Total Motorcycle Community Forums

DieMonkeys wrote: More slaves in the North than in the South during the Civil War. Also, look up where the KKK headquarters is located... In the North!

yes, but william bedford forrest was a southern general

indiana doesn't really count as the north anyways

DieMonkeys wrote:

scan wrote:Like white sheets for hoods and separate bathrooms depending on skin shade.

There were more slaves in the North than in the South during the Civil War. Also, look up where the KKK headquarters is located... In the North!

Oh, and the Civil War was not a war about slavery, it was, as you said, about States Rights!

absolutely. There are racist people all over the place. Indiana and PA have the largest Klan populations, although they say today its members is very small, probably less then 3,000. There was even Klan groups in Canada, Seskakeuan specifically.

As far as more slaves in the north during the civil war. Well, for one, the north was free. Slavery was illegal. So they werent slaves.

The KKK was indeed created in the south though, by ex Confederate army members who created the group in order to fight reconstruction. that is the group most people are thinking of when they mention the KKK being from the south. However, that group was mostly dissolved i think by the turn of the century, until immigration started to pick up a lot after world war 1. It was the 20's when the Klan saw its largest numbers, something like 15% of the population, and that group was started out of Indiana by some racist bastrd who's name i cant remember.

So although racism is something to be associated with the stars and bars, it really shouldnt be any more then Indiana, Pennsylvania, New York City, Canada, Philadelphia, and just about every place people live is.

tex1230 wrote:To each his own...I think it's an ugly bike, but I won't coment on other peoples' religions. and neither should those who don't understand them...
Jews never considered Jesus a "King"... we really don't consider him much of anything other than an important historical figure who others choose to believe in.

"King of the Jews" was posted above Jesus while he was being crucified as the Romans' and Pharisees' way of mocking him.

rider67 wrote:I am glad this topic was posted. I too am tired of reading signatures and emblems and all sort of quotes that are religion based. You want to be religious, you are proud of your faith, keep it to your self. Religion has done nothing but cause strife, wars and conflict. I am not interested in reading about who your god is or who died for what, or how you plan on getting to heaven.

scan wrote:

MajorGator wrote:Not to mention hugely inaccurate stereotypes...

To be fair I listed more than one possiblity. I don't think you can claim none of those who display this flag or the confederate are harboring racist attitude. The majority? No. But enough to make you aware it is sometimes the case. That was all I was saying. That is one of many reasons to display these specific flags. If you don't want people to wonder, you don't display them. If you don't care what people think, I suppose that doesn't matter anyway.

I could not disagree more. The vast (I mean 98% vast) majority of Southerners who choose to fly the Confederate flag in any of its forms are not flaming bigots, but instead, they are honoring their heritage. Come down to Virginia, and you would be amazed at the multiracial mixture of those old societies.

Racist groups like the Klan represent an extraordinarily tiny minority of Southern citizens, and actually are equally represented in states like Ohio.

Those who identify the Stars and Bars as exclusively a symbol of hate hav their own agendas and issues, but by and large, they are beyond clueless. These are the Howard Deans of the world, who would not understand Southern culture if he lived in the Deep south for a decade.

Big B wrote:

DieMonkeys wrote: More slaves in the North than in the South during the Civil War. Also, look up where the KKK headquarters is located... In the North!

yes, but william bedford forrest was a southern general

indiana doesn't really count as the north anyways

Ol' Bill Forrest never served a day in the Confederate service...

absolutely. There are racist people all over the place. Indiana and PA have the largest Klan populations, although they say today its members is very small, probably less then 3,000. There was even Klan groups in Canada, Seskakeuan specifically.

As far as more slaves in the north during the civil war. Well, for one, the north was free. Slavery was illegal. So they werent slaves.

Not exactly. It was illegal to purchase slaves in the North, and since 1807, the slave trade with Africa was abolished by law. But the Dred Scott decision sanctioned slave ownership anywhere in the United States or its territories. The right to property was affirmed.

The KKK was indeed created in the south though, by ex Confederate army members who created the group in order to fight reconstruction. that is the group most people are thinking of when they mention the KKK being from the south. However, that group was mostly dissolved i think by the turn of the century, until immigration started to pick up a lot after world war 1.

