It was just quoting the word I’d used earlier. It wasn’t intended as scare quotes.
Most of the right-wing groups they list aren’t really “of consequence” either. I’m sure I could come up with some that are as deserving of the label as Focus on the Family or the Tea Party Nation. Are there any Occupy Wall Street remnants? Environmentalist or animal-rights groups? Hell, by their definition any group that uses the Bible could qualify as a “hate group” and I find that laughable.
Are you saying there’s no such thing as the radical right?
How is Occupy Wall Street a hate group?
It might be interesting to note that Morris Dees got his start working for George Wallace.
They hate certain minorities; in particular the 1%.
There is nothing left-partisan about opposing the Klan, etc.; any conservative of good conscience would do the same.
Or radical terrorists like those eco-bombers: they’re radical and extreme and dangerous and violent…but they don’t really do “hate.”
It’s a separate phase of group psychosis. The Unobomber was a dangerous loony who needed stopping, but he didn’t practice hate.
It has to do with intent. A guy who shoots up everyone in a theater isn’t committing a “hate crime,” just a crime. A guy who shoots up a black church…because it’s a black church…is committing a hate crime.
Also, not all “hate” activity is criminal. There are lots of ways to keep it within the bounds.
“Focus on the Family” is a hate group – although what they do is not criminal – in that they actively preach that some people are less worthy of rights than other people.
They hate the huge inequalities that exist and they hate the actions of some individuals. But they don’t hate the 1%. There are some very wealthy people who believe in and support OWS, I’ll even give you some right-wing sources as cites for that.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/paul-wilson/2011/12/28/99-percent-top-25-occupy-wall-street-backers-worth-over-4-billion
http://humanevents.com/2011/10/21/george-soros-funds-occupy-wall-street/
The 1% is not some oppressed minority, even if some have whined that they are.
To compare OWS to the types of groups that the SPLC targets is silly.
[shrug] So name their wrong calls.
In the same way that it is interesting to note that leading Abolitionist (and author of “Amazing Grace”) John Newton got his start as a slave trader.
WWHHOOOOOOOOOOSSSHHHH!!!
Ermm, right?
I’ll bite. How was I wooshed?
The Southern Poverty Law Center fights terrorists: some people unsurprisingly have a problem with that. Or so it appears: it’s difficult to tell when insinuations are vague. I stand with America. Sure the SPLC does not track all terrorist groups: that’s not their job. They only track hate groups of the violent and non-violent kind. Don’t like it? Tough.
As noted above, critiques about them making money hand over fist are nonsense. Yeah, they’ve built up a large endowment in case the shit hits the fan. But their top 3 salaries paid are in the $230,000 to $344,000 range, considerably less than top lawyers could be paid in the private sector. Contrast that to the NRA execs who have rather thinner outside opportunities. The top 3 executives there take in $664,000 to 972,000: yes, the lowest of the three makes almost twice that of the highest paid SPLC executive.
I speculate that those who are bothered by SPLC salaries are unburdened with consternation about the higher salaries of the NRA. That’s ok: it helpfully lets us know that the initial complaint consisted largely of blown smoke.
Cite: Charity Watch, Winter 2013.
Under their websites what we do one link is “hate and extremism” (my emphasis.) Under that I did think about one of the major strains of the US domestic terror threat - eco-terrorism. Animal liberationsists and eco-terrorists do get some air time on their site even if not as much up front mention as right racist groups. They don’t show up on the list though.
They don’t seem to do as much with some of the direct action anarchist groups that espouse and have practiced violence. It’s hard not to see that as fitting in with the extremism part of their extended mission. A quick review showed the anarchist group coverage tended to be a of a strange hybrid of far left and far right where groups with a racist bent approach things from a more environmentalist/anarchist position. The didn’t so much cover the more common anarchist strains that fit more closely with the far left. One interesting quote in a story about the Bay Area National Anarchists:
Add anarchism, environmentalism, and racism. Spice it with mystical tribalism and blend. Talk about an odd ideological smoothie. :smack:
Well, Mr. Nylock could not have possibly meant that bit seriously, could he?!
Ermm, right?
National Anarchists?
Lemon curry?
How about you put up some examples rather than making vague claims?
Name some groups that SPLC has identified as hate groups that are undeserving of the label.
Name some groups that can be identified as hate groups that the SPLC does not track.
What groups do eco-terrorists, animal rights groups, and anarchists hate and harass? From what I can see, these groups attack property, not people. If they do attack people, it’s not due to their race, religion, sexuality, or nationality.
While I happen to agree that the CEO and top litigator of a non-profit as big as the SPLC make good but not scandalous salaries, I think comparing them to the NRA is a bit of a straw man - the NRA is not a 501c3.
Personally, I expect more accountability from a tax-deductible outfit. If the NRA wants to scrub its executives’ feet with gold loofahs, meh. But the SPLC is exempt from income tax (in addition to contributions to them being deductible), exempt from unemployment tax, etc.