@professorgerm's banner p

professorgerm

clutching my imitation pearls

3 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 12 12:41:49 UTC

				

User ID: 1157

professorgerm

clutching my imitation pearls

3 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 12 12:41:49 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1157

I'm not sure the average American is that spiteful.

Jury trials have other issues than mere spite, especially when race gets involved.

using other company names for billing is a not that uncommon practice (see tons of sex toy/porn/etc companies for instance)

Ehh, fair example.

I still see virtually no difference between this case and the Trump "34 felonies" hush money. He paid someone to not talk, recorded it under the wrong header, and everyone raised a big stink. The SPLC pays people to talk, set up shell accounts for it, and... somehow that's fine? I don't get it.

Very little I've said has been about the actual success of the case, which I expect to fail even if the leadership team of the SPLC said, on video and broadcasted to the world, "Real hate groups basically don't exist any more except the ones we pay to keep cushy activist jobs." Success of the case has little to do with the law or the behavior of the SPLC, and everything to do with Trump.

Whether or not it's fraud by legal standards if you squint and stand on one foot and jump through the loopholes, I think it's bad behavior for an NGO to engage in.

One is that lawfare contributes to a decline in civility.

The ongoing existence of the SPLC also contributes to a decline in civility. Civility is a difficult thing to build, easy to destroy.

The SPLC lists over 1300 hate groups on its website.

Immigration Reform Law Institute

Federation for American Immigration Reform

Center for Family and Human Rights

Parents Defending Education

Constitutional Rights PAC

The Family Foundation

Society for Evidence-based Gender Medicine

American Police Officer's Alliance

Eight is only a small fraction of 1300 but I don't want to get too gish-gallopy. I note that some fraction of what SPLC lists as hate groups are... similar organizations to the SPLC that they happen to disagree with! Funny how that works. Wish I could get paid to name all my enemies as hate groups, that's a helluva racket.

Now, that's not to deny groups like The Blood Tribe exist and are also listed (wonder if they got paid). They seem to be the kind of "hate group" and probably skinheads people actually think of, not just some lobby group that the SPLC disagrees with. But I had to go through multiple states to find them.

But that begs the question: what percent of the 1300 are "real" hate groups, and what percent are the SPLC doing this scumbag "we disagree so they're hateful" routine?

I see no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt after this little experiment.

edit:

looking at the site again they list

1,371 active hate and antigovernment groups

118 white nationalist groups

I would not be surprised if less than 150 of the groups they call "hate groups" total fit the colloquial definition of "hate group," and of that number it would be a smaller fraction that are actual problems.

there's no evidence for it whatsoever

Is your standard here that the SPLC should have a public website that says "we pay white supremacists to continue existing so we can keep our cushy high-status jobs"?

What sort of evidence do you expect to see for that kind of self-justifying creative endeavor?

they would not go after them for donation fraud.

Remind me how they got Al Capone?

I do not think that the SPLC are actually mustache-twisting villains who want to enable far-right violence to justify their own existence.

"enable" is a stronger word than I'd use. Encourage isn't quite right either. Something like "generate just barely enough existence to keep money flowing and publicize 4chan memes, without causing significant harm to people we care about."

If the options are find a new cause or shut down and find different jobs... I also don't think, say, gay and lesbian actively desired to funnel questioning kids into lifetimes of medicalization, but the institutional survival incentives once they'd won pretty much everything else generated that as side-effect of the new cause area.

The fraud is in creating fake bank accounts and shell entities. That it's stupid and absolutely inappropriate behavior for an NGO are separate complaints.

I think we're too far apart in our respective biases on the topic and what kind of actions should be allowable for NGOs to commit.

the ATF and DEA alone paid informants almost 260 million.

Surely there's a difference between the government doing something, and theoretically being democratically accountable for it, versus an NGO of questionable action and well beyond any form of normal accountability?

Though I'm not sure exactly where I fall on the question being "paying informants creates questionable incentives" versus "NGOs should be more accountable for self-interested and possibly fraudulent behaviors."

I struggle to come up with a more sympathetic NGO where I would find this acceptable. Like... if Worldvision was paying people to have more kids and put them in orphanages, I think we could agree that's perverse and insane.

The purpose of the fictitious businesses was to disguise the origin of the money from the organizations.

The law is a funny and stupid thing, because that sure sounds like some form of fraud to a layman.

The money laundering charges are subordinate to the fraud charges, and are thus bogus.

Unless you're in New York?

I agree it's not surprising they pay people.

What’s the equivalent here?

I suspect we'll find out if this makes it as far as discovery! At this stage, the available information and how to interpret it relies too much on partisan bias to say with much confidence.

Money is fungible, and the difference between the two is a perforated line of intent. If you want information, you need your stool pigeon to stay in the group and keep participating.

That said, the SPLC probably has more money than every group they "track" combined, and nobody really cares that much if they just make shit up or fall for 4chan trolling. It does suggest they're trying to find something real rather than just continue justifying their existence, though I do suspect it's mostly in their heads.

There were lots of articles saying that Trump said Republicans were "entitled" to 5 more districts in Texas.

He's putting the cart before the horse but presumably that's based on the census predictions.

The idea that paying for an informant inside of a group to provide you leaks and information that you report on, and even share with law enforcement if it hints at potential criminal behavior counts as "funding" the movement as a form of support is quite a stretch.

I think this highlights an interesting difference between some sort of moral intuition because it seems common among SPLC defenders that this is just a nonsense connection, but I don't find it a stretch at all. It strikes me as a perfectly reasonable conclusion! But I don't know how to phrase what that difference in intuition is, exactly.

Now that might actually have some teeth to it

34 felonies. But Alabama's probably not as corrupt and motivated as New York.

I don't see any contradiction between claiming to fight right-wing extremism and funding extremist informants

Same sort of issue as the FBI prodding along and composing a significant fraction of the Whitmer kidnapping plot, the line between fighting something and manufacturing something to fight gets patchy.

Paying informants to stay in an organization, continue rousing for it, and report back is fungible with just paying the organization to exist.

Also that we clearly have affected Iran, quite recently. Not in a way that progressives want this time, but we "can" if we choose to.

there are a lot of people who would never dream of suggesting that a hate crime targeting e.g. black people might be justified because of how a group of black people behaved in a different country

Not only would a lot of people never dream of suggesting that, the US even has a government agency that supposedly coerces people into making explicit statements regarding the denial of race as a factor in crimes committed against their families.

Americans can’t affect humans rights abuses in Iran, Belarus, or Sudan

They absolutely can, they generally choose not to. It's not like it would even be surprising if progressives took up Sudan as a major cause du jour and demanded change! And yet.

Greenfield

Looking forward to it!

I spent Easter weekend in the 'burgh, got to see that killer last-play win from the Pirates and enjoy an Iron City and an IC Mango at PNC park, and my local buddy described Greenfield as one of those areas that's perpetually predicted to gentrify next but never does. I got that vibe as we drove through. He and his wife live in Baldwin Borough.

I don't comment on these much, but I love reading them. Spent a fair bit of time visiting Pittsburgh back in college (Let's GOOOOO!), and between reading these and having the occasional visit... it feeds my nostalgia while reminding me why I don't actually want to live there (I hate navigating Pittsburgh). That said, Pittsburgh has a personality, or several, in a way that Raleigh NC (where I live now) does not. Having a Gilded Age past plays a big role in that for Pittsburgh, what with all the investment back at a time when people cared about aesthetics, while Raleigh is too... new-money blandness mixed with with gentility and a soupcon of shame. Good museums, though.

Keep up the good work, hoss. Thank you for the posts.

you're literally writing that he wasn't actually trans and thinking that he was a mistake of his.

Real transgender has never been tried, comrade! Trans cannot fail, they can only be failed.

gas prices are over 4 dollars

Not disagreeing with your lived experience, but locally gas has dropped $0.40 in the last two weeks. Still up from pre-Iran debacle but closer to the summer-increase margin.

Mostly I'm pointing this out to say: this market's crazy and whether this affects voters this fall will be decided, mostly, in the last few days before the midterm.

Assimilation typically doesn't happen as much with the first generation immigrants, it's a second generation, and even more so a third generation thing.

Depends on the specific situation, host culture and immigrant culture, etc.

German immigrants after the war were, uh, highly motivated to assimilate as quickly as possible, but that's an almost-unique scenario. British and French immigration issues have had bouts of first-gens that really want to adopt British culture, but then drift over time- there's a bimodal issue with second/third gen can become either more assimilated or more radicalized.

Sadly not as far as I can tell. I share the intuition most are one and done, two's borderline, and 3+ is definitely a category worth knowing more about.

When looking for the data I came across this anecdote, published in Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish back in 2009

Twenty-seven years ago I went to the ER after having suffered my fourth miscarriage. After genetic screening, my husband had previously been diagnosed with a chromosal defect which would result in the spontaneous abortion of about 50% of our conceptions (actually, more like 66). It's called a balanced reciprocal translocation, and the anomaly is so severe that the fetus dies within about 12 weeks of conception. We managed to eventually have a son and daughter, but both are carriers who will in turn someday face the same daunting experiences we endured.

Anyway, back to the ER. As I was registering to get my D and C [dilatation and curettage], a woman barged in the front door demanding an abortion immediately. The attendant told her she would have to wait her turn, to which she responded that she'd already had six abortions and it was no big deal, couldn't they just rush her case a little since she had several more appointments to keep that day.

What a contrast we presented. One woman who was devastated by the loss of four babies countered by a woman who could so blithely give up one after another. My daughter is getting married this summer and, as I said before, she is a carrier. They will have to undergo genetic testing to confirm what we already know, and that is she will most likely have to endure the heartbreak of numerous miscarriages.

27 years before, which would've been 1992. I would be fascinated to know more about the demographics.

We don't say "you assumed this risk by deciding to live in a place full of humans". It's entirely the fault of the serial killer, and the fact that someone "signed up for the possibility" of living next to a serial killer is not taken into consideration at all.

Well. Historically we said that, but over the last several years progressive urbanists and anti-carceralists have taken strange new approaches to victim-blaming.

not difficult

you overestimate people.