SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the keep-your-friends-close-and-your-enemies-closer? dept.
An article at vice.com reports The Number of U.S. Hate Groups Keeps Surging, Largely Thanks to Young, White men:
The number of hate groups nationwide reached a record high in 2018, driven partly by the persistent growth of white nationalist groups catering to young, college-aged men.
There are currently 1,020 active hate groups in America — up from 954 in 2017, and 917 the previous year, according to an annual tally by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). The new, young face of hate emerged from the shadows during the 2016 election and organized through a shared language of memes and under the banner of the “alt-right.” Many hailed then-candidate Donald Trump, with his hard-line views on immigration, as a hero. In celebration of his election, the alt-right’s one-time de facto leader Richard Spencer led a room full of young men in suits to give Nazi salutes.
Since then, Spencer and other prominent actors, entangled in costly lawsuits and tired of being heckled by anti-fascist protesters, have faded into relative obscurity.
At the same time, groups like Identity Evropa — whose khaki-clad members were a formidable presence at the violent “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August 2017— have proliferated and expanded their reach by setting up new chapters across the country. Patriot Front also grew significantly in 2018 after splintering from Vanguard America, the group linked to the 19-year-old neo-Nazi who rammed his car into a crowd of protesters during the Charlottesville rally and killed Heather Heyer.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday February 22 2019, @05:58AM (26 children)
Now the SPLC isn't exactly rigorous in their standards for qualifying for this list but let's go with their numbers for a worst case scenario. 1020 groups? Let's be generous and assume 100 members each. That's a hundred thousand people and change, assuming they all only belong to one group each. Actual collected membership numbers are about a tenth of this but let's be silly for the sake of argument. Out of well over three hundred million people. So less than one out of every three thousand people. Yep, sure sounds like something worth raising holy hell and declaring them the boogymen hiding under everyone's bed to me.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday February 22 2019, @06:12AM (10 children)
One per 3E3 people who care enough to join and maybe attend meetings. That's probably good enough to get continuing support from the others in the group, and start insinuating their comfort with actionable racism into the surrounding population (assuming they're geographically distributed sufficiently, which is unlikely). Seems like the ones who are racist-weaboo enough to attend hate conventions aren't hiding under peoples' beds -- or maybe they're just bored in these communities, with not much else to do after work is out.
I have a sort of cognitive dissonance going on these things -- are they motivated enough to make their racism actionable, in which case it would seem like in the land of opportunity, they'd have enough interesting things to pursue to not have time to make this kind of stuff a priority on their time; or are they not really that motivated and are just going along with the crowd, in which case they're just listening to the wrong information sources and randomly blowing off aggressive tendencies? Or do I not have the picture right here?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @08:16AM (2 children)
What is actionable racism?
(Score: 2) by EETech1 on Friday February 22 2019, @08:43AM
Sounds like racism against whites?
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday February 22 2019, @09:01PM
'Actionable' is not the right word here. I meant the kind of thing where you'd go out and participate in rallies, distribute flyers, proactively engage people, show up on TV, strategize, etc., rather than complaining to friends and family, harassing or calling the cops on people walking through your neighborhood, choosing who to associate with, and voting accordingly (and maybe writing your congresspeople).
Something more about making public statements and strategies against it in the context of it being a 'larger-scale threat' rather than individual behaviors based on a personal prejudice/preference.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Friday February 22 2019, @02:13PM (5 children)
Add me to the list of people wondering what "actionable racism" means. In a dictionary, "actionable" means [oxforddictionaries.com] "giving sufficient reason to take legal action". Sounds like a fine stream of bullshit to me.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday February 22 2019, @09:20PM (4 children)
By 'Insinuating their comfort with actionable racism', I misused 'actionable' when referring to public, proactive forms of racism in my reply above [soylentnews.org]. I'm further insinuating that the surrounding population would then start feeling more comfortable and justified, and may eventually amplify their own (personal, individual) racist behaviors and tendencies.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Saturday February 23 2019, @12:17AM
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday February 23 2019, @04:53AM (2 children)
To continue on my previous remark, this is vague and pedantic scorekeeping. We're discussing groups with minute presence who might be getting slightly more numerous, maybe. It's an SPLC thing to make mountains of molehills. That's their bread and butter.
I think it's pathological to puff up such things. This isn't some weird war of entrenchment where slight moves in relative power have long term consequences. It's just short term shifts, which might not have even happened.
My view is the best defense against racism is fair and equal treatment for all ethnic groups and elimination of favoritism/patronage and double standards in this area. I think that has mostly happened.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Saturday February 23 2019, @06:01AM (1 child)
One in 20,000 people, sure. One in 3000, I'm a little less comfortable calling minute. I'm saying they don't have to be numerous to influence a halo of people they know, unless they mostly spend time within their echo chamber (which is probable) and less with 'outreach'.
Agreed; I see it more as a recurring ground-level tendency across a reasonably-sized population and those sympathetic or on the fence with those ideas, not movements of monolithic power structures.
