[Vision2020] More on Dees/SPLC
Tim Lohrmann
timlohr@yahoo.com
Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:14:15 -0800 (PST)
--0-1937207570-1067465655=:2804
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Amy,
You write:
"If people really believe that an organization like SPLC is needed, but that it
is being misdirected by Dees, supporters should make that board deal
with their concerns, and make the non-profit act according to its stated
charitable purposes. Donors and potential donors have a lot of standing
to influence the organization, especially if they are organized."
I agree 100%, but if supporters and contributors have no clue that their personal contributions are, for the most part, are going to solicit more money or to enrich the big wigs in the organization, then how are they to know that action is necessary?
Revealing manipulative malfeasance by the powerful is called investigative journalism.
In this case, the suggestions for improvement are self-evident: Stop using contributions for personal enrichment and start using a much higher percentage of these funds to actually for the work that the contributors intended.
So, you question the motives of those who disagree with how the SPLC is run. Do you believe that Cockburn is a racist? How about Ken Silverstein--an anti-semite?
Do you also question the motives of those who investigate organizations or individuals with which you disagree? How about the NY Timeses and Wash. Post reporters who are investigating Rumsfeld, leaking his memos, and suggesting that the Iraqi war is going very poorly? What would you say about their motives? Are they Al-Qaida linked? Or are they just doing what investigative journalists do. Looking for the truth about the powerful so that the general public is informed?
It's difficult to identify with an individual or organization and then realize that it is, for the most part, a sham vehicle for amassing wealth.
But burying one's head in the sand is hardly the answer.
The personal criticism of Dees is a common reaction when such large-scale hucksterism is shown the light of day.
It's called disgust.
Disgust at the manipulation of the noble sentiments of the unsuspecting for personal gain.
It's the same reaction that most have when the lavish lifestyles of Televangelists or the huge salaries of the chairpersons of major charities are revealed.
As for Dees' criticism and suspicion about anti-globalization activists, the point is that he published these allegations without any evidence that they were true. And not only that he did so in order to raise even more money.
I appreciate your experience with creepy anarchists, they were in Seattle too of course. They're the ones that the major media outlets focused on. But the SPLC bulletin wasn't talking about them--it was talking about actual racist infiltrators. No one has said that the black clad anarchist punks are racists, indeed their rhetoric suggests that the opposite is true. I don't think they were "infiltrating" anything, they were out in the open and attracting as much attention as possible.
As I mentioned above, the SPLC suggested that racists were involved in infiltrating the anti-globalization movement, esp. in Seattle.
If you question the criticism of Dees when ample figures and examples are given, don't you question the SPLC's motives since they have been unable to provide any proof?
TL
amy smoucha <asmoucha@hotmail.com> wrote:
Again, I think the Southern Poverty Law Center deserves criticism and should
be reformed. However, I don't understand the type of criticism--ad hominum
attacks on Dees without suggestions for improvement--provided by Cockburn
and others.
SPLC is a non-profit, which means it is a public-benefits organization run
by a board of directors and officers, not just Dees. If people really
believe that an organization like SPLC is needed, but that it is being
misdirected by Dees, supporters should make that board deal with their
concerns, and make the non-profit act according to its stated charitable
purposes. Donors and potential donors have a lot of standing to influence
the organization, especially if they are organized. Information on the
Directors is available on the website at
http://www.splcenter.org/center/about.jsp .
Simply attacking Dees serves only to discredit the law center and the
necessary, unique work it does, and can do in the future. I am especially
suspicious of attacks like paragraph 3 of Cockburn's column. Who cares if
Dees represented a Klan member in 1960, when he subsequently proved himself
an enemy (and target) of the Klan? Maybe he learned from that experience.
And, if we're really going to paint people evil for amassing wealth, let's
spread it around a little--to most of our elected officials, many community
leaders, etc. Again, I think the individual choice to amass personal wealth
at the expense of others in our capitalist economy is obscene, but it's not
uncommon nor unaccepted. Our society embraces and promotes such aspirations,
and we glorify the self-made man. You'd think everyone who criticized Dees
is a socialist, but I doubt that's the case.
