black people, as well as Jews and Catholics, was seen as part of God's plan, by huge numbers of conservative southern Christian protestants. Many Americans still have such views today. I don't think we have the right to claim that "Well, they aren't really Christian, they only claim to be Christian. That is the infamous "No true Scottsman" fallacy that has always been used to whitewash religious intolerance and extremism. The fact is that they were and are Christians. [user:RK] I beg to differ. A Christian follows the teachings of Christ, and Christ overwhelmingly taught acceptance, inclusion, humility, and love. So someone claiming to be a Christian while hating and terrorizing people would not be a Christian. And no, I am not a Christian, either; I am an agnostic. user:Koyaanis Qatsi : I agree, though not for the same reasons. I simply don't think that Protestant Christianity is a homogeneous group, so that such an assertion can be made. There were certainly groups of churches in the south that included racism in their official or unofficial creeds, and they would certainly reject being called non-Christian simply because what they believed differs or even contradicts what other Protestant Christian groups believed. On the other hand, it is not representative of American Protestantism as a whole. A statement about Protestants should be more specific. user:Danny :If you actually read the bible, it is filled with passages advocating, with divine mandate, just the type of violent terrorism practiced by the KKK. check out the doings of Jehu: he gathered the followers of a competing religion into a temple under false pretenses and then slaughtered them all. Christianity has always viewed anything outside itself to be of the devil, and therefor a legitimate target for destruction. Bearing this in mind, I propose that the KKK are not just christians, but the epitomy of christianity. Anyone who thinks the cult of christianity is not soaked in blood is not very familiar with their own doctrine and ignorant of much of world history.-Helios The KKK pick out what they want to from the Bible...if they actually read it they would see that in the 10 Commandments it actually says 'Thou Shall Not Kill'. They obviously missed this...or misunderstood it. In modern English, it basically means 'Do not kill other beings'. It is just plain wrong, we are all the same in some way, it's not our fault that our bodies and skins are not all the same. Descrimination against a person with colour is basically like descrimination against another white person who is ugly. How many lessons are there in the Bible of accepting others?! The KKK sickens me...the fact that they atually killed coloured people who had the same beliefs and thoughts as they did...bt they looked different. O yeah...whats up with that hating Catholics and Immigrants too? -lil 13 year old who is by the way Protestant Christian : ''"So someone claiming to be a Christian while hating and terrorizing people would not be a Christian."'', who ever said people don't contradict themselves? Define a christian and I will find you a christian who disagrees with you. Someone is christian if they believe they are, it's not like there is some council that approves people who want to become christian. -- user:Ydd Yes, and by that logic someone who ate veal consistently and professed to be a vegan would in fact be a vegan. There is also no council to approve vegans--not that it's relevant. user:Koyaanis Qatsi : The difference being, Veganism has a pretty solid grounds for reference. Where as religion, typically, is a huge matter of interpretation and personal beliefe. Despite any of this, I certainly wouldn't tell someone they aren't a vegan if they ate veal and vehemently said they were vegan. maybe they're a special sect of vegan. Are Ichthy-Ovi Vegitarians not vegitarians? -- user:Ydd Christians do share some characteristics which are not shared with, say, Buddhists or Wiccans. user:Koyaanis Qatsi writes "A Christian follows the teachings of Christ, and Christ overwhelmingly taught acceptance, inclusion, humility, and love. So someone claiming to be a Christian while hating and terrorizing people would not be a Christian." :::Jesus. only "Christ" if you're a Christian (Muslims, who love and venerate him will not call him \"Christ\", claim that jesus was a ''Prophet''--not the Son of God [a non-monotheistic concept]). Jesus, according to some, never advocated acceptance or open mindedness in any manner. Read the Christian Bible. Jesus personally beat people who changed money in the Temples. Did Mohammed? Did Moses? Did Joseph Smith? Did Darwin? No! Only Jesus! Jesus is judged by some (c.f., Why I am not a Christian by Bertram Russell) to be the most judgmental and cruel of all religious leaders (based on Christian Scriptures). : That is absolutely incorrect. A Christian may reasonably be defined as a person who believes in the Religion of Christianity, is a member of a Christian Church, and is recognized by many other Christians as a practicing Christian. By this definition the members of the KK were Christians. You seem to be claiming that you have the ability to define who a Christian is and isn't, but you don't. Again, you are using the "No True Scottsman fallacy". Are you familiar with this? user:RK">user:RK Do you realize you've just defined Christianity in terms of Christianity not once but three times?--Anon I hate to disagree with KQ here, or risk looking like I am in any way defending the KKK, but the KKK regard themselves as Christian and that by itself is enough for us to call them Christian. I have heard many arguments that state that Mormans, Unitarians and Catholics also aren't Christian - but this doesn't make that assertion correct. The only thing we can do here is depend on self-identification - not some external definition. BTW, my ''personal'' feeling is in agreement with KQ - that the KKK are very ''un''-Christian - but we shouldn't let our personal feelings cloud our attempt at nuetrality. We could say that the KKK claim to be the only true Christians (which many groups in the KKK do) and that others in the Christian world think otherwise for KQ's reasons. --user:maveric149 We need a much stricter definition of "Christian" than just the mere claim of being Christian. The mere claim, by itself, means nothing. After all, even I could claim to be a Christian. But I reject most everything about Chrisitian beliefs! The word "Christian" has to have some meaning, or else it has no meaning. Consider Mormons; they are in no way, shape or form Christians, because they reject most Christian beliefs. ::Can you provide some references here? Show us how Mormons are not Christians! If you cannot, please stop saying that! They imply that all other Chrisitians are not really Christians, and that they are the true Christians. While I agree that they have the right to their beliefs, they don't have the right to totally rewrite the dictionary. Or, rather, they may even have the right to rewrite the dictionary, but they can't force the rest of the world to go along with this rewrite. Unitarians also are not Christian, but they no longer claim to be. user:RK">user:RK The same is true for other religions as well. Consider proselytizing fundamentalist Protestant Christian groups like "Jews for Jesus"; they claim to be "Jews" practicing "Judaism", yet their faith is evangelical Protestant Christianity. Is it rational to say that Protestant Christianity is the same as Judaism? Nope. The mere use of the word, by itself, means nothing. Back to the specific topic of the KKK, there are firm reasons why they must be considered Chrisitians: (1) They accept Christian scriptures, and add no new "testaments" or "hidden books" to them. (2) They believe in the Trinity, and follow traditional Protestant Christian theology, (3) they follow traditional Christian holidays, and (4) non-KKK members in America historically have recognized them as Christians in good-standing vis-a-vis Christianity. In short, there is no way that they can be called anything except Christian. :Yes, but Catholics worship the Madonna and pray to saints which is arguably a form of idolatry. Should we also not consider them Christian because of this? I for one am not so presumptuous to think that I have the ability to say just who, or who not is a "true" member of any faith. But then, that's just me. Go ahead and define who is a Christian - I will have no part of it. --user:maveric149 I shouldn't have brought it up--it's not particularly productive. I think maveric is right, that we shouldn't let our opinions interfere with the article. If the KKK consider themselves Christian, we can state as much without having to deal with whether they are or not. Apologies, bowing out, user:Koyaanis Qatsi ---------- The KKK page is annoying. It is entirely lacking in NPOV. Is there no KKK-knowledgeable wikipedian? (Don't get me wrong! I hate the KKK. I hate nazis. I hate all things that good liberals (not an \"L word\" to me!) hate. But this article is written in a largely uninformed way. The origins of the KKK are entirely misrepresented here. The current beliefs of the KKK are entirely misrepresented here.) Is there no legitimate scholar here? (No! It can't be me. I don't know enough. But I know some. And this stuff is biased.) Arthur3030 : Yes, it's very biased, and at some points just plain wrong. For example, NB Forrest did ''not'' found the Klan. It was started by six Confederate soldiers, almost as more of a social club. Forrest, if he actually was a member, did not even come into the picture until the Klan had grown substantially, and he was nominated to be the Klan's (I believe first) "Grand Wizard." There are too many KKK websites online for there to be this many mistakes. (Another: The anti-Catholic stance was more a thing of the 50's and 60's, and other than that doesn't have much to do with the Klan's beliefs or practices.) User:RL Barrett 19:39 May 8, 2003 (UTC) --------------- Harry Truman "believed" to be in the KKK? What about Senator Byrd? He *WAS* in the KKK! More examples of the Wikipedia liberal bias. ~I dont care what u say about "what u believe"...its wrong. Get it through your thick sculls. Does anyone have information on their ranks? Why do the names sound like they were found in a D&D manual? ----- The first sentence states: "The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is one of several white-supremacist organizations in the Southern United States, which are dedicated to..." Though they started in the Southern US, the article goes on to say how they shifted to the Midwest and are now even in Queens, NY. Perhaps it is better to drop the "Southern" from the first sentence and just say "in the United States". Otherwise it seems like the article is making the KKK out to be only a Southern problem rather than an American problem. It seems to be pointing a finger at "those racist Southerners" rather than "those racist Americans". I did not change it yet because I wanted to see what others thought first. :I think you have a good point. Still, the KKK is (rightly or wrongly) generally associated with the US South by connotation. It's probably unfair to say that it's a Southern organization, but it is significant that people identify it with the South. :User:Acegikmo1 19:19, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC) In the "Description" paragraph, I don't understand the following sentence: "The Ku Klux Klan has committed many acts of violence such as lynchings, the burning of homes, and even, in extreme cases, murder." Surely lynchings are murders (in fact, the first significant word in Lynching is Murder). I would edit out the duplication myself, but I am not sure what the OP is trying to say. User:PRB 14:04, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC) ---- This article needs to be rewritten. There is no one Klu Klux Klan today, the name is in the public domain. So anybody who wants can start a group, call it Klu Klux Klan or The Grand XXXs of the Klu Klux Klan and profess whatever beliefs they have. Hence, trying to characterize the beliefs of the Klu Klux Klan today is futile. The article should focus on the historical KKK and then link to individual pages for major modern day KKKs, like the one David Duke was part of.User:Ydorb 19:07, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC) == caption == ''In 1928, the Klan saw a very big and strong boy by the age of 14 called Nick Betts (who is now a grand wizard who leads the clan via the internet) who then had a wave of popularity in response to the Democratic nomination of Roman Catholic Alfred E. Smith for the office of President.'' What thought is this sentence in the caption trying to communicate? I honestly have no idea. User:Wolfman 01:33, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC) ==Vandalsim== This page seems to require repair on a daily basis. I'm not familiar with the relevant Wiki mechanisms. Is there a way of improving the situation? == Disputed! == I have placed a dispute tag on this article. As another commentor pointed out, this page seems to be tinkered with far too often. Over the time I've monitored this page, I have seen factual inaccuracies, ommissions and important pieces of information disappear. From what I can tell, this is largely partisan in nature, as neither apparent supporters of the Democratic or Republican parties wish to acknowledge that the Klan influenced many important and prominent political leaders, and that most Klan members were thought to have affiliation with one party or another. The Democratic Party, particularly in the South, had significant Klan ties with each incarnation of the group, and this remained so until the liberal wing annd African-Americans effectively took control of the party in the late 60s and early 70s. The Republicans, the party of Abraham Lincoln and the Reconstruction, had far less in the way of Klan ties until far right-wing groups felt that the Democratic Party had been effectively usurped from its traditional control. A true, neutral historian who is knowledgeable Klan history should clean up this article, and Wiki editors should respect the most neutral version that comes of this. Such a version, in my opinion, would not shy away from explaining the Klan's ties to both parties, and would present it in such a way tht no partisan bias is apparent. ::It's not clear what exactly you are disputing. You raise two issues. First, vandalism. I think we all agree that this page is a target of vandals and probably should be protected. This, however, has nothing to do with NPOV and factual accuracy. Second, you raise the issue of the influence of the Klan in various incarnations on political parties. This seems to be an error of omission rather than fact. I don't think that a NPOV/factual dispute is warranted. It seems more like it is an incomplete article that still needs work. User:Ydorb 19:43, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC) :::I agree with Ydorb, though if the posters assertion that references to Klanish influence of major political figures are being deleted is corrected, it merits some investigation. The article is lacking in completeness, and not factual accuracy. If an NPOV issue exists at all, it is a minor one. User:Ingoolemo User_talk:Ingoolemo 07:38, 2005 Jan 4 (UTC) == Currently Attending the Klan == I have read over this article, and I have read over the discussions. To be honest and straightforward, I personally have a first hand experience with a present day association of the Ku Klux Klan, and I believe it is wrong to dub the organization as hateful and discriminative simply by what one source will tell us. But I have had experiences of my own, and I want to let everyone know that the organization has and always will have a hateful and violent past. Its unfortunate for the organization, but its the truth. But these situations in the past have been taken purely biased from the media, and therefore, the majority of America will only experience one side of the story. This one side becomes their instant claim that the Klan is hateful, sickening, and bloodthirsty. I hope to dispell these assumptions. For me though, I have written a couple of remarks on the edit page of the Encyclopedia's definition of the Ku Klux Klan. To my dispare, these added changes have been removed (and I have no problem with people changing things, but don't cause yourself to remove someone else's). I felt it was my responsibility to try and show people a different side of all of the bad we might THINK we understand about the Klan. I have even thrown together a small web site to allow people to transition into realizing the objectives and idealisms of an organization such as the Ku Klux Klan. However, I understand a lot of people that see my explanations feel that I'm trying to protect an evil society. And they're wrong. The fact is, I have come from exactly the same teachings as these people might have had. I thought apprehended to even mentioning the Klan. I had an idea of this organization as being a group of brainwashed zombies breaking down doors to retirement homes, and killing anyone that moved. But essentially, I believed the organization was filled with fanatical people. And I was wrong. But as I came to realize, history is only what our leaders want it to be. We have been so close minded to the Klan because we have absolutely no idea of how it operates. We have absolutely no reasoning to understand why they do the things they do. However, I came into it wondering if it all was true. I came into it asking questions as many of you might ask of me. I wondered if all of the people in it were out of their minds. And I waited, and I tested the waters. And I came to realize that these people were NOT