Let's leave links like this to the Southern Poverty Law Center, OK? June 15, 2001 8:21 PM   Subscribe

Let's leave links like this to the Southern Poverty Law Center, OK?
posted by sudama to Etiquette/Policy at 8:21 PM (33 comments total)

Why?
posted by aaron at 9:17 PM on June 15, 2001


I didn't want to sidetrack the referred to thread either, but I found the (implied) suggestion that the link was inappropriate for MeFi to be... unpleasant. Then again, it wouldn't be the first time sudama had summarily informed me that content or a comment was inappropriate for MeFi.
posted by m.polo at 9:25 PM on June 15, 2001


what is inappropriate about this link, sudama? it's typical white power drivel (at least I guess it's typical). it's laughably stupid (unless, I suppose, you're a white power person.)

but isn't it important to know what's out there? I wouldn't like having this on metafilter everyday, but I'm not bothered by its appearance one time. it would lose whatever educational/entertainment value it had after that. - rcb
posted by rebeccablood at 10:05 PM on June 15, 2001


Censorship in the name of "good" is still censorship.
posted by owillis at 10:08 PM on June 15, 2001


I'm confused, Sudama. You've posted many, many links about racism in the past. Is your problem with this one that the racism is so blatant that no one can miss it? Do you only want to discuss things that you see as racist while most other people don't?

I thought the link was both funny and disturbing, and I was glad to see it here.
posted by anapestic at 10:10 PM on June 15, 2001


Amen, anapestic. That site is entertainingly stupid, and I think it's worthwhile to be reminded from time to time that people like Sister Lisa are out there.
posted by rcade at 6:07 AM on June 16, 2001


"Let's leave links like this to the Southern Poverty Law Center, OK?"

Asked, but not answered - Why?
posted by y6y6y6 at 6:18 AM on June 16, 2001


I didn't realize so many people found this kind of thing entertaining. I don't think it's inappropriate so much as unnecessary. I'm surprised as many people spent time reading and discussing it as did. I thought most of us would just pass over it -- it just doesn't deserve the attention it got on the front page of mefi.

Sites like the SPLC provide a context for this stuff that mefi can't. I'm afraid that among the tens of thousands of mefi readers, one of them clicked on the link and said "you know, they're right" and now there's a little more hate in the world. I just wish there were a little less.

I'm only asking for voluntary self-restraint from those who agree with me. This has nothing to do with censorship.
posted by sudama at 9:39 AM on June 16, 2001


Sudama, I'd counter with this: if there's someone walking through life, thinking minorities are just being greedy because "we've solved the racism problem" - this link will at least remind them, that yes - there are racist idiots still out there. Someone going to the SPLC site is probably already pre-disposed to not being racist, so the effect of publishing a site like this on their site is nil. To combat this problem, we can't always run around with rose colored glasses and pretend these people don't exist. See what I mean?
posted by owillis at 10:07 AM on June 16, 2001


What I didn't like about the link (and about several links posted on MeFi) was there there was nothing around it - nothing to discuss, no question raised, etc.

I mean, what is the commenting system for on MeFi? For us all to just say "Ha ha those keeerazy racists!"

The same link attached to some brief commentary or a question asked would have at least led to some interesting conversation
posted by jbeaumont at 10:28 AM on June 16, 2001


I didn't realize so many people found this kind of thing entertaining.
You act as if we're sitting around, slapping our thighs, and saying "That's so true!" I don't think a single one of us agrees with Sister Lisa.

I'm afraid that among the tens of thousands of mefi readers, one of them clicked on the link and said "you know, they're right" and now there's a little more hate in the world.
If it hadn't been this, it would have been something else, on some other forum, somewhere. If someone was that predisposed to hate, any pretext would serve. Or are you suggesting that the normal guy-on-the-street will be instantly converted by the overwhelming rational force behind Sister Lisa's argument?

I'm only asking for voluntary self-restraint from those who agree with me.
And every time someone fails to restrain themselves appropriately, will there be another finger-wagging post to MeTa?
posted by darukaru at 10:30 AM on June 16, 2001


And every time someone fails to restrain themselves appropriately, will there be another finger-wagging post to MeTa?