If the non-profit resources of SPLC are not being used according to the
charitable purposes under which they raised the money, there are productive
ways to challenge the Directors and the officers. Attacking an individual
like Dees--and thereby discrediting the important organization which which
he is affiliated--is a shallow, unproductive way to fix the problem, and I
question the motives of those who engage in such attacks.
By the way, SPLC has its annual report, audited financial statement, 990
etc, on the web at
http://www.splcenter.org/donate/financialinfo/financial.jsp .
Regarding the WTO info. You may suggest it is manipulative hype, but I'm
not so sure. When I lived in another state, I was an activist with ACORN
and some local grassroots groups promoting positive welfare refrom. I
worked on health care and welfare issues--we were doing community organizing
and mobilizing poor people to demand the services and assistance they needed
from the government and from non-profit health care corporations. One time,
two people showed up at our rally and invited me to lunch. They promised
that they could double the number of people showing up at our rallies, and
promoted themselves as people interested in seeing "the people" become
politically active and rising up against the establishment. I was in the
middle of a huge campaign, and I no longer have the newsletters they gave me
or the specifics, but it became obvious that they were interested in
stirring up organized resistance--the anarchists. Everything about them was
creepy, and they kept showing up at our forums and rallies and talking to
people. I don't know all of their agenda, because I made myself unavailable
to them, and our leaders were not interested. But I have first hand
knowledge that there are groups out there who try to infiltrate and
influence grassroots activists. I have friends who were at the WTO rally
who reported that the anarchists and others who showed up and began acting
destructive turned the tone of the rally towards violence. The book I've
recommended before, _Blood In the Face_ has interesting information about
the diffent ideologies in extremist groups. The odd mixtures of
Chrisitanity, Consitutionalist ideology (posse comitatus), white supremacy,
etc. that unfolds in these groups can make for strange bedfellows. I don't
disbelieve the infiltration SPLC reports--I think it is possible.
Amy Smoucha
----Original Message Follows----
From: Tim Lohrmann
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] More on Dees/SPLC
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 11:22:20 -0800 (PST)
Visionaries,
It was amusing to see one post-er's comment that "despite the drivel
on this list," one or the other SPLC spokespersons are recognized as
authorities on hate.
Sure the SPLC is widely recognized as an authority.
Cheney and Rumsfield are recognized by some as authorities on
international policy too.
Does that mean that those who question their motives and their
conclusions are guilty of being drooling authors of "drivel?"
Alexander Cockburn, a mainstay of left/liberal journalism, contributor
to THE NATION, and one of the editors of COUNTERPUNCH may be many things.
But guilty of writing "drivel?"
I don't think so. Cockburn's take on Dees' empire is included below
this message.
I was particularly interested in Dees' allegation of dangerous racists in
those who protested the WTO in Seattle. And not only that, he apparently
used this "finding" in, what else, his relentless fundraising appeals.
TL
The Dees Money Machine
by Alexander Cockburn
from "Wild Justice," The New York Press
I've long regarded Morris Dees and his Southern Poverty Law Center as
collectively one of the greatest frauds in American life. The reasons: a
relentless fundraising machine devoted to terrifying its mostly low-income
contributors into unbeltiing ill-spared dollars year after year to an
organization that now has an endowment of more than $100 million, with very
little to show for it beyond hysterical bulletins designed to raise money on
the proposition that only the SPLC can stop Nazism and the KKK from seizing
power.
Gloria Browne, a lawyer who's worked with Dees' outfit, once told the
Montgomery Advertiser that the Southern Poverty Law Center trades in "black
pain and white guilt." He's the Jim and Tammy Faye Baker of the civil
rights movement.
In fact, Dees began the 1960's as an attorney in Montgomery, representing a
Ku Klux Klan sympathizer, Claude Henley, who had led an attack on Freedom
Riders at the local bus station. Dees has denied he was ever personally
supportive of the Klan or Henley, but his former partner, Millard Farmer,
has said, "We expressed openly our sympathies and support for what happened
at the bus station." For the rest of the 1960s Dees sat on the sidelines
and got rich from marketing "Famous Recipe" cookbooks with Farmer; he built
a tennis court, pool, high-quality stables and got a Rolls-Royce.
