The Second Coming of the KKK Linda Gordon
This book reflects with some detail the resurgence of the KKK in the Roaring Twenties when it boasted membership, nation-wide, in the millions. It explores the history and dynamics of the organization and its downfall before the depression.
Thoughts:
My prejudices since childhood made the KKK an easy target for disdain. Firstly—it was overtly racist and in my mind, a Southern aberration. This linked to a common prejudice agains the Southern Culture —at least that part of Southern culture that maintained it was just misunderstood or that the Civil War was based on reasonable or even admirable beliefs. Where I grew up, the Klan and that Southern culture were just bogeymen. I did not get it. I do not get it. I remain astounded. Reality vs Myth-- for example, if you consider the state of Kentucky, which never seceded, one gets a feeling that the sentiments of the population during the Civil War were likely Southern. Why might one think that? It is the accent. To this day, of the 59 state markers in the State of Kentucky celebrating some aspect of the Civil War, 48 commemorate Confederates. Of note, records show that Kentucky contributed 25,000 men to the Confederate cause. 75,000 of which 24,000 were black fought for the Union. The power and propaganda of the lost cause is palpable and the KKK was a figurehead of that.
Kentucky never had to use the Civil War Draft for the Union because volunteers filled that state’s quota……..and it was the only Union State with that distinction.
My other prejudice was that the KKK of the 1920’s was a fraternal organization — with rituals and uniforms, secret handshakes, coded words to communicate real meaning, ranks with bizarre titles all contribute to the appeal that today, looks odd.
Points of interest:
Oregon—of all places!. A theme of the book is that the first iteration of the KKK was definitely regional ie Southern and was an overt terrorist organization set on establishing and enforcing a caste system based on race.
The KKK of the 1920’s was national in scope and actually had more members in the North. What is surprising about Oregon and the KKK influence there is instructive: Oregon was the most racist region outside of the deep South from 1850 to 1950. Oregon and Indiana had the highest % of the electorate in the KKK organization. Outlawing slavery before the civil war, the Oregon state government manifested its racial point of view by attempted to force all-non white people to leave the state. This violated Federal Law so the back up was forbidding land ownership (blacks) —and Oregon was the only state in the Union to do this. People of color were taxed to live in Oregon (much as Christians were taxed in Islamic countries). The 14th and 15th amendments were ratified by Oregon in 1959 and 1973 respectively. The KKK adapted when out of the South: it was not always about blacks. In the 20’s, Japanese numbered 5,000 out of 800,000 ie .006% of the population ( and larger than the black population) and owned less than 3,000 acres (.008%) of land and yet the KKK labeled this workforce a threat to white workers in the farming industry. Both Washington and Oregon in the 20’s would prohibit Japanese from renting land to farm…..
The KKK platform basically held that white protestants should run the country and those who were of color, or of a non protestant denomination (Catholics for example) or other religion (Jews) were to be relegated to second class citizenship. Oregon’s anti-catholic sentiment led to state-wide referendum: re closing down parochial schools as they were forums for Papist propaganda and therefore, disloyal. Citizen initiatives like this went against political machines and traditional norms—-and made for intolerant laws. The requirement to attend public school passed but failed the judicial test with what is now a familiar response: “…the people will not stand for any half-dozen judges telling them that an overwhelming majority cannot make their own law….”
Not Oregon:
We cannot have an easy time understanding the relationship of this fundamentally evangelically based institution with its time—when “populism” or “progressivism” was an active part of social change in the United States before and after World War I. Consider how much change came around these years: the direct election of senators, federal income tax, and prohibition! The pure food and drug act was established as was the licensing of professionals, like doctors. It was the Roaring Twenties with much social change afoot. Paradoxically the woman’s movement re right to vote had an ally in the KKK. They were that confident in their womenfolk. They believed alcohol was a social evil and argued for prohibition. They aligned with some mainstream beliefs such as eugenics (with its obvious racial overtones); Margaret Singer (a founding voice for Planned Parenthood) would be invited to speak at KKK conferences to discuss birth control—a very, “lefty” topic. Margaret Singer supported forms of eugenics……On the other hand, the KKK was violently opposed to the science related to evolution with the possible exception of this (evolutionary) logic of eugenics.
The KKK of the 20’s did not ride horseback at night terrorizing individuals—with the possible exception of the Southern States. This clan was public and largely non-violent. It was a religious movement and a political movement. It advertised openly and was at the cutting edge of information technologies such as radio and public relation efforts.
A reason for this iteration of the KKK’s success in the North was the presence of large numbers of immigrants from non Protestant cultures. Existing populations saw themselves as real Americans and in competition with these immigrants who had different religions, languages, and cultures. The political machines in big cities that attempted to manage and profit from such immigrants were the target of the KKK which exploited the rural/urban divide we know so well today. Political Machines, labeled correctly as corrupt and nativism were points of view that were in effect mainstream: the influence of the Klan is hard to measure because such points of view could be held with people who would would vote accordingly but disdained the racial politics of the KKK.
