4 ms·

The SPLC is not a credible organization for mapping 'hate groups'

by creaghpatr 9y ago

Balgair 9y ago
Why?
- stcredzero 9y ago
  Because there are people in the SLPC who are abusing the reputation of the organization as a political weapon. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an ex-muslim who wants to reform the society she came from and Majid Nawaz is a muslim reformer. Labeling what they are doing and saying as "hate speech" is intellectual dishonesty.
  - Balgair 9y ago
    No offense, but I'm going to believe the SPLC in general all the same. They have a pretty good track record over the decades. Yeah, if they screwed up 2 things, that's not good and they should fix it. But, a 99.9% 'correct' rate is pretty damn good all the same. You should email them and tell them though, I'm sure they would want to correct anything they are wrong about. Smearing people incorrectly is something I imagine they would want to make right. https://www.splcenter.org/contact-us https://www.splcenter.org/contact-us
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      They have a pretty good track record over the decades. They seemed to have taken a "hockey stick" turn in the past several years. Yeah, if they screwed up 2 things, that's not good and they should fix it. There's more than just those two things. You should email them and tell them though, I'm sure they would want to correct anything they are wrong about. There's already a lawsuit. Smearing people incorrectly is something I imagine they would want to make right. I've had pretty much the same thought, but my conclusion is that their definition of "right" has become essentially tribal, and that they feel justified in using their reputation as a partisan weapon, because in their minds, their ends justify those means.
      - Balgair 9y ago
        You provide no sources. Please update.
extra88 9y ago
While I think their definition of "hate group" is sometimes too expansive (e.g. religious groups that are mostly about something else but disagree with gay marriage), SPLC is still credible.
- creaghpatr 9y ago
  That's the point here. The parent comment is leveraging the credibility of the SPLC to smear a community/region based on the organization's subjective definition of 'hate groups'. An interactive 'hate map' seems to encourage this form of stereotyping. It's all about the branding. It works because there's always a kernel of truth in stereotypes (I'm sure there are true hate groups in Indiana), but that raises larger questions about stereotyping regions or races or religions or anything for that matter.
  - extra88 9y ago
    I don't think they're smearing. There is a cluster of white nationalist groups in southern Indiana but I don't think that means people are generally more racist there than say, Ohio. The two things I take away from looking at the map are 1) it's not just a southern thing (which I think is a misconception they're explicitly trying to correct) and 2) the hate group density correlates with population centers pretty well (which is often the case for maps of people).

The SPLC is not a credible organization for mapping 'hate groups'

Balgair 9y ago

Why?

stcredzero 9y ago
Because there are people in the SLPC who are abusing the reputation of the organization as a political weapon. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an ex-muslim who wants to reform the society she came from and Majid Nawaz is a muslim reformer. Labeling what they are doing and saying as "hate speech" is intellectual dishonesty.
- Balgair 9y ago
  No offense, but I'm going to believe the SPLC in general all the same. They have a pretty good track record over the decades. Yeah, if they screwed up 2 things, that's not good and they should fix it. But, a 99.9% 'correct' rate is pretty damn good all the same. You should email them and tell them though, I'm sure they would want to correct anything they are wrong about. Smearing people incorrectly is something I imagine they would want to make right. https://www.splcenter.org/contact-us https://www.splcenter.org/contact-us
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    They have a pretty good track record over the decades. They seemed to have taken a "hockey stick" turn in the past several years. Yeah, if they screwed up 2 things, that's not good and they should fix it. There's more than just those two things. You should email them and tell them though, I'm sure they would want to correct anything they are wrong about. There's already a lawsuit. Smearing people incorrectly is something I imagine they would want to make right. I've had pretty much the same thought, but my conclusion is that their definition of "right" has become essentially tribal, and that they feel justified in using their reputation as a partisan weapon, because in their minds, their ends justify those means.
    - Balgair 9y ago
      You provide no sources. Please update.

extra88 9y ago

While I think their definition of "hate group" is sometimes too expansive (e.g. religious groups that are mostly about something else but disagree with gay marriage), SPLC is still credible.

creaghpatr 9y ago
That's the point here. The parent comment is leveraging the credibility of the SPLC to smear a community/region based on the organization's subjective definition of 'hate groups'. An interactive 'hate map' seems to encourage this form of stereotyping. It's all about the branding. It works because there's always a kernel of truth in stereotypes (I'm sure there are true hate groups in Indiana), but that raises larger questions about stereotyping regions or races or religions or anything for that matter.
- extra88 9y ago
  I don't think they're smearing. There is a cluster of white nationalist groups in southern Indiana but I don't think that means people are generally more racist there than say, Ohio. The two things I take away from looking at the map are 1) it's not just a southern thing (which I think is a misconception they're explicitly trying to correct) and 2) the hate group density correlates with population centers pretty well (which is often the case for maps of people).