crazy, instead, they were kind to me, they were generous to offer assistance when I needed it. They showed me that the Klan was a fraternal order that was kept to hold a philosophy of moral dignity among themselves. This order was something they could rely on to protect themselves from anything that might try and harm them. I asked them about their sketchy past, and they admitted that it was unfortunate that many of these things had been told on a biased level. In the end, none of the Klan's original motives were declared. So no one knew the full story. But how was I suppose to believe them? I had been brought up so vividly to believe an opposite way. I had such a deep rooted hate for this group. How could I break away? Well, at first, my beliefs had still been intact. I didn't want to change my position against them, nor did I want to change my entire outlook on the world. But as I kept asking, I wondered about some things. I wondered about the small conscience I had in my mind. I wondered how bad it would be to strive to protect the fundamentals that my conscience drove to tell me. So I looked around, and I realized certain things about my world. I realized that there were bigger things for the world to be worrying about than some group that has nothing to harm but those that harm it. I could think of plenty of things our world needs more attention and control on. You could include the poverty of this world, the robberies, the corrupt police, even the corrupt governments. Our world is becoming a massive sewer of humanity. And it doesn't take a genius to realize this. And we may think that the Ku Klux Klan is a part of this indecency in our world, but do we really know the truth behind these stories? Do you really think these people get up in the morning and proclaim to kill off a number of people simply because they feel like it. If this were the case, then these people should be locked up. But it wasn't. It wasn't what I learned when I wanted to know more. I never realized that it would be worth my effort to follow a group of people that felt so strongly about an idealism in this country, that they would lie down their lives for it. And I began to realize this belief. I came to respect it as a fraternal group of people that support and protect its own. That none of it was a brutal outcry to change the world. It WAS, however, a belief among the Klan that the world was becoming a stretched existence. A foregoing of dignity to tolerate the actions of another. To appease someone who wouldn't do the same in return. Our world has become a disrupted chaos of behavior, and I brought it upon myself to take a liking to a society that held strongly against this apparent outbreak. Its fundamentals were never forcefully exercised onto anyone. They were only exercised when one of its own was threatened. They ARE militant, but they are constricted of killing out of unreason. The fact is, when someone is threatened, it is their duty to protect. If someone's life is taken, the life of the murderer is taken in the same way. It is unfortunate, but this is how things work in this WORLD let alone in this society. But what is even more unfortunate is the biased undermining message given to us in order to prove that this organization is hurtful and evil simply because of the actions taken from a situation's context. The fact is, it is sites like these that proclaim and reinterpret the same old description that every other site has given. No one really looks beneath the surface. No one really cares to open a can of worms. And it is for this very reason, that a fundamental group such as the Klan is fading away. And what are we left with? We are left with a world that just might be unsafe to unlock our doors in. Unsafe to raise our children in. Even unsafe to trust our government or our police because a big enough bribe could change their decision. And if you don't believe me, then you're naive to this world, or you simply don't care. And these unaware people are more to the problem than a REAL problem could be. But I care, and I want the people that I'm around to care too. And as long as these one-sided media commentations exist, there will never be a real understanding of why we have certain radical foundations. So give yourself a little time and explore everything I've said. As much as it hurts to think about it, try to understand the other side before jumping to conclusions about both. - User:Camarofloyd 09:15, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) :I am currently writing a history paper on the Klans and hope to add more information on the fraternal side of the organisation. I don't think that anybody is suggesting that the Klansmen were motivated by evil, although the early days of the Klan at least were certainly filled with violence, and they have become a symbol of intolerance through the years. Much of the operations of the Klan over the years can be attributed to their own sense of justice and vigilantism. All your contributions are welcome as long as they are presented from a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view :It seems clear to me so far that the first Klan began in secrecy and fraternalism and expanded to vigilantism and violence from a sense of an "uprising of outraged manhood" (to use the words of Chief Justice Edward White). The second Klan began as a product what could almost be called Simmons's hobby, fraternal organisations, quickly grew as a result of social reaction to perceived social corruption, inspired at least in part by ''The Clansmen'', its play and movie, and was milked as a cash operation by Tyler and Clarke. User:Silsor 08:43, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC) ::I realize this site is neutral in its best ability, but I would hope a discussion board provides the chance to express one's own oppinions on any reasoning of his/her fundamentalisms. I would also hope that these oppinions can be expressed in any way possible, be it biased or neutral. But I could be mistaken, and I can take my position of the Klan elsewhere. - User:Camarofloyd 09:15, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) :::This page is a discussion board, so you are free to express your opinions however you want here (within reasonable limits). But material that goes into the Ku Klux Klan article page itself must be kept neutral and report only the facts. User:Silsor 09:12, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC) ==Weasel statement== I have removed the following text from the page, for a second time: :''Many hold that the Klan's doctrine was not Christian, as they did not follow the nonviolent "turn the other cheek" teachings of New Testament Christianity, but followed the Old Testament traditions of "smite thine enemy" and "an eye for an eye."'' for these reasons: # The statement that "many hold" this belief is unsourced # The statement that the Ku Klux Klan followed the Old Testament traditions of "smite thine enemy" and "an eye for an eye" is unsourced # The statement that the Ku Klux Klan did not follow the nonviolent "turn the other cheek" teachings of New Testament Christianity is unsourced # The statement that "many hold" this belief uses Wikipedia:Avoid weasel terms and reflects badly on the text. User:Silsor 20:16, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC) == Wilson and Birth of a nation == The quote is highly questionable. There's no evidence that Wilson actually ever said this; the only source was Thomas Dixon's widow, who claimed that Wilson made the statement in a letter which conveniently no longer existed. Wilson never confirmed the quote or, as far as I can tell, ever said anything else about the movie. The fact that it's been repeatedly quoted does not mean that it is true. Perhaps the item can be phrased to indicate the distinction; Wilson has enough warts on him that it seems hardly necessary to add more. --User:JpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 18:35, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC) ::Given that the quote is not directly about the KKK, and since it is apparently not 100% verifiable (or even 50%), I suggest we remove it from this article. It would be better suited, with qualifications, for the article on the movie. And yes, Wilson and race relations - ugh. -User:Willmcw 23:16, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) Considering that the Woodrow Wilson Foundation attests to the accuracy of the statement, it is fairly pointless for Wilson apologists to try to distance Wilson from this quote. 155/ 11 Apr 05 :The quote, if true, should go in the articles about the movie and about Wilson. It is only tangentially related to the KKK itself. If FDR saw and commented on Gone With The Wind, we wouldn't necessarily include that in the American Civil War. -User:Willmcw 21:41, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC) :It should be noted that while Wilson't quote about the movie may be disputed, it is undisputed that the movie repeatedly quoted Wilson's book, "History of the American People". [http://www.geocities.com/emruf5/birthofanation.html]. It is entirely possible that Wilson uttered the line quoted, though it is still of questrionable relevance to this article. -User:Willmcw 21:47, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC) ==IMMIGRATION QUOTAS== NEGROES DID NOT IMMIGRATE TO THE UNITED STATES FOR ABOUT 75 YEARS (1885-1960) DUE TO A QUOTA SYSTEM THAT PERMITTED ONLY A PAUCITY OF PEOPLE TO ENTER THE UNITED STATES FROM AFRICA. Why lie about it? March 10th, 2005 1807Z UTC *Above contributed by 68.162.134.204, who has repeatedly tried to add POV information about "sneaky blacks" to the KKK article. User:Katefan0 18:13, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC) **As for immigration quotas, regardless of whether what you say is true (I have no opinion on this particular part), what in the world does that have to do with the KKK? I fail to see how it is relevant, and adding the information to the article in the way you did ("sneaky blacks") was highly biased and, frankly, offensive to me at least. User:Katefan0 18:13, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC) :I challenge you to point out where somebody lied about it. User:Silsor 18:49, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC) My interest in the KKK article is due to my desire to see accurate statements in Wikipedia articles. The KKK article is full of wishy-washy statements. A FEW FACTS ABOUT IMMIGRANTS. (Taken from an encyclopedia). African (black) immigrants to the United States in 1914 totaled 8,447 0f the 1,218,480 immigrants who entered the United states that year. Chinese totaled 2,354. Japanese totaled 8,941. East Indians totaled 174. Koreans totaled 152. Pacific Islander, 1 person. Some 33 other categories of people are listed, too. Italian (south) totaled 251,612. Italian (north) totaled 44,802. Polish totaled 122,657. Hebrew totaled 138,051. (Jews are not on the list). German totaled 79,871. English totaled 51,746. Irish totaled 33,898. Greek totaled 45,881. Russian totaled 44,957. Slovak totaled 25,819. Scandinavian totaled 36,053. Magyar totaled 44,538. In 1910, a man named Dillingham proposed that a "national-origins" rule be added to the immigration laws. The Burnett-Dillingham Bill created quite a stir from 1911-1913. The national origins provision was approved in 1921 on May 19th, and became effective on June 3rd. It was extended in May, 1922 to June 30, 1924. The Immigration Act of 1924 was another important measure. By that time, immigrants were being called "aliens" or "alien immigrants." The national origins provision (or rule) based its quota of immigrants on the number of people of each type already in the United states in 1910. It was designed to modify the types of immigrants who were entering the United States. It was referred to as the 2 percent provision. The rule resulted in the selection of more immigrants from northern and western Europe, and fewer from southern and eastern Europe. As proclaimed by President Coolidge on June 30, 1924, the largest quota for 1924-25 was that of Germany, 51,227. The quota for Great Britain and Northern Ireland was 34,007; Irish Free state, 28,567; Italy 3845; Russia, 2248. In 1921-22, the quota for the entire continent of Africa was 120; Australia, 271; United Kingdom, 77,206; Germany, 68,039; Russia, 34,427; Italy, 42,021; Poland, 20,019; Czecho-Slovakia, 14,269; France, 5,692. The Chinese Exclusion act of 1882 led to a decrease in their population numbers from 71,531 in 1910 to 61,686 in 1920. The Japanese population total increased from 72,157 to 111,025 in the 10 years. In that decade, 5,735,811 immigrants entered the United States from 1911 to 1920. It is a case of deception whenever a person hints that Blacks and Asians led or encouraged Mr. Simmons to form the new Ku Klux Klan in 1915 because of their "increasing numbers." His organization was intent on reducing the influx of southern and eastern Catholics from Europe (i.e., to keep a Catholic out of the White House). Jews were catching hell in Russia due to pogroms, so they fled for their lives. Whenever inaccurate, misleading statements are made in Wikipedia articles of the KKK sort, they taint all of the other Wikipedia articles. Accuracy must be the most important ideal in Wikipedia. ''Please do not obliterate the facts and figures''. they represent ''accuracy'', not conjecture. Friday, March 11, 2005, 1915Z (UTC) *And I guess you adding that information by calling black people "sneaky blacks" also represents your dedication to accuracy, right? User:Katefan0 19:25, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) Saturday, March 19th, 2005 From 1911 through 1921, the total number of immigrants was 6,535,039. Koreans totaled 1,110 during those eleven years. Pacific Islanders totaled 101. African (black) totaled 76,344. Chinese totaled 23,280. Japanese totaled 91,269. Mexicans totaled 236,548. Italian (south) totaled 1,181,603. Italian (north) totaled 206,229. Slovak totaled 141,630. Scandinavians totaled 274,716. Hebrew totaled 610,201. (Jews are not on the list). Due to the Great War in Europe, the total number of immigrants fell from 1,218,480 in 1914 to 110,618 in 1918, which was the lowest total since 72,183 immigrants arrived in 1862. Records of immigration to the United States begin in 1820. FOREIGN-BORN WHITE MALES 21 YEARS OF AGE OR OVER, 1910. ''All countries'' 6,646,817. ''Germany''1,278,667, ''Russia'' 737,120, ''Italy'' 712,812, ''Austria'' 609,437, ''Ireland'' 597,860, ''Canada and Newfoundland'' 533,359, ''Canada---French'' 170,987, ''England'' 437,152, ''Sweden'' 349,022, ''Hungary'' 255,844, ''Norway'' 213,042, ''Scotland'' 133,116, ''Denmark'' 102,398, ''Mexico''102,009, ''Bulgaria, Servia, and Montenegro'' 17,524. I do not know how many of these purported "foreign-born white males" were actually sneaky "Blacks" who out-foxed the Governmental authorities. "Blacks" are too clever to be caught (everyone knows that)! Time: 2000Z GMT ::Don't presume to speak for me (or everyone). Your biased language reveals your true motives, regardless of how many "facts" you dump into this page. User:Katefan0 22:44, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC) April 2nd, 2005 The human brain can develop certain psychoses which prevent it from regarding facts and figures. Whenever the human brain becomes afflicted by those psychoses, a "stupid" person results. I am not wasting my time by trying to affect the minds of other people. My aim was to show that there were no "increasing numbers of Blacks and Asians" in the United States in 1915 who inspired Mister Simmons to organize the Ku Klux Klan. Mister Simmons was from the State of Georgia (U.S.A.). More than one million Negroes lived in that State in 1915. Those Negroes were laborers (cotton-pickers, etc.) and the backbone of the economy in that State and elsewhere. Mister Simmons may not have ever heard of a "Black" or ever seen an "Asian." Negroes were lynched in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and other States without anyone raising an eyebrow, so Mister Simmons knew that the Negroes were powerless. Most of the "Asians" lived in the three States on the West Coast in 1915 (a long way from Georgia). Many immigrants were white men and Catholics who eventually might become voters and vote for other Catholics. About eighty percent of the immigrants were males. The American men gave women the right to vote in 1920 because they knew that the women were mostly ("indigenous") Protestants who would blunt the impact that the influx of Catholic immigrants had created. Prior to 1916, women were given equal suffrage rights with men in the States of Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Washington, California, Idaho, Orehon, Montana, Kansas, Arizona, Nevada, and the Territory of Alaska. Women in Illinois could vote in the national elections, but they faced some other restrictions. The Constitution confers the the right of suffrage directly on no one, so that there are no United States voters (individual States control who may vote). Many States kept Negroes from voting by inserting clauses into the State Constitutions. Such clauses were designed to defeat the Fifteenth Amendment. The United States Supreme Court gave such amendatory clauses the ax in June, 1915. Even so, Negroes did not vote because they had to risk their lives to do so. They might be hanged from a tree, and give the law enforcement officers a good laugh. Sneaky Blacks were never caught, though (everyone knows that). 