The Ku Klux Klan was established in Pulaski, TN as a means to offer support to the southern people from the abuses of Reconstruction. It's first leader was ol' Bill Forrest's 3d cousin, Lieutenant General Nathan Bedford Forrest, called by William Tecumsah Sherman the most remarkable man on either side during the Civil War. Forrest was the head of a loosely-knit organization of small, disparate units until he formally disbanded the Klan in 1868, due to straying beyond its original mission to become home-grown terrorists.

MajorGator wrote:

Big B wrote:

DieMonkeys wrote: More slaves in the North than in the South during the Civil War. Also, look up where the KKK headquarters is located... In the North!

yes, but william bedford forrest was a southern general

indiana doesn't really count as the north anyways

Ol' Bill Forrest never served a day in the Confederate service...

Doh! you're right. I was thinking of Nathan as well..

MajorGator wrote:

Big B wrote:

DieMonkeys wrote: More slaves in the North than in the South during the Civil War. Also, look up where the KKK headquarters is located... In the North!

yes, but william bedford forrest was a southern general

indiana doesn't really count as the north anyways

Ol' Bill Forrest never served a day in the Confederate service...

absolutely. There are racist people all over the place. Indiana and PA have the largest Klan populations, although they say today its members is very small, probably less then 3,000. There was even Klan groups in Canada, Seskakeuan specifically.

As far as more slaves in the north during the civil war. Well, for one, the north was free. Slavery was illegal. So they werent slaves.

Not exactly. It was illegal to purchase slaves in the North, and since 1807, the slave trade with Africa was abolished by law. But the Dred Scott decision sanctioned slave ownership anywhere in the United States or its territories. The right to property was affirmed.

The KKK was indeed created in the south though, by ex Confederate army members who created the group in order to fight reconstruction. that is the group most people are thinking of when they mention the KKK being from the south. However, that group was mostly dissolved i think by the turn of the century, until immigration started to pick up a lot after world war 1.

The Ku Klux Klan was established in Pulaski, TN as a means to offer support to the southern people from the abuses of Reconstruction. It's first leader was ol' Bill Forrest's 3d cousin, Lieutenant General Nathan Bedford Forrest, called by William Tecumsah Sherman the most remarkable man on either side during the Civil War. Forrest was the head of a loosely-knit organization of small, disparate units until he formally disbanded the Klan in 1868, due to straying beyond its original mission to become home-grown terrorists.

Not exactly. Dred Scott simply said slaves can never be citizens. It also said Scott specifically could not be free,but only because he was bound by Missouri laws which said he was a slave. That has nothing to do with northern states where it was illegal to own slaves...

MajorGator wrote: Forrest was the head of a loosely-knit organization of small, disparate units until he formally disbanded the Klan in 1868, due to straying beyond its original mission to become home-grown terrorists.

close, 69 (course the Klan never really disbanded in reality) :

"Forrest ordered the Klan to disband in 1869, stating that it was "being perverted from its original honorable and patriotic purposes, becoming injurious instead of subservient to the public peace.""

I'll bow out of the discussion and defer to those who know the facts. I will report two things though. One - I think my point was that those flags can and do represent something racist sometimes (absolute truth) - or at the very least the view point of someone who displays it would have racism at some level reflecting back to the way it should be (again read that before you think I'm saying everyone, always). Two - I never said the majority or most of the people who display the flag are racist nor have that intent. Read back and see - I never said that, but it is interesting how sensitive people are about his, and how many facts there are known about the KKK. I'm glad I didn't bring up the Nazis.

So with that said - I will say that I am being a flagist - in that I am pre-judging without knowledge of an individual based on a flag - and further more I will not judge a man until I can talk to him beyond his displayed flag (or skin color, which is how I normally behave).

So - I now bow out of the conversation - repentant of my indiscretion against those who fly the flag in question, with honor and good intentions, and having totally explained that, I, in no way think the majority or even a lot of those people have ill intent.

I want to note the spell checker didn't have the word flagist.