For liberals, exposing the KKK for its views often backfired and in fact, a NYT article (1921) with details of people and activities in the KKK led to more successful recruiting. Similarly, congressional attempts to isolate it backfired with the same result. Most political discussions in the 1920’s occurred in segregated settings—for everyone. Fraternal groups were likewise segregated—for example the knights of Columbus for Catholics and B’nai B’rith for Jews—one might ask (and Klan leaders did) why not one for whites? This KKK supported elected presidents who were conservative and non interventionists in the US economy: Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover.
Not unlike modern conservatives and those at a loss when confronted by our complex modern times, the followers of the KKK had a fundamental desire to establish order, stability, and morality —-on their terms. They mythologized our nation’s birth in a manner that supported this end point and supported their “birth right” to the traditions they admired. These themes are in part what made them less racially motivated as had been the case in the Southern States fifty years before. Order and stability were challenged by immigrants. Religion competed for their wrath with non whites: Catholics took orders from the Pope—a foreigner answerable to no one. Jews were both fundamental to the Communist and Socialist movements as well as manipulators at the top of the Capitalist system. And their blood line traced to the murderers of Jesus. The KKK was first and foremost, Protestant--evangelical Protestant.
Immigrants from 1880-1920 were largely non-protestants. There were racial implications to this (Is an Italian really “white?” Is the question considered differently in Atlanta, New York City, or Portland?), but also the religious orientation was fundamental to the KKK. KKK meetings in fact shared much with traditional evangelical church meetings. The Grand Dragon of the KKK proclaimed after the Scopes trial, paraphrasing Abraham Lincoln, “America cannot survive half Christian and half Agnostic.” Of note, at the national level, the legislative success of the KKK that was most clear was the Federal legislation on Immigration which would not be reversed until the 1960’s. People from, “shit hole” countries were excluded for forty years.
The KKK advocated for the 19th Amendment which brought the vote to women in the United States. It had female leaders who were charismatic and held their own against the predominant male leadership.
Despite the “old time” and fundamentalist religious orientation, much like Al Qaeda, the KKK made use of modern technology and moderns systems to gain attention and popularity. PR consultants, politicians advocating their positions, the use of the media, and public entertainment events all contributed to success. In addition, the nature of the fraternal organization, costumes, ranks, special language, and underground culture all trended in their favor. They also made use of Brandolini’s law: “the amount of energy to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude greater than the energy to produce it.”
Vigilanteism: The reputation of the Klan includes vigilanteism. This was most prominent in the Deep South and the original version of the KKK. Regionally in the 1920’s, it varied. The Northeast Klan functioned more like a lobbying organization that relied on the political system to achieve its goals ie no lynchings but rather, coercion might more likely be economical ie boycotting targeted businesses. The South had more traditional versions of coercion that included lynchings, whippings, and threatened violence. Famously, in Omaha Nebraska, Malcolm X’s house was attacked in search of his father who was absent. The pregnant mother was told in no uncertain terms what to expect if the family stayed (Malcolm’s dad was said to be organizing “good negroes” and resisting the assumption that White Supremacy was the law of the land….) and all the windows in the house were broken to make the point to his mother and her children. They would flee and that story would be central to the evolution of a black revolutionary. The circle would be completed. The movie “Birth of a Nation” modeled vigilante behavior KKK1.0 and was much admired —a best selling movie in its time.
There is no comprehensive tally of KKK candidates being elected and the point is lost when you consider than many non KKK victors shared many of the same points of view. White protestants were after all, a majority. However, with respect to high offices: 16 senators, scores of congressmen, 11 governors, divided amongst democrats/republicans. Ironically, Justice Black from Alabama—one of the most liberal court justices from FDR’s time had been a member of the Klan and this caused embarrassment during and after the confirmation hearings—and after the KKK’s fortunes had declined dramatically. Still, from California in those days, “….the election of Richardson is imperative if we are to remove the Jews, Catholics, and Negroes from public life in California.” Richardson won with an overwhelming majority.
The scientific rhetoric and trending ideas that supported the Klan were shared by their cousins, the fascists in Italy and Germany with a focus on race, blood lines, and antipathy for Jews. Two fundamental differences flow from this. The fascists in Italy and France were tied to a top down linking of the culture with the national government. Conservatives in Europe liked--and still like -- strong national governments. In contrast, the Klan wanted a weak Federal Government. The European fascists did not meld their political philosophy to fundamentalist religion. “Sin” has a very different feel to it than “bad blood lines.” Hitler did not suggest Germany’s greatness was part of God’s plan……..but rather, a more “scientific” sense that the (mythological) nation’s greatness ran through the blood lines of the German people.
KKK authoritarianism was not out of line with representational democracy in the 1920’s because the notion that “real Americans” would not be a majority was not a realistic concept then. The majority with its entitlements was very real —-Klan or no Klan. It was a political machine and social movement but not an instrument of insurrection because the system accommodated their points of view. 2023 finds people with the same attitudes and beliefs not only a minority, —a vocal minority —with its opposition far more liberal than that of 1923. For the majority of Americans, discrimination is wrong, racist language is pejorative, freedom of speech is valued, and many non-white people are considered true citizens. Even today when those with Klan orientations win elections, they face an electorate with fundamental differences of opinion.........I pray...........
Comments