12:15 GMT == Symbols == The sections on symbols includes this text: :''Some Klan groups in the 1950s and 1960s attempted to usurp the use of the Confederate battle flag (the Southern Cross, not related to the "Stars and Bars" or governmental flag of the Confederacy) in efforts aimed against desegregation and racial integration in the South. This appropriation of Southern symbols has been widely disavowed by historical and heritage activists in the South today. In its current fragmented form, the Klan in some instances continue to use both the Battle Flag and the American flag, but in both instances without official sanction.'' This seems oddly written. Was the aim of the KKK in the 50s and 60s to "usurp" a symbol, or to have one? It seems to me that we should just say they used it. And from whom would they have received official sanction to use the flags of either the U.S.A. or the C.S.A? The whole notion is off-the-wall. I hope someone around can do the research. In the meantime, I'm inclined to cut some dubious assertions. -User:Willmcw 11:48, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) ::''Some Klan groups in the 1950s and 1960s appropriated the Confederate battle flag (the Southern Cross, not related to the "Stars and Bars" or governmental flag of the Confederacy) in efforts aimed against desegregation and racial integration in the South.'' ::First it said "usurped", now it says "appropriated." How does someone "appropriate" a flag? They did not take it for their exclusive use, but simply began to use it. The more correct phrase would seem to be, "began to use", as in "some groups...began to use the flag." -User:Willmcw 01:45, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC) == A couple of boys? == I'm dubious about the recent addition regarding "a couple of boys".... --User:JpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 03:25, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) :The facts in the addition are basically correct but the language is crap. They were grown men, not boys, although "boys" could be used as a slang term for them (see for example good old boy). User:Silsor 03:37, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC) == A Protestant Organization == Saying that the KKK was a " Protestant white-supremacist organization" in this context means that they were ''composed'' of Protestants and believed in Protestant supremacy. It does not imply that they were endorsed by some sort of centralized Protestant authority; indeed, there is no such Protestant centralized authority. Any organization with a Protestant character or an exclusively Protestant membership is therefore a 'Protestant organization', regardless of whether or not they are recognized by a Protestant church. Saying that they were just 'Protestant-based' is insufficent. The original KKK's Protestant identity was absolutely, incontrovertibly central to its ideology; the article must touch on the fact that it was virulently pro-Protestant and virulently anti-Catholic, and then explain how these views changed over time. You can add sentences saying that they were never endorsed by any Protestant church, that they were never formally identified with the Protestant faith, or that the vast majority of Protestants never supported them; but presenting the original KKK as anything other than a Protestant organization is false. User:Aquillion 03:49, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) **Personally I agree that simply leaving it at "Protestant-based" is not quite enough. They were not only composed of Protestants, they were rabidly anti-Catholic (though their slanted propaganda at the time denied this). WASPs who joined the KKK saw the KKK as part of their faith, they felt that WASPs were inherently superior to other races (and religious groups) and that oppressing Jews, Catholics and black people was part of "God's plan." From a pamphlet of the time: "The KKK... chief aims of which are to bring the different branches of the Protestant Church into a closer relationship ... and to preserve the US as a Protestant Christian nation." ([http://digital.lib.msu.edu/collections/index.cfm?action=view&TitleID=141&Format=gif&PageNum=3] (from the Michigan State University digital archives [http://digital.lib.msu.edu/collections/index.cfm?CollectionID=22]). I do think there should be careful wording to make it clear that there was no central Protestant body that endorsed these beliefs. Also, let's be clear, Protestants didn't have to be in the KKK to dislike Catholics -- enmity between the groups, regardless of whether individuals belonged to the KKK or not, was fairly widespread and cut both ways. User:Katefan0 17:01, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) :Would describing it as "an organization with an exclusively-Protestant membership" convey the right meaning? -User:Willmcw 20:23, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) :*I think what Aquillion has been trying to convey is that the KKK was not simply a white supremacist organization in its earliest incarnation. I think WehrWolf's moving Protestant to describe its early founders is fine, but the text of the intro still does not adequately convey that the KKK, originally, were not only racists, they were also religious zealots. I would propose that language to that effect be added in the same place, up at the article's top, where white supremacy is mentioned. User:Katefan0 21:19, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) == Removal of theories about the origins of garb == Also, WehrWolf, why did you remove the information about Spanish Easter garb? I'm not familiar enough to know whether this is a widely accepted theory, but I'd want to see some sort of disproof before just deleting that information. I personally have no opinion, but ask for the sake of making sure valuable information wasn't deleted. User:Katefan0 21:24, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) There is no evidence that these traditions were adopted by the KKK. Aside from an anecdotal and superficial resemblance, there is nothing linking these costumes together. The Spanish Easter costume is intended to demonstrate the penitence and shame of the religious pilgrim, the KKK had no such motives. In addition, the Klan was virulently anti-Catholic when the traditional costume was adopted, and it is highly doubtful they would drape themselves in the trappings of Catholicism. It doesn't pass the logic test. If you can find evidence that proves they were related, I would be happy to reconsider. User:WehrWolf 21:55, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) ==Where is the Klan?== I admit that I made a mistake calling the American midwest the middle of the western United States. I already admitted this in my last edit summary, but you felt the need to gloat. I think that calling a group of the Eastern United States the "midwest" has no meaning to anybody outside the United States, and that we should just say "eastern and southern United States". If you make it "midwest" and link it, nobody will click, because they will assume they know what it means. After all, I used the specific word "midwest" wrongly to describe exactly what many other people will think when they read that. User:Silsor 15:58, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) :I was not gloating. If you were offended by my edits and explanations, I'm sorry, but apparently they were needed to finally convince you. This started out with you calling these states the mideast - which according to wikipedia is closer to Baghdad than Indianapolis. The whole point of this exercise is to be clear and factual. The membership in the Eastern united states (ie Northeast according to wikipedia) does not compare in numbers to the membership in the Midwest. Additionally, we are contributing to Wikipedia, and should stay consistent with Wikipedia geographic designations. User:WehrWolf 17:03, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) ::How does this help our readers know where Klan operations are centered? People who are not American will have no clue what your meaning is. Saying "southern and eastern United States" is clear and factual, but your version is only factual, and then only to a limited readership. Just because Wikipedia acknowledges the naming conventions of our US readership doesn't mean they should be used. ::Also, if you're going to use the American meaning of "Midwest", shouldn't it be capitalised? User:Silsor 20:27, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) This is the English language version of Wikipedia. The terms here are common to the English speaking world - they are not used only in the United States. If the Swedes define US geography differently then the Swedish terms should be used in the Swedish language article on the KKK. In regard to your question about "how does it help our readers know where Klan operations are centered? - this was not my platform, I was only correcting obviously erroneous information. You provided the map. Please, get over this injury to your pride and move on. User:WehrWolf 20.43, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) :Why do you have to assume this is about my pride? What happened to Wikipedia:Assume good faith? I haven't accused you of pride or US-centrism. I argue there's no reason to believe that the terms you are using are commonly known outside the United States, and that we should put our readers first by using universal terminology. Can we carry on a conversation on such a simple topic without any more insults? User:Silsor 21:02, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) ::Silsor, thanks for doing that re-write. It is more relevant to indicate where the KKK ''are'' than to say where they are ''not''. Cheers, -User:Willmcw 21:48, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) Silsor - RELAX. If you think I was insulting you, then you should get out more. That was never my intent, or my action. I agree that we should put our readers first - by providing them accurate information, not a contributor's personal views. Best Wishes. User:WehrWolf 23:27, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) Relocated from article page - In Canada after one attempt in the early 20th century to stop a black man and a white woman from marrying in ontario, the government of canada passed a law that made the KKK illigal in canada. *(Above by User:Wehrwolf). The paragraph was terribly formulated, but I think the information is true. From [http://www.media-awareness.ca] - ''Is spreading hatred illegal in Canada? (The answer is yes: the Criminal Code of Canada, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Broadcasting Act and the Immigration Act all address hate mongering.)'' This isn't a definitive Website but it does appear that it probably would be banned under this sort of statute. Their symbols are probably banned or something. · User:Katefan0User talk:Katefan0 18:08, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC) ==Superman vs. the Klan== Ref Levitt and Dubner, 62-66. User:Binkymagnus 21:12, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC) == Structure? == As most Christian based religious groups there is no structure. All donations go to a mission in neverland where the Pastor is molesting your children and lusting after your wife. The last klan member I heard about was in Louisiana. Pastor jailed in child molestation inquiry Kansas City Star - May 20 12:02 AM PONCHATOULA, La. — A minister and his followers are suspected of sexually molesting as many as two dozen children — as well as dogs and cats — at their church, authorities say. Same day as Saddam in his briefs?????????? It seems even in the heart of the south the klan has fallen into the trap of waiting for Jesus to clean his house. == "Etymology" == Under the "Etymology" section of the article: What is the last sentence referring to? It doesn't seem to be referring to the Sherlock Holmes story... it also contradicts the first sentence... — User:Flamingspinach | User_talk:Flamingspinach 20:54, 2005 Jun 1 (UTC) == my opinion == Some of the people that have posted on this page should read a book before discussing a topic. The Klan was formed to insure the southern way of life, not to kill African-Americans...origionally. At the culmination of the Civil War Confederate soldiers were told to go home and things would be fine. When they did go home they found Carpetbaggers and Scalawags had taken their jobs, land, and even family in some instances. This is why the Klan was formed. Also, they felt it necessary to uphold a moral and righteous community. If a man beat his wife, they would beat that man regardless of race, religion, or friendship for that matter. The Klan disbanded in the late 1860's because it was BECOMING a racist organization of bigots (I believe Gen. Forrest is documented as stating this). Its resurface in the early 20th century as a racist movement contributes to false alligations concerning its origin. No, I do not have any sources...that is, other than living in Alabama for 17 years. Oral tradition is alive around the world, including the "back woods" of Alabama (as many see it). I have also lived in the Northeast and currently reside in California. Let me tell you from personal experience: Racism is still alive today. Ironically I have seen more social acceptance and integration in the South than any other region of the United States. Don't get me wrong; I am not in any way defending the Klan. In fact, I have heard stories that would make you sick. But, I have also read much about the KKK; most of which is biased. The key is to read numerous differing OPINIONS and decide for yourself what might be the truth. Regardless of what you might think, NO single source is 100% correct, including that of mine. But, we were all given common sense to decyper for ourselves what we want to believe and most of us are too stuborn to listen to another point of view. The previous statements construct my personal opinion, or educated guess, as to what happened according to my vast study of the subject. It is your right and priviledge to disagree. As for the debate throughout this discussion about what constitutes being a Christian, that is a matter of opinion as well and has been dabated for almost 2000 years. [The first group to refer to themselves as "Christians" were in Antioch sometime after Jesus' cruxifiction and resurrection. (Acts 11:26)] ''an enlightened mind'' if i post here again i will attempt to be more clear...my apologies leave religion out of this, you still have yer to justify thier actions, or explain them away, they, being "the klan" are still a bunch of small minded fuckwits. User:Gabrielsimon 00:49, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) I am not trying to justify their actions. And, I agree that they ARE "small minded fuckwits"; operative word being ARE. If you READ my post you will see that I am simply expressing my OPINION! i aknowleged that, but its still something that can rile people up quite a bit, and btw, theres no need to get antzey... btw, sigh your posts. User:Gabrielsimon 00:53, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) get over it...and yourself are and were, with these people, they have always been as stupid and morally lacking as they currently are. User:Gabrielsimon 01:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) I am sure you've met numerous klansmen in Canada. Unlike you, I have a basis for my statements. "Always" applies to nothing and these people are not stupid. In fact some of them hold very high positions in the United States government. They are smart enough to work the system from within. I believe the word you are looking for is ignorant, which they are. Who are you to label someone elses morals? You may not agree with the morals of the klan, and I can agree with you on that, but don't generalize a subject about which you yourself are ignorant. *Sign your posts, please. You can do this by typing~~~~ after you post. It makes it a lot easier to follow a conversation. --User:JpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 03:23, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Official homepage? ==
Should we link to [http://www.kkk.com KKK.com], after all it seems to be the official homepage, or at least the page of an organisation calling itself the KKK. --User:Ashmodai 08:05, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:There is no one Klan anymore - the copyright has expired and anyone can call themselves the "KKK" now. The group that has that website, The Knights Party, is just one more tiny group. The website is down at the moment, but it may be set to redirect to http://www.kkk.bz/index1.htm. Does it tell the readers much about the KKK? I don't think so, but other may disagree. [Here's a line from their version of history: ''The Knights Party is the 6th era of the Ku Klux Klan.'' Whew.] -User:Willmcw 09:14, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)
== Comment on ACLU ==
The concluding statement that the American Civil Liberties Union defended the Klan's first amendment rights more appropriately belongs
in the article on the ACLU. The relevant point being that the Union defends First Amendment rights, not the Klan ''per se''.
soverman 20 Jun 0109 (UTC)
:It's a significant fact that the KKK has needed, and accepted, the help of the ACLU. If you object to it being at the end we could potentially move it to a different location within the article. -User:Willmcw 07:26, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
==Michael Donald lynching, copyright, other hate groups==
I think the article should say something about the Michael Donald lynching; the resulting civil lawsuit was apparently a crippling financial blow to the Klan(s):
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkkk.htm
I'm also confused by the statements that Ku Klux Klan is in the public domain, and used to be copyrighted. I don't think the name of an organization can be copyrighted under U.S. law!?
And finally, I think the article should say something about the relationship of the Klan(s) today to other hate groups: neo-nazis, christian identity, etc.[http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp]
I'll see if I can find out more about the Klan at the library, and maybe do some editing on this article myself, if nobody else steps up to the plate.--User:Bcrowell 18:53, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
==KKK outside the USA==
Are there KKK or KKK-originated organisations outside the USA? I have heard that there are in Canada. How about other countries? User:Everton
==terrorist==
Today, an anonymous editor (not me) inserted "a domestic terrorist group" in the first sentence. Silsor then reverted the edit. I've reinserted the (wikified) word "terrorist" in the first sentence, so it now reads "The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) was a terrorist fraternal organization in the United States that advocated white supremacy, and promoted Protestantism to the exclusion of other religions." Silsor, could you explain your rationale for reverting the anon's edit? The terrorism article says this by way of definition:
:Terrorism is a controversial and subjective term with multiple definitions. One definition means a violent action targetting civilians exclusively. Another definition is the use or threatened use of violence for the purpose of creating fear in order to achieve a political, economic, religious, or ideological goal.
It seems to me that the KKK was a terrorist organization under either of the two definitions. It targetted civilians exclusively, and it also used violence and the threat of violence for the purpose of creating fear, etc.--User:Bcrowell 22:32, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:I removed the words "domestic terrorist group" because they have an extreme negative connotation, and since the anonymous editor only added those words without touching the rest of the article, it seems to me that he or she was trying to slur the KKK and did not have the intention of writing a neutral introduction. I was the second person to revert, not the first. User:Silsor 22:36, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
::How do you feel about the present version? Note that the word "terrorist" is also used elsewhere in the article. Just because a word has a negative connotation to many people, that doesn't mean that its use makes the article POV.--User:Bcrowell 22:43, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:::By changing "Ku Klux Klan was" to "Ku Klux Klan is" you lumped all the Klans together under the label of "terrorist". I rearranged the words to make the present tense description make sense, but did not remove the "terrorist" designation. Have you done the research to verify that every independent group that has ever used the name "Ku Klux Klan" (dozens at least) is/was in fact a terrorist organisation? User:Silsor 22:48, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
::::The designation might be better placed elsewhere in the article. The SPLC calls the earlier KKK, "one of the nation's first terrorist groups" [http://www.iupui.edu/~aao/kkk.html]. The modern KKK, such as it is, has been called a terroist group too. See ''[http://www.rickross.com/reference/kkk/kkk12.html SC City Labels KKK Terrorist Group]'', and ''[http://www.uua.org/actions/racial-justice/81kkk.html General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association Condemning the Ku Klux Klan]''. It is also included in the ''[http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=62 MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base]''. Maybe we shuold have a discussion of this towards the end of the article, where we can properly attribute it. -User:Willmcw 22:57, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
:::::I've put in a somewhat revised version of what you wrote as a footnote in the first sentence, along with a wikilink to the article on terrorism, and a quote from the article's definition of terrorism.--User:Bcrowell 23:06, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::The article already states repeatedly that the KKK's are/were violent. (Note that the reason Forrest called for the disbanding of the original organization was that he disapproved of its violence.)--User:Bcrowell 22:59, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
FWIW, MSN Encarta's article "Ku Klux Klan"[http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761562317/Ku_Klux_Klan.html] has the following lead: "Ku Klux Klan, secret terrorist organization that originated in the southern states during the period of Reconstruction following the American Civil War and was reactivated on a wider geographic basis in the 20th century."
--User:Bcrowell 23:26, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
==Michael Donald lynching image==
I've added a photo of the 1981 Michael Donald lynching. I believe it falls within Wikipedia's guidelines for Wikipedia:Fair use, and I think it's necessary to the article, because if the article is weighted heavily toward pre-1922 images, and never shows anything within the last 50 years, people will get the comfortable feeling that the Klan is a thing of the past. The Michael Donald lynching was also extremely historically important, because of the large civil judgment, which had the effect of bankrupting one of the large national Klan organizations, and furthering the decentralization of the Klan.--User:Bcrowell 20:48, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:I have grave misgivings about the use of this image and wish to protest it's implementation. Not only are the current lynching photos up disturbing enough, a full colour graphic image of a murdered person is not suited for the Wikipedia project. Whilst it is accepted that this goes on, illustration of it without warning, to the point where it can be accessable by a minor or someone who's religion dictates that imagery or imagery of the dead is prohibited would cause neccesary negativity. User:Jachin 22:22, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::A number of other articles contain images of dead people, murdered or worse.(Rape of Nanking, Mary Jane Kelly) There is no law or rule that minors should not see photos of dead people (otherwise families would not own televisions). Anyone reading an article about a group known for violence should expect that there may be photographic evidence. That said, such photos should not be larger than necessary and should not be at the top of the page, where they'd be the first thing a browsing reader sees. This photo seems appropriately sized and placed. -User:Willmcw 22:31, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
:::I have to agree with Willmcw, particularly given this article's subject matter. If it were an article on bunnies, the picture was too gory or was improperly placed, I'd have to vote it down. But this is the KKK. Besides which, Wikipedia isn't censored. If someone's afraid of having their sensibilities offended, this perhaps isn't the place to be browsing an article on such a topic. · User:Katefan0User talk:Katefan0 22:43, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
::Jachin, I agree with you that the images are disturbing. It's been a very unpleasant and depressing process for me to work with these images. It makes me feel negative about the human race. However, just because reality is disturbing, that doesn't mean we should ignore it. I got into editing the KKK and lynching articles this week because of the news about the Killen trial, which I discussed with my 5-year-old and 8-year-old children at the breakfast table. I think it's important for generations who have no personal memory of some of these events to realize that this kind of thing is always waiting to happen to society as soon as we let down our guard. My grandmother (their great-grandmother), who is Jewish, hid under the bed as a girl in Ohio when the KKK marched down the street. I don't want that to happen again during my kids' time on earth, and I think the way to keep it from happening again is to remember it accurately, not to try to forget that it happened. I think Wikipedia:Profanity is relevant here: "Images, particularly photos, often have a greater impact than words. Therefore, it may be preferable not to embed possibly offensive images in articles, but rather use a media:image name link with an appropriate warning. On the other hand, if the page title already tells the reader what to expect (e.g. Erotic art in Pompeii), such a warning may be unnecessary. Censorship should be avoided, if an image adds something to an article."--User:Bcrowell 03:15, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Bcrowell's edits ==
Bcrowell, just wanted to point out a paragraph that I think is not entirely in keeping with encyclopedic style. You wrote: '' It is important to understand that, in the context of the post-Civil War South, the "protection of southern womanhood" has implications beyond its literal meaning. In this society, violence and the threat of violence, including lynching, were tools of social control used, for example, to enforce Jim Crow etiquette, or to prevent economic competition from blacks.'' This reads like an essay, not an encyclopedia -- an encyclopedia shouldn't tell a reader what it's important to understand or not. I suggest something like: ''Some suggest that "the protection of southern womanhood" in this context was a euphemism for continued subjugation of and violence against black people.'' or something like that. · User:Katefan0User talk:Katefan0 16:35, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
:Hi Katefan0 -- Good point! Would you like to do the edit yourself? --User:Bcrowell 16:59, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::Oh no, please go ahead. I don't really know enough about the subject to write about it with authority -- it's a good and valid point, the phraseology just caught my eye. I mostly patrol this page because it frequently gets vandalized, not because of any real expertise in the subject, beyond what one would know from an interest in American history. · User:Katefan0User talk:Katefan0
White supremacist groups in the U.S.
#redirect:Ku Klux Klan
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Ku_Klux_Klan:
Ku-klux-klan
Ku-Klux_Klan
Ku_Klux_Klan
Ku_Klux_Klan
Ku_Klux_Klan
Ku_klux_klan
Ku_Klux_Klan_,
Ku_Klux_Klan_costume
Ku_Klux_Klan_crimes
Ku_Klux_Klan_members
Ku Klux Klan
Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is a term used to refer to a number of past and present fraternal organizations in the United States that have advocated white supremacy, and promoted Protestant to the exclusion of other religions. In its original incarnation, the Ku Klux Klan sought to reestablish Democratic power in the South at the time when Radical Republicans and carpetbaggers dominated Reconstruction. It was founded by ex-servicemen of the Confederate States Army in 1866, led by Nathan Bedford Forrest. The original group opposed the reforms enforced on the South by federal troops regarding the treatment of former History of slavery in the United Statess, often using violence to achieve their goals. Forrest ordered the Klan to disband in 1869, but many of its groups in other parts of the country ignored the order and continued to function. A second distinct group using the same name was started atop Stone Mountain near Atlanta in 1915 by William J. Simmons. This second group existed as a money-making fraternal organization and fought to maintain the ways of the past by fighting against the increasing numbers of Roman Catholics, Jews, Blacks, Asians, and other immigrants into the United States. This group, although preaching racism, was a mainstream organization with 4 million members at its peak in the 1920s. Its popularity fell during the Great Depression, and membership fell again during World War II presumably because of mass enlistment or conscription to the Armed Forces. The name ''Ku Klux Klan'' has since fallen into the public domain. It was adopted in different forms by many different unrelated groups, including many who opposed the Civil Rights Act and desegregation in the 1960s. Today, dozens of organizations with chapters across the United States and other countries use all or part of the name in their titles. ==Etymology== The name Ku Klux Klan comes from κυκλος (''kyklos''), the Greek word for circle, and the Scots Gaelic-derived word "clan". Another etymology proposes an onomatopoeia of the loading of a gun (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle mentions this latter etymology in the Sherlock Holmes story The Five Orange Pips). ==Traditions== Members of the Klan wear white robes with hoods to represent the ghosts of Confederate soldiers returning from the dead to take revenge on their enemies, and to hide their faces. Another explanation of the white robes and hoods was the "anonymity of good works" – as the Ku Klux Klan members believe their works were given to them by God, they wear the robes and hoods as a symbol of humility. Yet another explanation of the costumes may have been to imitate the medieval Knights Templar. Much of the original leadership of the Klan were Freemasonry with the degree of "Knight Templar." Titles such as "Grand Wizard", "Exalted Cyclops" and "Kleagle" are used to indicate status. ==History== ===The original Ku Klux Klan=== [[Image:Misissippi ku klux.jpg|200px|thumb|Three Ku Klux Klan members captured in Tishomingo County, Mississippi, Mississippi in September 1871.]] The original Ku Klux Klan was first established in Pulaski, Tennessee after the end of the American Civil War on December 24, 1865 by Confederate veterans. It grew to prominence after a convention held in Nashville in the summer of 1866. At this convention, Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest presided as the Grand Wizard. The main goal of the Klan was to fight Congressional Reconstruction. During the Reconstruction the South was undergoing drastic changes to its social and political life. Whites saw this as a threat to their supremacy as a race and sought to end this process. Due to Congress enacting laws that promoted racial equality, southern whites could not turn to the law in order to regain their power through the Democratic Party. In addition, the Klan sought to control the political and social status of the freed slaves. More specifically, it attempted to curb black education, economic advancement, and voting rights. Violence came to be seen as the best way to accomplish their goals. However, the Klan's violence was not limited to African Americans; Southern Republicans also became the target of vicious intimidation tactics. The Klan became the violent arm of the Democratic Party. As federal control of the ex-Confederate states was withdrawn, the local Caucasian population re-established their power and with it segregation laws. Forrest ordered the Klan to disband in 1869, stating that its increasingly violent tactics were at odds with the original reason for which he founded it, which he stated to be the "protection of southern womanhood." It is important to understand that, in the context of the post-Civil War South, the "protection of southern womanhood" has implications beyond its literal meaning. In this society, violence and the threat of violence, including lynching, were tools of social control used, for example, to enforce Jim Crow etiquette, or to prevent economic competition from blacks. Protecting white women against black men was a common pretext for lynchings. Despite Forrest's order, many Klan groups around the country continued to function without a centralized organization. In 1871 President Ulysses S. Grant put what was believed to be the final nail in the Klan's coffin by signing The Klan Act and Enforcement Act. The Klan became an illegal group, and the use of force was authorized to suppress and disrupt the organization's activities. Hundreds of Klan members were fined or imprisoned, and ''habeas corpus'' was suspended in some counties in South Carolina. These efforts were so successful that the Klan was eliminated in South Carolina and decimated throughout the rest of the country. The Klan Act was declared unconstitutional in 1882, but the Klan was largely gone by then, and had in fact achieved many of its original goals, such as denying political rights to blacks. ===The second Ku Klux Klan=== The second Ku Klux Klan was established during World War I, a feat which arguably would not have been possible without President Woodrow Wilson's influence and D. W. Griffith's controversial classic film, ''The Birth of a Nation''. Upon seeing the film, Wilson remarked, "It was like writing history with lightning. It is all so terribly true." [http://www.woodrowwilson.org/content/articles/48130001/file_2196.pdf](Portable Document Format) Griffith's film was based on the book and play ''The Clansman (book)'' and the book ''The Leopard's Spots (book)'', both by Thomas Dixon who intended "to revolutionize northern sentiment by a presentation of history that would transform every man in my audience into a good United States Democratic Party!". This was consistent with the new Klan's greater success at recruiting in the US Midwest region of the United States than in the South. Many poor whites were drawn to the idea that their economic woes were caused by African American, or by Jewish bankers, or by other such groups, similar to the Nazi party's propaganda in Nazi Germany. An important event in the coalescence of the second Klan was the lynching of Leo Frank, a Jewish factory manager. Frank had been accused of the brutal rape and strangulation of a 13 year old employee named Mary Phagan. Allegations arose that the motivation was due to the story being taken up of the crime by Thomas E. Watson who was the editor for The Jeffersonian magazine at the time and later a leader in the reorganization of the Klan who was later elected to the U.S. Senate. The Frank lynching demonstrated both the Klan's continuing violent nature and its relatively new emphasis on anti-semitism. This Klan was operated as a profit-making venture by its leaders, and participated in the boom in fraternal organizations at the time. It differed from the first Klan; the first Klan was United States Democratic Party and U.S. Southern states, this Klan boasted members from both the United States Democratic Party and to a lesser degree United States Republican Party parties and was influential throughout the United States, with major political influence on politicians in several states. It collapsed largely as a result of a scandal involving D. C. Stephenson, the Grand Dragon of Indiana and fourteen other states, who was convicted of the rape and murder of Madge Oberholtzer in a sensational trial (she was bitten so many times that one man who saw her described her condition as having been "chewed by a cannibalism"). The second Klan dwindled in popularity throughout the 1930s. It was disbanded in 1944 and the name Ku Klux Klan fell into the public domain. In the 1920s and 1930s a faction of the Klan called the Black Legion (murder cult) was very active in the Midwest region of the United States Rather than wearing white robes, the Legion wore black uniforms reminiscent of pirates. The Black Legion was the most violent and zealous faction of the Klan, and were notable for targeting and assassinating Communists and Socialists. Stetson Kennedy, folklorist and author, infiltrated the Klan after World War II, and provided information, including secret codewords, to the writers of the ''Superman (radio)'' radio program, resulting in a series of four episodes in which Superman took on the Klan. Kennedy intended to strip away the Klan's mystique, and the trivialization of the Klan's rituals and codewords likely did have a negative impact on Klan recruiting and membership. ===Later Ku Klux Klans=== After World War II, several organizations using the name Ku Klux Klan were established to counter the American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968) of the 1960s. These are the Klans that are still seen today, though as American society has become more racially inclusive, the Klan has once more shrunk dramatically. Vulnerability to lawsuits has encouraged the trend away from central organization, as when, for example, the lynching of Michael Donald in 1981 led to a civil suit that bankrupted one Klan group, the United Klans of America[http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkkk.htm]. Klan activity has also been diverted into other racist groups and movements, such as Christian Identity, Neo-Nazism groups, and racist subgroups of the skinheads. KKK organizations currently in operation include the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, the Imperial Klans of America, and the Knights of the White Kamelia. ==Political influence== The second Ku Klux Klan rose to great prominence and spread from the South into the Midwest region of the United States and Northern states and even into Canada. At its peak, most of the membership resided in Midwestern states. Through sympathetic elected officials, the KKK controlled the governments of Tennessee, Indiana, Oklahoma, and Oregon in addition to those of the Southern Democratic legislatures. Klan publications from the 1920's even claimed to have inducted Republican President Warren Harding at the White House, though the evidence of this event actually happening has never been substantiated. Klan delegates played a significant role at the 1924 Democratic National Convention in New York City, often called the "Klanbake Convention" as a result. The convention initially pitted Klan-backed candidate William McAdoo against New York Governor Al Smith, who drew the opposition of the group because of his Catholic faith. After days of stalemates and rioting, both candidates withdrew in favor of a compromise. Klan delegates defeated a Democratic Party platform plank that would have condemned their organization. On July 4, 1924 thousands of Klansmen converged on a nearby field in New Jersey where they participated in cross burnings, burned effigies of Smith, and celebrated their defeat of the platform plank. At its peak in the 1920s, Klan membership exceeded 4 million and counted many politicians among its members. In many places, such as some counties in Missouri during Harry Truman's youth, Klan membership was considered a ''de facto'' prerequisite for entering politics. Truman, a Democrat, is believed to have paid the membership fee to join the Klan during his youth, but never formally joined because of the Klan's anti-Catholicism. (When Truman became President of the United States, he had an extensive civil rights record and was much-hated by the Klan.) In Saskatchewan, Canada the KKK was seen as having a dramatic effect on the provincial election of 1929, which defeated the James G. Gardiner Liberal government and installed the 1929-1934 Progressive Conservative Party of Saskatchewan government of James T.M. Anderson. Another former Klansman to rise to national prominence was the Democratic Senator and later Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, who later repudiated the organization. Early in his political career Black defended one of the group's members for the assassination of Father James Coyle, an Alabama Catholic priest, and obtained a "not guilty" verdict through a Klan-controlled jury. David Duke served as a Republican state representative and ran for office in Louisiana in both Democratic and Republican primary elections. He served until 1978 as the National Director of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, and resigned from the Klan in 1980. West Virginia's Democratic Senator Robert Byrd was a recruiter for the Klan while in his 20s and 30s, rising to the title of Kleagle, and defended the Klan in his 1958 U.S. Senate campaign when he was 41 years old. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8272822/] He has since called joining the Klan his "greatest mistake." ==Today== [[Image:KKK holocaust a zionist hoax.jpg|thumb|right|KKK members calling the Holocaust a "Zionist hoax"]] Although often still discussed in contemporary American politics as representing the quintessential "fringe" end of the far right spectrum, today the group only exists in the form of a number of very isolated, scattered "supporters" that probably do not number more than a few thousand. In a 2002 report on "Extremism in America", the Jewish Anti-Defamation League wrote "Today, there is no such thing as the Ku Klux Klan. Fragmentation, decentralization and decline have continued unabated." However they also noted that the group's supporters' "need for justification runs deep in the disaffected and is unlikely to disappear, regardless of how low the Klan's fortunes eventually sink." As of 2003, there were an estimated 5,500 to 6,000 dedicated Klan members, divided among 158 chapters of a variety of splinter organizations, about two-thirds of which were in former Confederate States of America states. The other third are primarily in the Midwest region of the United States. [http://www.adl.org/backgrounders/american_knights_kkk.asp] Individuals who consider themselves members of the Klan tend to conceal their affiliation. They may use the acronym ''AYAK'' ('Are you a Klansman?') in conversation to surreptitiously identify themselves to another potential member. The response ''AKIA'' ('A Klansman I am') completes the greeting. The ACLU has provided legal support to various factions of the KKK, including defense of First Amendment rights to hold public rallies, parades, marches, and field political candidates. ==Related articles== *KKK Costume *Jim Crow laws *League of the Holy Court *Silent Brotherhood *Neo-Nazism *History of the United States (1865-1918) *Knights of the Ku Klux Klan ==External links== * [http://reactor-core.org/original-kkk.html The History of the Original Ku Klux Klan] * [http://www.splcenter.org/center/splcreport/report.jsp The Southern Poverty Law Center Report] * [http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/KKK.asp?xpicked=4&item=18 The ADL on the KKK] * [http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkkk.htm Spartacus Education about the KKK] ==References== ''[http://www.rickross.com/reference/kkk/kkk12.html SC City Labels KKK Terrorist Group]'', and ''[http://www.uua.org/actions/racial-justice/81kkk.html General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association Condemning the Ku Klux Klan]''. The KKK is also included in the ''[http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=62 MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base]''. # Southern Poverty Law Center. Active U.S. Hate Groups in 2004. ''Intelligence Report''. Retrieved April 5, 2005 from [http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp]. * Levitt, Stephen D. and Stephen J. Dubner. ''Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything''. New York: William Morrow (2005). Anti-Semitism Ku Klux Klan Terrorist organizations based in the United States White supremacist groups in the U.S. Reconstruction Racism Secret societies Fascism
Ku Klux Klan
Leadership Heierarcy? I'd be very interested to see a list of how the klan is structured. Wizards and Dragons and what not. --User:69.9.212.229 03:04, 5 May 2005 (UTC) :INSERTED ON D-DAY, 6/6/05 The second group of 1915 introduced the "Kl" tradition. "Klavern" and "Kleagle" and such weren't a part of the original KKK. 17:40 Zebra This may be off topic for the discussion here, but the Klan was not started by Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, he was made the Grand Wizard in 1867 when the Klan re-formed itself in light of the Reconstruction Acts. The costumes of the Klan were extremely similar to those worn by slave patrollers before the Civil war, (for further reading see Gladys Marie Fry ''Italic text''Night Riders in Black Folk History''Italic text'') and it is also noteworthy that the pre-1867 Klan was not simply an organization for bored aristocrats as is often reported. There is indication that even in its earliest days the Klan would ride out to black settlements to intimidate and assault their newly freed neighbors. The Klan has always been a violent organization, but has masked this with a language about being reluctant warriors. To clarify another point, the Klan officially died in 1869, but lynch law ruled the South well beyond the turn of the century. The official re-birth of the Klan was in 1915, but it had few adherents until 1920. the "No true Scottsman" fallacy?? I seem to recall that they also used a name Knights of something or other? Yes, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), or Grand Knights, and so forth. There have been hundreds--literally--of these groups, which go out of business or split into fractions when the leaders quarrel.--AMT :Knights of the White Camilla How is KKK related to the white supremist groups today? In movies, the KKK was first portrayed as staunch defenders of decency and morality (c.f. ''The Birth of Nations''--a film considered beautiful but racist by many late 20th Century African Americans and European Americans, but later portrayed as a film full of hatred and bigotry.) But were the KKK legitimate in their actions according to the laws then? For example, was public linching a legal thing to do back then? Any historian to comment? :::Oh crap! is this legal?! I just edited someone else's remarks. Please undo this if this is unfair. I apologize!!! (I don't remember the original). I, for a moment, thought I was editing a wikipedia main page--where they encourage me to "Edit Boldy!". but i don't mean to rob anyone of their voice. If I screwed up, please fix it!! I'm no historian, but I believe lynching was always illegal. But police, prosecutors and judges would often turn a blind eye to it. -- User:Simon J Kissane The Southern Poverty Law Center, which has a website, documents a lot of the shifting of personnel among white supremacist groups. The various Klans are related/not related to the others--the groups split up and form alliances largely on the basis of personal quarrels and legal difficulties. Also there are various ideologies and gurus that come into fashion and pass. As to the Klan: the original groups were formed to intimidate free blacks and middle-of-the-road whites during Reconstruction. They continued through at least the 1930s with the support of many influential people. The main thing to keep in mind is that they were political terrorists--lynching has always been illegal, as SJK says, but lynchings do not always come from political motives. In San Jose, California, for example, some kidnappers were dragged from the jail and hanged in the town square in the late 30s. A certain social prejudice may have been involved--they were drifters or less reputable members of the community. But the mob was just angry. On the other hand, Klan actions were undertaken for political ends: to prevent blacks from voting, to prevent labor organizing, to prevent votes against candidates that the Klan favored, to intimidate juries, and so forth.--AMT ---- This An organization in America dedicated to opposing civil rights for blacks, Jews, and other disadvantaged groups. does not strike me as how ''they'' would describe their primary purpose. I don't know how ''they'' would describe it, but in an article about them, how they describe themselves would seem to be a key fact, which it is essential to mention in the article itself. --User:LMS ---- I believe that the timeing of the KKK's re-emergence in the 20th century precedes the Great Depression by at least a decade. I seem to recall that it was a powerful force in Indiana politics in the 1920s, for example, and certainly "Birth of a Nation" was much earlier (1915 or so, as I recall). Egern ----- It is often heard that the name represents the sound of a gunman chambering a bullet. I've never heard of "kuklos" before. Can someone document this? --User:Dmerrill ---- :The :COINTELPRO program of the :FBI has also been credited with decimating the :KKK in the 1960s, leaving many anti-COINTELPRO liberals in a philosophical conundrum about the powers that should be granted to government. I think this is point to make, but it needs to be in a better NPOV. I'd do it myself, but I don't know much about the KKK and nothing at all about COINTELPRO. ---- :opposing [civil rights]? for Blacks, Jews, and other disadvantaged groups Since when were Jews in US 'disadvantaged' ? --User:Taw :well, Jews in America were legally disadvantaged - excluded by legal covenant or by silent consent from home ownership in many communities or neighborhoods and stated or tacit quotas were established for admission to universities. I don't much like the formulation as it is, but Jews were certainly not assimilated into broader American society before the 2nd quarter of the 20th century, with the process accelerating after WWII. --MichaelTinkler ---- (I'm not sure what this means in a sociological sense, but I think it's interesting...) My mother grew up in a very small, all-white Minnesota town in the 1930s and 1940s. She never even saw a black (or latin or Asian) person until she went to Minneapolis, half-a-day's drive away. Yet still, her town held Ku Klux Klan meetings regularly. One wonders, "Why?" User:firepink --- Removing "Christian." Do they profess to be Christian? Then state that they profess it, not that they are. :-)] : The KK has always been a Protestant Christian organization. In the United States, millions of Protestant Christians viewed the KKK as a valid Christian organization. (less do today, obviously!) This statement makes some people feel uncomfortable, but is the historical truth. In the USA from the late 1800s to World War II, hating black people, as well as Jews and Catholics, was seen as part of God's plan, by huge numbers of conservative southern Christian protestants. Many Americans still have such views today. I don't think we have the right to claim that "Well, they aren't really Christian, they only claim to be Christian. That is the infamous "No true Scottsman" fallacy that has always been used to whitewash religious intolerance and extremism. The fact is that they were and are Christians. [user:RK] I beg to differ. A Christian follows the teachings of Christ, and Christ overwhelmingly taught acceptance, inclusion, humility, and love. So someone claiming to be a Christian while hating and terrorizing people would not be a Christian. And no, I am not a Christian, either; I am an agnostic. user:Koyaanis Qatsi : I agree, though not for the same reasons. I simply don't think that Protestant Christianity is a homogeneous group, so that such an assertion can be made. There were certainly groups of churches in the south that included racism in their official or unofficial creeds, and they would certainly reject being called non-Christian simply because what they believed differs or even contradicts what other Protestant Christian groups believed. On the other hand, it is not representative of American Protestantism as a whole. A statement about Protestants should be more specific. user:Danny :If you actually read the bible, it is filled with passages advocating, with divine mandate, just the type of violent terrorism practiced by the KKK. check out the doings of Jehu: he gathered the followers of a competing religion into a temple under false pretenses and then slaughtered them all. Christianity has always viewed anything outside itself to be of the devil, and therefor a legitimate target for destruction. Bearing this in mind, I propose that the KKK are not just christians, but the epitomy of christianity. Anyone who thinks the cult of christianity is not soaked in blood is not very familiar with their own doctrine and ignorant of much of world history.