He founded the SPLC in 1971. In the end Dees and Farmer fell out, with
Farmer (who later gave away most of his money and started Habitat for
Humanity) saying bitterly, "If an issue isn't bringing in money, he's off to
the woods. He may believe [in civil rights] but he'll quit doing the work
if it doesn't make money." Farmer says of the Southern Poverty Law Center
that it's "little more than a 900 number."
Dees has always been alert to the paranoias of the hour. The center's
entire legal staff resigned in the late 1980s, in part because Dees was
reluctant to take up legal issues of real importance to poor people. His
obsession was the Klanwatch Project, a cash cow for the SPLC. Literature
from the SPLC portrayed the Klan as poised to take over American and embark
on an orgy of burning and lynching. This was at a time when the major
danger to poor people was going to be welfare reform , a collusive project
between the Gingrich Republicans and Clinton liberals, among the latter
being many fervent supporters of Dees. Dees sits on a mountain of cash, but
his courtroom forays are not profuse. In the early 1990s, when the center's
reserves were about half what they are today- $52 million in 1993- the
center (between 1989 and 1994) filed only a dozen suits.
Recently Jim Reddin and Cletus Nelson sent CounterPunch, the newsletter I
coedit with Jeffrey St. Clair, and interesting account of Dees' latest twist
in moneygrubbing. In its most recent Intelligence Report newsletter, the
SPLC -in a "Special Report"- puts forth the preposterous theory that far
from being a glorious renaissance of the radical spirit in American
political life, the protest against the World Trade Organization, most in
evidence in Seattle and in Washington, DC, at the start of last week, have
been the nexus for a far-flung crypto-facist conspiracy comprised of white
supremacists, neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members and other shock troops of the
far right. The SPLC's anonymous writer confidently states that the
anarchists, socialists, environmentalists and other left-wing dissidents who
gathered in Seattle at the start of last December were secretly infiltrated
by European-style "Third Position" fascists who mix racism with
environmentalism. "Right alongside the progressive groups that demonstrated
in Seattle- mostly peaceful defenders of labor, the environment, animal
rights and similar causes- were the hard-edged soldiers of neofascism," the
newsletter excitedly warns.
No documentation is offered to substantiate this allegation. The newsletter
doesn't name a single right-winger who has infiltrated Direct Action, Food
Not Bombs, Greenpeace or any of the other groups that organized the Seattle
protests. Dees' pretense is that he stands for civil rights, but of course
the newsletter entirely ignores the civil rights abuses committed by the
Seattle police against the protesters, even though the ACLU has filed a
civil rights suit over the "no protest" zone" declared by city officials.
The attack on the anti-globalization movement marks a significant shift in
the SPLC's policies, suggesting to us that Dees sees material opportunity in
attacking a popular radical cause. As part of its scourched-earth policy,
the organization has declared war against grassroots environmental
activists. "They pine for nations of peasant-like folk tied closely to the
land and to their neighbors," the newsletter observes disdainfully.
Some who've followed the FBI's recent disastrous predictions about Y2K
terror attacks from right-wing militias suspect that both the SPLC and the
Anti-Defamation League (which helped fuel the FBI"s Y2K predictions) are
hauling water for the bureau, essentially acting as subcontractors
performing tasks of defamation that in the old COINTELPRO days would have
been performed by the bureau itself. The worrying fact for fundraisers like
Dees is that there is a distinct shortage of terrifying specters with which
to coax the money out of the pockets of the suckers. How long can you raise
the alarm about a fascist takeover, when the legions of the ultra-right are
a few beleaguered platoons camped around Hayden Lake, ID?
The Nation, Mother Jones, and kindred liberal publications have the same
problem. If the fascist/Gingrichian bogey isn't out there in the darkness,
prowling round the campfire, maybe people will start concluding that real
enemy is all too unidentifiably roosting in Washington in the two-party
system. So the new strategy of the Dees crowd, the SPLC and ADL, is to
point tremulously to such signs of realignment as the Antiwar.com
conference, "Beyond Left and Right," about which I reported a couple of
weeks ago, and raise the alarm, saying -as the Dees Intelligence Report
does- that the left is being duped and captured by the far right and that
realignment is a neo-fascist strategy. And of course they're strains in the
anti-globalist, anti-free trade movement that can buttress such a charge.
