You should cross-reference this with the tax accountant thread. Views such as his were commonplace, and would have remained for generations without laws specifically ending them. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that this guy's marginalization would happen with a naive libertarian ideal in place. Parochial majoritarianism is a far more likely outcome. This guy is a big fan of bringing back extra-judicial ways of maintaining societal norms. How could that have ever gone wrong? BTW, I am not really in favor of the mob mentality of retaliating against him (absurd as his views are). So many ways to go wrong....

"The Klan wasn't violent until they needed to be."

Ah, the klan needed to be violent. For the good of man. I knew they wore white, I didn’t realize that they were white knights.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

"This is the same so what used when Democrats got us into World War I and World War II."

grampa slipped a cog there

Laws didn't end these views. Enlightenment did. Laws only made it a bit easier to go after those dumbasses when they committed crimes against others. And to be clear, marching in the streets and protesting for or against a particular ideology, hateful as it may be, is not a crime against others.

At any rate, out of about 320 million people in the U.S., the Klan probably numbers from 5,000 to 8,000, as estimated in 2016 until now. Something like 0.000016 to 0.000025 percent of the population. There are also about 300 black nationalist hate groups operating in the U.S. (All figures come from major media news reports that cited the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has its own problems with disseminating hate, in my opinion).

Now I don't know if racial polarization is getting better or worse -- mainly because I don't pay all that much attention to the doings of stupid idiots running loose out in the general population -- but I do know that the media tends to blow said stupid idiots' doings all out of proportion to their actual numbers, as they did with this cretinous retard. (To me, race relations seem light years better than what I remember in the 1960s and early 1970s.)

Seriously: Does anyone here really think these people, whether white nationalist or black nationalist actually have even the remotest chance of imposing their views on the rest of the country? My guess is, nowadays, if they tried they'd quickly get the Mussolini light pole treatment from a mass of "concerned citizens" who wouldn't put up with their idiocy.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Uh... they were the knights of the klue klux klan....

The bolded part isn't entirely false. Even if the rest is stupid crazy stuff.

Democrats back in the day were pretty active in putting down domestic socialist groups that popularly opposed entry into both WWI and WWII (mostly socialist leaning trade unions, like the ALF?).

They also went lock-step in line with Republicans on laws and rules to enforce some pretty rough rules about speaking out about the wars, opposing drafts, etc..........a lot of people ended up in jail at the hands of Democrats in that era for things that today Democrats supposedly champion.

As to how they got us into the war? In the Pacific in WWII the US was already involved in lots of islands financially and stood to lose a lot to Japan even without Pearl Harbor. We'd have warred with Japan without Pearl Harbor.

Policies of Pacific expansionism to get US business into the Pacific islands and Asia was helped along by congressional Democrats at the time.......and could argue directly led eventually to Pearl Harbor and WWII.

As for WWI, I'd need to go re-read that section.

I think the whole notion of blaming political parties for past policies or actions that are now often diametrically opposed to their modern positions is kind of silly on top of all the other nonsense in the that guy's ranting.

It sounds like you read the whole editorial or perhaps other things he has said. That bit in the picture was not about race was it, it seemed to be against Democrat tax policy. I'll take your word on it if he is racist elsewhere.

But if he was trying to use some image of scaring liberals, by invoking kkk images, that is bad too even not directed against race. It kind of like like invoking hitler in a debate. You should not be trying to make points by invoking kkk or hitler.