-Helios The KKK pick out what they want to from the Bible...if they actually read it they would see that in the 10 Commandments it actually says 'Thou Shall Not Kill'. They obviously missed this...or misunderstood it. In modern English, it basically means 'Do not kill other beings'. It is just plain wrong, we are all the same in some way, it's not our fault that our bodies and skins are not all the same. Descrimination against a person with colour is basically like descrimination against another white person who is ugly. How many lessons are there in the Bible of accepting others?! The KKK sickens me...the fact that they atually killed coloured people who had the same beliefs and thoughts as they did...bt they looked different. O yeah...whats up with that hating Catholics and Immigrants too? -lil 13 year old who is by the way Protestant Christian : ''"So someone claiming to be a Christian while hating and terrorizing people would not be a Christian."'', who ever said people don't contradict themselves? Define a christian and I will find you a christian who disagrees with you. Someone is christian if they believe they are, it's not like there is some council that approves people who want to become christian. -- user:Ydd Yes, and by that logic someone who ate veal consistently and professed to be a vegan would in fact be a vegan. There is also no council to approve vegans--not that it's relevant. user:Koyaanis Qatsi : The difference being, Veganism has a pretty solid grounds for reference. Where as religion, typically, is a huge matter of interpretation and personal beliefe. Despite any of this, I certainly wouldn't tell someone they aren't a vegan if they ate veal and vehemently said they were vegan. maybe they're a special sect of vegan. Are Ichthy-Ovi Vegitarians not vegitarians? -- user:Ydd Christians do share some characteristics which are not shared with, say, Buddhists or Wiccans. user:Koyaanis Qatsi writes "A Christian follows the teachings of Christ, and Christ overwhelmingly taught acceptance, inclusion, humility, and love. So someone claiming to be a Christian while hating and terrorizing people would not be a Christian." :::Jesus. only "Christ" if you're a Christian (Muslims, who love and venerate him will not call him \"Christ\", claim that jesus was a ''Prophet''--not the Son of God [a non-monotheistic concept]). Jesus, according to some, never advocated acceptance or open mindedness in any manner. Read the Christian Bible. Jesus personally beat people who changed money in the Temples. Did Mohammed? Did Moses? Did Joseph Smith? Did Darwin? No! Only Jesus! Jesus is judged by some (c.f., Why I am not a Christian by Bertram Russell) to be the most judgmental and cruel of all religious leaders (based on Christian Scriptures). : That is absolutely incorrect. A Christian may reasonably be defined as a person who believes in the Religion of Christianity, is a member of a Christian Church, and is recognized by many other Christians as a practicing Christian. By this definition the members of the KK were Christians. You seem to be claiming that you have the ability to define who a Christian is and isn't, but you don't. Again, you are using the "No True Scottsman fallacy". Are you familiar with this? user:RK">user:RK Do you realize you've just defined Christianity in terms of Christianity not once but three times?--Anon I hate to disagree with KQ here, or risk looking like I am in any way defending the KKK, but the KKK regard themselves as Christian and that by itself is enough for us to call them Christian. I have heard many arguments that state that Mormans, Unitarians and Catholics also aren't Christian - but this doesn't make that assertion correct. The only thing we can do here is depend on self-identification - not some external definition. BTW, my ''personal'' feeling is in agreement with KQ - that the KKK are very ''un''-Christian - but we shouldn't let our personal feelings cloud our attempt at nuetrality. We could say that the KKK claim to be the only true Christians (which many groups in the KKK do) and that others in the Christian world think otherwise for KQ's reasons. --user:maveric149 We need a much stricter definition of "Christian" than just the mere claim of being Christian. The mere claim, by itself, means nothing. After all, even I could claim to be a Christian. But I reject most everything about Chrisitian beliefs! The word "Christian" has to have some meaning, or else it has no meaning. Consider Mormons; they are in no way, shape or form Christians, because they reject most Christian beliefs. ::Can you provide some references here? Show us how Mormons are not Christians! If you cannot, please stop saying that! They imply that all other Chrisitians are not really Christians, and that they are the true Christians. While I agree that they have the right to their beliefs, they don't have the right to totally rewrite the dictionary. Or, rather, they may even have the right to rewrite the dictionary, but they can't force the rest of the world to go along with this rewrite. Unitarians also are not Christian, but they no longer claim to be. user:RK">user:RK The same is true for other religions as well. Consider proselytizing fundamentalist Protestant Christian groups like "Jews for Jesus"; they claim to be "Jews" practicing "Judaism", yet their faith is evangelical Protestant Christianity. Is it rational to say that Protestant Christianity is the same as Judaism? Nope. The mere use of the word, by itself, means nothing. Back to the specific topic of the KKK, there are firm reasons why they must be considered Chrisitians: (1) They accept Christian scriptures, and add no new "testaments" or "hidden books" to them. (2) They believe in the Trinity, and follow traditional Protestant Christian theology, (3) they follow traditional Christian holidays, and (4) non-KKK members in America historically have recognized them as Christians in good-standing vis-a-vis Christianity. In short, there is no way that they can be called anything except Christian. :Yes, but Catholics worship the Madonna and pray to saints which is arguably a form of idolatry. Should we also not consider them Christian because of this? I for one am not so presumptuous to think that I have the ability to say just who, or who not is a "true" member of any faith. But then, that's just me. Go ahead and define who is a Christian - I will have no part of it. --user:maveric149 I shouldn't have brought it up--it's not particularly productive. I think maveric is right, that we shouldn't let our opinions interfere with the article. If the KKK consider themselves Christian, we can state as much without having to deal with whether they are or not. Apologies, bowing out, user:Koyaanis Qatsi ---------- The KKK page is annoying. It is entirely lacking in NPOV. Is there no KKK-knowledgeable wikipedian? (Don't get me wrong! I hate the KKK. I hate nazis. I hate all things that good liberals (not an \"L word\" to me!) hate. But this article is written in a largely uninformed way. The origins of the KKK are entirely misrepresented here. The current beliefs of the KKK are entirely misrepresented here.) Is there no legitimate scholar here? (No! It can't be me. I don't know enough. But I know some. And this stuff is biased.) Arthur3030 : Yes, it's very biased, and at some points just plain wrong. For example, NB Forrest did ''not'' found the Klan. It was started by six Confederate soldiers, almost as more of a social club. Forrest, if he actually was a member, did not even come into the picture until the Klan had grown substantially, and he was nominated to be the Klan's (I believe first) "Grand Wizard." There are too many KKK websites online for there to be this many mistakes. (Another: The anti-Catholic stance was more a thing of the 50's and 60's, and other than that doesn't have much to do with the Klan's beliefs or practices.) User:RL Barrett 19:39 May 8, 2003 (UTC) --------------- Harry Truman "believed" to be in the KKK? What about Senator Byrd? He *WAS* in the KKK! More examples of the Wikipedia liberal bias. ~I dont care what u say about "what u believe"...its wrong. Get it through your thick sculls. Does anyone have information on their ranks? Why do the names sound like they were found in a D&D manual? ----- The first sentence states: "The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is one of several white-supremacist organizations in the Southern United States, which are dedicated to..." Though they started in the Southern US, the article goes on to say how they shifted to the Midwest and are now even in Queens, NY. Perhaps it is better to drop the "Southern" from the first sentence and just say "in the United States". Otherwise it seems like the article is making the KKK out to be only a Southern problem rather than an American problem. It seems to be pointing a finger at "those racist Southerners" rather than "those racist Americans". I did not change it yet because I wanted to see what others thought first. :I think you have a good point. Still, the KKK is (rightly or wrongly) generally associated with the US South by connotation. It's probably unfair to say that it's a Southern organization, but it is significant that people identify it with the South. :User:Acegikmo1 19:19, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC) In the "Description" paragraph, I don't understand the following sentence: "The Ku Klux Klan has committed many acts of violence such as lynchings, the burning of homes, and even, in extreme cases, murder." Surely lynchings are murders (in fact, the first significant word in Lynching is Murder). I would edit out the duplication myself, but I am not sure what the OP is trying to say. User:PRB 14:04, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC) ---- This article needs to be rewritten. There is no one Klu Klux Klan today, the name is in the public domain. So anybody who wants can start a group, call it Klu Klux Klan or The Grand XXXs of the Klu Klux Klan and profess whatever beliefs they have. Hence, trying to characterize the beliefs of the Klu Klux Klan today is futile. The article should focus on the historical KKK and then link to individual pages for major modern day KKKs, like the one David Duke was part of.User:Ydorb 19:07, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC) == caption == ''In 1928, the Klan saw a very big and strong boy by the age of 14 called Nick Betts (who is now a grand wizard who leads the clan via the internet) who then had a wave of popularity in response to the Democratic nomination of Roman Catholic Alfred E. Smith for the office of President.'' What thought is this sentence in the caption trying to communicate? I honestly have no idea. User:Wolfman 01:33, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC) ==Vandalsim== This page seems to require repair on a daily basis. I'm not familiar with the relevant Wiki mechanisms. Is there a way of improving the situation? == Disputed! == I have placed a dispute tag on this article. As another commentor pointed out, this page seems to be tinkered with far too often. Over the time I've monitored this page, I have seen factual inaccuracies, ommissions and important pieces of information disappear. From what I can tell, this is largely partisan in nature, as neither apparent supporters of the Democratic or Republican parties wish to acknowledge that the Klan influenced many important and prominent political leaders, and that most Klan members were thought to have affiliation with one party or another. The Democratic Party, particularly in the South, had significant Klan ties with each incarnation of the group, and this remained so until the liberal wing annd African-Americans effectively took control of the party in the late 60s and early 70s. The Republicans, the party of Abraham Lincoln and the Reconstruction, had far less in the way of Klan ties until far right-wing groups felt that the Democratic Party had been effectively usurped from its traditional control. A true, neutral historian who is knowledgeable Klan history should clean up this article, and Wiki editors should respect the most neutral version that comes of this. Such a version, in my opinion, would not shy away from explaining the Klan's ties to both parties, and would present it in such a way tht no partisan bias is apparent. ::It's not clear what exactly you are disputing. You raise two issues. First, vandalism. I think we all agree that this page is a target of vandals and probably should be protected. This, however, has nothing to do with NPOV and factual accuracy. Second, you raise the issue of the influence of the Klan in various incarnations on political parties. This seems to be an error of omission rather than fact. I don't think that a NPOV/factual dispute is warranted. It seems more like it is an incomplete article that still needs work. User:Ydorb 19:43, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC) :::I agree with Ydorb, though if the posters assertion that references to Klanish influence of major political figures are being deleted is corrected, it merits some investigation. The article is lacking in completeness, and not factual accuracy. If an NPOV issue exists at all, it is a minor one. User:Ingoolemo User_talk:Ingoolemo 07:38, 2005 Jan 4 (UTC) == Currently Attending the Klan == I have read over this article, and I have read over the discussions. To be honest and straightforward, I personally have a first hand experience with a present day association of the Ku Klux Klan, and I believe it is wrong to dub the organization as hateful and discriminative simply by what one source will tell us. But I have had experiences of my own, and I want to let everyone know that the organization has and always will have a hateful and violent past. Its unfortunate for the organization, but its the truth. But these situations in the past have been taken purely biased from the media, and therefore, the majority of America will only experience one side of the story. This one side becomes their instant claim that the Klan is hateful, sickening, and bloodthirsty. I hope to dispell these assumptions. For me though, I have written a couple of remarks on the edit page of the Encyclopedia's definition of the Ku Klux Klan. To my dispare, these added changes have been removed (and I have no problem with people changing things, but don't cause yourself to remove someone else's). I felt it was my responsibility to try and show people a different side of all of the bad we might THINK we understand about the Klan. I have even thrown together a small web site to allow people to transition into realizing the objectives and idealisms of an organization such as the Ku Klux Klan. However, I understand a lot of people that see my explanations feel that I'm trying to protect an evil society. And they're wrong. The fact is, I have come from exactly the same teachings as these people might have had. I thought apprehended to even mentioning the Klan. I had an idea of this organization as being a group of brainwashed zombies breaking down doors to retirement homes, and killing anyone that moved. But essentially, I believed the organization was filled with fanatical people. And I was wrong. But as I came to realize, history is only what our leaders want it to be. We have been so close minded to the Klan because we have absolutely no idea of how it operates. We have absolutely no reasoning to understand why they do the things they do. However, I came into it wondering if it