NationStates

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:

George Kaplan wrote:Did the Klan ever go away?

Until a book/film that inspired people to be racist again caused its second or third phase, AFAIK, it was very very very very underground.

Which "book/film"?

Don't worry, they'll be away soon. Klanfolk are easily distracted. They're kinda like birds, if they see in the sea, they'll leave where they are go there, if they see fish somewhere else, they'll go there.

Don't post links to neo-Nazi sites.

Mods won't be happy. :c

Farnhamia wrote:

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:Until a book/film that inspired people to be racist again caused its second or third phase, AFAIK, it was very very very very underground.

Which "book/film"?

The Birth of A Nation. Not sure what it was again, I don't read about this subject for over a couple years.

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:Don't post links to neo-Nazi sites.

Mods won't be happy. :c

I believe it is allowed for referencing purposes, whoever did so.

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Which "book/film"?

The Birth of A Nation. Not sure what it was again, I don't read about this subject for over a couple years.

Hmmm ... yes, I hadn't realized it was so influential. Sometimes my countrymen do embarrass me.

Farnhamia wrote:

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:The Birth of A Nation. Not sure what it was again, I don't read about this subject for over a couple years.

Hmmm ... yes, I hadn't realized it was so influential. Sometimes my countrymen do embarrass me.

By what I learned, the racism was always there, but the film romanticized the group as something representing the spirit of the country. Before it, the Klan was just like one more of today's neo-Nazi gangs. >_>

'The Klan Rides Again in Mississippi'? Sound like a version of Black Beauty. Which they'd hate.

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Hmmm ... yes, I hadn't realized it was so influential. Sometimes my countrymen do embarrass me.

By what I learned, the racism was always there, but the film romanticized the group as something representing the spirit of the country. Before it, the Klan was just like one more of today's neo-Nazi gangs. >_>

Before 1915 there was no official organization but the threat of the Klan was always present in the American South.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Scholencia wrote:Also, you should ignore them and not give them publicity, by doing otherwise you just make a big deal from stupid stuffs. You also admit that the KKK is irrelevant, so you dont have to be paranoid about them. Also, the Crips from the videos are evil as the KKK, just as you are not worried about them your should also not be worried about the clan.

And yes, the Park of the Confederate general should not be renamed since he was not a racist, in fact it is otherwise, he was a humanist.

"KKK NOT BITE"

Forrest, the founder of the Klan, was not a racist?

According to the documentary from the OP, he was not. He was also not the founder of the KKK, and the originally first klan was not racist either.

Scholencia wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Forrest, the founder of the Klan, was not a racist?

According to the documentary from the OP, he was not. He was also not the founder of the KKK, and the originally first klan was not racist either.

Much like George Wallace, towards the end of his life, he repented of his former views. However, it is undeniable that he led the Klan in a campaign of terror and murder designed to intimidate black voters.

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:The Birth of A Nation. Not sure what it was again, I don't read about this subject for over a couple years.

Made somewhere during the First World War, I believe, it's actually a good movie. Surprisingly long, also, three hours - but it did portray the Klan and the Confederate States as heroes while insulting Lincoln.

Quintium wrote:

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:The Birth of A Nation. Not sure what it was again, I don't read about this subject for over a couple years.

Made somewhere during the First World War, I believe, it's actually a good movie. Surprisingly long, also, three hours - but it did portray the Klan and the Confederate States as heroes while insulting Lincoln.

It also portrayed blacks as oversexed, easily corrupted people of low intelligence.

EDIT: Of course, as the film is in the public domain, if those reading this have a few hours to spare, then they can judge for themselves.

Quintium wrote:

Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:The Birth of A Nation. Not sure what it was again, I don't read about this subject for over a couple years.

Made somewhere during the First World War, I believe, it's actually a good movie. Surprisingly long, also, three hours - but it did portray the Klan and the Confederate States as heroes while insulting Lincoln.

It's a sad, sad case where a contemptible piece of media was a massive step forward in movie making. As far as technical filmmaking went, it was a triumph for its time, introducing a number of camera and narrative techniques that would become standards for many years (and in some cases still are). As far as content... Well. I'd be suspicious of anyone who tried to defend that. By the way, it was actually based on a book that was also influential for its time, but evidently far easier forgotten (part of a trilogy, no less).

I would like to point out if it hasn't already that this seems to be happening in Memphis, which is in Tennessee, not Mississippi.

Releign wrote:Lol whut?
Why u care nao?
I mean, they have no power compared to these guys...

They're just as powerless as the Klan.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:It also portrayed blacks as oversexed, easily corrupted people of low intelligence.

Sounds prophetic; look at literally all rap videos now!
Just kidding, just kidding, don't hang me on a burning cross.

As for the movie itself, you must understand the era to see why people didn't respond the way we would if something like that was made today. This movie was made at a time when half of Europe was at war over the question who had the best emperor. It was made at a time when calling black people 'nigger' and treating them as dirt was completely normal. It was made at a time when people believed a low forehead was enough to assume someone was a criminal, and the Klan was seen by many as a positive force in their community.

Quintium wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:It also portrayed blacks as oversexed, easily corrupted people of low intelligence.

Sounds prophetic; look at literally all rap videos now!
Just kidding, just kidding, don't hang me on a burning cross.

As for the movie itself, you must understand the era to see why people didn't respond the way we would if something like that was made today. This movie was made at a time when half of Europe was at war over the question who had the best emperor. It was made at a time when calling black people 'nigger' and treating them as dirt was completely normal. It was made at a time when people believed a low forehead was enough to assume someone was a criminal, and the Klan was seen by many as a positive force in their community.

First, saying "just kidding" after a grossly offensive comment does not make the comment less offensive. Please remember that in the future.

Second, thank you for the not-condescending-at-all history lesson. As someone reasonably well versed in both the history of film and the history of racial relations in the United States, I can tell you that Griffith's masterpiece was controversial upon its very release, and has never been free of criticism regarding its portrayal of black people. Also, calling black people "nigger" at the time was considered (among anyone middle-class or above) to be crude at best, and malicious at worst, depending upon the local culture.