Monday, March 25, 2013

I’m an “Antigovernment Extremist”!


    We were astonished recently to discover that an organization of which we happen to be a member is on the Southern Poverty Law Center's list of "antigovernment Patriot groups," and that the SPLC has asked the government to devote more resources to meeting the threat posed by ourselves. The "Patriot group" in question is the Wellsboro (PA) chapter of the Constitution Party.
    I suppose that we should be flattered by the attention. On a good evening we might have a turnout of a half a dozen or so. We recently held a meeting at a local donut shop where we hatched antigovernment plots while we feasted on the house specialty. (It's amazing what a sugar high will do for one's patriotic fervor!) But the fact of the matter is that the SPLC's list is an outrageous attempt to smear a group of peaceful, law-abiding citizens exercising their right of free assembly.
    The SPLC's website describes "Patriot groups" as groups that "define themselves as opposed to the 'New World Order,' engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines." In a letter that the SPLC sent to Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, SPLC President J. Richard Cohen stated that "In the last four years, we have seen a tremendous increase in the number of conspiracy-minded, antigovernment groups." He claims that the number of such groups grew from 149 in 2008 to 1,360 in 2012. Mr. Cohen warned of "the rage that is building in certain quarters," and stated that "the country has seen an increase in right wing domestic terrorism as the number of hate and antigovernment groups has increased in recent years." He urged Mr. Holder and Ms. Napolitano to "establish an interagency task force to assess the adequacy of the resources devoted to responding to the growing threat of non-Islamic domestic terrorism."
    It appears that Mr. Cohen is something of a conspiracy theorist himself. The SPLC has not yet posted its 2012 list of "antigovernment Patriot" groups, but its 2011 list is on its website. It contains the names of 1,274 organizations. Noticeably absent from the list are any radical left-wing groups. Presumably the Tea Party is a threat to civilization, but Occupy Wall Street, Moveon.org and ACORN are not. Does this betray a political agenda on the part of the SPLC?
    But what about the "tremendous increase" in the number of "conspiracy-minded, antigovernment" groups? On closer inspection it turns out that of the 1,274 groups listed, 174 of them, or 13.7% of the total, are local chapters of the Constitution Party, including our little cabal in Wellsboro. Multiple local affiliates of other organizations are on the list as well. When considered as nationally organized groups, the number shrinks considerably. Moreover, Mr. Cohen claims that there were only 149 such groups in 2008. Yet the Constitution Party has been around far longer than that. It appears that the "tremendous increase" is more the result of the SPLC's statistical gathering techniques than any real change in the political landscape.
    But is the Constitution Party really a "conspiracy-minded, antigovernment" group that defines itself as "opposed to the 'New World Order,' engages in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocates extreme antigovernment doctrines"? We might begin by asking, what is a "New World Order"? If we called it "globalization" instead, would it make a difference? Is it only right-wing "antigovernment" groups that are alarmed by the reach and scope of multinational corporations, and the wealthy elite that controls them? Is the world being taken over by Bilderbergers? What about the "1%"?
    And what constitutes "an extreme antigovernment doctrine"? We in the Constitution Party simply believe that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted in the sense originally intended by its framers. It is a little hard to see how one could be considered "antigovernment" by being patriotic and upholding the Constitution. We seem to recall that even President Obama himself recently took an oath to "faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will, to the best of [his] ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." Does this make him "antigovernment"? Or would he be "antigovernment" only if he actually meant what he said? It appears that one man's orthodoxy is another man's "extremism."
    What is especially insidious about Mr. Cohen's letter is his attempt to link the Constitution Party to "domestic terrorist plots," and his call for increased government surveillance. This is, in fact, the mirror image of the bigotry and intolerance that his organization decries in others. Is this the future of democracy?

Here are the links to the relevant websites:
Southern Poverty Law Center 
Constitution Party 

To see the 2011 list of "Patriot" groups click on this link:
"Patriot" groups-2011 

8 comments:

  1. The SPLC's website describes "Patriot groups" as groups that...

    How are they normally defined?

    The SPLC has not yet posted its 2012 list of "antigovernment Patriot" groups, but its 2011 list is on its website. It contains the names of 1,274 organizations. Noticeably absent from the list are any radical left-wing groups.

    Tu Quoque argument.
    Besides, without even bothering to look up this list and ignoring the tu quoque you have made a bad argument.
    What "antigovernment Patriot" groups would you expect to be on the list that are "radical, left wing"?
    Name one.

    Presumably the Tea Party is a threat to civilization, but Occupy Wall Street, Moveon.org and ACORN are not.

    Can you think of a good, basic reason why ACORN (for example) would not be on that list? I can.
    I don't even have to look it up.

    But what about the "tremendous increase" in the number of "conspiracy-minded, antigovernment" groups?(...)When considered as nationally organized groups, the number shrinks considerably.

    Numbers?
    Or are you just handwaving? Further, how do I know that you are representing the claim fairly? Strawman?