all was true. I came into it asking questions as many of you might ask of me. I wondered if all of the people in it were out of their minds. And I waited, and I tested the waters. And I came to realize that these people were NOT crazy, instead, they were kind to me, they were generous to offer assistance when I needed it. They showed me that the Klan was a fraternal order that was kept to hold a philosophy of moral dignity among themselves. This order was something they could rely on to protect themselves from anything that might try and harm them. I asked them about their sketchy past, and they admitted that it was unfortunate that many of these things had been told on a biased level. In the end, none of the Klan's original motives were declared. So no one knew the full story. But how was I suppose to believe them? I had been brought up so vividly to believe an opposite way. I had such a deep rooted hate for this group. How could I break away? Well, at first, my beliefs had still been intact. I didn't want to change my position against them, nor did I want to change my entire outlook on the world. But as I kept asking, I wondered about some things. I wondered about the small conscience I had in my mind. I wondered how bad it would be to strive to protect the fundamentals that my conscience drove to tell me. So I looked around, and I realized certain things about my world. I realized that there were bigger things for the world to be worrying about than some group that has nothing to harm but those that harm it. I could think of plenty of things our world needs more attention and control on. You could include the poverty of this world, the robberies, the corrupt police, even the corrupt governments. Our world is becoming a massive sewer of humanity. And it doesn't take a genius to realize this. And we may think that the Ku Klux Klan is a part of this indecency in our world, but do we really know the truth behind these stories? Do you really think these people get up in the morning and proclaim to kill off a number of people simply because they feel like it. If this were the case, then these people should be locked up. But it wasn't. It wasn't what I learned when I wanted to know more. I never realized that it would be worth my effort to follow a group of people that felt so strongly about an idealism in this country, that they would lie down their lives for it. And I began to realize this belief. I came to respect it as a fraternal group of people that support and protect its own. That none of it was a brutal outcry to change the world. It WAS, however, a belief among the Klan that the world was becoming a stretched existence. A foregoing of dignity to tolerate the actions of another. To appease someone who wouldn't do the same in return. Our world has become a disrupted chaos of behavior, and I brought it upon myself to take a liking to a society that held strongly against this apparent outbreak. Its fundamentals were never forcefully exercised onto anyone. They were only exercised when one of its own was threatened. They ARE militant, but they are constricted of killing out of unreason. The fact is, when someone is threatened, it is their duty to protect. If someone's life is taken, the life of the murderer is taken in the same way. It is unfortunate, but this is how things work in this WORLD let alone in this society. But what is even more unfortunate is the biased undermining message given to us in order to prove that this organization is hurtful and evil simply because of the actions taken from a situation's context. The fact is, it is sites like these that proclaim and reinterpret the same old description that every other site has given. No one really looks beneath the surface. No one really cares to open a can of worms. And it is for this very reason, that a fundamental group such as the Klan is fading away. And what are we left with? We are left with a world that just might be unsafe to unlock our doors in. Unsafe to raise our children in. Even unsafe to trust our government or our police because a big enough bribe could change their decision. And if you don't believe me, then you're naive to this world, or you simply don't care. And these unaware people are more to the problem than a REAL problem could be. But I care, and I want the people that I'm around to care too. And as long as these one-sided media commentations exist, there will never be a real understanding of why we have certain radical foundations. So give yourself a little time and explore everything I've said. As much as it hurts to think about it, try to understand the other side before jumping to conclusions about both. - User:Camarofloyd 09:15, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) :I am currently writing a history paper on the Klans and hope to add more information on the fraternal side of the organisation. I don't think that anybody is suggesting that the Klansmen were motivated by evil, although the early days of the Klan at least were certainly filled with violence, and they have become a symbol of intolerance through the years. Much of the operations of the Klan over the years can be attributed to their own sense of justice and vigilantism. All your contributions are welcome as long as they are presented from a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view :It seems clear to me so far that the first Klan began in secrecy and fraternalism and expanded to vigilantism and violence from a sense of an "uprising of outraged manhood" (to use the words of Chief Justice Edward White). The second Klan began as a product what could almost be called Simmons's hobby, fraternal organisations, quickly grew as a result of social reaction to perceived social corruption, inspired at least in part by ''The Clansmen'', its play and movie, and was milked as a cash operation by Tyler and Clarke. User:Silsor 08:43, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC) ::I realize this site is neutral in its best ability, but I would hope a discussion board provides the chance to express one's own oppinions on any reasoning of his/her fundamentalisms. I would also hope that these oppinions can be expressed in any way possible, be it biased or neutral. But I could be mistaken, and I can take my position of the Klan elsewhere. - User:Camarofloyd 09:15, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) :::This page is a discussion board, so you are free to express your opinions however you want here (within reasonable limits). But material that goes into the Ku Klux Klan article page itself must be kept neutral and report only the facts. User:Silsor 09:12, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC) ==Weasel statement== I have removed the following text from the page, for a second time: :''Many hold that the Klan's doctrine was not Christian, as they did not follow the nonviolent "turn the other cheek" teachings of New Testament Christianity, but followed the Old Testament traditions of "smite thine enemy" and "an eye for an eye."'' for these reasons: # The statement that "many hold" this belief is unsourced # The statement that the Ku Klux Klan followed the Old Testament traditions of "smite thine enemy" and "an eye for an eye" is unsourced # The statement that the Ku Klux Klan did not follow the nonviolent "turn the other cheek" teachings of New Testament Christianity is unsourced # The statement that "many hold" this belief uses Wikipedia:Avoid weasel terms and reflects badly on the text. User:Silsor 20:16, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC) == Wilson and Birth of a nation == The quote is highly questionable. There's no evidence that Wilson actually ever said this; the only source was Thomas Dixon's widow, who claimed that Wilson made the statement in a letter which conveniently no longer existed. Wilson never confirmed the quote or, as far as I can tell, ever said anything else about the movie. The fact that it's been repeatedly quoted does not mean that it is true. Perhaps the item can be phrased to indicate the distinction; Wilson has enough warts on him that it seems hardly necessary to add more. --User:JpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 18:35, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC) ::Given that the quote is not directly about the KKK, and since it is apparently not 100% verifiable (or even 50%), I suggest we remove it from this article. It would be better suited, with qualifications, for the article on the movie. And yes, Wilson and race relations - ugh. -User:Willmcw 23:16, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) Considering that the Woodrow Wilson Foundation attests to the accuracy of the statement, it is fairly pointless for Wilson apologists to try to distance Wilson from this quote. 155/ 11 Apr 05 :The quote, if true, should go in the articles about the movie and about Wilson. It is only tangentially related to the KKK itself. If FDR saw and commented on Gone With The Wind, we wouldn't necessarily include that in the American Civil War. -User:Willmcw 21:41, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC) :It should be noted that while Wilson't quote about the movie may be disputed, it is undisputed that the movie repeatedly quoted Wilson's book, "History of the American People". [http://www.geocities.com/emruf5/birthofanation.html]. It is entirely possible that Wilson uttered the line quoted, though it is still of questrionable relevance to this article. -User:Willmcw 21:47, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC) ==IMMIGRATION QUOTAS== NEGROES DID NOT IMMIGRATE TO THE UNITED STATES FOR ABOUT 75 YEARS (1885-1960) DUE TO A QUOTA SYSTEM THAT PERMITTED ONLY A PAUCITY OF PEOPLE TO ENTER THE UNITED STATES FROM AFRICA. Why lie about it? March 10th, 2005 1807Z UTC *Above contributed by 68.162.134.204, who has repeatedly tried to add POV information about "sneaky blacks" to the KKK article. User:Katefan0 18:13, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC) **As for immigration quotas, regardless of whether what you say is true (I have no opinion on this particular part), what in the world does that have to do with the KKK? I fail to see how it is relevant, and adding the information to the article in the way you did ("sneaky blacks") was highly biased and, frankly, offensive to me at least. User:Katefan0 18:13, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC) :I challenge you to point out where somebody lied about it. User:Silsor 18:49, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC) My interest in the KKK article is due to my desire to see accurate statements in Wikipedia articles. The KKK article is full of wishy-washy statements. A FEW FACTS ABOUT IMMIGRANTS. (Taken from an encyclopedia). African (black) immigrants to the United States in 1914 totaled 8,447 0f the 1,218,480 immigrants who entered the United states that year. Chinese totaled 2,354. Japanese totaled 8,941. East Indians totaled 174. Koreans totaled 152. Pacific Islander, 1 person. Some 33 other categories of people are listed, too. Italian (south) totaled 251,612. Italian (north) totaled 44,802. Polish totaled 122,657. Hebrew totaled 138,051. (Jews are not on the list). German totaled 79,871. English totaled 51,746. Irish totaled 33,898. Greek totaled 45,881. Russian totaled 44,957. Slovak totaled 25,819. Scandinavian totaled 36,053. Magyar totaled 44,538. In 1910, a man named Dillingham proposed that a "national-origins" rule be added to the immigration laws. The Burnett-Dillingham Bill created quite a stir from 1911-1913. The national origins provision was approved in 1921 on May 19th, and became effective on June 3rd. It was extended in May, 1922 to June 30, 1924. The Immigration Act of 1924 was another important measure. By that time, immigrants were being called "aliens" or "alien immigrants." The national origins provision (or rule) based its quota of immigrants on the number of people of each type already in the United states in 1910. It was designed to modify the types of immigrants who were entering the United States. It was referred to as the 2 percent provision. The rule resulted in the selection of more immigrants from northern and western Europe, and fewer from southern and eastern Europe. As proclaimed by President Coolidge on June 30, 1924, the largest quota for 1924-25 was that of Germany, 51,227. The quota for Great Britain and Northern Ireland was 34,007; Irish Free state, 28,567; Italy 3845; Russia, 2248. In 1921-22, the quota for the entire continent of Africa was 120; Australia, 271; United Kingdom, 77,206; Germany, 68,039; Russia, 34,427; Italy, 42,021; Poland, 20,019; Czecho-Slovakia, 14,269; France, 5,692. The Chinese Exclusion act of 1882 led to a decrease in their population numbers from 71,531 in 1910 to 61,686 in 1920. The Japanese population total increased from 72,157 to 111,025 in the 10 years. In that decade, 5,735,811 immigrants entered the United States from 1911 to 1920. It is a case of deception whenever a person hints that Blacks and Asians led or encouraged Mr. Simmons to form the new Ku Klux Klan in 1915 because of their "increasing numbers." His organization was intent on reducing the influx of southern and eastern Catholics from Europe (i.e., to keep a Catholic out of the White House). Jews were catching hell in Russia due to pogroms, so they fled for their lives. Whenever inaccurate, misleading statements are made in Wikipedia articles of the KKK sort, they taint all of the other Wikipedia articles. Accuracy must be the most important ideal in Wikipedia. ''Please do not obliterate the facts and figures''. they represent ''accuracy'', not conjecture. Friday, March 11, 2005, 1915Z (UTC) *And I guess you adding that information by calling black people "sneaky blacks" also represents your dedication to accuracy, right? User:Katefan0 19:25, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) Saturday, March 19th, 2005 From 1911 through 1921, the total number of immigrants was 6,535,039. Koreans totaled 1,110 during those eleven years. Pacific Islanders totaled 101. African (black) totaled 76,344. Chinese totaled 23,280. Japanese totaled 91,269. Mexicans totaled 236,548. Italian (south) totaled 1,181,603. Italian (north) totaled 206,229. Slovak totaled 141,630. Scandinavians totaled 274,716. Hebrew totaled 610,201. (Jews are not on the list). Due to the Great War in Europe, the total number of immigrants fell from 1,218,480 in 1914 to 110,618 in 1918, which was the lowest total since 72,183 immigrants arrived in 1862. Records of immigration to the United States begin in 1820. FOREIGN-BORN WHITE MALES 21 YEARS OF AGE OR OVER, 1910. ''All countries'' 6,646,817. ''Germany''1,278,667, ''Russia'' 737,120, ''Italy'' 712,812, ''Austria'' 609,437, ''Ireland'' 597,860, ''Canada and Newfoundland'' 533,359, ''Canada---French'' 170,987, ''England'' 437,152, ''Sweden'' 349,022, ''Hungary'' 255,844, ''Norway'' 213,042, ''Scotland'' 133,116, ''Denmark'' 102,398, ''Mexico''102,009, ''Bulgaria, Servia, and Montenegro'' 17,524. I do not know how many of these purported "foreign-born white males" were actually sneaky "Blacks" who out-foxed the Governmental authorities. "Blacks" are too clever to be caught (everyone knows that)! Time: 2000Z GMT ::Don't presume to speak for me (or everyone). Your biased language reveals your true motives, regardless of how many "facts" you dump into this page. User:Katefan0 22:44, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC) April 2nd, 2005 The human brain can develop certain psychoses which prevent it from regarding facts and figures. Whenever the human brain becomes afflicted by those psychoses, a "stupid" person results. I am not wasting my time by trying to affect the minds of other people. My aim was to show that there were no "increasing numbers of Blacks and Asians" in the United States in 1915 who inspired Mister Simmons to organize the Ku Klux Klan. Mister Simmons was from the State of Georgia (U.S.A.). More than one million Negroes lived in that State in 1915. Those Negroes were laborers (cotton-pickers, etc.) and the backbone of the economy in that State and elsewhere. Mister Simmons may not have ever heard of a "Black" or ever seen an "Asian." Negroes were lynched in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and other States without anyone raising an eyebrow, so Mister Simmons knew that the Negroes were powerless. Most of the "Asians" lived in the three States on the West Coast in 1915 (a long way from Georgia). Many immigrants were white men and Catholics who eventually might become voters and vote for other Catholics. About eighty percent of the immigrants were males. The American men gave women the right to vote in 1920 because they knew that the women were mostly ("indigenous") Protestants who would blunt the impact that the influx of Catholic immigrants had created. Prior to 1916, women were given equal suffrage rights with men in the States of Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Washington, California, Idaho, Orehon, Montana, Kansas, Arizona, Nevada, and the Territory of Alaska. Women in Illinois could vote in the national elections, but they faced some other restrictions. The Constitution confers the the right of suffrage directly on no one, so that there are no United States voters (individual States control who may vote). Many States kept Negroes from voting by inserting clauses into the State Constitutions. Such clauses were designed to defeat the Fifteenth Amendment. The United States Supreme Court gave such amendatory clauses the ax in June, 1915. Even so, Negroes did not vote because they had to risk their lives to do so. They might be hanged from a tree, and give the law enforcement officers a good laugh. Sneaky Blacks were never caught, though (everyone knows that). 