Oh come on, he's raising a valid point for discussion. I don't see any wagging fingers.
posted by rodii at 11:43 AM on June 16, 2001


sudama: I'm afraid that among the tens of thousands of mefi readers, one of them clicked on the link and said "you know, they're right" and now there's a little more hate in the world.

you know, you can't control what people think by keeping them away from thinking you don't like. that's what fundamentalists and extremists of all stripes try to do.

the fuss over monty python and the holy grail, the last temptation of christ, serrano, mapplethorpe, and all the others all come from this same way of thinking.

it doesn't work.

if someone clicked on that link and agreed with what they read, they were probably already thinking that, or they were on their way.

if metafilter became a compendium of these links, I'd stop visiting. I don't intend to link this site on my site anywhere. but having been linked here, I think all we can do is ignore it or comment on it as compassionately, or as strongly, or as intelligently as we can. - rcb
posted by rebeccablood at 1:14 PM on June 16, 2001


This is the classic justification for any kind of censorship: "Those people are just too stupid to think for themselves and too gullible to reject evil ideas, so I (in my infinite wisdom) must protect them by making sure that they never encounter any information which might harm them."

Pfeh.
posted by Steven Den Beste at 1:17 PM on June 16, 2001


What Steven said. I find your need to protect people from things they aren't smart enough to handle contemptible.

How smug. How elitist.

"Well, of course I understand what's going on here because I'm wise and righteous. But some people will see this and suddenly become racists. Because they can't think for themselves."

Protecting people by filtering the information they have access to. How dare you?
posted by y6y6y6 at 1:31 PM on June 16, 2001


y6: you're joking, right?

there's no need to attack sudama or anyone. he stated an opinion, we're stating ours. I understand his first instinct at seeing this, I just have a different point of view.

I remember walking through my neighborhood years ago and coming upon a white-power, anti-black and anything else poster stapled to a phone pole. I looked at it for a few minutes, and tried to figure out what to do. I believe in freedom of speech, *and* this thing was reprehensible.

so I took it down and threw it away. I decided that the guy had every right to put that thing up and that it was my neighborhood and I didn't hold with that, so I had every right to take it down. sort of guerrilla tactics on both sides.

I wasn't worried that anyone would read it and be swayed by it; I just found it to be profoundly offensive.

some people think I did the wrong thing. I made the best decision I could. I stand behind it.
-----

what does "self-policing" mean? I think it means that we all have opinions about how this place should be run, and we hash it out and come to some kind of a consensus. not one of us is going to be entirely satisfied with the end result, but metafilter will in the end reflect some sort of "community standards", and matt won't be ashamed to have his name associated with it.

this is where we hash it out. this is where we keep each other honest. this is where we engage in a vigorous shaking out process, like a court is supposed to function, reaching a conclusion through an adversarial system. we need all the points of view. we need to encourage people to speak their minds, and we need to be as respectful as can be while we do it.

we're all here because we care about metafilter. - rcb
posted by rebeccablood at 2:10 PM on June 16, 2001


To the extent that this is "our" site, and "we" don't want to promote this stuff, I'd humbly suggest that we don't nail it to a telephone pole or hand-deliver it to every neighbor in "our" neighborhood. (Apologies to rcb.)

I fully expect some to disagree with me but I hope that many agree. Of all the crappy links each of us has complained about publicly or privately, I'm disappointed that this one has garnered such a strong defense.

If it hadn't been this, it would have been something else, on some other forum, somewhere.
No doubt. But should it have been here? Is mefi a better place for having seen this posted to the front page?
posted by sudama at 3:27 PM on June 16, 2001


Considering the number of comments in the thread (41), the quality of the discussion, and the lack of racists showing up, I think Sudama's fear is ill-founded. Of all media, the Internet should be the last place people think they can protect you by hiding something from you. Exposing idiots like Sister Lisa to ridicule is much healthier response than treating her ideas like they are too dangerous to discuss openly.
posted by rcade at 5:01 PM on June 16, 2001


Given the way the Google algorithm works, better that these things receive links from dissenting comments, than more of the same.

