Silverstein on Dees

[Justin Schwartz]

I'm with Wojtek here. Silverstein is mad at Dees because (1) he's rich, a 
very bad thing; (2) he spends his time beating up on the Klan, a moribund 
force, ignoring the fact that insofar as it is, Dees has a lot to do with 
that; moreover, having close friends who have lost husbands to the Klan and 
the Nazis, I am unimpressed by claims about their harmlessness; (3) Dees 
monitors hate groups in a supposedly anti-civil-libertarian way and shares 
his information with law enforcement; apparently we shouldn't be bothered 
with what people who want to kill us and sometimes to are up to, nor tell 
the authorities about their plans to kill us; (4) a bunch of people don't 
like him because he doesn't do as much death penalty and other socially 
conscious work as they would like, abd (5) unlike everyone else, hes ends 
out vacuous fundindraising letters.

This is a reason to run a campaign against Dees? Silverstein and Cockburn 
are full of shit. Dees does good work shutting down the Klan. He may or may 
not be a jerk. He might do more than he does. What he does is good. I am not 
impressed by this attack and I am frank;y surprised that you are, Doug.

--jks


> >annotation
> >THE CHURCH OF MORRIS DEES
> >How the Southern Poverty Law Center profits from intolerance
> >by Ken Silverstein
> >fighting the KKK. Another lawyer, Gloria Browne, who resigned a few
> >years later, told reporters that the center's programs were
> >calculated to cash in on "black pain and white guilt." Asked in 1994
>
>
>Is not self-promotion what many self-styled champions of civil rights do?
>Not to mention those who make a comfortable living by speaking and writing
>against them? Singleing-out Dees creates a deceptive illusion that his
>practices are an exception rather than the rule.
>
>In these days, the shibboleths and costumes of the past struggles have
>become mere marketing gimmicks to sell the moral and intellectual commodity
>produced by an army of college educated symbol manipulators.  Most
>nonprofits use the services of professional fundraisers or telemarketers
>whose charitable sales pitch benefit mainly their own profits.
>
>Charity, social movements, moral entrepreneurship and kindred "warm glow"
>or "grievance manufacturing" enterprises in this country are for the most
>part a sham to milk the gullible people with excess resources and the need
>of buying a clean conscience by chipping in a few bucks for "worthy"
>causes.  This is, in fact, a modern version of medieveal "merit making" -
>the practice of the wealthy supporting hordes of professional beggars to
>"make merits" and earn social respectability and a place in heaven.
>
>The real change can be achieved not by feel-good philanthropy but by a fat
>progressive tax and government programs, to which nonprofits can no doubt
>be valuable partners.
>
>
>wojtek
>
>------
>NOTE: Opinions expressed in this forum are my own, and do not necessarily
>represent the views of my employer.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com