12:15 GMT == Symbols == The sections on symbols includes this text: :''Some Klan groups in the 1950s and 1960s attempted to usurp the use of the Confederate battle flag (the Southern Cross, not related to the "Stars and Bars" or governmental flag of the Confederacy) in efforts aimed against desegregation and racial integration in the South. This appropriation of Southern symbols has been widely disavowed by historical and heritage activists in the South today. In its current fragmented form, the Klan in some instances continue to use both the Battle Flag and the American flag, but in both instances without official sanction.'' This seems oddly written. Was the aim of the KKK in the 50s and 60s to "usurp" a symbol, or to have one? It seems to me that we should just say they used it. And from whom would they have received official sanction to use the flags of either the U.S.A. or the C.S.A? The whole notion is off-the-wall. I hope someone around can do the research. In the meantime, I'm inclined to cut some dubious assertions. -User:Willmcw 11:48, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) ::''Some Klan groups in the 1950s and 1960s appropriated the Confederate battle flag (the Southern Cross, not related to the "Stars and Bars" or governmental flag of the Confederacy) in efforts aimed against desegregation and racial integration in the South.'' ::First it said "usurped", now it says "appropriated." How does someone "appropriate" a flag? They did not take it for their exclusive use, but simply began to use it. The more correct phrase would seem to be, "began to use", as in "some groups...began to use the flag." -User:Willmcw 01:45, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC) == A couple of boys? == I'm dubious about the recent addition regarding "a couple of boys".... --User:JpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 03:25, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) :The facts in the addition are basically correct but the language is crap. They were grown men, not boys, although "boys" could be used as a slang term for them (see for example good old boy). User:Silsor 03:37, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC) == A Protestant Organization == Saying that the KKK was a " Protestant white-supremacist organization" in this context means that they were ''composed'' of Protestants and believed in Protestant supremacy. It does not imply that they were endorsed by some sort of centralized Protestant authority; indeed, there is no such Protestant centralized authority. Any organization with a Protestant character or an exclusively Protestant membership is therefore a 'Protestant organization', regardless of whether or not they are recognized by a Protestant church. Saying that they were just 'Protestant-based' is insufficent. The original KKK's Protestant identity was absolutely, incontrovertibly central to its ideology; the article must touch on the fact that it was virulently pro-Protestant and virulently anti-Catholic, and then explain how these views changed over time. You can add sentences saying that they were never endorsed by any Protestant church, that they were never formally identified with the Protestant faith, or that the vast majority of Protestants never supported them; but presenting the original KKK as anything other than a Protestant organization is false. User:Aquillion 03:49, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) **Personally I agree that simply leaving it at "Protestant-based" is not quite enough. They were not only composed of Protestants, they were rabidly anti-Catholic (though their slanted propaganda at the time denied this). WASPs who joined the KKK saw the KKK as part of their faith, they felt that WASPs were inherently superior to other races (and religious groups) and that oppressing Jews, Catholics and black people was part of "God's plan." From a pamphlet of the time: "The KKK... chief aims of which are to bring the different branches of the Protestant Church into a closer relationship ... and to preserve the US as a Protestant Christian nation." ([http://digital.lib.msu.edu/collections/index.cfm?action=view&TitleID=141&Format=gif&PageNum=3] (from the Michigan State University digital archives [http://digital.lib.msu.edu/collections/index.cfm?CollectionID=22]). I do think there should be careful wording to make it clear that there was no central Protestant body that endorsed these beliefs. Also, let's be clear, Protestants didn't have to be in the KKK to dislike Catholics -- enmity between the groups, regardless of whether individuals belonged to the KKK or not, was fairly widespread and cut both ways. User:Katefan0 17:01, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) :Would describing it as "an organization with an exclusively-Protestant membership" convey the right meaning? -User:Willmcw 20:23, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) :*I think what Aquillion has been trying to convey is that the KKK was not simply a white supremacist organization in its earliest incarnation. I think WehrWolf's moving Protestant to describe its early founders is fine, but the text of the intro still does not adequately convey that the KKK, originally, were not only racists, they were also religious zealots. I would propose that language to that effect be added in the same place, up at the article's top, where white supremacy is mentioned. User:Katefan0 21:19, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) == Removal of theories about the origins of garb == Also, WehrWolf, why did you remove the information about Spanish Easter garb? I'm not familiar enough to know whether this is a widely accepted theory, but I'd want to see some sort of disproof before just deleting that information. I personally have no opinion, but ask for the sake of making sure valuable information wasn't deleted. User:Katefan0 21:24, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) There is no evidence that these traditions were adopted by the KKK. Aside from an anecdotal and superficial resemblance, there is nothing linking these costumes together. The Spanish Easter costume is intended to demonstrate the penitence and shame of the religious pilgrim, the KKK had no such motives. In addition, the Klan was virulently anti-Catholic when the traditional costume was adopted, and it is highly doubtful they would drape themselves in the trappings of Catholicism. It doesn't pass the logic test. If you can find evidence that proves they were related, I would be happy to reconsider. User:WehrWolf 21:55, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) ==Where is the Klan?== I admit that I made a mistake calling the American midwest the middle of the western United States. I already admitted this in my last edit summary, but you felt the need to gloat. I think that calling a group of the Eastern United States the "midwest" has no meaning to anybody outside the United States, and that we should just say "eastern and southern United States". If you make it "midwest" and link it, nobody will click, because they will assume they know what it means. After all, I used the specific word "midwest" wrongly to describe exactly what many other people will think when they read that. User:Silsor 15:58, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) :I was not gloating. If you were offended by my edits and explanations, I'm sorry, but apparently they were needed to finally convince you. This started out with you calling these states the mideast - which according to wikipedia is closer to Baghdad than Indianapolis. The whole point of this exercise is to be clear and factual. The membership in the Eastern united states (ie Northeast according to wikipedia) does not compare in numbers to the membership in the Midwest. Additionally, we are contributing to Wikipedia, and should stay consistent with Wikipedia geographic designations. User:WehrWolf 17:03, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) ::How does this help our readers know where Klan operations are centered? People who are not American will have no clue what your meaning is. Saying "southern and eastern United States" is clear and factual, but your version is only factual, and then only to a limited readership. Just because Wikipedia acknowledges the naming conventions of our US readership doesn't mean they should be used. ::Also, if you're going to use the American meaning of "Midwest", shouldn't it be capitalised? User:Silsor 20:27, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) This is the English language version of Wikipedia. The terms here are common to the English speaking world - they are not used only in the United States. If the Swedes define US geography differently then the Swedish terms should be used in the Swedish language article on the KKK. In regard to your question about "how does it help our readers know where Klan operations are centered? - this was not my platform, I was only correcting obviously erroneous information. You provided the map. Please, get over this injury to your pride and move on. User:WehrWolf 20.43, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) :Why do you have to assume this is about my pride? What happened to Wikipedia:Assume good faith? I haven't accused you of pride or US-centrism. I argue there's no reason to believe that the terms you are using are commonly known outside the United States, and that we should put our readers first by using universal terminology. Can we carry on a conversation on such a simple topic without any more insults? User:Silsor 21:02, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) ::Silsor, thanks for doing that re-write. It is more relevant to indicate where the KKK ''are'' than to say where they are ''not''. Cheers, -User:Willmcw 21:48, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) Silsor - RELAX. If you think I was insulting you, then you should get out more. That was never my intent, or my action. I agree that we should put our readers first - by providing them accurate information, not a contributor's personal views. Best Wishes. User:WehrWolf 23:27, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) Relocated from article page - In Canada after one attempt in the early 20th century to stop a black man and a white woman from marrying in ontario, the government of canada passed a law that made the KKK illigal in canada. *(Above by User:Wehrwolf). The paragraph was terribly formulated, but I think the information is true. From [http://www.media-awareness.ca] - ''Is spreading hatred illegal in Canada? (The answer is yes: the Criminal Code of Canada, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Broadcasting Act and the Immigration Act all address hate mongering.)'' This isn't a definitive Website but it does appear that it probably would be banned under this sort of statute. Their symbols are probably banned or something. · User:Katefan0User talk:Katefan0 18:08, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC) ==Superman vs. the Klan== Ref Levitt and Dubner, 62-66. User:Binkymagnus 21:12, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC) == Structure? == As most Christian based religious groups there is no structure. All donations go to a mission in neverland where the Pastor is molesting your children and lusting after your wife. The last klan member I heard about was in Louisiana. Pastor jailed in child molestation inquiry Kansas City Star - May 20 12:02 AM PONCHATOULA, La. — A minister and his followers are suspected of sexually molesting as many as two dozen children — as well as dogs and cats — at their church, authorities say. Same day as Saddam in his briefs?????????? It seems even in the heart of the south the klan has fallen into the trap of waiting for Jesus to clean his house. == "Etymology" == Under the "Etymology" section of the article: What is the last sentence referring to? It doesn't seem to be referring to the Sherlock Holmes story... it also contradicts the first sentence... — User:Flamingspinach | User_talk:Flamingspinach 20:54, 2005 Jun 1 (UTC) == my opinion == Some of the people that have posted on this page should read a book before discussing a topic. The Klan was formed to insure the southern way of life, not to kill African-Americans...origionally. At the culmination of the Civil War Confederate soldiers were told to go home and things would be fine. When they did go home they found Carpetbaggers and Scalawags had taken their jobs, land, and even family in some instances. This is why the Klan was formed. Also, they felt it necessary to uphold a moral and righteous community. If a man beat his wife, they would beat that man regardless of race, religion, or friendship for that matter. The Klan disbanded in the late 1860's because it was BECOMING a racist organization of bigots (I believe Gen. Forrest is documented as stating this). Its resurface in the early 20th century as a racist movement contributes to false alligations concerning its origin. No, I do not have any sources...that is, other than living in Alabama for 17 years. Oral tradition is alive around the world, including the "back woods" of Alabama (as many see it). I have also lived in the Northeast and currently reside in California. Let me tell you from personal experience: Racism is still alive today. Ironically I have seen more social acceptance and integration in the South than any other region of the United States. Don't get me wrong; I am not in any way defending the Klan. In fact, I have heard stories that would make you sick. But, I have also read much about the KKK; most of which is biased. The key is to read numerous differing OPINIONS and decide for yourself what might be the truth. Regardless of what you might think, NO single source is 100% correct, including that of mine. But, we were all given common sense to decyper for ourselves what we want to believe and most of us are too stuborn to listen to another point of view. The previous statements construct my personal opinion, or educated guess, as to what happened according to my vast study of the subject. It is your right and priviledge to disagree. As for the debate throughout this discussion about what constitutes being a Christian, that is a matter of opinion as well and has been dabated for almost 2000 years. [The first group to refer to themselves as "Christians" were in Antioch sometime after Jesus' cruxifiction and resurrection. (Acts 11:26)] ''an enlightened mind'' if i post here again i will attempt to be more clear...my apologies leave religion out of this, you still have yer to justify thier actions, or explain them away, they, being "the klan" are still a bunch of small minded fuckwits. User:Gabrielsimon 00:49, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) I am not trying to justify their actions. And, I agree that they ARE "small minded fuckwits"; operative word being ARE. If you READ my post you will see that I am simply expressing my OPINION! i aknowleged that, but its still something that can rile people up quite a bit, and btw, theres no need to get antzey... btw, sigh your posts. User:Gabrielsimon 00:53, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) get over it...and yourself are and were, with these people, they have always been as stupid and morally lacking as they currently are. User:Gabrielsimon 01:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) I am sure you've met numerous klansmen in Canada. Unlike you, I have a basis for my statements. "Always" applies to nothing and these people are not stupid. In fact some of them hold very high positions in the United States government. They are smart enough to work the system from within. I believe the word you are looking for is ignorant, which they are. Who are you to label someone elses morals? You may not agree with the morals of the klan, and I can agree with you on that, but don't generalize a subject about which you yourself are ignorant. *Sign your posts, please. You can do this by typing
Ku Klux Klan
White supremacist groups in the U.S.
Ku klux klan
#redirect:Ku Klux Klan
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
K
KA | KB | KC | KD | KE | KF | KG | KH | KI | KJ | KL | KM | KN | KO | KP | KR | KS | KT | KU | KW | KX | KY | KZ |Words begining with Ku_Klux_Klan:
Ku-klux-klan
Ku-Klux_Klan
Ku_Klux_Klan
Ku_Klux_Klan
Ku_Klux_Klan
Ku_klux_klan
Ku_Klux_Klan_,
Ku_Klux_Klan_costume
Ku_Klux_Klan_crimes
Ku_Klux_Klan_members
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
