Monarchy Forum
Register Latest Topics

  Author   Comment   Page 6 of 6     «   Prev   3   4   5   6

Posts: 4,857
Reply with quote  #76 
There's an abundance of evidence, produced here and elsewhere, to show you that the SPLC clearly targets the entirety of the conservative movement with baseless accusations of promoting hatred and extremism. They are treated as if they were objective researchers when they are in reality an ideological and partisan smear machine. Furthermore, as I mentioned in previous posts, their smears have been shown to potentially endanger the lives and property of those being smeared.

Furthermore, there is a very clear cynicism behind this operation. They only "discovered" or invented new categories of "extremism" (e.g. anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-women, etc) out of expediency. It is very much related to their desire to expand an already substantive donor base, which enriches the group to a degree that has raised questions from experts in the industry.

Lastly, the fact that even some prominent liberal and left-wing journalists - Ken Silverstein and the late Alexander Cockburn among them - have publicly criticised this method of operation and have pointed out that at the end of the day, the SPLC is a money-making scam.

Posts: 6,875
Reply with quote  #77 
To Wessexman, 'material'? It was a sentence! To David, fact is that every one of your blizzard of accusations I have troubled to look into turned out to be questionable at best and baseless at worst. I do not feel a need to investigate the SPLC thoroughly enough to form my own solidly-grounded opinion of their merits, or lack thereof. But if you want me to take the latter view, there is a need for you to build a better case for it.

Posts: 1,103
Reply with quote  #78 
But do they have such sentences about third wave, hard left feminists? I'm not sure that it was only a sentence really excuses such smears. If we are going to say these are single pieces or reports, it is telling they all go the same way and that such tactics are very common from the SPLC. They don't make such smears of left-liberal causes or figures. Let's not also forget that people from the SPLC saw fit just recently to forward it to that radical feminist mentioned in the article - so it wasn't a throw away sentence, or even report, to them!

What they do say about Christina Hoff Sommers and those like her is so silly, exaggerated, and one-sided that, though it might not technically be lying, it is essentially dishonest:

The point is to clearly make out a classical liberal feminist like Hoff Sommers, or similar people, is enabling some kind of extreme, nefarious, but only vaguely described, anti-woman radicalism, simply for not towing the third wave feminist line.

Posts: 4,857
Reply with quote  #79 
That's precisely the point - they don't do the same reporting about Leftists or Islamists because it doesn't suit them, rather it's because they are in league with them on the basis of a shared agenda. Their inclusion of Black Nationalist groups (e.g. Nation of Islam) and a few small and inconsequential Islamic groups would seem to be pure tokenism, as the far more insidious and influential minority organisations are those purporting to promote civil rights and social justice.

The smears of "anti-immigration" groups include those who simply want a sane and rational immigration policy, highlight the fact that crime is disproportionately committed by illegal immigrants (the Remembrance Project) or simply want to require all Americans to at least be able to speak English (ProEnglish). I don't think any of these things is unreasonable at all.

Likewise, their smear of "anti-Muslim" groups on the basis of mild and generally factual criticisms of Islam and the Muslim community, and more specifically of Muslim activist individuals and organisations who have dubious links to say the least. For instance, the suggestion that the Muslim Brotherhood and its front groups are actively working to advance their agenda on various fronts is dismissed as a "far right conspiracy theory", despite the fact that it is known in the Middle East (and it has been confirmed to me on social media by sources there) that this is in fact the case. In short, the SPLC is smearing conservatives who hold views which are in fact shared by many in the Islamic World, including its traditional religious establishments.

So you see the point - the SPLC is simply targeting groups that stand in the way of the agenda of it and its allies - whether it is in favour of uncontrolled immigration and the increasingly sinister "diversity" cult, or the advance of radical Islamist ideology in its most insidious and allegedly "non-violent" form.

Posts: 4,857
Reply with quote  #80 
Accusations that Asians are embracing the "Far Right" and "white supremacy" in Canada have now appeared:

This would seem to be the culmination of a process going back some time, as evidenced by the LA Riots of 1992 when Korean-Americans, one of America's most successful and integrated communities, bore the brunt of rioters. In more recent times, the Left has circulated the idea that the "Far Right" or "Alt Right" (well, really the conservative movement) has some kind of "Asian fetish".

Now let's get this straight. Many conservatives DO have a positive view of Eastern Europe and East Asia, because of their comparative cultural homogeneity, social conservatism, rejection of Political Correctness and, at least in Japan, apparently a lack of guilt for history.

But in reality, the identity politics Left's recent inclusion of Asians (along with Jews) as a "privileged" group is rooted in their racialised Marxist socioeconomic discourse. It is because the Left is basically all about envy. This envy is not exclusively directed to anyone on the basis of race or class but some social construct of group or individual "privilege".

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.