Hate Groups on the Rise in the US

[SpeakNow]

Since the beginning of the Obama administration, hate groups have grown 755 percent, according to the Southern Law Poverty Center. Besides the recession, antagonism over a black Democratic president has been cited for its rise: A known neo-Nazi Web forum, which had amassed 90,000 users over 12 years, saw an increase of 5,000 sign-ups the day after the 2008 election. By April 2009, membership had nearly doubled to 160,000.

http://news.yahoo.com/y--big-picture--h ... emism.html (not breaking the link because it's from yahoo news)

[tropaka]

I'm guessing the "known neo nazi web site" is S t o r m f r o n t. Some slimy shit on that site.

Edited by Alecto so certain sites won't come here.

[crazyforkate]

Does not surprise me in the slightest. People tend to get more extreme in bad economic times. That, and the Internet is a cesspool.

[luckystone]

The day after the election? That's fucking disgusting

[lilwriter85]

That site/forum is definitely S t o r m f r o n t. But with S t o r m f r o n t , some people join to debate with the white supremacists. I've see a few threads in which that happens.

[Alecto]

Please don't post the exact name or spell it out. I REALLY don't want them to invade.

[JesusFightClub]

That site/forum is definitely (that place). But with (that place), some people join to debate with the white supremacists. I've see a few threads in which that happens.

There's no point "debating" with a fascist ever. Joining (that place) in order to have calm and reasoned debate with fascists is like eating seven chocolate cakes in a row in order to lose weight. You're actively sabotaging your own cause.

If (that place) is (as it is) inane paranoid racist ramblings by a bunch of beergutted men who struggle to stay sober enough to download their next batch of Thai underage porn, what's good about "debating" with them? You give them a legitimacy they don't deserve by doing so.

*edit at Alecto's request.*

[lilwriter85]

There's no point "debating" with a fascist ever. Joining (that place) in order to have calm and reasoned debate with fascists is like eating seven chocolate cakes in a row in order to lose weight. You're actively sabotaging your own cause.

If (that place) is (as it is) inane paranoid racist ramblings by a bunch of beergutted men who struggle to stay sober enough to download their next batch of Thai underage porn, what's good about "debating" with them? You give them a legitimacy they don't deserve by doing so.

*edit at Alecto's request.*

I agree there is not point in debating a facist at that place. But several people have done and they keep doing it. I haven't lurked at that place in awhile, but the last time I was there a Mesitzo kept trying to egg them on, but the regulars just ignored him.

[Cran]

This numbers only confirm my personal impression. i was like "Duh, people need this article to figure THAT out?!" but then, I spent too much time here.

For the facist forum, if its member growth was recently (like, last half year) this could also be because a very large, mostly German-speaking neonazi forum is defunct now, most likely due to legal problems (YEAH! :D ), so the users have probably migrated elsewhere.

The now defunct forum actually stole pictures from a hair forum I am a member in, and posted them as examples of hairstyles a German woman would wear, the users were livid, of course, and that's how I came to take notice of the webpage.

[Anxious Girl]

A commenter/sympathizer cries white persecution when most of the government is controlled by old white men. She Who Laughs Jigglypuff, is that you, dearie? * borrows some of experiencedd's mesquite * :whistle:

[Guest Anonymous]

This numbers only confirm my personal impression. i was like "Duh, people need this article to figure THAT out?!" but then, I spent too much time here.

For the facist forum, if its member growth was recently (like, last half year) this could also be because a very large, mostly German-speaking neonazi forum is defunct now, most likely due to legal problems (YEAH! :D ), so the users have probably migrated elsewhere.

The now defunct forum actually stole pictures from a hair forum I am a member in, and posted them as examples of hairstyles a German woman would wear, the users were livid, of course, and that's how I came to take notice of the webpage.

I've never been to a fascist forum, but I didn't think they spent that much time discussing German women's hairstyles. That's just odd.

