Dutch Colonization of Africa

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Klu Klux Klan still exists today?

Sort of. The Klan went through three distinct phases. The first in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War, the second during the 'civil rights era' and is now in it's third phase.

There is no copyright on the name 'KKK' and pretty much any mug with a white sheet and an internet connection can found a chapter of the muckety-muck Knights of Christian Heritage or some such.

Unlike the 2nd phase Klan, there is no central organization, hardly any popular membership, and acts of violence are more or less insignificant from a LEO perspective.

Sure, keep an eye on them, but don't flatter them by giving them any significance at all.

What is generally regarded as the second phase of the Klan began around 1915 with a meeting in Stone Mountain Georgia. It took on more of a nativist complexion at that time and was also strong in the Midwest and other parts of the country outside of the old Confederacy. The Civil Rights era was the third phase.
 
And it must be added, that the Klan of today is NOT a "fourth phase".

Todays "klan" is made up of a few rednecks with a quart of beer & a sheet.

BTW do you know how to tell who is the undercover fed at the Klan meeting? He is the only one who can afford to pay his dues!:lol:
 
And it must be added, that the Klan of today is NOT a "fourth phase".

Todays "klan" is made up of a few rednecks with a quart of beer & a sheet.

BTW do you know how to tell who is the undercover fed at the Klan meeting? He is the only one who can afford to pay his dues!:lol:

Kevin, with all due respect, this is just not true. I'm intimately familiar with the Klan in its current form. I detest the organisation - just so nobody gets any funny ideas.

-----Added 2/13/2009 at 06:04:22 EST-----

This discussion on SA and the Boers is fascinating. Why did we brush over so quickly in school. I do have a question as an ignorant bystander: Do the descendants of the Boers till refer to themselves as Boers?
 
The word Boer means farmer, and they use both that word and Afrikaner to refer to themselves. The plural form is Boere, and it's pronounced BOO ra.

We have got a couple on the forum and lost a couple lately as well. They'll say something like "we boers are like mules" or "Afrikaner self determination won't happen because we can't do our own laundry". One of the traits I like in them is that they can with really few words pass on a lot of meaning. They don't like bragging, and would be amazed at how many people admire their history. They pretty much feel dumped on.
 
Thanks. I know that I really learned a lot of practical thought from my Afrikaner professor. He was a dear man. Thanks for the heads up on the proper plural form.

On a different note. I'm reminded of SA often. We play Euchre. The trump and off jack are called, 'Boer'; or Bauer depending upon where you play.

-----Added 2/13/2009 at 07:30:42 EST-----

This is a very interesting thread. I had a professor in college who was an Afrikaner. He was an amazing man. But, he regretted the history of his people. He often made connections to the Boer War and the War for Southern Independence (His title). His oft repeated statement was, 'I'm from the side of the history writers and they've done a d@^n good job of shining their boots.'

Upon re-reading this I thought I'd make it more clear what Mr. Van was meaning. His regrets had to do with Apartheid, not their war against the British.
 
This has been one of the most interesting history threads on this board in a long time. I have really enjoyed it.:2cents:
 
Why did we brush over so quickly in school.

I'd be interested to learn what non-US history most of you have studied at school.

I went through a mix of homeschooling, private & public education, and I covered Australian, pre & post colonization America, European (mainly from Renaissance on), South African & general Church history (pretty much all from Reformation on, focusing on the Presbyterians).

The average Australian student will come across a mix of Australian & British history, maybe some Ancient Civs and maybe some basic Asia & the Pacific stuff.
 
I'd be interested to learn what non-US history most of you have studied at school.

High School: We had one year of World History, and one year of Current Events, which incorporated a fair amount of history as we studied what led to the present situations.

University: Two courses on non-U.S. history
 
Why did we brush over so quickly in school.

I'd be interested to learn what non-US history most of you have studied at school.

I was supposed to go to public school, but never showed up- thus they expelled me. Kinda like punishing a drunk by making him guard the bar.

My interest was in more ancient world history, though I've been reading on modernish (post 16th century) stuff as of late. And I agree with Kevin's statement that this is quite an informative thread.

Theognome
 
My college minor was history. I studied Renaissance, early modern (with courses in Middle Eastern history) and did a lot of reading on my own. I do know what sources to trust and what the agenda of the various authors is. My Middle Eastern History prof Dr. Smith taught me to look beyond agendas and slogans. :2cents:
 
The Klan made headlines in our area recently when a recruit was murdered when she tried to back out of an initiation. The story may have hit some of the national news wires as well. As the story notes, that area was a hotbed of Klan activity during the Civil Rights era.
 
Yeah, I remember that. It made the Australian news.

I think calling the modern Klan 'the Klan' is not helpful. People have this idea of a unified underground movement with members all across the nation/world working together for the same goal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top