Free Markets, Free People

right-wing violence


SPLC: Giffords’ shooter “absorbed … ideas from … radical right”

The Southern Poverty Law Center is again pitching its slanted quarterly “Intelligence Report” in which it shockingly (/sarc) finds over “1,000 hate groups” on the right.

Wow. 

What a surprise. 

Don’t forget, this has to do with whatever the SPLC decides constitutes “hate” and apparently that means pretty much whatever it decides fits its agenda of giving the left  a pass and demonizing the right.  The prefect example of that is how it treats the shooting in Tucson of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords:

That’s in addition to the attempted assassination of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona, an attack that left six dead that same month. The assailant appeared to be severely mentally ill, but he also seemed to have absorbed certain ideas from the radical right, including the notion that the federal government is evil.

Everyone but the SPLC seems to disagree with the notion that he was motivated by any particular ideology or a certain type of ideas.   He was all over the place.   Additionally, and inconveniently, the notion that the “federal government is evil” certainly isn’t an exclusive idea of the radical right if the weathermen, SDS, and any number of left-wing groups from the 60s and 70s are any indication.  Ask Bill Ayers. Consult with the plethora of black liberation and black separatist movements.

The point, of course, is their treatment of Loughner’s attempt on Giffords is indicative of their ability to rationalize anything they wish too into “right-wing extremism” and thus “hate”.  It plays perfectly into their desired theme of an alarming rise of right wing hate groups, whether true or not.

And that’s pretty much how their tagging of other right-wing and “extremist” groups (aka “hate groups”) goes as well.  Here’s the key to the SPLC’s “findings”:

“Far-right extremists remain highly energized, even as politicians across the country co-opt many of the radical ideas and issues that are important to them,” said Mark Potok, editor of the Intelligence Report. “This success in having their voices heard in the political arena, where they have long occupied the fringe of conservative thought, might eventually take the wind out of their sails, but so far we’re not seeing any sign of that.

Some of the “radical ideas” the politicians across the country have “co-opt[ed]?”  Well here’s a short list as I’ve observed them:

  • Immigration laws should be followed and enforced
  • Government should spend less
  • Government should regulate less
  • Government should be smaller
  • Government should be less intrusive
  • Politicians should be held accountable

Association with any group which might espouse such things (don’t worry, most of the Founding Fathers would fall into the SPLC’s definition of radical right-wing fanatics and members of “hate” groups) and is actively promoting them puts you in the "antigovernment Patriot movement“ whether you like it or not. And of course that makes you a member of a ‘conspiracy minded organization’ which sees the federal government as the "primary enemy".

Add “nativist groups” and plain old vanilla right-wing hate groups and you have an “alarming rise” in hate groups on the right.

The biggest rise among right-wing haters, per the SPLC,  is a single “movement” that apparently most threatens the left.  The SPLC dutifully takes them on and categorizes them as hate groups in order to demonize them:

But the most dramatic growth in the radical right came in the antigovernment “Patriot” movement. These conspiracy-minded organizations, which see the federal government as their primary enemy, grew by 61 percent over the previous year. Their numbers increased to 824 groups in 2010, from 512 groups a year earlier. Previously, the only higher count of Patriot groups came in 1996, during the movement’s heyday, when the SPLC found 858 groups. Militias, the paramilitary arm of the Patriot movement, grew from 127 groups to 330 – a 160 percent increase.

Never mentioned by name, the obvious “growth” in the “radical right” came from Tea Party groups forming.  And, as with much of the left, the SPLC attempts to lay “hate” at the foundation of the Tea Party’s formation:

The number of active hate groups in the United States topped 1,000 for the first time and the antigovernment “Patriot” movement expanded dramatically for the second straight year as the radical right showed continued explosive growth in 2010.

Several factors fueled the growth: resentment over the changing racial demographics of the country, frustration over the lagging economy, and the mainstreaming of conspiracy theories and other demonizing propaganda aimed at minorities and the government.

I follow the news fairly closely, but I’ve seen no “mainstreaming of conspiracy theories”.  “Obama is a Muslim” – mainstreamed? Ignored for the most part?  Birthers?  Same same.  And the right isn’t exclusive in this area – just ask the truthers, a group and “conspiracy” completely ignored by the SPLC when it was at its peak (it still exists, btw).

Certainly “Patriot groups” have risen because of government profligacy, frustration over the economy (and government’s role in hurting it even further), but I’m at a loss to remember anything about that movement that seemed concerned with “changing racial demographics” and “demonizing propaganda aimed at minorities”, do you? 

Government and government excess/intrusion  has been the primary focus of those groups the SPLC has chosen to demonize by labeling them “hate groups”.  

Are there fringe right-wing extremists?  Of course.  Just as there are fringe left-wing extremists.  But they’re such a tiny portion of the population on each side of the ideological divide as to be negligible .  Unless you’re the SPLC, that is, and your bread and butter is finding hate where none exists so you can denounce it, play to the paranoia of the left and get them to send you money.

We should help the SPLC set up some better criteria for assessing hate, don’t you think?

Here, for the SPLC,  is a check list of some things to look for among real hate groups provided by John Sexton (I’ve added the last one).  I assume we’ll see this bunch in SPLC’s next sensationalized “Intelligence Report” denouncing them as left-wing “hate groups”, no?

  • Violent rhetoric? Check. Double check.
  • Unhinged political analogies? Check.
  • Hilter signs? Check.
  • Crosshairs on politicians. Check.
  • Anger and cursing? Check.  Double check.
  • Shoving? Check.
  • Racial overtones? Check.
  • Astroturfing by national organizations? Check.
  • Assault? Check.

~McQ


Left wing fights back – with false accusations and groundless rumors of impending right-wing violence

Example one: AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka at a lefty panel discussion in NYC:

Trumka said it is vital to channel working-class anger away from Fox News and Tea Party extremists who are delivering "…a cynical, deeply dishonest and incoherent message—that big government is somehow to blame for the current crisis that the budget deficit will eat our children, and that illegal immigrants took all the good jobs."

However, he added, “The good news is they haven’t bought into right-wing ideology. They are just confused about who to blame.”

But: "We have to offer working people something other than the dead-end choice between the failed agenda of greed and the voices of hate and division and violence."

Speaking of incoherent messages, Trumka is obviously laboring under the delusion that the generational theft now under way – powered mostly by the left and executed by the government that represents them – isn’t doing any harm?

How does one look at the facts and honestly conclude otherwise?  Key word: “honestly”. 

Speaking of “hate and division and violence”, as I recall, just about all of that has been consistently demonstrated at various town halls by SEIU thugs – leftists.

And then there’s our old friend Kos, who has to make those sorts of accusations in order to pimp his new book, “The American Taliban”:

MARKOS MOULITSAS (32:48): Right now there is a six month backlog on ammunition in this country. People trying to buy bullets cannot buy bullets because they’ve been hoarding these guns. These aren’t people who aren’t people who are hoarding guns and ammo because they way to participate in a peaceful Democratic process.

STEPHANIE MILLER: Well you’ve got candidates like Sharron Angles saying second amendment remedies.

MOULITSAS: Right, when you have key top level Republicans saying that sort of thing, you have a movement that really rejects democracy as a tool and are willing to resort to violence and they haven’t yet. They started to resorting to violence after Obama was elected, cause having an African American with the middle name Hussein sort of blew their minds. But, the Tea Party movement sort of allowed them to channel their energies into something a little more healthy than shooting people.

MILLER: Well right, but Marcos there have been exactly what the Homeland Security Department report talked about. There have been a huge increase in right-wing violence.

Really? Where? Markos, surely you’re going to challenge that statement, right? Uh, no:

MOULITSAS: I know and there have been. MILLER: They all screamed about it and it’s true. It’s quantitatively provably true that there have been a lot of violence that have been, I think has been fomented by a lot of these right-wing characters.

Again, examples would be wonderful, but alas, none are forthcoming. And as Radio Equalizer points out:

But the ammo shortage is already over and was caused by a number of factors, including fears Second Amendment rights would be rescinded and old-fashioned production issues. In addition, the "right-wing violence" allegations made here weren’t backed up with actual incidents.

Beyond his extreme rhetoric, Moulitsas’ delivery is tough to take. Clearly the product of parochial, inward-looking East Bay "progressive" politics, he seems willing to accept at face value almost any conspiracy theory thrown his way.

Indeed. But when you’re trying to justify the lunacy you’ve contrived in your book, you have to buy into such conspiracy theories to justify your take on the issue. Facts need not apply. And of course, neither do actual examples of the claims.

Typical left-wing fear mongering.  And the irony?  It’s mostly projection.  As I’ve said, the only examples of recent violence related to politics belongs to the unions and the left.

~McQ

michael kors outlet michael kors handbags outlet michael kors factory outlet