SPLC, Debate-Crushing Goons
– Commentary by Steve Scroggins, 4/16/10
"The SPLC’s campaign of distortion, smear, and character assassination, has become a central part of the campaign…Conducted in the name of tolerance, civility, and good governance, that campaign is itself intolerant, uncivil, and extremist. In the name of defending democracy, it seeks to stifle one of democracy’s most vital functions, the vigorous discussion of important public issues. It demonstrates that the Southern Poverty Law Center has become a peddler of its own brand of self-righteous hate. It is a center of intolerance, marked by a poverty of ideas, a dependence on dishonesty, and a lack of fundamental decency."
–Jerry Kammer, CIS Senior Fellow, from conclusion of report entitled, Immigration and the SPLC: How the Southern Poverty Law Center Invented a Smear, Served La Raza, Manipulated the Press, and Duped its Donors, March 2010
The mission of the Southern Poverty Law Center is to make its founders and managers wealthy (mission accomplished!) and, secondarily, to serve as a propaganda tool for the leftist ‘progressive’ agenda. Totalitarians (advocates of centralized control) on the left and right see the SPLC and its seasoned tactics as a valuable tool for crushing debate, dissent and opposition to ever more centralized and intrusive government control of our daily lives.
Immigration & the SPLC: Stopping ‘Hate’ Is Really about Stopping Debate – Jerry Kammer, March 2010
The SPLC’s tools and tactics are to use fear, intimidation and smears to shut down debate. By smearing outspoken people and groups as hateful bigots and potentially dangerous ‘terrorists,’ the SPLC’s goal is to discredit opponents and silence dissent and to encourage parrots and dupes (part of the Echo Chamber of Lies) to assist in "shouting down" anyone who doesn’t think in the ‘approved way.’ But that is a secondary ‘benefit’; SPLC’s primary goal is to scare their liberal donor base into panic and induce them to send money to SPLC to "fight hate."
The SPLC’s definition of "hate" is ever-expanding, so naturally there is an ever-expanding list of target people and groups to smear. That’s just good business strategy for the premiere organization in the Hate Industry. The so-called ‘news’ media as well as law enforcement (federal, state and local agencies) and thousands of public schools have assisted them by treating the SPLC as some sort of authority on hate groups while completely ignoring their hyperbole, faulty logic, flimsy connections and the VERY soft mud under their foundation of lies.
Pro Libertate author William Norman Grigg writes that the SPLC "is in everything but name an adjunct to the FBI"…that is, an extension of the sedition police. That is a scary thought. The SPLC uses law enforcement to harass their ideological enemies and generate an air of official authenticity. In so doing, the SPLC wastes precious taxpayer resources that should be used to combat real crime and neutralize real threats.
When (rarely) pressed for specifics to justify their smears, the SPLC uses all manner of linguinstic and logical acrobatics to paint their smear targets as guilty by distant and tortured association with people/groups they label as ‘bad’ or ‘dangerous.’ When pressed (rarely) to define what they mean by "hate" we get more acrobatics, vague platitudes and anecdotes along with questionable links to known bogeymen. When they cannot show a particular group as having committed any criminal or unethical act or even a particularly offensive statement, they label them as dangerous incendiaries whose ideas or rhetoric supposedly incites the lone wolf wackos — thereby suggesting that the smear targets are the cause of violence perpetrated by random lunatics (and therefore should be silenced!). According to the SPLC (as echoed by then President Clinton), it’s the rhetoric of the right (Rush Limbaugh, talk radio, conspiracy theories, etc.) that inspired Timothy McVeigh and his conspirators to commit the OKC bombing. And the SPLC is still using McVeigh as an bogeyman, hysterically warning that current anti-government talk will incite another McVeigh-like terrorist.
Jerry Kammer’s report notes that when the SPLC designates an organization as a "hate group," it places that organization on a list already occupied by such notorious groups as the Ku Klux Klan and racist skinheads. Yet SPLC director of research Heidi Beirich acknowledged that SPLC "does not have a formal written criteria" for assigning a label intended to bring disgrace to its recipients. Pressed to define a hate group, Beirich said (in a radio interview): "You qualify as a hate group if you treat an entire group of people for their internal characteristics, or their inherent characteristics, or you demean them in some way." By that loose definition, the SPLC itself certainly qualifies as a "hate group."
