Another Corporate Gift for the Southern Poverty Law Center – National Review

The Wall Street Journal:

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co is planning up to $2 million in donations to human and civil-rights organizations following the recent clashes in Charlottesville, Va. The largest U.S. bank by assets will donate $1 million split between the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti-Defamation League to further their work in tracking, exposing and fighting hate groups and other extremist organizations, according to an internal bank memo sent Monday that was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

I blogged a bit last week about the decision by Apple CEO, Tim Cook, to spend $1m of shareholders money on a gift to the Southern Poverty Law Center in the wake of those clashes and Trumps less than impressive(to put it mildly) response to them.

Yes, it has been alleged in a series of articles in Harpers Magazine that, for all its undoubted achievements in the past, the SPLC has its, well, issues, but my real focus in last weeks post was the organizations Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists and in particular the inclusion of two names on that list:Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Heres some more on Maajid Nawaz, this time from an article in the Tablet by Lee Smith:

I spoke to Nawaz on the phone in London to ask for his reaction. A bunch of first-world, comfortable liberal Americans who are not Muslims have decided from their comfortable perch to label me, an activist who is working within his Muslim community to push back against extremism, an anti-Muslim extremist.

On the face of it, its difficult to understand why Nawaz was listed as such. As he told me, hes a proud Muslim. I learned Arabic in order to read my holy book, he said. In an Intelligence Squared debate, I defended the proposition that Islam was a religion of peace. This was the same week that the man who attempted to bomb Times Square was sentenced so it wasnt the friendliest New York audience. I hosted Morgan Freeman in a mosque for his documentary The Story of God.

Nawaz takes the SPLC blacklist seriously, he told me, because he believes that it has put his life in danger. Theyve put a target on my head, he said. This is what putting people on lists does. When Theo Van Gogh was killed in the Netherlands, a list was stuck to his body that included Ayaan Hirsi Alis name. It was a hit list. When Bangladeshi reformers were hacked to death by jihadist terrorists, they were working off lists. Only fascists produce lists.

And its not as if SPLC needs the cash.


The organization has been criticized for spending more of its money on fundraising and overhead and less on litigation than comparable groups like the American Civil Liberties Union. And it has taken flak for amassing a huge endowmentmore than $200 millionthat is disproportionately large for its operating costs. SPLC President Richard Cohen defends the endowment as necessary to ensure the group can survive legal battles that might last for years. (As for Dees himself, he made $337,000 in 2015, according to the watchdog group Charity Navigator; Cohen made $333,000 the same year.) In 1994, the local paper, the Montgomery Advertiser, ran a series investigating the groups marketing, finances and personnel practices that was a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize. (Dees respondedaccording to a transcript from a 1999 Nieman Foundation discussion on journalism about nonprofitsby mobilizing prominent liberal politicians for whom he had raised money to lobby the Pulitzer Board not to award the prize to the Advertiser.)

Other critics say the SPLC picks its causes with its bottom line in mind. In the 1980s, the groups entire legal staff quit to protest Dees obsession with the remnants of the KKKwhich still captured the imagination of the groups liberal donor baseat the expense of lower-profile but more relevant targets. In its marketing, the SPLC still touts seven-figure judgments it has won against Klan organizations, even though the plaintiffs have been able to recoup only a tiny fraction of that from the groups, which possessed paltry assets

And then theres that freedom of expression thing (my emphasis added):

William Jacobson, a law professor at Cornell and critic of the SPLC, says the group has wrapped itself in the mantle of the civil rights struggle to engage in partisan political crusading. Time and again, I see the SPLC using the reputation it gained decades ago fighting the Klan as a tool to bludgeon mainstream politically conservative opponents, he says. For groups that do not threaten violence, the use of SPLC hate group or extremist designations frequently are exploited as an excuse to silence speech and speakers, Jacobson adds. It taints not only the group or person, but others who associate with them.

I suppose defenders of free speech should be grateful that J.P. Morgan Chase has only chosen to throw $500,000 of its shareholders money this organizations way.

Read this article:

Another Corporate Gift for the Southern Poverty Law Center – National Review

Related Post

August 21, 2017   Posted in: Southern Poverty Law Center |

Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."