    Moreover, Mr. Cohen claims that there were only 149 such groups in 2008. Yet the Constitution Party has been around far longer than that.

    Why "yet"?

    But is the Constitution Party really a "conspiracy-minded, antigovernment" group that defines itself as "opposed to the 'New World Order,' engages in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocates extreme antigovernment doctrines"?

    No idea. If you were me, how would you find out? Follow my methodology.

    We in the Constitution Party simply believe...

    No.
    The idea is not to ask me to trust you.
    Don't insult your reader.
    Provide evidence and be aware of any counter-evidence.
    The Internet sees all and remembers all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I inserted the links to the websites for both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Constitution Party, so that you can check them out for yourself.
    To find the letter to Holder and Napolitano, go to the SPLC's homepage, scroll down to "New Report: Radical antigovernment movement, etc." and click on the heading. A box in the upper right hand corner contains links to both the letter and the report.
    However, they appear to have removed the 2011 list from their website, or at least I couldn't find it when I looked for it just now. If I recalled correctly, they had a link to it in the body of their report.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Actually, I just found the 2011 list and added the link above.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I inserted the links to the websites for both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Constitution Party, so that you can check them out for yourself.

    Yes, I could. I could go to those websites and go hunting.
    Or...you could build a better case and stop hand waving.

    The SPLC's website describes "Patriot groups" as groups that...

    How are they normally defined? What is your beef with their definition? Or is this just a distraction?

    What "antigovernment Patriot" groups would you expect to be on the list that are "radical, left wing"?
    Name one.

    Can you think of a good, basic reason why ACORN (for example) would not be on that list?
    (Google it. One big, fat reason will leap out at you straight away. Impossible to miss.)

    Moreover, Mr. Cohen claims that there were only 149 such groups in 2008. Yet the Constitution Party has been around far longer than that.

    I'm still asking here. Why "yet"?
    I don't get it.
    There were x amount of whatever groups in year x.
    Um, Ok.
    "Yet" the Constitution Party has been around far longer than that?
    (...scratches head...)
    Non Sequitur.
    There's a logic disconnect.

    Bob, you know my methodology by now.
    You know it's easy and it delivers the goods.
    So, I have to ask...
    Have you ever done a google search on the Constitution Party and then run a background check on them using certain key phrases?
    I don't mean just reading their official site and leaving it at that.
    I mean have you googled them? Properly?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It might strike you as a bit peculiar that a "Patriot" group would be "antigovernment." Most patriotic people support their governments. There are, in fact, leftist groups that have actually advocating overthrowing the government. Strictly speaking, however, to be "antigovernment" you would have to be an anarchist, and the Constitution Party certainly is not that. And then there's the question of what constitutes an "extreme" antigovernment doctrine.
    The problem with the statistics is that Cohen has manipulated them to make it appear that the right-wing has mushroomed in the last four years and poses an imminent threat to American society. The real problem with Cohen's letter is that he is attempting to link the Constitution Party with domestic terrorism. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
    I would also have to say that I think that your methodology is faulty. The problem with the Internet is that you have know way of checking the accuracy of the "facts" on any particular website. The proper method is to rely on primary sources, which in this case would be the websites of the two organizations themselves.
    One of the "antigovernment Patriot" groups listed by the SPLC was the Constitution Party of Wellsboro, PA. I don't need to Google them -- I attend their meetings and know the county chairman personally.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It might strike you as a bit peculiar that a "Patriot" group would be "antigovernment." Most patriotic people support their governments.

    Not really.
    "Democratic People's Republic of Korea."
    (shrug)
    Very few people want to join political organizations named "White, Paranoid Kooks With Guns."

    The SPLC's website describes "Patriot groups" as groups that...

    How are they normally defined? What is your beef with their definition?

    There are, in fact, leftist groups that have actually advocating overthrowing the government.

    I'm sure there are. So what?

    The SPLC has not yet posted its 2012 list of "antigovernment Patriot" groups, but its 2011 list is on its website. It contains the names of 1,274 organizations. Noticeably absent from the list are any radical left-wing groups.

    Given that the topic is the list is about "antigovernment Patriot" groups, what "radical, left-wing groups" can you name that should be on that list?
    Seriously, name one.

    Strictly speaking, however, to be "antigovernment" you would have to be an anarchist, and the Constitution Party certainly is not that.

    Are you really comfortable with this line of thinking?
    Really?

    Does the name Timothey McVeigh ring a bell at all?
    Do you remember the reason why he parked that truck in that particular place?

    I understand that you want to defend your own Party yet you've just provided every group on that list with cover that's not explicitly anarchist...which would be all of them.
    Is that what you really want to do?
    You may have no problems with your own group but do you really seen nothing at all wrong with any of those other groups?
    Really?
    You find none of them just a little bit creepy?

    The problem with the statistics is that Cohen has manipulated them to make it appear that the right-wing has mushroomed in the last four years and poses an imminent threat to American society.

    Go back to the original claim as stated by you.

    But what about the "tremendous increase" in the number of "conspiracy-minded, antigovernment" groups?(...)When considered as nationally organized groups, the number shrinks considerably.

    Numbers? Well? Still waiting here.

    I would also have to say that I think that your methodology is faulty.

    Do go on.

    The problem with the Internet is that you have know way of checking the accuracy of the "facts" on any particular website.

    No way whatsoever? Really? As a reasonable adult, you can't take a stab at this whole critical thinking business?

    The proper method is to rely on primary sources...

    So far, so good.

    The proper method is to rely on primary sources, which in this case would be the websites of the two organizations themselves.

    Exclusively?
    Does that apply to the KKK website too?
    How about the DPRK website? Spot the flaw in your thinking.

    Have you ever done a google search on the Constitution Party and then run a background check on them using certain key phrases?

    (...handwaving ensues...)

    Evidently not.

    I don't need to Google them -- I attend their meetings and know the county chairman personally.

    Yes, but I don't.
    Probably your average reader doesn't either.
    Personal testimoney and warm fuzzy words count for nothing.
    You have to build a proper case.

    You have to dig a little deeper.
    The SPLC put together that list. It didn't appear overnight.

    You can gnash your teeth to your heart's content but if you really want to dismantle their accusations then you are going to have to do it in a responsible manner.

    The first thing you have to do is stop being so strangely incurious about why the Consitution Party made the list.
    Have you ever heard of playing Devil's advocate?
    This would be a perfect time.
    Do a little detective work. Demonstrate your methodology.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The question is this: why is the SPLC singling out conservative groups as a threat to society, and not groups on the left? You don't see a political bias there? And then when they ask the government to step up its efforts to meet the "threat," they're frankly trying to intimidate their political opponents. That is Fascism, not democracy.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The question is this...

    Why do you always do this? Why do you ditch your original argument rather that defend it with some question that you made up on the spot to try and somehow salvage your position?

    ...why is the SPLC singling out conservative groups as a threat to society, and not groups on the left?

    Strawman. You have to represent the opposition's viewpoint fairly and honestly and as scrupulously as you would have them represent yours.
    Let's go back to what you originally said.
    (It's an important part of my methodology when examining a claim. I do it all the time. You should adopt the practice too.)

    The SPLC's website describes "Patriot groups" as groups that "define themselves as opposed to the 'New World Order,' engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines."

    Now suddenly, that's morphed into "conservative groups"?
    How?
    What happened to "Patriot groups"?
    Why the bait and switch?

    Noticeably absent from the list are any radical left-wing groups.

    Given that the list is specifically about "antigovernment Patriot" groups, what "radical, left-wing groups" can you name that should be on that list?
    Seriously, name one.
    Why do you seem not to be able to do this?
    What's the problem here?
    Could it be that no radical, left wing group qualifies for a list devoted to Patriot groups?
    Could be, could be.
    Hmm.

    You don't see a political bias there?

    No. You have yet to demonstrate one. Your argument is just one giant Tu Quoque.
    I can't believe you don't see it for yourself.
    Think about it.

    For example:
    I can criticise the Black Panther movement without being obliged to criticise the KKK. There's no magical balance required.
    The opposite is true.
    I can criticise the KKK without being obliged to criticise the Black Panther movement.
    My criticisms stand on their own merits.
    I may have a real bee in my bonnet about the Black Panther Movement. I might spend 24 hours a day, seven days a week for the next fifty years monitoring their every move.
    Doesn't matter.
    You don't get to discount such criticisms just because I have not addressed (for example) the KKK.
    You are indulging in....Whataboutism.

    Good grief.
    I don't even have a dog in this hunt.
    I'm not American and don't give a fig about either the SPLC or the Conservative Party or whatever.
    Not my backyard. Not my problem.
    But the way you are going about arguing on this topic is badly flawed .
    There are multiple ways you could defend the the "street cred" of your party that would be fair and reasonable and appeal to a neutral observer.
    Yet you are adopting a handwavey "Just trust me on this" approach and when your position is probed with the most basic of questions you evade like crazy.
    Nothing could undermine your position more effectively.

    With me, you have a clean slate. I could be easily pursuaded that you and your party have been wronged by the SPLC. You, however, are badly botching the job. Your methodology is all over the place like a mad woman's custard.

    And then when they ask the government to step up its efforts to meet the "threat," they're frankly trying to intimidate their political opponents. That is Fascism, not democracy.

    You just broke Godwin's Law.
    Internet fail. Step back and try again.
    This time try to be just a bit more reasonable. Don't go off half-cocked like you always do. Play Devil's Advocate.
    Represent the SPLC's position with the utmost fairness. Bend over backwards to walk a mile in their shoes and demonstrate to a neutral reader that you have done so. Let that be your starting point.

    ReplyDelete