It's not hard to go to a gun show and scoop up a pamphlet attacking the New
World Order along with the UN, the big banks, and the WTO.
American, populist culture has crank patches, as do all political cultures.
In American environmentalism there's a Malthusian element that goes back to
the racist speculations of Harvard professors a century ago. One task for
us left greens has always been to identify this element and attack it.
Going "beyond left and right" doesn't mean abandoning basic positions on
racism, Malthusianism and the like, it means trying to forge alliances on
issues such as U.S. Interventions and wars, or on the Bill of Rights - and
keeping one's powder dry. The attack from Dees on the anti-WTO forces won't
be the last.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
_________________________________________________________________
Cheer a special someone with a fun Halloween eCard from American Greetings!
Go to http://www.msn.americangreetings.com/index_msn.pd?source=msne134
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
--0-1937207570-1067465655=:2804
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<DIV>Amy, </DIV>
<DIV>You write:</DIV>
<DIV>"If people really believe that an organization like SPLC is needed, but that it <BR>is being misdirected by Dees, supporters should make that board deal <BR>with their concerns, and make the non-profit act according to its stated <BR>charitable purposes. Donors and potential donors have a lot of standing <BR>to influence the organization, especially if they are organized."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I agree 100%, but if supporters and contributors have no clue that their personal contributions are, for the most part, are going to solicit more money or to enrich the big wigs in the organization, then how are they to know that action is necessary?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Revealing manipulative malfeasance by the powerful is called investigative journalism. </DIV>
<DIV>In this case, the suggestions for improvement are self-evident: Stop using contributions for personal enrichment and start using a much higher percentage of these funds to actually for the work that the contributors intended.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So, you question the motives of those who disagree with how the SPLC is run. Do you believe that Cockburn is a racist? How about Ken Silverstein--an anti-semite?</DIV>
<DIV>Do you also question the motives of those who investigate organizations or individuals with which you disagree? How about the NY Timeses and Wash. Post reporters who are investigating Rumsfeld, leaking his memos, and suggesting that the Iraqi war is going very poorly? What would you say about their motives? Are they Al-Qaida linked? Or are they just doing what investigative journalists do. Looking for the truth about the powerful so that the general public is informed? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> It's difficult to identify with an individual or organization and then realize that it is, for the most part, a sham vehicle for amassing wealth. </DIV>
<DIV>But burying one's head in the sand is hardly the answer. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The personal criticism of Dees is a common reaction when such large-scale hucksterism is shown the light of day. </DIV>
<DIV>It's called disgust.</DIV>
<DIV>Disgust at the manipulation of the noble sentiments of the unsuspecting for personal gain. <BR>It's the same reaction that most have when the lavish lifestyles of Televangelists or the huge salaries of the chairpersons of major charities are revealed. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As for Dees' criticism and suspicion about anti-globalization activists, the point is that he published these allegations without any evidence that they were true. And not only that he did so in order to raise even more money. </DIV>
<DIV>I appreciate your experience with creepy anarchists, they were in Seattle too of course. They're the ones that the major media outlets focused on. But the SPLC bulletin wasn't talking about them--it was talking about actual racist infiltrators. No one has said that the black clad anarchist punks are racists, indeed their rhetoric suggests that the opposite is true. I don't think they were "infiltrating" anything, they were out in the open and attracting as much attention as possible.</DIV>
<DIV> As I mentioned above, the SPLC suggested that racists were involved in infiltrating the anti-globalization movement, esp. in Seattle. </DIV>
<DIV>If you question the criticism of Dees when ample figures and examples are given, don't you question the SPLC's motives since they have been unable to provide any proof?</DIV>
<DIV> TL</DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>amy smoucha <asmoucha@hotmail.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Again, I think the Southern Poverty Law Center deserves criticism and should <BR>be reformed. However, I don't understand the type of criticism--ad hominum <BR>attacks on Dees without suggestions for improvement--provided by Cockburn <BR>and others.<BR><BR>SPLC is a non-profit, which means it is a public-benefits organization run <BR>by a board of directors and officers, not just Dees. If people really <BR>believe that an organization like SPLC is needed, but that it is being <BR>misdirected by Dees, supporters should make that board deal with their <BR>concerns, and make the non-profit act according to its stated charitable <BR>purposes. Donors and potential donors have a lot of standing to influence <BR>the organization, especially if they are organized. Information on the <BR>Directors is available on the website at <BR>http://www.splcenter.org/center/about.jsp .<BR><BR>Si!
mply
attacking Dees serves only to discredit the law center and the <BR>necessary, unique work it does, and can do in the future. I am especially <BR>suspicious of attacks like paragraph 3 of Cockburn's column. Who cares if <BR>Dees represented a Klan member in 1960, when he subsequently proved himself <BR>an enemy (and target) of the Klan? Maybe he learned from that experience. <BR>And, if we're really going to paint people evil for amassing wealth, let's <BR>spread it around a little--to most of our elected officials, many community <BR>leaders, etc. Again, I think the individual choice to amass personal wealth <BR>at the expense of others in our capitalist economy is obscene, but it's not <BR>uncommon nor unaccepted. Our society embraces and promotes such aspirations, <BR>and we glorify the self-made man. You'd think everyone who criticized Dees <BR>is a socialist, but I doubt that's the case.<BR><BR>If the non-profit resources of SPLC are not being used according to the
<BR>charitable purposes under which they raised the money, there are productive <BR>ways to challenge the Directors and the officers. Attacking an individual <BR>like Dees--and thereby discrediting the important organization which which <BR>he is affiliated--is a shallow, unproductive way to fix the problem, and I <BR>question the motives of those who engage in such attacks.<BR><BR>By the way, SPLC has its annual report, audited financial statement, 990 <BR>etc, on the web at <BR>http://www.splcenter.org/donate/financialinfo/financial.jsp .<BR><BR>Regarding the WTO info. You may suggest it is manipulative hype, but I'm <BR>not so sure. When I lived in another state, I was an activist with ACORN <BR>and some local grassroots groups promoting positive welfare refrom. I <BR>worked on health care and welfare issues--we were doing community organizing <BR>and mobilizing poor people to demand the services and assistance they needed <BR>from the government and from non-profit heal!
th care
corporations. One time, <BR>two people showed up at our rally and invited me to lunch. They promised <BR>that they could double the number of people showing up at our rallies, and <BR>promoted themselves as people interested in seeing "the people" become <BR>politically active and rising up against the establishment. I was in the <BR>middle of a huge campaign, and I no longer have the newsletters they gave me <BR>or the specifics, but it became obvious that they were interested in <BR>stirring up organized resistance--the anarchists. Everything about them was <BR>creepy, and they kept showing up at our forums and rallies and talking to <BR>people. I don't know all of their agenda, because I made myself unavailable <BR>to them, and our leaders were not interested. But I have first hand <BR>knowledge that there are groups out there who try to infiltrate and <BR>influence grassroots activists. I have friends who were at the WTO rally <BR>who reported that the anarchists and ot!
hers who
showed up and began acting <BR>destructive turned the tone of the rally towards violence. The book I've <BR>recommended before, _Blood In the Face_ has interesting information about <BR>the diffent ideologies in extremist groups. The odd mixtures of <BR>Chrisitanity, Consitutionalist ideology (posse comitatus), white supremacy, <BR>etc. that unfolds in these groups can make for strange bedfellows. I don't <BR>disbelieve the infiltration SPLC reports--I think it is possible.<BR><BR>Amy Smoucha<BR><BR><BR>----Original Message Follows----<BR>From: Tim Lohrmann <TIMLOHR@YAHOO.COM><BR>To: vision2020@moscow.com<BR>Subject: [Vision2020] More on Dees/SPLC<BR>Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 11:22:20 -0800 (PST)<BR><BR>Visionaries,<BR>It was amusing to see one post-er's comment that "despite the drivel <BR>on this list," one or the other SPLC spokespersons are recognized as <BR>authorities on hate.<BR>Sure the SPLC is widely recognized as an authority.<BR>Cheney and Rumsfield are recognized b!
y some as
authorities on <BR>international policy too.<BR>Does that mean that those who question their motives and their <BR>conclusions are guilty of being drooling authors of "drivel?"<BR>Alexander Cockburn, a mainstay of left/liberal journalism, contributor <BR>to THE NATION, and one of the editors of COUNTERPUNCH may be many things. <BR>But guilty of writing "drivel?"<BR>I don't think so. Cockburn's take on Dees' empire is included below <BR>this message.<BR><BR>I was particularly interested in Dees' allegation of dangerous racists in <BR>those who protested the WTO in Seattle. And not only that, he apparently <BR>used this "finding" in, what else, his relentless fundraising appeals.<BR>TL<BR><BR><BR>The Dees Money Machine<BR>by Alexander Cockburn<BR><BR>from "Wild Justice," The New York Press<BR><BR>I've long regarded Morris Dees and his Southern Poverty Law Center as<BR>collectively one of the greatest frauds in American life. The reasons: a<BR>relentless fundraising machine de!
voted to
terrifying its mostly low-income<BR>contributors into unbeltiing ill-spared dollars year after year to an<BR>organization that now has an endowment of more than $100 million, with very<BR>little to show for it beyond hysterical bulletins designed to raise money on<BR>the proposition that only the SPLC can stop Nazism and the KKK from seizing<BR>power.<BR><BR>Gloria Browne, a lawyer who's worked with Dees' outfit, once told the<BR>Montgomery Advertiser that the Southern Poverty Law Center trades in "black<BR>pain and white guilt." He's the Jim and Tammy Faye Baker of the civil<BR>rights movement.<BR><BR>In fact, Dees began the 1960's as an attorney in Montgomery, representing a<BR>Ku Klux Klan sympathizer, Claude Henley, who had led an attack on Freedom<BR>Riders at the local bus station. Dees has denied he was ever personally<BR>supportive of the Klan or Henley, but his former partner, Millard Farmer,<BR>has said, "We expressed openly our sympathies and support for what
happened<BR>at the bus station." For the rest of the 1960s Dees sat on the sidelines<BR>and got rich from marketing "Famous Recipe" cookbooks with Farmer; he built<BR>a tennis court, pool, high-quality stables and got a Rolls-Royce.<BR><BR>He founded the SPLC in 1971. In the end Dees and Farmer fell out, with<BR>Farmer (who later gave away most of his money and started Habitat for<BR>Humanity) saying bitterly, "If an issue isn't bringing in money, he's off to<BR>the woods. He may believe [in civil rights] but he'll quit doing the work<BR>if it doesn't make money." Farmer says of the Southern Poverty Law Center<BR>that it's "little more than a 900 number."<BR><BR>Dees has always been alert to the paranoias of the hour. The center's<BR>entire legal staff resigned in the late 1980s, in part because Dees was<BR>reluctant to take up legal issues of real importance to poor people. His<BR>obsession was the Klanwatch Project, a cash cow for the SPLC. Literature<BR>from the SPLC por!
trayed
the Klan as poised to take over American and embark<BR>on an orgy of burning and lynching. This was at a time when the major<BR>danger to poor people was going to be welfare reform , a collusive project<BR>between the Gingrich Republicans and Clinton liberals, among the latter<BR>being many fervent supporters of Dees. Dees sits on a mountain of cash, but<BR>his courtroom forays are not profuse. In the early 1990s, when the center's<BR>reserves were about half what they are today- $52 million in 1993- the<BR>center (between 1989 and 1994) filed only a dozen suits.<BR><BR>Recently Jim Reddin and Cletus Nelson sent CounterPunch, the newsletter I<BR>coedit with Jeffrey St. Clair, and interesting account of Dees' latest twist<BR>in moneygrubbing. In its most recent Intelligence Report newsletter, the<BR>SPLC -in a "Special Report"- puts forth the preposterous theory that far<BR>from being a glorious renaissance of the radical spirit in American<BR>political life, the protest aga!