And it's a sufficient portion of the voting population thing to elect someone based on his promise of making a giant fence out of a border with a country that's 'not sending us their best people', to keep out people who (ostensibly) come here for work and a more stable civil situation and aren't bringing their own tools, much less weapons. No question that that part of the voting bloc would rally behind someone who promised another shot at making that happen.
Fundamentally, I see it as a bunch of seeds and less as a state of affairs. I'm not saying they'll necessarily grow, thrive, convince, or disperse themselves sufficiently to the general population, but if they do and they're spread widely enough, there are enough of them to influence others. Kind of like both the contagion-vs-vaccine situation. And we have daily evidence that a lot of the population is fertile ground and welcomes that kind of ideology.
Well, it seems like more police brutality stories nowadays cover people roughly equally re: skin color, so ... progress?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Saturday February 23 2019, @01:51PM
Are you joking?
The 2999 in 3000 also have halos too, you know.
Who before Trump was creating a more stable civil situation? It's nice that you're applying standards to Trump, but I'm not seeing a lot of presidents meet even those limited standards before him. And what's the point of caring that a part of a part of a voting block is anti-immigration to some degree?
Then maybe you should start caring about the allegedly fertile ground then. For example, you wondered [soylentnews.org] why the supporters didn't have time to do other things.
Check the economy. We had a big crisis back in 2008 from a poor attempt under Bush II to recover from the dotcom bubble way back when, then Obama was more interested in attacking business than fixing what was broke. There's been almost two decades of ham-handed efforts economically.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 23 2019, @03:17AM
Going by my personal experiences, they just like to have someone to blame their problems on and generally bitch about. I've not personally met anyone old enough to buy beer who gives enough of a shit to even be rude in public.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by physicsmajor on Friday February 22 2019, @09:25AM (12 children)
Isn't exactly rigorous?!
Seriously read up on that organization. They have absolutely no credibility. They make things up at will to suit a particular agenda.
The correct reaction when you see that organization's name is laughter and complete disregard for everything else in the story.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @11:09AM (3 children)
Don't people say the same thing about climate change? Is the SPLC the purveyor of that hoax as well?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @01:20PM (2 children)
The SPLC are self admitted grievance grifters [splcenter.org]
When Maajid Nawaz [washingtontimes.com] was assaulted [standard.co.uk] the other day, people who the SPLC would like to label a plethora of "ists" were the first to express their outrage.
The SPLC is not a credible organization.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @08:13PM (1 child)
Whatever. SPLC certainly draws out the haters and loonies, so we can know who they are! Everyone repeating the "no credibility" meme goes on the list. It's an anonymous list, because anonymous is everywhere. Expect us.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 23 2019, @08:57AM
And when they down mod posts pointing out that they go on the list, they go on the list twice! Guess what happens if you down mod this post, linked as it is to SJW central, where we have control over the camera on you laptop. Ewww! Stop that! Nasty!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday February 22 2019, @03:48PM (6 children)
I thought that way. In fact, I thought that way fairly recently. But, I'm beginning to wonder if that's the right thing to do. The problem is, they haven't dried up and blown away, yet. They haven't gone broke, yet. They haven't learned that they are irrelevant, yet. They are still around, with a war chest of millions, funneling their propaganda into the lamestream media. And, people suck it up, taking it as gospel.
Maybe it would be better if some of the organizations that SPLC accuses were to sue them. Hell, it may not even matter if some, most, or all the suits are lost. Just tie the bastards up in court for forever, and suck all the money out of them.
The SPLC is an enemy of the American people. They contribute to the whole identity politics divisiveness in this country.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday February 22 2019, @08:26PM (1 child)
Truly, you are an idiot, Runaway!
Under US law, truth is an absolute defence against a charge of libel. None of these groups could have grounds to sue.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @08:54PM
Both sides, very fine people, the best. No one is less racist than Runaway! All those hate groups? Fake NEWBZ!
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Saturday February 23 2019, @05:06AM
That's the key. I can't get worked up over such organizations because they're squandering the money of people who might be otherwise inclined to cause more harm in some other way. The supporters of SPLC will virtue signal in some way. Might as well be a way that is completely ineffective.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday February 23 2019, @03:05PM (2 children)
"There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs -- partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."
-- Booker T Washington, UP FROM SLAVERY (1911)
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 23 2019, @03:17PM (1 child)
Booker T. Washington knew this guy? http://www.capitolhilloutsider.com/just-a-two-day-anger-fit-reverend-al/ [capitolhilloutsider.com] That's a great little cartoon in the top right of the story.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday February 23 2019, @05:35PM
It's an old family business. :D
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 23 2019, @03:18AM
So you're saying I'm not all that bad at understatement then?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @11:46AM (1 child)
I am far more concerned with the 1 billion persons plus who have declared war on the rest of humanity
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @08:11PM
China?