Editor’s Note: There has recently been a lot of blowback against the SPLC.
Ben Schreckinger has a new article in Politico about how the SPLC has gone from fighting the Klan to setting itself up as the hall monitor of American politics:
“But today, the group is best known for its “Intelligence Project,” which has essentially cornered the market on identifying and tracking hate groups, as well as extremists and “hate incidents.” The Intelligence Project’s 15 full-time and two part-time staffers (it’s in the process of hiring five more) pump out reports that are regularly cited by just about every major mainstream media outlet, including Politico, and their researchers have become the go-to experts for quotes on those topics.
The SPLC’s hate group and extremist labels are effective. Groups slapped with them have lost funding, been targeted by activists and generally been banished from mainstream legitimacy. This makes SPLC the de facto cop in this realm of American politics, with all the friction that kind of policing engenders. …
The Klan may be out of commission, but Dees says these new tactics of organized American racism are “just as bad as burning up this building. He just burned up an individual in a small town.”
Trump supporters, of course, would disagree. Trump campaigned as a rebel against political correctness, and in a sense his election was a backlash against the power amassed by liberal groups like the SPLC—a rejection of the idea that liberal activists should determine what views are considered out of bounds in American politics. …”
Ben is right.
In recent years, the SPLC has made a number of moves which have shredded its legitimacy on the Right: participating in the Black Lives Matter protests in Ferguson, hiring one of the Jena 6 thugs as a “community advocate,” rushing to blame the Gabrielle Giffords shooting in Tuscon on the Tea Party, labeling figures like Ben Carson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Charles Murray haters and extremists, labeling the Family Research Council a “hate group,” targeting all Confederate monuments in the South for destruction, ignoring countless black-on-white mass shootings which don’t fit the Narrative and ignoring political violence against Trump supporters and Republicans.
There’s nothing “objective” about what the SPLC does. It tries to stigmatize groups and individuals as “haters” and “hate groups” and “extremists” based solely on their politics and how they fit into their Narrative. A good example of this is the Dylann Roof shooting in Charleston. A month later the jihadist Muhammad Abdulazeez struck in Chattanooga. The SPLC ignored the story just like it has ignored the half dozen or so black-on-white and anti-police mass shootings (Micah X. in Dallas, Cosmo Setepenra in Baton Rouge, Ismaaiyl Brinsley in New York City, Vester Flanagan II in Roanoke, Kori Allen Muhammad in Fresno, Chris Harper Mercer in Roseburg) that have occurred since then. Whenever the SPLC finds a mentally ill White male who can be of service to the Narrative like Dylann Roof, Jeremy Christian or Jared Loughner, we never hear the end of it. It becomes a “story about hate.”
We all remember the time Floyd Corkins tried to murder the leaders of the Family Research Council and stuff their faces with Chick-fil-A sandwiches smeared in their blood. He was “inspired” by the SPLC’s hate group list. James Hodgkinson, the Alexandria shooter, “liked” the SPLC on Facebook. The SPLC is about as objective as Mother Jones in its reporting on “hate” in America. Amazingly, this “watchdog” doesn’t list any of the openly violent antifa groups in the United States as “hate groups.”
The liberal and progressive journalists who are in collusion with the SPLC are equally partisan. Only 7 percent of journalists in America are Republicans and they are overwhelmingly concentrated in a handful of Democratic urban enclaves. There are 12x more liberal professors in academia. It is all one big incestuous bubble talking to each other and pushing narratives. In the SPLC’s case, the money comes from scaring little old Jewish ladies in the North and West with junk mail. In CNN’s case, the Russia Narrative is about titillating liberals with fake news and an exciting conspiracy theory in order to drive up ratings and ad revenue. It is on the same level as Infowars on Jade Helm.
The one positive thing Trump has done is to dismiss all of them as fake news. They have lost their legitimacy. Everyone knows what they are about now and only defer to them out of habit.