I think I gave to the splc once, maybe twice, many years ago before I heard about the endowment. They sent me Morris Dees's autobiography which strangely trumpets his direct mail marketing experience (some of the link probably comes from it) and mentions with very few specifics a point in the organization's early history when a majority the board left.
I like Current Affairs. Current Affairs is good. But this article being a polemic may not be needed. The New Yorker had a version of the same article this month that isn't a polemic. But this article did let me know about an alternative organization to donate to.
I agree with the article on the likely sloppiness of the SPLC's identification of hate groups, but not on its criticism of that strategy as a strategy. Yes, less flamboyantly racist Republicans do more damage, but Republicans run partly on hate group ideas that have been laundered into the mainstream (see Neiwert).
Imagine if the SPLC put serious resources into actually figuring out how to compassionately redirect or defuse people being drawn into hate groups! That would be a big deal.
I first became aware of something fishy going on with the SPLC when they included Maajid Nawaz on one of their hate group lists. Although I gather they later walked that back.
In their Whose Heritage? thing they also exaggerated the number of things named after Confederates. I emailed them to say that "Lee Park" in Wilkes-Barre, PA is not named after Robert E. Lee. Why would they even think that? "Lee" is not exactly a rare name and you can easily look up who the Lee in question was.
To their credit they took its pin off the map, along with the one for Longstreet Avenue in the Bronx which I saw other people saying was not bad since Longstreet repudiated the Confederacy as much as any general could, becoming a Republican, leading the militia of the new Reconstruction Louisiana government, hiring black troops and attacking white supremacist insurgencies, working as a diplomat for the Grant and Hayes administrations, denying all forms of Lost Cause theorizing, etc.
Not yet having read links, what to date are the reactions of Republican politicians/prospective candidates in those places?
I admit I hope Halford finds some way to contribute to this thread, perhaps under deep cover, on the strength of this comment. I also admit that the "look at this harmless kook selling Confederate memorabilia" bit of the Current Affairs article soft-pedaled just a bit how horrible that guy actually seems to be.
The [real keyaki lastnames] lived in St. Landry parish for a hundred years, intermarrying with the family of Master Epps [video link, to the "dance, git up!" scene], and learning about these church fires has conveniently coincided with that research. Apparently there was a similar rash of fires in Baton Rouge 20+ years ago, indeed set by white supremacists, which is making me think not just about the 1850s-past but also the 1990s-past, and how much pre-Trump extremism was swirling around that I only half remember.
MC: one GOP reaction in this article:
U.S. Rep. Clay Higgins released a video Sunday urging anyone involved in these fires to turn themselves in to law enforcement.
"If you participated in this, you have succumbed to evil," he said, wearing a cowboy hat and standing in front of the rubble at St. Mary Baptist Church. "Powers of principality are controlling your life."
Not a Coen brothers clip, I swear.
My mom has really staked a large part of her identity as a virtuous person on donations (which is good!) and a major recipient is SLPC, so much so that they've visited the center and met Dees, etc etc etc. It feels like not quite a scam on aging liberals, but still uncomfortable to me.
Oh - I was just coming over to say that I'd read the Bob Moser New Yorker article on the SPLC a week or so ago (I'd been wondering what the fuck was going on with them) -- and it's worth a read.
Somehow I'd had it in my head that the SPLC was one of the good ones; it makes me REALLY MAD quite annoyed that this bullshit was going on all along. Not least: the right-wingers who are designated as hate groups by the SPLC now get to say that they were targets of a bullshit organization all along. Thanks a lot, guys.
10: I also had that understanding. Very pissed off about it, and shame on me for buying their hype, I guess.
I don't know. Whether the organization lives up to its values -- internally -- is a lot less important to me than whether it is effective at what it is trying to do. Of course employees should care whether it's a good workplace. And I guess I do, in the same way that I care, generally, about workplaces. But this outfit is worthy of attention only for the mission. Which isn't, imo, even a little about whether or not Dees sexually harassed the staff (for which he has to be fired, of course), but whether they are effective at calling out and fighting right wing hate groups.