inst the
World Trade Organization, most in<BR>evidence in Seattle and in Washington, DC, at the start of last week, have<BR>been the nexus for a far-flung crypto-facist conspiracy comprised of white<BR>supremacists, neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members and other shock troops of the<BR>far right. The SPLC's anonymous writer confidently states that the<BR>anarchists, socialists, environmentalists and other left-wing dissidents who<BR>gathered in Seattle at the start of last December were secretly infiltrated<BR>by European-style "Third Position" fascists who mix racism with<BR>environmentalism. "Right alongside the progressive groups that demonstrated<BR>in Seattle- mostly peaceful defenders of labor, the environment, animal<BR>rights and similar causes- were the hard-edged soldiers of neofascism," the<BR>newsletter excitedly warns.<BR><BR>No documentation is offered to substantiate this allegation. The newsletter<BR>doesn't name a single right-winger who has infiltrated Direct Action, Foo!
d<BR>Not
Bombs, Greenpeace or any of the other groups that organized the Seattle<BR>protests. Dees' pretense is that he stands for civil rights, but of course<BR>the newsletter entirely ignores the civil rights abuses committed by the<BR>Seattle police against the protesters, even though the ACLU has filed a<BR>civil rights suit over the "no protest" zone" declared by city officials.<BR><BR>The attack on the anti-globalization movement marks a significant shift in<BR>the SPLC's policies, suggesting to us that Dees sees material opportunity in<BR>attacking a popular radical cause. As part of its scourched-earth policy,<BR>the organization has declared war against grassroots environmental<BR>activists. "They pine for nations of peasant-like folk tied closely to the<BR>land and to their neighbors," the newsletter observes disdainfully.<BR><BR>Some who've followed the FBI's recent disastrous predictions about Y2K<BR>terror attacks from right-wing militias suspect that both the SPLC and
the<BR>Anti-Defamation League (which helped fuel the FBI"s Y2K predictions) are<BR>hauling water for the bureau, essentially acting as subcontractors<BR>performing tasks of defamation that in the old COINTELPRO days would have<BR>been performed by the bureau itself. The worrying fact for fundraisers like<BR>Dees is that there is a distinct shortage of terrifying specters with which<BR>to coax the money out of the pockets of the suckers. How long can you raise<BR>the alarm about a fascist takeover, when the legions of the ultra-right are<BR>a few beleaguered platoons camped around Hayden Lake, ID?<BR><BR>The Nation, Mother Jones, and kindred liberal publications have the same<BR>problem. If the fascist/Gingrichian bogey isn't out there in the darkness,<BR>prowling round the campfire, maybe people will start concluding that real<BR>enemy is all too unidentifiably roosting in Washington in the two-party<BR>system. So the new strategy of the Dees crowd, the SPLC and ADL, is to<!
BR>point
tremulously to such signs of realignment as the Antiwar.com<BR>conference, "Beyond Left and Right," about which I reported a couple of<BR>weeks ago, and raise the alarm, saying -as the Dees Intelligence Report<BR>does- that the left is being duped and captured by the far right and that<BR>realignment is a neo-fascist strategy. And of course they're strains in the<BR>anti-globalist, anti-free trade movement that can buttress such a charge.<BR>It's not hard to go to a gun show and scoop up a pamphlet attacking the New<BR>World Order along with the UN, the big banks, and the WTO.<BR><BR>American, populist culture has crank patches, as do all political cultures.<BR>In American environmentalism there's a Malthusian element that goes back to<BR>the racist speculations of Harvard professors a century ago. One task for<BR>us left greens has always been to identify this element and attack it.<BR>Going "beyond left and right" doesn't mean abandoning basic positions on<BR>racism, Malt!
husianism
and the like, it means trying to forge alliances on<BR>issues such as U.S. Interventions and wars, or on the Bill of Rights - and<BR>keeping one's powder dry. The attack from Dees on the anti-WTO forces won't<BR>be the last.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>---------------------------------<BR>Do you Yahoo!?<BR>Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears<BR><BR>_________________________________________________________________<BR>Cheer a special someone with a fun Halloween eCard from American Greetings! <BR>Go to http://www.msn.americangreetings.com/index_msn.pd?source=msne134<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<BR>Exclusive Video Premiere - <A href="http://launch.yahoo.com/video/?1093432&fs=1&redirectURL=http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/">Britney Spears</A></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><hr SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
Exclusive Video Premiere - <a href="http://launch.yahoo.com/video/?1093432&fs=1&redirectURL=http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/">Britney Spears</a>
--0-1937207570-1067465655=:2804--