Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: rmlew
My friend Lawrence Auster has responded to this pack of lies and smears. Sadly, I cannot link to it.

Would that it were true! If it were, then, 16 years ago, when I wrote a draft manifesto and proposed to Tanton the creation of an organization to defend America's majority culture and people, called the League for European-American Defense, Education, and Research (figure out the acronym yourself), he would have said yes. But he said no, because, as he put it, he did not relate to the idea of defending white America as such.

In the world according to SPLC, NumbersUSA (which by the way never says anything critical about the ethnicity of immigrants) is a "nativist hate" organization; the Center for Immigration Studies (which never says anything critical about the ethnicity of immigrants) is a "nativist hate" organization; and the Federation for American Immigration Reform (ditto) is also a "nativist hate" organization. The proof for these assertions, according to SPLC, is that Tanton originally founded FAIR and CIS, and funded NumbersUSA, and that, years after he had founded FAIR and CIS, he privately expressed concerns about the assimilability of non-European immigrants and about the loss of America's historic European culture, and also published some articles along the same lines in his journal, The Social Contract, which, of course, does not have a single philosphy but criticizes immigration from many angles. Therefore Tanton is a "nativist hater," and therefore everyone and everything that has ever been associated with him gets the word "hate" and "nativist" attached as a prefix to his, her, or its name. Similarly, if a person has had any connection, no matter how tangential, to any entity deemed by SPLC to be a "nativist hate" organization, then not only is that person a nativist hater, but any other organizations that person is associated with are also nativist hate organizations.

As an example of SPLC's smear techniques, in her chapter on CIS, Beirich writes:

Some at CIS have also written for a nativist hate site, VDARE.com, which is named after Virginia Dare, said to be the first English child born in the New World. They include CIS Fellow John Miano and board member Carol Iannone.

Here are the facts. Carol Iannone in 2001 wrote a one-paragraph letter to the editor of Vdare in which she criticized Paul Gottfried's justification of paleocon Schadenfreude over the political defeats of neocons by the left, and referred to Samuel Francis's support for the left's attack on Iannone's nomination to the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1991. As would be evident to anyone with third-grade reading comprehension and a smidgen of intellectual honesty, Iannone was not writing for Vdare (not that there would have been anything wrong with that), she was writing to Vdare. Yet SPLC portrays her as a Vdare contributor, and therefore as a nativist hater, and thus, through her connection with Vdare, proves that CIS is a "nativist hate" organization. Again, there is nothing inherently wrong in writing for Vdare. But within the terms and technique of the SPLC report, Vdare is a "nativist hate" website, and Iannone is tainted for having written "for" it.

As anyone who reads the report will see, SPLC is vastly more "McCarthyite" than Sen. Joseph McCarthy ever was. May we then hope for the day when we will see a self-righteous liberal like Joseph Welch thundering:

Until this moment, Mr. Dees, Mr. Potok, and Ms. Beirich, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

Well, we may hope. But in reality it's vanishingly unlikely that SPLC--an organization that automatically labels as a "nativist hater" anyone who has ever expressed even the most moderate and reasonable questions about the desirability of large scale immigration--will ever be held to task for its disgusting and dishonest tactics of character assassination. Why? Because liberals rule America, and liberals only see evil to their right. Just as Muslims define Islam as identical to the good, and therefore never see Muslims as evil, liberals define liberalism as identical to the good, and therefore never see evil among themselves.

There. I've written only 600 words about SPLC, and already I need to take a shower.

However, I must say that in this entry I am treating the report much more seriously than when I read parts of the introduction earlier today. Then, I just laughed and laughed at the sheer absurdity and audacity of it, at the relentless brainlessness with which it automatically affixes the phrase "nativist hate" to every organization it discusses.


2 posted on 02/09/2009 5:50:04 PM PST by rmlew (The loyal opposition to a regime dedicated to overthrowing the Constitution are accomplices.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rmlew
I told a Chinese girl tonight what the SPLC advocates and she shook her head in disbelief. It's unthinkable in China, Japan, or Korea that an organization dedicated to reducing their founding population to minority status would be considered the “good guys” by their politicians and media.
26 posted on 02/09/2009 8:52:23 PM PST by puroresu (Enjoy ASIAN CINEMA? See my Freeper page for recommendations (updated!).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson