Diskussion:Southern Poverty Law Center
Füge neue Diskussionsthemen unten an:
Klicke auf , um ein neues Diskussionsthema zu beginnen.USA Today
BearbeitenAs for the USA Today article, here it is cited in full so others can know what it says
USA TODAY August 3, 1996, Saturday, ATLANTA FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 7A LENGTH: 1360 words HEADLINE: Morris Dees: At center of the racial storm BYLINE: Andrea Stone DATELINE: WASHINGTON BODY: WASHINGTON --
Morris Dees recently sold his passion for fighting hate to the Direct Marketing Association here. In his "aw, shucks" Alabama accent, the founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) wove one "let-me-tell-you-a-story" after another. His tales of boldly suing racists riveted these junk mailers, themselves masters of hyperbole. Later, at a VIP reception, Dees signed copies of Hate on Trial, his book on how he battled neo-Nazi leader Tom Metzger. Nearby, a college student told how Dees sold anti-balding cream through the mail. For Dees, selling racial justice isn't much different than hustling hair cream. Today, 25 years after founding the SPLC in Montgomery, Ala., Dees heads the nation's richest civil rights organization. At a time when the NAACP is struggling back from bankruptcy, this white lawyer's nonprofit center boasts assets of $ 68 million. Most was raised through the mail from 300,000 contributors, most of whom were white. Their dollars helped Dees end segregation in public accommodations and government. They fund the center's Klanwatch and Militia Task Force, which monitor more than 800 hate groups. They underwrite Teaching Tolerance, a project that distributes free educational materials to 55,000 schools nationwide. And they finance precedent-setting lawsuits. Currently, Dees is focusing on the rash of arson fires at Southern black churches. The SPLC recently filed a civil suit against two members of the Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan arrested in two South Carolina blazes. The men were later indicted on federal charges. "He's been one of the most persistent seekers of truth and justice in the South," says Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a civil rights movement veteran. Dees' crusades have made him a target of numerous death threats. The SPLC's first offices were firebombed by Klan arsonists in 1983. Today, Dees and his fourth wife, Elizabeth, live with round-the-clock security at their 2,500-acre ranch in Mathews, Ala. Bodyguards follow when Dees travels. "He's taken tremendous risks," says Ron Kuby, a white New York civil rights lawyer. "As a Southern white man, he's uniquely situated . . . to put the spotlight on racism in his own community." Yet some black civil rights leaders and others have criticized Dees for running a "poverty palace." They say he raises millions by exaggerating the threat of hate groups. For instance, in a recent report on arsons at black churches in the South, his Klanwatch newsletter included five 1990 fires in Kentucky. The article doesn't mention they were set by a black man. "He's a fraud who has milked a lot of very wonderful, well-intentioned people," says Stephen Bright of Atlanta's Southern Center for Human Rights. "If it's got headlines, Morris is there." Critics say Dees ignores controversial issues such as affirmative action. Some former black employees quoted in a 1994 series by The Montgomery Advertiser say they often heard racial jokes or slurs from white staffers. They say the SPLC is a paternalistic organization where few blacks hold high positions. Dees says such charges are the gripes of a few disgruntled staff members. He notes that two of the SPLC's five board members and one of four staff lawyers are black. To some blacks, though, the complaints seem petty. "This young man is to be honored, to be praised," says
Mamie Till-Mobley, the mother of Emmett Till, the 14-year-old black boy whose 1955 murder for talking to a Mississippi white woman sparked the civil rights movement. "Anytime you do anything, you're going to be criticized. But even critics say Dees, 59, is a genius at selling both his cause and himself. His tour to promote his latest book on right-wing militias coincided with the one-year anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing. After that, he waded into the black church arsons. Dees' arson lawsuit is similar to his 1987 case against the United Klans of America. In that, he won a $ 7 million judgment for the mother of Michael Donald, a black lynching victim in Alabama.
In 1990, the SPLC won $ 12.5 million in damages against Metzger and his White Aryan Resistance. A Portland, Ore., jury held the neo-Nazi group liable in the beating death of an Ethiopian immigrant. Critics say only a fraction of those settlements have actually been paid out by hate groups. Dees says what is recovered has paid to house and educate victims' families. Dees came late to the civil rights movement. In college, he hawked birthday cakes by mail, using what he learned to later make millions marketing cookbooks and tractor cushions through direct marketing. In the 1960s, Dees tended mostly to business and his law practice. It was there, on the sidelines of history, that Dees transformed himself into a visionary civil rights lawyer. In his autobiography, Dees writes that the Till murder "touched me so deeply that for the first time I seriously examined the Southern way of life." While a student at the University of Alabama, he watched as a black woman, Autherine Lucy, tried to enroll in the all-white school as white protesters jeered and threw bottles. But Dees did nothing. In 1961, as a young lawyer, he defended a white neighbor charged with beating a journalist covering the Freedom Riders, who had come to Alabama to integrate its bus terminals. During the trial, Dees sat next to Bobby Shelton, founder of the United Klans of America -- the group he would later sue in the Donald case. After a black Freedom Rider asked him how he could defend a racist, Dees was shaken. "I vowed then and there that nobody would ever again doubt where I stood." Still, it wasn't until he read the autobiography of crusading lawyer Clarence Darrow that he decided to sell his business and practice civil rights law.
