Talk:Ku Klux Klan

Christian?

So I came to this article to learn a little bit about the Ku Klux Klan so it goes without saying that i'm not exactly well-versed on the subject but there isn't a single mention of the fact that the KKK are motivated by their religion, or even what religion they affiliate themselves with.. So I went to the KKK's homepage at KKK.com .. no idea if it's official or anything but it does say right there "America, Our Nation is Under Judgement from God!" which leads me to believe that this article has a SERIOUS POV problem.. someone who knows more should probably look into this.. if there are many chapters of the KKK and not all of them are motivated by religion, I still feel that the variety of motivations between the chapters should be mentioned.. if you don't feel that the Christianity of the Klan is genuine because they deter from basic Christian values like "Thou shalt not kill" as I can kind of guess will happen by looking at the talk page I would suggest you A)Study the nuances of Christianity a little bit more, there are many facets to the religion (it's big) and just being Christian doesn't mean you know about them and B) take a look at the article for Al Qaeda, if the Muslims have to associate themselves with those people than Christians should really have to swallow their pride and realise that for the sake of fair journalism, if a group claims to be a religion than they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.133.201 (talk) 16:35, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

White political disenfranchisement during Reconstruction period under Ironclad Oath? People, hello!?

How can you understand the first KKK without explicitly noting that at the time pretty much the entire white male population in the South was disenfranchised, i.e. prevented from voting and holding political office, because they could not (at least honestly) take the Ironclad Oath? Which, btw, makes it much easier to understand the quoted sentence from the Rescript: "the reenfranchisement and emancipation of the white men of the South, and the restitution of the Southern people to all their rights." Whereas these people were indeed racists and "not nice guys", this does not change the fact that they were ALSO very much validly aggrieved people stripped of their traditional political rights. Like, government with consent of the governed and all that jazz. Unfortunately, the traditional American historiography prefers to minimize and/or ignore this issue, as is e.g. reflected in this current article. 76.24.104.52 (talk) 04:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

The Ironclad Oath article makes it sound like any such disenfranchisement was much less widespread than you seem to be saying. In any case, do you have a verifiable source for this theory about the reason the original Klan arose? If not, then it doesn't belong in the article.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 20:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Not

I object to saying that the KKK is Christian. How can an anti-Semitic, racist, fascist murder group be even close to Christian? All true Christians love the Jews! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.237.97.73 (talk) 16:49, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

They believe they are Christian, and in America, you cannot change someone's beliefs, even if they seem morally wrong. I object to this institutions statements that they are christian as well, but there is not anything I can do about it, which defeats the purpose of declaring in order to persuade some change be brought about.

69.201.159.52 (talk) 15:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

KKK Founding Revealed

According to famous historian David Barton, http://wallbuilders.com in his DVD set, the KKK was founded by Democrats not for racism but to kill anti-slavery Republicans, both white and black. The true history of the KKK and its derivatives should be declared. The fictional history popularized by various sources should also be exposed.

Also, in talking with a member of the KKK derivative Aryan Nations, and reading his recruitment literature, it is clear that their claims of Christianity are equally false. They invented a completely false concept and label it Christianity to recruit dumb young men who don't know the difference because of the failures of both church and state to teach the Bible. 75.139.213.230 (talk) 12:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

David Barton is not a reliable source for American history. But if there are more reliable sources that make the same assertions then they should be added. The article already says that the first KKK was formed to oppose Reconstruction and carpetbaggers.   Will Beback  talk  19:18, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

removing templates

The article has templates at the top saying that the lead is too long, the article is too long, and the article may need a rewrite. However, the person who put the templates there doesn't seem to have posted anything on the talk page to explain what he/she thinks the issues are, and I notice that there have been edits to shorten the lead that postdate the addition of the templates. Looking over the article, I don't agree that there is any problem. Since nobody seems to have made a case here on the talk page that there *is* a problem, I'm removing the templates.--Fashionslide (talk) 19:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

logo removed from infobox

I replaced the logo in the infobox, File:KKK.svg, with an image of a Klan rally. The main issue I have with the logo is that we have absolutely no documentation to back up the idea that this logo is widely recognized, and absolutely nothing to indicate how far back in the Klan's history it goes. The illustrations in the article provide quite a large sample of the Klan's iconography over a period of a century and a half, and it looks to me like the specific logo never appears in any of those illustrations. The logo at File:KKK.svg has three elements: a circle, a Greek cross, and drop of blood. In the historical images, I see the Greek cross appearing most of the time, the circle appearing less than half the time (often the cross is surrounded by a shield, or by nothing at all), and the drop of blood never. I suspect that the KKK.svg logo is one particular logo being used by one of the many recent splinter groups of the Klan, and it has no greater significance than that. We need to watch out for this kind of thing, because this article has a long history in which various tiny and insignificant Klan or white supremacist groups have tried to use it as a platform to promote themselves.--Fashionslide (talk) 20:31, 12 July 2009 (UTC)