The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2026 11:47 pm why the innocent SPLC put Turning point USA on their list of hate groups

it isn't their fault that a heavenly good leftist assassin put a bullet in Charlie Kirk

it's coming around

-Imp

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 9:46 pm The Southern Policy Law Center, one of the largest and best-known non-profit anti-racism lobbies in the US has just been indicted for funding pro-racism organizations, including the KKK, and the National Socialist movement, and for having sponsored the famous "Unite the Right" Charlottesville March and riots. Shell companies and the banking system were used to defraud donors by channelling millions of dollars to these racist organizations, so that they would produce higher profile "racist incidents."

Why did the SPLC do that? Apparently, to raise their own importance and to increase their own revenue, by presenting an impression that "white supremacy" was a crisis issue, and to reassure the public and other sponsors that they were more necessary than ever...evidently, because there weren't enough real cases of racism that they could use to do the same thing.

The details can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS0TNiaqU4o

So here's a question. In the name of anti-racism, the public has been trained to develop a high tolerance for unethical activities, so long as those unethical activities are perceived to be "on the right side." Vilifying "privileged" groups, stereotyping, misandry, flag burning, censorship, revisionist 'histories,' canonization of drug dealers, allowing gangs that exploit migrants and traffick women and children, and even violent riots have been countenanced and gone largely unchallenged by both media and the political Left, particularly. Often, these activities have even been valourized and treated as noble civil disobedience or "peaceful protest."

Question: have we lost our way, ethically? Has the belief that we are "on the right side" facillitated our own blindness regarding the ethics of the methods we were employing?

What code should we apply to "right the ship," ethically speaking?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 12:30 am They need to charge the SPLC with conspiracy to stop racism. Otherwise, this case is almost kind of like the DoJ convicting Al Capone on tax evasion. Gosh dang it! I want the real crimes to be punished not some petty "it's the only thing we can get them on" crime. Stopping racism is WRONG!

Go TRUMP!!! Make America Great Again!!!

This is too funny.

accelafine wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:06 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 12:30 am They need to charge the SPLC with conspiracy to stop racism. Otherwise, this case is almost kind of like the DoJ convicting Al Capone on tax evasion. Gosh dang it! I want the real crimes to be punished not some petty "it's the only thing we can get them on" crime. Stopping racism is WRONG!

Go TRUMP!!! Make America Great Again!!!

This is too funny.

Are they 'stopping racism' or is it just another massive grift? What do you REALLY think, Gary Childress?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:14 am

accelafine wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:06 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 12:30 am They need to charge the SPLC with conspiracy to stop racism. Otherwise, this case is almost kind of like the DoJ convicting Al Capone on tax evasion. Gosh dang it! I want the real crimes to be punished not some petty "it's the only thing we can get them on" crime. Stopping racism is WRONG!

Go TRUMP!!! Make America Great Again!!!

This is too funny.

Are they 'stopping racism' or is it just another massive grift? What do you REALLY think, Gary Childress?

I think the Trump administration has discovered the highest form of comic parody ever discovered by mankind! I'm jealous.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 12:06 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 9:46 pm The Southern Policy Law Center, one of the largest and best-known non-profit anti-racism lobbies in the US has just been indicted for funding pro-racism organizations, including the KKK, and the National Socialist movement, and for having sponsored the famous "Unite the Right" Charlottesville March and riots. Shell companies and the banking system were used to defraud donors by channelling millions of dollars to these racist organizations, so that they would produce higher profile "racist incidents."

Why did the SPLC do that? Apparently, to raise their own importance and to increase their own revenue, by presenting an impression that "white supremacy" was a crisis issue, and to reassure the public and other sponsors that they were more necessary than ever...evidently, because there weren't enough real cases of racism that they could use to do the same thing.

The details can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS0TNiaqU4o

So here's a question. In the name of anti-racism, the public has been trained to develop a high tolerance for unethical activities, so long as those unethical activities are perceived to be "on the right side." Vilifying "privileged" groups, stereotyping, misandry, flag burning, censorship, revisionist 'histories,' canonization of drug dealers, allowing gangs that exploit migrants and traffick women and children, and even violent riots have been countenanced and gone largely unchallenged by both media and the political Left, particularly. Often, these activities have even been valourized and treated as noble civil disobedience or "peaceful protest."

Question: have we lost our way, ethically? Has the belief that we are "on the right side" facillitated our own blindness regarding the ethics of the methods we were employing?

What code should we apply to "right the ship," ethically speaking?

Saturday Night Live needs to do a skit on this.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:26 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 12:06 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 9:46 pm The Southern Policy Law Center, one of the largest and best-known non-profit anti-racism lobbies in the US has just been indicted for funding pro-racism organizations, including the KKK, and the National Socialist movement, and for having sponsored the famous "Unite the Right" Charlottesville March and riots. Shell companies and the banking system were used to defraud donors by channelling millions of dollars to these racist organizations, so that they would produce higher profile "racist incidents."

Why did the SPLC do that? Apparently, to raise their own importance and to increase their own revenue, by presenting an impression that "white supremacy" was a crisis issue, and to reassure the public and other sponsors that they were more necessary than ever...evidently, because there weren't enough real cases of racism that they could use to do the same thing.

The details can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS0TNiaqU4o

So here's a question. In the name of anti-racism, the public has been trained to develop a high tolerance for unethical activities, so long as those unethical activities are perceived to be "on the right side." Vilifying "privileged" groups, stereotyping, misandry, flag burning, censorship, revisionist 'histories,' canonization of drug dealers, allowing gangs that exploit migrants and traffick women and children, and even violent riots have been countenanced and gone largely unchallenged by both media and the political Left, particularly. Often, these activities have even been valourized and treated as noble civil disobedience or "peaceful protest."

Question: have we lost our way, ethically? Has the belief that we are "on the right side" facillitated our own blindness regarding the ethics of the methods we were employing?

What code should we apply to "right the ship," ethically speaking?

Saturday Night Live needs to do a skit on this.

They really do. But not the one you think they need to do.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:31 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:26 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 12:06 am

Saturday Night Live needs to do a skit on this.

They really do. But not the one you think they need to do.

Really, what do you think I think they need to do?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:39 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:31 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:26 am
They really do. But not the one you think they need to do.

Really, what do you think I think they need to do?

Point out the unbelievable absurdity of the SPLC fraud, and make it as funny as it is that they were funding racists on donations from people who thought they were fighting racism. It's hilarious, in addition to being fraudulent.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:50 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:39 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:31 am

Really, what do you think I think they need to do?

Point out the unbelievable absurdity of the SPLC fraud, and make it as funny as it is that they were funding racists on donations from people who thought they were fighting racism. It's hilarious, in addition to being fraudulent.

I already did in my Al Capone example I gave above. You didn't find that funny? I thought it was hilarious.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:58 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:50 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:39 am
Point out the unbelievable absurdity of the SPLC fraud, and make it as funny as it is that they were funding racists on donations from people who thought they were fighting racism. It's hilarious, in addition to being fraudulent.

I already did in my Al Capone example I gave above. You didn't find that funny? I thought it was hilarious.

Actually, I thought it was kind of inept. Just being honest.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 2:01 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:58 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2026 1:50 am

I already did in my Al Capone example I gave above. You didn't find that funny? I thought it was hilarious.

Actually, I thought it was kind of inept. Just being honest.

Oh well. I tried and failed you. You didn't find it funny. Sorry about that.