Edited: wording

[Cran]

The forum was, as I said, German, so many were especially interested in the NSDAP, leading to the obsession with being German. There were man strange beliefs the Nazis had about women.. not unlike patriarchy: How to dress (no high heels), not too much make-up, long hair, do not smoke, have wide hips and bear many, many healthy children for the Fuehrer!

The conclusion for the users of this forum was: Grow out your hair and then braid it, so people will not confuse you with da ebil feminists.

Funny enough, many wives of the Nazi elite didn't fit this picture at all.

[caito]

>:(

I've read that site quite a few times, mostly when I feel the need to get angry and pissed off for no particular reason. Again, it's my fascination with different cultures and beliefs. The things those...I guess I hesitate to call them "people" believe are just so horrible and disgusting. I'd never join and talk to any of them, for any reason. I commend the people that try to talk to them though.

[JesusFightClub]

I do not commend them.

You can't make fash better. You can't make them see sense or stop being fascists. What you do by speaking with them is legitimize their point of view. You're making pet fundies, pet fascists and pet State. You're joining in with the people who hate you and everything you stand for.

So, gonnae no' . ;)

[Guest Anonymous]

Hating someone based on their skin color, something no one has control over is the dumbest thing ever.

[ladyamylynn]

The forum was, as I said, German, so many were especially interested in the NSDAP, leading to the obsession with being German. There were man strange beliefs the Nazis had about women.. not unlike patriarchy: How to dress (no high heels), not too much make-up, long hair, do not smoke, have wide hips and bear many, many healthy children for the Fuehrer!

The conclusion for the users of this forum was: Grow out your hair and then braid it, so people will not confuse you with da ebil feminists.

Funny enough, many wives of the Nazi elite didn't fit this picture at all.

Huh, reminds me of a certain Zsuzsu.

[Arete]

I do not commend them.

You can't make fash better. You can't make them see sense or stop being fascists. What you do by speaking with them is legitimize their point of view. You're making pet fundies, pet fascists and pet State. You're joining in with the people who hate you and everything you stand for.

So, gonnae no' . ;)

I'm of two minds here. I totally understand where you are coming from, and I myself have never gone on these creepy sites to debate. But I have to say I do have a certain amount of admiration for those who can fight that fight. I don't think they keep pet fascists or even get swayed in the slightest. Talking with them does not give them legitimacy, agreement does. It's just my feeling that fascists take silence for agreement. If no one is speaking against them to their faces, they get delusions that they have silent majorities behind them or have scared the opposition into hiding.

As noxious as their presence in cyberspace is, it's a good thing to have them out in the open instead of under a rock. When they stay under rocks, we can get complacent and think their ideas have been exterminated. The enemy you see and hear keeps you alert. A sorry state of affairs, but their it is.

[DarkAnts]

Does not surprise me in the slightest. People tend to get more extreme in bad economic times. That, and the Internet is a cesspool.

Agreed, they have an us vs them mentality. It gets worse in bad economic times. They see the president as the "other or them." They dont understand that Congress has the power. Congress is the ones making it harder on everyone by not working together. The president has very little power by himself.

[Kaylee]

JFC's right here. With no opposition it spoils the fun. A lot of people are involved more to troll and piss off anti-racists and "liberals" than because they really even care that much about race (hence the large number of avoid racists who sleep with women of other races on the down low). If people are angry and looking for people to show up for them scream at, piss, off, and argue with it frustrates them when that doesn't happen. This is why people tend to notify the media of their own events - the counter-protesters assure media attention. They know most people disagree, but if they can get you there to argue they have your attention. Also, you'd be surprised at the pet facists/racists people pick up - I was active on a certain board being discussed in this thread many years ago and I would get positive rep points from antis and even from people of color on occasion, despite being racist and rather outspoken about it, and ended up being friends with a woman who became an anti-racist activist at the same time I was a leader in a racist group which caused all sorts of drama for both of us.