And maybe, just maybe, Sister Lisa may care to check her referrer logs this weekend.
posted by holgate at 7:50 PM on June 16, 2001


self-restraint = self censorship

voluntary censorship is censorship in its most insidious form.

besides, we're not children here.
posted by will at 9:52 PM on June 16, 2001


I do not believe we can leave our predjudices truly behind us if we are not every so often given a booster shot to strengthen and fortify our disgust and loathe for it. We live in a world diseased by these thoughts. To shy from them is ignorance. To deny them is cowardice.

Sudama, I appreciate your concern... but I believe it is not neccessary for you to worry about the resolve of this company against intolerance. I feel no need to be protected. I am strong enough in the strength of my convictions not to need the protection of anyone. I believe most people in MeFi are. If you find it disturbing that we can look so completely at darkness, understand that it is because we can stand so firmly in the light.

Sure - you should be disturbed by this. And you should have it inflicted on you as often as possible - it is a reminder of what still is. As we are the hope that it will someday no longer be.

Have you written the author of this piece, Sudama? The editor of the publication? Take the fight to the offender - display their shame to the public. Do not pretend it doesn't exist, and do not try to shield people from the unpleasant fact that thoughts like this exist. You do a disservice to progress, when you attempt to shield adult minds from the ugly truths of this world.

posted by Perigee at 11:33 PM on June 16, 2001


Sister Lisa's racism is not something that concerns me. Sister Lisa's racist voice amplified thousands of times is a slightly greater problem. But the real problem is that dozens of millions of people believe that racism is crazy folks in the woods worshipping Hitler, when the racism that hurts people of color is the racism of dozens of millions of people going along with entrenched systems of privilege and oppression.

When we point to Sister Lisa and say "look at that racist," we are saying, "racism is over there." We like to compare ourselves to people like Sister Lisa so we can reassure ourselves that we have left prejudice behind us; after all, we are not racist like Sister Lisa is racist. We are congratulating ourselves for not being as ugly and loathsome as the worst humanity has to offer. We are not making progress. In fact, each one of us lives a life touched by racism. If only we would let ourselves see it, we could begin to find solutions.
posted by sudama at 12:16 AM on June 17, 2001


Sister Lisa's racism concerns the Southern Policy Law Center, which interviewed her in 1999 and covers the World Church of the Creator frequently.

Now I know the SPLC is on the approved list of groups that are allowed to openly discuss virulent racists, but aren't you a little afraid that people reading the interview will feel ridicule for Turner's hilarious attempt to introduce feminism to the white supremacy crowd, thus blinding themselves to their own less obvious racism?
posted by rcade at 6:45 AM on June 17, 2001


Meta: Ken Silverstein vs. the SPLC
posted by capt.crackpipe at 7:19 AM on June 17, 2001


Capt., thanks for that link... does a nice job of collating the somewhat disquieting things I have heard and/or read about Dees and the SPLC. Of course, we can't be allowed to question the motives or high calling of Dees and Co., but it's interesting reading.
posted by m.polo at 8:41 AM on June 17, 2001


Hmm. I guess you can draw that conclusion if you want. I didn’t really post it so people can write of the SPLC. The work they do is important, I just find it interesting that any institution’s motives can be diluted. That doesn’t make every single one worthy of being written off — it makes them more human.

In the same sense, I can understand sudama’s contention that racism, or other potentially dangerous information, should be considered from a certain level of abstraction. I also understand everyone else’s slippery slope arguement. I think they’re both valuable and shouldn’t be patronized.
posted by capt.crackpipe at 9:34 AM on June 17, 2001


>sudama: the racism that hurts people of color is the racism of dozens of millions of people going along with entrenched systems of privilege and oppression.<

well, that might, thankfully, be the racism that hurts most people of color (and make no mistake: it is an improvement); but when you're being dragged behind the truck of two hitler-worshipping back-woods crazies, I think sister lisa's kind of racism matters to you a lot more.

see, I always thought that the truck-dragging was something that never could happen any more. I always thought that the fight was against prejudice among individuals and the ways in which that translates into racism as it becomes institutionalized.