Kammer’s report observes: "A definition this flexible and imprecise could summon the SPLC Hate Patrol to the door of nearly any group of football fans, political activists, or Apple computer enthusiasts." The report adds that "such laxity is an invitation for the malice and mischief that are characteristic of the SPLC."
"What makes the Southern Poverty Law Center particularly odious is its habit of taking legitimate conservatives and jumbling them with genuine hate groups (the Klan, Aryan Nation, skinheads, etc.), to make it appear that there’s a logical relationship between say opposing affirmative action and lynching, or demands for an end to government services for illegal aliens and attacks on dark-skinned immigrants. The late novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand called this ‘the broad-brush smear.’"
–Don Feder, syndicated columnist, from THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER – NO ARTISTRY IN ITS SMEARS, 11/28/07
"When the [SPLC] doesn’t have the guts to call someone a racist (or feels it might be skirting libel laws to do so), it attributes its views to unnamed observers. (“The Southern Poverty Law Center’s tactics are seen by many as devious and/or reprehensible.”)
–Don Feder, syndicated columnist, 11/28/07
The objective of this commentary is to connect some dots for our readers. The most recent dots to connect were placed out there quite eloquently by writers J.D. Tuccille (the Civil Liberties Examiner on examiner.com) in his commentary entitled, "When did ‘anti-government’ become a bad thing?" and by William Norman Grigg in his commentary entitled "’Sedition’ Purges – Past, Present, and Future on LewRockwell.com.
As a service to our readers and in the interest of preserving American liberty, we began tracking, documenting and logging news, information and opinion about what we termed "the Hate Industry" on the HATE WATCH page of our website (and in offline dossiers). A partial survey and compilation on the SPLC was published last August in our commentary entitled SPLC’s Reputation as Frauds and Conmen Grows. We’ve added to that a fairly decent digest of professionally published news and opinion together with the observations of self-published bloggers. If you know of any worthy material not included in our digest, please forward the links to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Founders saw a ‘free press’ — meaning the sharing of ideas, with truths, falsehoods and shades of gray —- as an essential necessity for a free people to govern themselves and to control their government. Of course, the advent of modern communications technology (telegraph, telephone, radio, television and the Internet) has changed the game significantly and added complexity to the process. But the principle remains the same: the government should be very limited in its control of the flow of ideas. The free flow of ideas and debate are a requirement for a society that wants to be free.
A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both. –James Madison
"In every country where man is free to think and to speak, differences of opinion will arise from difference of perception, and the imperfection of reason; but these differences when permitted, as in this happy country, to purify themselves by free discussion, are but as passing clouds overspreading our land transiently and leaving our horizon more bright and serene."
–Thomas Jefferson, to Benjamin Waring, 1801.
"Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." –First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
Measures and Countermeasures
The study of propaganda as a control tool expanded when "wireless telegraphy" (known popularly now as radio) emerged to compete with print media as a means for mass communication. Audio and video information have persuasive qualities not available with the cold hard logic of the printed word. FDR’s fireside chats and the Nazi Propaganda ministry serve as examples illustrating that political leaders recognized the power of mass communication for control purposes. Just as the powers that be had a firm grasp on television and radio networks for controlling the message and public thought, along comes cable television and the Internet. The mid to late 1990s also brought the resurgence of AM talk radio, especially of the "conservative" variety.
A lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth has found its way to print and the airwaves lamenting the "wild west" nature of the Internet and the fact that ‘conservatives’ dominate AM talk radio. The totalitarians, be they leftwing or rightwing, despise losing control. They are control freaks. So, they have devised plans and means to regain control over these new media.
Legislation known as the "Fairness Doctrine" has been frequently discussed in recent years. It’s essentially a sham to make talk radio less profitable and thereby to silence the dissent expressed through that medium. The other favorite of the left (ADL, SPLC, et al) are "Hate Laws" which are designed to specify a state sanctioned "truth" and to make it a criminal offense to write or utter anything not in compliance with the approved "truth." Hate Laws are essentially tools to silence debate and discussion and any deviation from the approved "truth." Even if you can prove in a court of law that your statements were fact, you would be convicted of "hate crimes" if your words and thoughts didn’t match the official "truth."
As both J.D. Tuccille and William Norman Grigg point out, anti-government sentiments and distrust of government are an American tradition. America was founded on the idea that government must be limited. The Founding Principles recognized what all history before and since has proven: Government is the biggest threat to mankind and liberty. Governments of the 20th century proved brutally capable of murdering millions (Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, et al) to maintain their control. We find it hard to understand how any people can go along with such atrocities. William Norman Grigg’s chilling commentary explains how.
Author Alexander Abert Long lists "Fear of Government-over-man" as number two of his Twelve Basic American Principles. The spirit of the Founding Principles and Second Amendment in particular document that the Founders distrusted government and intended to maintain the absolute right of the people to defend themselves against ANY threat to their life, liberty and property, including ESPECIALLY government. The modern P.C. idea that the government should have the sole and exclusive right to use force (have weapons) is a totalitarian idea. Hitler and Stalin ranked disarming their citizens a high priority.
Were the Founders alive today, the SPLC would most certainly smear them as anti-government "rightwing extremists." Accordingly, I would be proud to be labeled as such by the SPLC or their media parrots. We added the warning label below to protect unsuspecting "loyal Obamanoids" who might stumble onto our website by mistake.
As Matthew Vadum warns, "if you’re reading this, chances are you’re a terrorist"… or at least worthy of being put on a federal DHS/FBI watch list of potential rightwing extremists.
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." –George Washington
"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." –Thomas Jefferson
"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all." –Thomas Jefferson
It has been said that all Government is an evil. It would be more proper to say that the necessity of any Government is a misfortune. This necessity however exists; and the problem to be solved is, not what form of Government is perfect, but which of the forms is least imperfect. –James Madison, 1833
It’s well documented that distrust of government is an American tradition and a wise one. Now, for a counter-point, study the propaganda of the SPLC. I know many readers will find this suggestion repulsive and disgusting, but to document that the SPLC smears anyone who dissents against government policies or holds views contrary to SPLC’s, we offer the following recent reports they hilariously call "Intelligence Reports." As an alternative to the SPLC’s militia tripe, just read Dan Amato’s detailed critique of the August 2009 SPLC report.
The SPLC would have us believe that Americans who don’t trust government are some kind of extremist aberration outside the mainstream, and a potentially violent threat to be suppressed. The enormous size and widespread nature of Tea Parties (true grass roots) have terrified the major parties and their corporate owners. Rest assured that enormous resources are being deployed to sabotage and discredit tea parties. SPLC is doing its part to "link" and "associate" tea parties with other people and groups they’re already smearing. Bill Whittle of PJTV has already linked Tea Parties to well-known radicals.
A somber thought to contemplate… If the SPLC’s smear tactics fail in their secondary mission to silence dissent, we may see the government execute plans to discourage dissent by force through some form of "sedition law." As Grigg writes, the president already claims the power to summarily execute (kill) any American citizen for sedition or ‘suspected terrorism,’ and without any due process.
Don’t think it can’t happen or won’t happen; it already HAS happened and IS happening. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and imprisoned between 10,000 and 15,000 political prisoners without trial in the north for the crime of simply voicing opposition to Lincoln’s war policy. Grigg documents similar totalitarian abuses of the Wilson and FDR administrations. George W. Bush and now President Obama claim similar powers to arrest, imprison, torture and execute anyone they deem an enemy of the state.
We cannot allow them —any group or the government, of any party or political ideology— to silence the truth or silence dissent. That would be surrender and complete submission to tyranny. If the government escalates to more overt suppression of dissent, such as concentration camps or gulags, then that will be our moment of truth. Do we love freedom enough to act and defend it? Will we react in time? Or be led like sheep to the slaughter?
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." –George Washington
"…At what exact point, then, should one resist…? …How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: what would have things been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? …If…If… We didn’t love freedom enough. …We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward." –Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, from "The Gulag Archipelago"
Copyright © 2003-2010, GeorgiaHeritageCouncil.org