As far as the reported growth, I'm just not seeing it. One of the reasons that group picked up so many around the election is because the servers were getting overloaded and there was a policy for a while that blocked views from non-members when traffic loads were high. I'd say at least half of those 5,000 came from people affiliated with the media and government or law enforcement wanting access to gauge the reaction. A lot of people on the fringes are joining websites and things because many of the racist sites have toned down and tried to bring in people from groups like the Tea Party, anti-immigrant groups, and militia/survivalist groups but the racist movement as a whole is much weaker than it was 10 years ago or so. The number of groups has grown because it is fractured and many of the groups on the SPLC website are 5 people or less - several are one person and a web presence. Most of the larger more organized groups have collapsed though, which means organized racism is much less of a threat, but it also means there's more room for people to go off the deep end and commit acts of violence on their own or with a few friends which some of the larger groups used to reign in a bit because they were afraid of a backlash from media and law enforcement.

[meda]

JFC's right here. With no opposition it spoils the fun. A lot of people are involved more to troll and piss off anti-racists and "liberals" than because they really even care that much about race (hence the large number of avoid racists who sleep with women of other races on the down low). If people are angry and looking for people to show up for them scream at, piss, off, and argue with it frustrates them when that doesn't happen. This is why people tend to notify the media of their own events - the counter-protesters assure media attention. They know most people disagree, but if they can get you there to argue they have your attention. Also, you'd be surprised at the pet facists/racists people pick up - I was active on a certain board being discussed in this thread many years ago and I would get positive rep points from antis and even from people of color on occasion, despite being racist and rather outspoken about it, and ended up being friends with a woman who became an anti-racist activist at the same time I was a leader in a racist group which caused all sorts of drama for both of us.

As far as the reported growth, I'm just not seeing it. One of the reasons that group picked up so many around the election is because the servers were getting overloaded and there was a policy for a while that blocked views from non-members when traffic loads were high. I'd say at least half of those 5,000 came from people affiliated with the media and government or law enforcement wanting access to gauge the reaction. A lot of people on the fringes are joining websites and things because many of the racist sites have toned down and tried to bring in people from groups like the Tea Party, anti-immigrant groups, and militia/survivalist groups but the racist movement as a whole is much weaker than it was 10 years ago or so. The number of groups has grown because it is fractured and many of the groups on the SPLC website are 5 people or less - several are one person and a web presence. Most of the larger more organized groups have collapsed though, which means organized racism is much less of a threat, but it also means there's more room for people to go off the deep end and commit acts of violence on their own or with a few friends which some of the larger groups used to reign in a bit because they were afraid of a backlash from media and law enforcement.

Ok, I realize you gets pass here for some reason because you have walked back from your involvement in these groups, (although I have never read about your current opinion of minorities or what you currently consider racist) but are you really going to put out the phenomenon of racist white men having sex with women of color as some sort of evidence that organized racism is on the decline? Seriously? Do you not have any concept of the power dynamics and history behind that particular type of sex? And how are some of these anti immigrant, tea party,militia/survivalist groups any less racist? They just use different words to say the same thing.

[Kaylee]

Ok, I realize you gets pass here for some reason because you have walked back from your involvement in these groups, (although I have never read about your current opinion of minorities or what you currently consider racist) but are you really going to put out the phenomenon of racist white men having sex with women of color as some sort of evidence that organized racism is on the decline? Seriously? Do you not have any concept of the power dynamics and history behind that particular type of sex? And how are some of these anti immigrant, tea party,militia/survivalist groups any less racist? They just use different words to say the same thing.

I was trying to explain something about the numbers, not say that racism as a whole is on a decline but, yes, I do thing that the types of groups counted and reported as hate groups are less powerful and less of a threat overall than they were 10-15 years ago. It's hard to explain why without going into a lot of interpersonal stuff, but I see a bunch of online forums run by 20 and 30 year olds without a car, a steady job, or a stable place to live and full of members in similar situations as much less of a threat then the groups that were around a decade ago run by people with professional degrees, much more money, and that attracted adults with more resources and more power in society. I think the people that are most scary now are the ones more on the fringe not in these little groups but sort of skirting between the racist groups and other areas of the radical right while considering themselves "lone wolfs".