They should be using their endowment in better ways, I suppose. That's a way less lurid hook.
whether they are effective at calling out and fighting right wing hate groups
Charley: they make themselves less effective by harboring this kind of grifting bullshit in management.
It is a serious question, though, the relationship between corporate culture and effectiveness. I don't know how often it's true that a place has a terrible corporate culture but is an overwhelming force for good in the world, that there's a firm ethical divide between external and internal values. I think we largely subscribe to the idea that this is the norm, that it's all sausage factories producing delicious, healthy, ecologically beneficial sausage. But what's the cost of remediation for those bad corporate cultures? Does a focus on internal equity increase inefficiency? It really shouldn't; but who decides how it's implemented? How many ways can you split the difference between institutional reform and mission effectiveness and end up better off? I'm thinking more about Oxfam, I guess: a pretty trusted and pretty effective org that had some fucked-up things going on behind the scenes. But SPLC is interesting because it does seem like Dees' behavior made it less efficient and effective than it could have been, given the talent they were able to attract.
15: Now that the word is out about SPLC's internal malfeasance, it's become less effective now. It's not a question of whether they were effective enough then, before word got out: they're less effective now. (This does not mean that it's okay as long as you don't get caught.)
Something similar has gone on with exposure of the American Red Cross's relief efforts/monies after the Haiti hurricane; turns out they were grifting in the extreme, fudging their numbers, conducting what looks for all the world like a con game, pretending to help people but actually pocketing the money. Great. Thanks, guys.
How the lawyer bringing the suit here against Anglin (mentioned in the Nyer article) treats his paralegal back in the office isn't going to have any impact on how the judge is going to rule on the various legal issues. OK, at a certain point, treating the paralegal badly in front of a jury is a bad move. Mostly though, what happens off the field is just not that relevant to what happens on the field.
There a whole perfect enemy of the good, feet of clay, all politicians lie so why are you so wound up about Trump thing that is worth not falling into.
I should have got one of those (what was he calling himself then?) Get Disappointed By Someone New -- Obama 2008 stickers when I had the chance. It does still make a difference to pick Obama over McCain.
To paraphrase a former SecDef, you go up against the Nazi hordes with the SPLC you have, not the SPLC you wish you had.
Get Disappointed By Someone New -- Obama 2008 stickers
They were ungrammatical, so nope.
(Teasing, of course, about those Obama stickers.)
I guess we'll see whether the SPLC's reputation is damaged enough that it crashes and burns; as I said, the right-wingers are going after it. They took down ACORN, no? But SPLC has a bountiful endowment, as noted.
I checked the docket to see what was going on in the Anglin case -- discovery disputes mostly -- but there were some entries last month of electronic notifications getting bounced, because they were sent to Dees. Including the motion to withdraw him as counsel.
you go up against the Nazi hordes with the SPLC you have, not the SPLC you wish you had
This doesn't excuse anyone bad behavior, of course.
Why can't they send Dees to another parish?
Pretty sure parsimon wasn't talking about consequences for bad organizational behavior just in terms of impact on the outcome of court cases the organization pursues.
@4 Not sure it justifies being on 'a list', but Quilliam have a history of playing very fast and loose on the facts.
24: Indeed, it's possible that covering for abusive people, especially in leadership positions, will lead to high turnover, difficulty recruiting talented individuals who believe in the org's purported mission, demoralized employees struggling to get through the week (much less doing the best they could, given a more supportive environment), settlement payouts or at least a high risk of them, and a risk of a potentially very public and damaging organizational implosion.
They arrested a guy. "Son of a St Landry Parish deputy sheriff." Story here.
So, the regular kind of race-based terrorism.
Mr. Matthews, who is white, was a member of a black metal band called Vodka Vultures.
Since when are white people allowed to play black metal?
Oh, peep. I'm sorry for what Google will show you.
DON'T GET ME STARTED ON SO-CALLED "BLUES MUSIC".