In 1971, he and lawyer Joseph Levin founded the SPLC. At first, it focused on Alabama, forcing the state Legislature, state troopers and the Montgomery YMCA to integrate. In 1972, Dees raised money for George McGovern, one of four Democratic presidential candidates for whom he's worked. His pioneering use of direct mail worked so well that the losing campaign ended with a surplus. His techniques have been copied ever since. McGovern rewarded Dees with 700,000 names. Dees took the huge mailing list home to Montgomery. Contributions soon poured in. Last year, the SPLC raised $ 14 million. Its goal is to increase its $ 68 million endowment to $ 100 million and quit fund-raising. As the center's coffers grew, so did Dees' fame. With his blond curls and toothy smile, he is often mistaken for a Kennedy. Dees says people who criticize him are resentful of his success. "I'm white. I had a business that made money. I wasn't active in the civil rights movement," Dees says. "Some in the old civil rights crowd may see me as an interloper because the (SPLC) is such a success." He says his work is crucial today because extremists have not faded into history, as some black civil rights activists contend. Instead, they have "traded their sheets in for paramilitary uniforms." Or, as the recent spate of church fires indicates, they carry on their own private race wars. "Don't tell me hate groups are less serious today," he says. "Don't tell me that they're paper tigers." (nicht signierter Beitrag von 141.89.80.167 (Diskussion) 13:50, 9. Jul. 2007)
- Ich versteh nicht, wieso hier ein ellenlanger Text auf Englisch, ohne Absender, ohne Signatur, auf Jahre stehen bleibt, und andererseits werden kritische Anmerkungen innerhalb von Minuten gelöscht. --89.1.181.236 03:03, 11. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
- Weil es keine Gleichbehandlung im Unrecht gibt. Der Text oben gehört nicht hierher und kann gern weg. Falls diese Seite automatisch archiviert würde (hier ist nicht genug los, um das zu rechtfertigen), würde jeder Abschnitt, der eine Überschrift und mindestens zwei signierte Beiträge hat, ab einem gewissen Alter archiviert.
- Und "kritische Anmerkungen" gehören hier nicht her, weil das hier kein Forum ist. --Hob (Diskussion) 13:53, 11. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
- Ich versteh nicht, wieso hier ein ellenlanger Text auf Englisch, ohne Absender, ohne Signatur, auf Jahre stehen bleibt, und andererseits werden kritische Anmerkungen innerhalb von Minuten gelöscht. --89.1.181.236 03:03, 11. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
- Also der englische Text oben bleibt jahrelang stehen, weil hier eh wenig los ist. Anderererseits werden Anmerkungen schnell gelöscht, da das hier kein Forum ist. Diese Logik muss man erstmal verstehen. --89.1.163.190 03:49, 12. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
- Der Text oben diente damals möglicherweise der Artikelverbesserung. Dein Beitrag definitiv nicht.
- Ist gut jetzt. Hast du was zur Artikelverbesserung beizutragen? Wenn nicht, hau ab. --Hob (Diskussion) 09:23, 12. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
- Deine Änderungen an diesem Artikel sind komplett unehrlich. --81.173.168.194 05:51, 13. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
- Das ist kein Beitrag zur Artikelverbesserung, sondern wirres Geraune. Wenn du was beanstanden willst, dann sag klar, was das ist. --Hob (Diskussion) 07:41, 13. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
- Deine Änderungen an diesem Artikel sind komplett unehrlich. --81.173.168.194 05:51, 13. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
- Also der englische Text oben bleibt jahrelang stehen, weil hier eh wenig los ist. Anderererseits werden Anmerkungen schnell gelöscht, da das hier kein Forum ist. Diese Logik muss man erstmal verstehen. --89.1.163.190 03:49, 12. Jul. 2020 (CEST)
Kritik
BearbeitenHier steht folgeender Satz "Der frühere Partner Dees und Anwalt gegen Todesstrafe, Millard Farmer, sagte: "Dees ist der Jim und Tammy Faye Bakker der Bürgerrechtsbewegung...wobei ich Jim und Tammy Faye nicht verleumden möchte." Ich glaube, jeder dürfte einverstanden sein, wenn ich diesen Satz entferne. Er ist unverständlich und es wird nicht deutlich, WAS ZUM TEUFEL der Kritiker überhaupt sagen möchte.--Grafite (Diskussion) 09:02, 16. Mär. 2012 (CET)
Kritik II
BearbeitenIn der Broschüre der Kritiker wird folgnde Frage aufgeworfen: "Are conservatives Senator George Allen and Representative Tom Tancredo racists? Yes, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, a fundraising powerhouse that poses as a public interest law firm." Und da kann ich mich nur anschließen, "Yes" also zumindest was Tancreod angeht. Wenn man sich vor allem den englischen Artikel durchliest, dann erscheint Jörg Haider im Vergleich wie ein Linksextremist. Mit anderen Worten: Ist die Kritik wirklich erwähnenswert ?--Grafite (Diskussion) 10:15, 16. Mär. 2012 (CET)
Kritik III: Weblinks
BearbeitenDer unter Weblinks angegebene „Special Report“ ist von 2010, die Webseite, die ihn hostet, Social Contract Press, wurde von John Tanton gegründet, der auch das Council of Conservative Citizens ins Leben rief. Sieht alles sehr nach White nationalism oder White Supremacy aus. MMn keine vertrauenswürdige Quelle, ich habe sie durch eine Radioshow vom New York Public Radio ersetzt. - Big Virgil (Diskussion) 15:26, 20. Mär. 2021 (CET)