I realize that the history and power structure of white men having sex with women of color, particularly in the US does have a basis in racism and in white men having power over those women. When a person who uses racist language and supports racist causes is doing it then, yes, there is probably still a lot of that at play. But I do think that the amount of it going on does mean that many of these people are more interested in power over others than in "racial purity". It's also why a lot of them seem to be as much, if not more, anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, etc than focused on race. It's about feeling superior to someone and pissing off the opposition rather than really buying into the ideology. There are a surprising number of people who jump from one movement to another, but always end up on the militant fringe, and I think that explains a lot of these online movement people these days. And, yes, there are a lot of people on there trolling in one way or another.

I agree with you that many of the anti immigrant, tea party,militia/survivalist groups are just as racist as the ones that are openly hate groups, but they are more acceptable to most people and provide a gateway to get people in. Some of the racist websites and groups have purposely toned down by banning swastikas and racial slurs and trying to attract people from those groups and it's working. I wasn't trying to say those groups were OK or give them a pass, but to explain how more people are being drawn towards racist groups. In the past, you pretty much had to seek one out to join and you knew what you were getting into if, but most of the people involved in the Tea Party and similar groups would not consider themselves racist. Then they start talking to someone who keeps playing on their racism, telling them it's OK, and leading them towards the more openly racist groups. Yea, they still know what they're getting involved in but they might not have started out on that path looking to get involved in the racist movement. With survivalism becoming more mainstream, the same thing is playing out in survivalist and militia groups, the the point that some the ones in this state have issued statements against racism in the past and gone through and kicked out members who were openly racist. Of course, then you have a handful of people pissed off over that in in some contact, so they fell free to grab 3 other guys who were kicked out and try to start their own racist militia group.

As far as your opening comment, I didn't realize I got any sort of a pass here. I'll be the first to admit I still have some baggage and a lot of work to do on some of my views and I welcome anyone to point it out if I am being racist or offense, because I'd rather see where I'm still being ignorant and try to overcome it than go around being prejudiced. I don't know that I have an across the board opinion on minorities other than people are people and I should try to treat them as individuals, at the same time recognizing that the majority has crewed over a lot of minority groups and should own it and try to help people overcome and disadvantages and damages from that pattern of mistreatment, instead of acting like it never happened or pretending that everything is totally equal and OK now. As far as what I consider racist, discriminating or having preconceived ideas about or opinions or a person or group because of their race or ethnicity - I think a lot of it in America gets couched in other language and tied up with other groups (ie immigration, social class), and there's probably a ton of racist things I see every day and don't even notice because of privilege, but I'm trying to be more sensitive to it and also trying to point it out to people I know when I see it and let them know it's not OK even though a lot of times I feel like a major hypocrite.

[meda]

That was a thoughtful response, thank you. First, what I mean by "getting a pass"...you have been pretty open about your past involvement in openly racist organizations, very conservative reformed churches with all the attendant baggage, and I believe you still hold hold a complementarian view of marriage. These are views that would ordinarily rouse mobs of FJ'ers carrying torches and pitchforks. You have been very honest here in trying work out your views on these issues, and you are obviously a valuable contributor to discussions, probably more so than I am. It does give me pause when you occasionally post something full of detailed information about violent extremist groups and reactionary churches that you either were involved with yourself or know people still involved with. It gives me pause because while such insider information is interesting and enlightening, it is being provided, by definition by an "insider". To be an insider in such a way means that you either are or are still close to people who are violent racists and misogynists. I am assuming the later, but I have never really read where you have disavowed those beliefs, only that you left groups in the past because of interpersonal conflicts. If you have discussed it someplace, then I stand corrected, and I would enjoy reading that thread.

Regarding racism, I think your second paragraph shows where we may be talking past each other. Simply because a member of a racist group can overlook "race purity" long enough to screw a woman of color does not make them less of an avowed racist. I believe power is entwined with racism, so I don't see much difference between someone who wants power over minorities through anti immigrant or ecconomic activism, and someone who will only have a pure white German Shepard for a pet and thinks the Turner Diaries is a work of great literature. If people with education and means are leaving the KKK and other such groups because they have more influence in the Tea Party or the birthers or the religious right, that is even more terrifying to me. The resurgence of the John Birchers should scare all of us. I would argue that the people who made openly racist organizations powerfully in the past have simply migrated to other places where they wield more effective power and influence.

Such people are now electing some really, really scary people into office by swarming the primaries and running very hard right candidates on major party tickets. I think Strom Thurman would feel more at home today in office than he would have 25 years ago, since the bar for racist, classist statements has been lowered so far as to be almost non existent. The institutional racism that is maintained and strengthened by money from people like the Koch brothers, who spend money to fight union rights, minimum wage and worker safety protections, the social safety net, public schools, really every thing that has helped lift minorities and women out of poverty and given them a modicum of power. I think such men are far more detrimental to equality than random acts of lone wolf violence.

[Kaylee]

That was a thoughtful response, thank you. First, what I mean by "getting a pass"...you have been pretty open about your past involvement in openly racist organizations, very conservative reformed churches with all the attendant baggage, and I believe you still hold hold a complementarian view of marriage. These are views that would ordinarily rouse mobs of FJ'ers carrying torches and pitchforks.

OK, I see what you mean there. I've pretty much given up on complementarianism. Until recently, I was trying to do they whole "well, it's not for everyone, but it works for me" thing but it really wasn't (could make a whole post out of that, but I was mainly holding onto it to try to follow a certain theology and justify a few life choices, even though it really didn't work as well as I kept telling myself it did). I'm still working through a lot of the rest, especially as far as religion goes. I've reached the conclusion over the past couple months that I don't really believe in Christianity or religion at all anymore, but I'm a little wary of myself because I've left before and then turned around and jumped headfirst into extreme fundamentalism, so I don't know how sure I am, also because this has come about during some pretty major changes in other areas of my life.

It does give me pause when you occasionally post something full of detailed information about violent extremist groups and reactionary churches that you either were involved with yourself or know people still involved with. It gives me pause because while such insider information is interesting and enlightening, it is being provided, by definition by an "insider". To be an insider in such a way means that you either are or are still close to people who are violent racists and misogynists. I am assuming the later, but I have never really read where you have disavowed those beliefs, only that you left groups in the past because of interpersonal conflicts. If you have discussed it someplace, then I stand corrected, and I would enjoy reading that thread.

I never really though of it like that. I still have a few people on my facebook that are involved in the racist movement and there are 3 or 4 people my husband still talks to who are involved, but I'm not really close friends with anyone who's part of it anymore. I'd been distancing myself from it for a while before I really left and then a lot of people cut ties with me because my beliefs have changed and either they disagree with things I've said or posted or because I will not stand around and laugh at racist or homophobic jokes or stay around and hang out when there's a lot of that going on. My husband still has this thing of wanting to call people and hang out and stay in touch, but now that word's got around most people just don't answer the phone or don't extend an invite, which is fine with me. I've been keeping up with things more in the past few months because there have been several things in the news involving people I've known and I wanted to know what was going on, but most of that was reading message board threads and stuff but not actively participating or talking to people still in the movement. I've popped up in quotes/comments a few times on nonracist sites sort of connecting people/events together on some things and I guess I still keep an eye on it for multiple reasons - part is just curiosity and part is trying to look out for people I know who are still involved, either to get in touch when they leave and see if they need help (I've had a few people live with me for a while after they left racist groups because they wanted to put some distance between themselves and former members or because they were living with or dating people who rejected them for leaving) or because I do still care about some of the people involved and want to at least know what's happening with them.

I posted some [link=http://freejinger.org/viewtopic.php?p=348003#p348003]here[/link] about why I left but there's no thread or anything about it. That's really the short version because it was a long process and there was a lot going on. One of the things I really regret now is that I stayed involved for a long time after I was starting too see the problems with it and why it was wrong because I didn't know how my husband would react, didn't want to lose my friends, and was scared of reprisal (I was physically attacked a few years before leaving and subject to harassment that cost my husband his job and almost cost me mine because someone thought I might be an informant or undercover antiracist [i wasn't either] and I was scared that something even worse would happen when I really did leave because people would take that as confirmation). When I left, literally all of my friends were part of the movement, which I think is why I jumped back into church, to help find a social circle. I still have family members who are a part of it too, and am still trying to navigate that because right now my father and I can hardly talk without it turning into a screaming match.

Regarding racism, I think your second paragraph shows where we may be talking past each other. Simply because a member of a racist group can overlook "race purity" long enough to screw a woman of color does not make them less of an avowed racist. I believe power is entwined with racism, so I don't see much difference between someone who wants power over minorities through anti immigrant or ecconomic activism, and someone who will only have a pure white German Shepard for a pet and thinks the Turner Diaries is a work of great literature. If people with education and means are leaving the KKK and other such groups because they have more influence in the Tea Party or the birthers or the religious right, that is even more terrifying to me. The resurgence of the John Birchers should scare all of us. I would argue that the people who made openly racist organizations powerfully in the past have simply migrated to other places where they wield more effective power and influence.

I agree with you last sentence and I think this is where we're getting crossed. I think one of the problems is that I'm focusing pretty much only on the hate groups and their power and influence and separating things into categories (hate groups with relatively little power and lower potential for violence, "lone wolves" with less power but more potential for violence, & more mainstream/political groups with more power and reach), instead of looking at them all together as part of the same system or structure of racism. I didn't mean to imply that one type is better or worse than another or that any are OK, but I do think that sometimes the media and even some of the larger anti-racist groups focus too much on the fringe groups that make good copy but don't really change much and not enough on the mainstreaming of racism, which should be a huge concern with the stuff coming out of the Tea Party and many of the anti-Obama, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim memes going around.

Such people are now electing some really, really scary people into office by swarming the primaries and running very hard right candidates on major party tickets. I think Strom Thurman would feel more at home today in office than he would have 25 years ago, since the bar for racist, classist statements has been lowered so far as to be almost non existent. The institutional racism that is maintained and strengthened by money from people like the Koch brothers, who spend money to fight union rights, minimum wage and worker safety protections, the social safety net, public schools, really every thing that has helped lift minorities and women out of poverty and given them a modicum of power. I think such men are far more detrimental to equality than random acts of lone wolf violence.

I agree there and it's scary. I've been wondering in the past year if racist and other types of discriminatory statements really were getting more common or if I am just more sensitive to it because of my past, but it does seem like people are saying things now they wouldn't have said even back when I was in high school. I also have noticed that racism seems to be showing up a lot more in even mainstream politics on the right and I think it will only get worse. Once the economy picks back up, I think most of the organized hate groups, the Tea Party, etc will shrink dramatically, but I think the major damage is how the "moderate" positions have now shifted far to the right because of their influence and how all sort of discrimination seem to be becoming almost acceptable in certain situations instead of decreasing. I don't understand why more media isn't reporting the links between the two - in the last election there was coverage of Ron Paul's links to some high profile racists, and the same thing with Pat Buchanan before that, but I haven't seen or heard a whole lot of it now even though I know there is probably a lot more of it this time around. It just seems like there's this focus on groups that look scary, have identifiable symbols, etc, but not so much on the same people when they start working into positions where they have even more power and influence.