I was shocked a few years ago to discover that a black man is still occasionally dragged to death behind a truck. staggered. beyond words. beyond emotion. beyond comprehension.

...

so, I take a different view. I think it's important to know that there is a hatred so severe still in people's hearts. I don't live and never have lived around that hatred. neither have many others. but people need to know that it's not a terrible memory from the past.

sudama, you're making some interesting points in this conversation, I'm a little sorry that you didn't make them in the front page discussion. that thread might have turned into an interesting exploration of racism and prejudice as each of us have experienced it. - rcb
posted by rebeccablood at 12:41 PM on June 17, 2001


Y'know... this is one of those times when a 'no link post' would have been handy in MeFi - this thread seems worthy of front page inclusion, but we're back here discussing it in the back room.

Not a bad thing - there's no more delightful company than you folks - but in a way, suddy's P.O.V. would have made a nice counterpoint on the front.

posted by Perigee at 3:18 PM on June 17, 2001


I was shocked a few years ago to discover that a black man is still occasionally dragged to death behind a truck.

Not to single you out Rebecca, but that's the sort of perception I was saying needs to be challenged. When people scoff and laugh at "racial profiling" they really don't know what its like to be tailed in department stores, or when you happen to be driving in "white" neighborhoods. I don't like the whole "victim" culture, but it's a fact of life that in 2001 these attitudes are still around and need to be aired out.
posted by owillis at 9:19 PM on June 17, 2001


owillis: say that again a different way; I don't understand what you're saying.

- that people *are* no longer dragged behind trucks?

- that people need to stop focusing on the truck-dragging and start paying attention to the more benign, but deeply humiliating and pervasive racism (like profiling) that happens more commenly?

- that profiling is as big a deal as truck-dragging, and it's time people realized it?

- or something else I'm missing entirely? - rcb
posted by rebeccablood at 10:04 PM on June 17, 2001


I think what he's trying to say is that he finds it sort of odd that you were so flabbergasted by the news of that guy's dragging, that you thought such a thing was no longer possible in this society.
posted by aaron at 10:38 PM on June 17, 2001


I really didn't think it was.

I grew up around some prejudice, but nothing extreme. I knew that some people didn't like blacks, but it never occurred to me that anyone would ever do something like that, and never, ever in the modern day.

some years ago, I was talking to two 20-year-old kids, both of whom had grown up in the south, about prejudice, and we weren't quite agreeing about it, and I was thinking about how black and white things were for me at that age, how certain, and how young they were....

then one of them said "I don't think you know what I mean when I talk about prejudice" and he told me about a black man who had been dragged to death down there.

and suddenly I realized that I was the naive one.

soon after was the very highly publicized dragging death. I had had no idea.

I grew up in the midwest, I've always lived in the city; does that explain how I could never have come across anything like this? but I never had. - rcb



posted by rebeccablood at 10:51 PM on June 17, 2001


rcb-

What aaron said. Brain and keyboard don't connect properly sometimes.

But you're not the only "naive" one. When I hear (mostly) white people say things to the effect that the whole "racism" problem was all done with and we basically fixed it in the '70s, I can't help but to shake my head. In my head, I don't fit the image of the stereotypical "angry black man" - I'm a big, chunky guy with glasses and a voice that you would characterize as "white" if you had your eyes closed. But I can't tell you how many times people have followed me around in department stores, or how many white women have clutched their purses for dear life when I have the nerve to get on the elevator with them.

Even two of my best friends (who are white and from the midwest - Iowa) tell me to "c'mon" when I say these things, because in their minds this stuff doesn't happen or if it does it happens in "bad neighborhoods". People think we have something to hide why we are distrustful of cops, and I would like to trust them - but I've had them hassle me for no reason while I was in the yard of my own home.

And it isn't a city thing either, I've lived in the 'burbs (MidAtlantic/West Coast) my whole life - middle class black/white mix. I'm as scared of "the hood" as anyone else who's lived in suburbia all their days.

Yuck. And I'm one of the optimistic ones (really. you should talk to people in my family)
posted by owillis at 11:13 PM on June 17, 2001


« Older What is Dave Winer talking about?   |   Metatalk 404 error Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments