Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

The Intellectual Poverty of the Southern Poverty Law Center

Branding dissenters as haters undercuts its effectiveness.

With America's president casually stirring racial and other hatreds, it would be helpful for our civic good to have an organizationSPLCRobert King Polaris via Newscom that tracks with honesty and precision what rabble his rhetoric is rousing. The Southern Poverty Law Center, the nation's largest (and richest) watchdog of hate groups, has long sought to fill that role. Unfortunately, the SPLC is not up to the task. It is too busy enforcing liberal orthodoxy against its intellectual opponents.

For proof, look no further than how it has treated conservative feminist scholar Christina Hoff Sommers.

The SPLC, which was formed in the aftermath of the Civil Rights movement with the noble goals of seeking justice for victims of racial violence and fighting hate, recently published a piece in which it accused Sommers of giving a "mainstream and respectable face" to groups peddling "male supremacy."

It was a single, throwaway line about Sommers in a much-longer report — but it prompted Portland's Lewis & Clark Law School's easily excitable students to declare her a "known fascist" and condemn the Federalist Society, the center-right outfit of legal scholars that had invited her to speak on campus, for perpetrating an "act of aggression." They hooted and heckled her, forcing her speech to be cut short.

Far from being spooked by the students' antics, the SPLC doubled down against Sommers. It accused her of wild exaggeration for tweeting that the SPLC had blacklisted her (which was fair enough because it hadn't done that). Then it ran a whole new piece dredging up Sommers' sins to prove that she was indeed an enabler of misogynistic men's groups, rattling off her podcast appearance on a white nationalist Swedish website, in-person appearances with Milo Yiannopolous, with whom she made common cause in defending GamerGate, her disagreement with liberal feminists on the existence of a gender wage gap and rape culture, and the fact that she has written about a feminist "war on men."

For the record, I find Sommers' brand of feminism, centered on the premise that men and women are equal but not identical, to be tinny and insufficiently attuned to the cultural incentives that shape women's choices. But the SPLC's criticism of her is insanely overboard.

Her podcast on the Swedish website was a mistake that she publicly — and deeply — regretted. Her appearances with Yiannopolous, whom I find revolting to the point that I question the judgment of campus conservatives who invite him to speak, occurred before he had become a flaming hatemonger (even progressive feminists in good standing like Julie Bindle were willing to debate him). And frankly, her skepticism about a gender wage gap, rape culture, and the excesses of modern feminism and its Title IX zealotry against due process rights of men are largely on point.

What ought to be clear is that reasonable people should be able to reasonably agree — or disagree — with her views. She may be wrong, but she is not the hate-peddling monster that the SPLC and its liberal acolytes pretend she is.

Sommers at least escaped being put on the SPLC's formal list of extremists. Not so with Aayan Hirsi Ali — the Somali Muslim woman whose experience with genital mutilation turned her into a fierce critic of Islam — or Maajid Nawaz — a former Muslim militant who now fights Islamic extremism. Ali and Nawaz have their problems. (In particular, as I have argued, Ali's broadsides on Islam are misguided and wrongheaded.) But both are well-meaning reformers, not motivated by raw hatred toward Muslims. They hardly deserve to share space with vicious Islamophobes like Pamela Geller who spread vile anti-Muslim conspiracy theories. Yet the SPLC has them all lumped together.

Likewise, the SPLC put the Family Research Center, a Christian traditional-values outfit, on its list of anti-gay organizations, and featured it on its "Hate Map" page. It also put Dr. Ben Carson, the failed Republican presidential candidate who is now President Trump's Housing and Urban Development secretary, on its "extremist watch list." Why? Because Carson and the FRC consider homosexuality a sin and regard marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Apparently, the SPLC can't see a distinction between religiously ordained opposition to homosexuality and actively preaching hate against gays.

The SPLC's ridiculously loose criteria could even brand the Dalai Lama a hater given that His Holiness considers homosexuality "sexual misconduct." The SPLC is now useful only to Social Justice Warriors who share its ideology in toto. For everyone else it is fast becoming a joke.

The SPLC's original mission was to be the go-to media guide covering extremists and hate groups. But center-right folks like myself who are deeply worried about the forces Trump is unleashing find that citing SPLC raises more questions than it answers. (I try hard to corroborate the center's claims by many independent sources before buying them.)

This is truly unfortunate. And the only way the SPLC can get out of its rut is by being less trigger happy. In order to purge every vestige of hate, it has become overzealous. It needs to rethink its strategy and decide that if it must err, it should do so on the side of branding fewer people and groups as hateful rather than more. It needs to strive to be completely above reproach by limiting its designations to airtight cases rather than going after the merely impure.

It'll do the world a whole lot more good by making a bulletproof case against David Duke—rather than a dubious one against Christina Hoff Sommers. After all, if everyone is a fascist then no one is a fascist.

This column originally appeared in The Week

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    With America's president casually stirring racial and other hatreds, it would be helpful for our civic good to have an organization that tracks with honesty and precision what rabble his rhetoric is rousing.

    Can we count on Reason to be that unbiased, level-headed organization?

  • Fjvjcdjjs||

    Ha!

  • Macy's Window||

    Now that is funny.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Whoa, deja vu.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Exactly

  • Nwallins||

    Mishigaslighting

  • Get lit||

    I'm pretty sure it's "Family Research Council" and that group would like to recriminalize gay sex so I think they are a poor choice if you're trying to discredit the SPLC.

  • Eidde||

    ANSWERING THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER'S ATTACKS UPON FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL

    "Does FRC want to "criminalize" homosexuality?

    "FRC has made no effort to reinstate sodomy laws since the U.S. Supreme Court struck them down in the 2003 case of Lawrence v. Texas. In a 2010 interview on a different topic, the question of whether we should "outlaw gay behavior" in U.S. civil law was raised not by an FRC spokesman, but by MSNBC's Chris Matthews. The spokesman affirmed that FRC (like three Supreme Court justices) believed Lawrence was wrongly decided; but the interview left some viewers with the mistaken impression that "re-criminalizing" homosexuality is a policy goal for FRC. It is not."

  • Kwix||

    Hmm, I think it was a (poorly worded) analogy related to the example above it.
    Aayan Hirsi Ali : Pam Geller :: Ben Carson : FRC

  • KevinP||

    Southern Poverty Law Center Gets Creative to Label 'Hate Groups': Principled conservatives are lumped together with bigots.


    Quote (but read the whole story):
    In 2010, the Southern Poverty Law Center designated the Family Research Council a "hate group" because of its orthodox position on homosexuality, and its occasionally incendiary defenses of that position.

    In 2012, Floyd Corkins showed up at the Family Research Council headquarters with a gun.

    I don't mean to imply that these two things were connected. I'm telling you that they were connected. We know because the shooter told the FBI where he got the idea.
  • Macy's Window||

    Yes, but you ignore the well-known progressive fact that is is ok -- indeed, laudable -- to shoot people if you disagree with their political views.

  • Longtobefree||

    Only if you are the progressive and they are conservative - - - -

  • sharmota4zeb||

    But remember, the Pulse shooting had nothing to do with the shooter's religious role models, because they tend to vote Democrat.

  • Macy's Window||

    Another gullible progressive self-identifies.

  • ThomasD||

    Gullible, as in, his heart is in the right place, but he's just misinformed?

    Maybe.

    But do you have any basis for assuming this goodwill on the part of the obvious leftist?

    I know Dalmia does it because it's her default schtick, but that doesn't mean it's mandatory.

  • Rhywun||

    In order to purge every vestige of hate, it has become overzealous.

    That is not the problem, otherwise Bill Maher and Samanthee Bee would be listed. The author makes the mistake of assuming that the SPLC is acting out of principle.

  • KevinP||

    A good article on the fraud that is the SPLC. And Tim Cook of Apple and ProPublica have been suckered by the SPLC.

    A Demagogic Bully:
    The Southern Poverty Law Center demonizes respectable political opponents as "hate groups" - and keeps its coffers bulging


    Quote:

  • libertynugget||

    Yeah, there doesn't seem to be a lot of money in being reasonable.

  • Finrod||

    But there's a lot of money in scaring people and telling them you're there to protect them. Half of Team Blue engages in that bullshit as a primary means of getting money.

  • ThomasD||

    Thinking this article is nothing other than a smokescreen might be rather gullible.

    Dalmia, like every leftist, understands the true value of "if only Stalin knew!"

  • Longtobefree||

    The SPLC is clearly acting out of principle; the principle of destroying an informed electorate and thereby a free representative democracy and establishing a left wing dictatorship.

  • Rhywun||

    "Mishigas"? Is that the female accusative form of "meshuggeneh" or something?

  • Echospinner||

    They should have said "meshuga" . Mishigas is craziness as in "the article is mishigas". If you are talking about people you would say meshuga as in "he went meshuga after he read the article". Meshugana means a crazy person. "The author is a total meshugana"

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    You know who else people said went meshuga?

  • Kivlor||

    Michael Hihn?

  • TGoodchild||

    Don't say his name!

  • Echospinner||

    I don't know but the mishigas from the meshugana in chief is driving me meshuga.

  • Agammamon||

    Either you're time traveling again or your meshugana.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Jeez, no need to slander his meshugana. He's a good guy.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Yes; finally, something we agree on?

  • General_Tso||

    It's deja vu, all over again!

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Regular Tony made a sensible remark earlier today to; what's going on?

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    too; lest I be wordsplained and completely discredited

  • Fjvjcdjjs||

    "For the record, I find Sommers' brand of feminism, centered on the premise that men and women are equal but not identical, to be tinny and insufficiently attuned to the cultural incentives that shape women's choices"

    Shikha admitting she's easily influenced into making stupid decisions.

  • Texasmotiv||

    I wish we could get that article, Shikha's treatise on feminism.

  • Cakesniffe||

    I assume Shikha will accept that "cultural incentives" "shape" the choices of both men and women in equal measure. For example, as a man I choose not to go to work in a sari, much as I would occasionally like to, based on the cultural disincentive of having to face a probable sacking if I do. As far as I know, Sommers' brand of feminism does not deny such obvious realities. It simply insists on being even-handed in discussing all such issues, an approach which I find welcome and refreshing. However, I can understand the objection that "not identical" is a dreadfully tinny sort of phrase, at least if compared to woodier sorts of phrase like, I dunno, "maaanspreading" or "my soggy kneees". Full marks for phonetic sensibility.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    The SPLC is to leftists what the Center for Immigration Studies is for right-wing haters of immigrants: A source of exaggerations and fabrications meant to booster a viewpoint about certain groups of people.

  • colorblindkid||

    Essentially, yes, but try telling that to people who think Huffington Post and Buzzfeed are non-partisan bastions of journalistic integrity.

  • JWatts||

    "The SPLC is to leftists what the Center for Immigration Studies is for right-wing haters of immigrants"

    Well the SPLC does list the Center for Immigration Studies as an 'Extremist Hate Group'. ;)

  • Rat on a train||

    The SPLC, in a moment of honesty, listed the SPLC as a hate group.

  • Macy's Window||

    I could finally agree with them.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    For the record, I find Sommers' brand of feminism, centered on the premise that men and women are equal but not identical, to be tinny and insufficiently attuned to the cultural incentives that shape women's choices.


    Depends on what you mean by "cultural incentives". Because it's one thing to say that as girls read beauty magazines, they want to put some makeup in their faces, and find that objectionable; it's quite another to equate Western culture with the kind of aggression that, let's say, a Boko Haram perpetrates on girls and women, which is what feminists to the LEFT of Sommers say or insinuate as a matter of routine.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    "For the record, I find Sommers' brand of feminism, centered on the premise that men and women are equal but not identical, to be tinny and insufficiently attuned to the cultural incentives that shape women's choices."
    I'm kinda slow so that's probably why I have no idea what this sentence is attempting to convey. That men and women are equal but not identical seems self evident to me. That cultural incentives shape choices, regardless of gender, doesn't change that fundamental, and I would add primal, reality. But Shikha finds it tinny, whatever the fuck that means, when someone points out the obvious. If only I could become sufficiently attuned perhaps I could benefit from her wisdom.

  • Nwallins||

    Tinny means unfashionable, in this context

  • Eidde||

    Whoa, deja vu.

  • Eidde||

    Whoa, deja vu.

  • Alan Vanneman||

    Nice article, for the most part. The SPLC has long been in danger of turning into a solution looking for a problem. Liberal anti-poverty outfits have a vested interest in the persistence of poverty and will invent it if they can't find it. Making up lists of "bad" people generally strikes me as a poor use of one's time.

  • JWatts||

    Making up partisan lists of "bad" people is what really make the SPLC's behavior objectionable. Particularly when the Federal government then uses the lists.

  • DajjaI||

    After all, if everyone is a fascist then no one is a fascist.

    Yes, everyone's a fascist. Except me of course.

  • Rigelsen||

    That guy's got isssues. I thought it was an attempt at humor at first, but the sheer banal incoherent stupidity.... Well, I suppose he could still be attempting humor or parody and just be lacking both a sense of humor and any insight.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Well despite Shikha's tepid criticism, I'm happy to see these shameless assholes finally having their credentials questioned. The MSM had been regurgitating their crap without question for decades. They need to follow their fellow race whores, like the Reverend Jesse Jackson, into well deserved obscurity. Not that they'll suffer much. Poor black people made them millionaires. Nice work if you can get it.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Milo is a troll, but he is not a "flaming hatemonger." Shame on you, Shika.

    -jcr

  • Macy's Window||

    Correct.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    I think your mistake here is believing that the SPLC actually want to be a reliable guide in this area. Their behavior for some time now demonstrates that they merely want to be thought reliable, in order that they can smear anyone who disagrees with them.

  • DH_DC_ReasonReader||

    The Southern Poverty Law Center demonstrated that its "hate group" designations are specious and unwarranted when they stuck the "hate group" label on cartoonist Bosch Fawstin. He's not a threat to anyone's safety. He became known as the winner of the "Draw Mohammed" contest in Garland, Texas (which would have led to him being a murder victim on site had the would-be assassins not been killed by a cop). Fawstin is simply someone who gave up the Muslim religion he grew up in, became a cartoonist, and decided to practice his trade by challenging the view that Mohammed should not be depicted by pen and ink. Fawstin's illustration was done in representational style, with Mohammed's features in normal human proportions (unlike the balloon-shaped facial features in the "Charlie Hebdo" cartoons which got that French magazine's staff killed). Nonetheless, Fawstin's mere going against the orthodox view about Mohammed being drawn was enough to get the SPLC to label Fawstin a "hate group"—not just an individual whom they would have mistakenly labeled a hater, but a "hate group," as though this one person is an organization.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    " it would be helpful for our civic good to have an organization that tracks with honesty and precision what rabble his rhetoric is rousing" Um no it wouldn't be helpful. And please define "civic good".

  • Longtobefree||

    Civic good = what she thinks

  • hello.||

    Say what you want about the SPLC but they've never called for violence against peaceful speakers

  • Brett Bellmore||

    No, they just provide the target list, and let the rest be implied.

  • KevinP||

    Anti-hate group Southern Poverty Law Center blamed for inspiring gun attack on Family Research Council


    Quote:
    In August 2012, a Washington area man guided by the Southern Poverty Law Center's "hate map" that cited FRC, entered the group's headquarters and shot a security guard. The guard survived and the shooter, a volunteer with a gay group, pleaded guilty to domestic terrorism.
  • Kazinski||

    Neither have many of the people that SPLC have labeled as haters and hate groups.

  • Claude Hopper||

    Does SPLC list Louis Farrakhan as a hater?

  • Longtobefree||

    Wait. That's different.

  • Gasherbrum||

    This criticism of the SPLC is rich coming from one who seems rather quick to libel those who question her open borders dogma.

  • vek||

    Right?

  • Rigelsen||

    Shika is the proverbial stopped clock. But she's really slow so only right once a year. And even then as this article shows, right on one or two things but hides that in a mess of shallow thinking.

  • No Longer Amused||

    The SPLC is a hate group. They are only trying to get rid of the competition and make a profit.

  • Kazinski||

    I don't have a problem with SPLC tracking groups they think are extremists, just like publications like Reason track the SPLC. Where i do have a problem is the SPLC tracking individuals and calling them extremists, even though very few of them advocate anything like violence when they express their views or associate with any who do.

    The SPLC are neo-McCarthyists, but worse because even McCarthy was ostensibly tracking members of the American Communist Party which actually was controlled by the Soviet Union just as alleged. The SPLC is targeting people for nothing more than their views, including people like Hirsi who mostly are just relating their own experience.

    Even to list people like Pamela Geller is absurd, I'm not aware of Geller making any threats against anyone, but she has been threatened with death, and there was even a terror attack on an event she organized, a free speech event. Had the SPLC listed any of the individuals or groups that have threatened Geller?

  • Longtobefree||

    That's different.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    No. The SPLC are not neo-McCarthites the SPLC are neo-Palmerites. Mitchell Palmer was the Attorney General of Woodrow Wilson, and a more disgusting flaming bigot has seldom walked the earth. Indeed, McCarthy is a goddamned GIFT to the left, because without his revolting antics people might remember Mitchell Palmer's Progressive Fascism.

    The thing is, the behavior of the SPLC is about standard for the Political Left Establishment; they cannot tolerate opposition, and instantly jump to demonizing their position.

    I mean, calling Bush and Trump new Hitlers? Trump may well be a new Huey Long, but the despicable Austrian? Get. A. Freaking. Grip!

    The SPLC is symptomatic of what is wrong with the Left.

  • mtrueman||

    "The thing is, the behavior of the SPLC is about standard for the Political Left Establishment; they cannot tolerate opposition, and instantly jump to demonizing their position."

    Why do you care? Is it an affront to your sense of fairness?

  • Finrod||

    So you think it's no big deal that a crazed gunman used their bullshit as a hit list?

  • mtrueman||

    The price of free speech.

  • Rigelsen||

    So, what, calling the SPLC the hateful shills they are is not free speech?

  • Hunthjof||

    Sadly even though he was a paranoid asshat McCarthy was right in that there were Soviet Agents, fellow travelers and useful idiots in almost every level of the US Government Academia, media and Hollywood.

  • vek||

    Yup. If people had realized McCarthy was right, and taken action, perhaps our country might have been saved. As it stands now I'm pretty sure the USA is going to go down in flames never to return. Best case scenario we might have a civil war and part of the country might be reborn as something like America used to be... But I have my doubts even that would happen.

  • mtrueman||

    "Had the SPLC listed any of the individuals or groups that have threatened Geller?"

    This is a leftist organization and their targets are on the right. Why would you expect otherwise?

  • Finrod||

    So you admit that the SPLC is a lying leftist group of thugs.

  • mtrueman||

    Only if you admit it first.

  • Hunthjof||

    After the SPLC labeled returning veterans as "Potential Domestic Terrorists" that was the final straw for me. Compound it the FBI and DOJ was using the SPLC as it's main go to and putting out reports and guidance using almost strictly them as their reference source. That means policy was being made of their inputs alone.

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    Summary of article and Shikha logic.

    SPLC bad. Christina Hoff Sommers worse.

    But at least Sommers isn't a white male, right Shikha?

  • Longtobefree||

    Maybe; but the last I heard it depends on how she/he/they/it feels today - - - - -

  • mtrueman||

    "a white male"

    A dispossessed white male is the only victim in our society who truly deserves our sympathy.

  • Finrod||

    Fuck off, slaver.

  • mtrueman||

    You're no slave. And wallowing in self pity doesn't become you.

  • vek||

    White men don't need sympathy... They'll just take their rights back when they get sick and tired of putting up with the leftist bullshit. Historically speaking, white men know how to take care of business when they get around to it.

  • mtrueman||

    "white men know how to take care of business when they get around to it."

    I think they've lost that capacity. When was the last lynching?

  • vek||

    Lynching is how the white trash rabble does things. We don't need none of that shit. But organized marching, militias, arresting treasonous politicians, giving them trials, and then jail sentences/executions as the case may warrant... That's all stuff white folks are good at!

  • FlameCCT||

    Naw!
    I have no sympathy for any male that can't stand up for himself regardless of race.

  • TO in TX||

    Something from SD that I mostly agree with. But then this "But center-right folks like myself..." Shikha has an amazing lack of political self awareness.

    Shikha if you are reading this, please know that you are on the libertarian left, no where near the center-right. Anyone who routinely argues for open borders without first eliminating socialized welfare and education is not right of center.

  • ||

    "The SPLC, which was formed in the aftermath of the Civil Rights movement with the noble goals of seeking justice for victims of racial violence and fighting hate..."

    What is "fighting hate?" We need to stop ceding language to the left, especially in at a publication called "Reason." If you cannot define a phrase, then it should not be used. "Hatemonger" is also a useless phrase.

  • ||

    Precisely.

  • JuanQPublic||

    The inherent problem with designating what a "hate" group is or who is part of one is that it's completely arbitrary. When there is a prescribed list of attributes (gender, ethnicity, religion, etc) that determine whether someone or a group has "hate" as it's motivating factor or reason for existence, then that isn't really monitoring hate, rather, it only monitors hate within in a certain set of criteria.

    If someone or a group wants to monitor hate, fine, but they can't expect to be taken seriously unless their decisions are independent of political motivation or a selective criteria of predjudice.

    Unfortunately, the SLPC does not transcend petty politics, which undermines their supposed goals, and they opt for highly selective criteria that conform ideologically to their political slant. The worst thing about it is that they willfully squander their resources for this, and poison the discussion with half-truths, selective information, and outright lies.

  • vek||

    Right? Where is ANTIFA on their list??? or 1000 other left leaning groups.

  • SimonP||

    So, let me get this straight. The SPLC:

    - Accurately reports on its targets;
    - Chooses targets that are worthy of criticism;
    - Properly distinguishes between its targets and demonstrably worse hatemongers; but
    - Fails to draw that distinction with quite the degree you think it ought to?

    I don't think it's the SPLC that's "intellectually impoverished," here.

  • Finrod||

    Zero for your first three, fucking slaver.

  • FlameCCT||

    I almost pity Progressive Plantation serfs like SimonP then I remember the words of the great philosopher, Forrest Gump:
    Progressive is as Progressive does!

  • Joseph Denman||

    I was looking for some working capital to help in expanding my business in regards to buying & upgrading equipment. Miles Dugan was awesome – he was straightforward & responded to any and all of my emails & phone calls promptly. The entire process was less than 48 hours & you required very little paperwork. I would highly recommend Miles Dugan Funding to others that are looking to g & expand their business. Here is Miles info you need to contact (milesduganllc@gmail.com) and be free of that stress today. Thanks alot.

    Joseph Transportation.
    Denman.

  • vek||

    "For the record, I find Sommers' brand of feminism, centered on the premise that men and women are equal but not identical, to be tinny and insufficiently attuned to the cultural incentives that shape women's choices. But the SPLC's criticism of her is insanely overboard."

    LOL So anybody who has a half way sane view of the world is crazy huh? Men and women are vastly different in terms of averages at societal scale. Anybody who denies this is insane AND can't read data. Women like babies more than men, that's why they like dolls instead of trucks. It's not culture forcing it on them, it's biology. So are most other observed differences. If that weren't the case don't you think even ONE culture in all of human history would have had all the so called masculine duties done by women just out of dumb luck at least? But that's not the case. Men are always soldiers, the Joan of Arc's of history are just complete anomalies. Women are always the primary caretakers. It's biology, deal with it.

    I'm willing to call us equal just to play nice. I think the problem a lot of feminists have is that on many of the things both men and women would consider "better" qualities, men tend to do better in these areas. So they can't even accept that, because the data really says we're not even actually equal by objective standards both sexes would choose as being higher value. So they deny the whole thing because it's the only way for their argument to stand.

  • vek||

    We both definitely have our strong suits, but if we're being honest the things men tend to be better at are more useful/valued by both sexes. The fact is evolution wasn't thinking about what would be PC several hundred million years after the sexes were split in our evolutionary history. Deal with it people. We need the positive aspects of both sexes to function, and I'm all for letting individuals do what they want, but we really need to be more realistic about averages.

    "But center-right folks like myself who are deeply worried about the forces Trump is unleashing find that citing SPLC raises more questions than it answers."

    LOLOLOLOL Center-right she says! LOLOLOLOL I guess Shikha ostensibly understands economics more than your typical socialist leftists... But that's about where her center-right credentials ends. You're as left as they come in the libertarian world sweetheart! Just accept it and wear it like a badge of honor, despite it being a very stupid badge.

  • FlameCCT||

    Q: What does the SPLC & NAACP have in common?
    A: They have been taken over by Progressives just like many other orgs that start with a good premise like Occupy & BLM.

    S outhern
    P rogressive
    L aw
    C enter

    N ational
    A ssociation for the
    A dvancement of
    C olored
    P rogressives

  • CGN||

    Screw the SPLC. What they truly are is a leftist bunch of America haters. Proof? Let them go and peddle their crap in Iran and see how long they last. Our nation is NOT perfect, but it is leaps and bound a better place to live that the next best nation, and HUGELY better than the Southern Pissant Liars Center thinks it is.

  • ZZZMike||

    But Planned Parenthood is still on their support list.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online