The Southern Poverty Law Center has been showing an increase in the number of these groups for a quite a while. They are not confined to the Old Confederacy. SPLC hate group map. Current SPLC Intelligence report. 2008 summary. You can subscribe to the report and search their archives. I recommend.
The two groups that concern me the most are the KKK and Neo-Nazi groups, though they are not the only ones. It looks to me like they are stepping up their recruiting efforts, and read a while back in a trustworthy source that the military has a problem with white supremacists joining up, volunteering for combat units, and then returning to civilian life with those skills. A sort of “train the trainer” from hell. If you just scanned the The Timothy McVeigh Finishing School the first time around, you might want to give it a close read. It’s an important piece of this puzzle.
I want to be clear about what I know versus what I just think, and do my best to avoid fearmongering, so this is going to take a little work.
Here is a plain English story that I am comfortable labeling a historical account, with a little psychology thrown in toward the end for good measure. Everything in here is there either because I am sure research will confirm it, or because I live down here and knew it was going on at the time.
In the mid-to-late 80s and early 90s, white supremacists started to go out into the woods and do paramilitary training. At some point they got the bright idea of recruiting survivalists, who had been neither particularly bad nor politically active, up to that point. I can’t do survivalism justice here; it’s a topic for another day. A lot of people down here knew these paramilitary exercises were going on, but for obvious reasons, very few people in any given area knew exactly to what extent it was going on. The states did little or nothing about it. The Feds failed to respond until things got out of control and forced their hand.
The white supremacists and the survivalists that they managed to ideologically capture were two of the key driving forces of the militia movement. They learned from one another. They grew. They developed a critique of the state that appealed to a targeted demographic. They had bases of operations. Political agendas. Enablers within the establishment and sympathizers in the Mighty Wurlitzer. All this was going on when the Ruby Ridge and Waco incidents occurred. Then came Oklahoma City. By that time, crackdowns had already started in some places. The government response scared a lot of people into submission. Some thought things had gone too far. Some had their eyes opened and realized they’d committed more than they were willing to sacrifice. Those people went their way. Some went into hibernation. Some were smart, continued to agitate openly within the limits of the law, and made the most of their constitutional rights. At this moment, they are more energetic than they have been in ten years and they have a new marketing strategy.
The white supremacists appealed to survivalists, and to anyone else who might be sympathetic, in a specific way. Here’s an oversimplification. Bear in mind: while this conversation is going on, the recruiter is doing most of his work in open-ended questions. Looking for what the recruit needs, and trying to figure out a way to offer it to them (like a good salesman).
The argument begins with an anti-police state appeal based on the Constitution. It moves from there through a series simpletarian arguments that most of us are probably familiar with. The sort of arguments that seem to lead to a paradise where all you have is local government if you don’t think them all the way through, but in practice would really lead straight to “nasty, brutish and short.” This sets the psychological table for the introduction of white supremacy. It’s analogous to religions conversion. Once you agree that the white race is superior - however it’s finally worded, “You’re saved! Want to know the next step? (Need a family? Or to have real agency? To feel like you’re a part of something bigger than yourself? Etc.) Here’s how!
At that point, you’re in. They isolate you from people who don’t think that way over time (like abusers do to their victims). The only way out is to renounce, stick to your guns, and try to escape in one piece. Renunciation is like admitting a lie. Tough to do unless you really know who you are under any circumstances. And remember, these people have a rich mythical tradition that runs from the Viking hordes through the Civil War and all the way down to the present day. They are masters of intimidation. And when they are among themselves, they are vicious to their enemies. Not many people can stand up against that, once they’re embedded, without some outside assistance.
I heard this pitch more than once in the early 90s without really understanding the cognitive manipulation. I am fortunate that I adopted tolerance and equality as non-negotiable values at a young age (thanks Mom!). I stopped hearing it right around the time of the Oklahoma City bombing. I didn’t hear it again until last spring, when I got a call in response to a letter to the editor I wrote in support of a protester who had his rights violated. That’s a very long time. The call spooked me, and it has been nagging me ever since. It could be a one-off event, but I don’t think so.
I think I was targeted specifically because the civil liberties argument I used was something the person who called me was looking for, and because I was encouraging people to take concrete action – to contact officials directly and join in public protest, and because of the tone of the letter. I am sure this was an organizer and not just a crank. I am sure he thought he’d hit a trifecta of political education, rhetorical skill, and righteous anger when he read that letter. The conversation could have ended with him giving me a “call anytime” number or arranging a meet-up if I had allowed it. I made sure to keep him talking until I was positive about that. He knew what he was doing.
I didn’t make a big deal of it at the time. I mentioned it in a comment and moved on. But I will tell you something. I was cold after I hung up that phone.
So much for what I know. I’ll tell you what I think in the next installment.
- geneo's blog
- Login or register to post comments



Front page


Comments
Intriguing
Would you mind telling me more specifically what you were writing in support of? I'm really trying to understand why someone would contact you if you obviously stood in complete opposition to what they are all about. Actually, what I'm getting at was was this event something that'd have revealed you as part of the reality-based (i.e. tolerant) community?
Not being someone these folks would come to (being black, I'd be one of the folks they were trying to intimidate), I don't have my finger on the pulse of these groups, and what scares me is how the rest of my community isn't very aware of these undercurrents beyond generally suspecting that they exist.
The Neo-Nazis and survivalists (I'm sure you've heard of the Michigan Militia) and the like have always had a disturbingly high presence up here in Michigan. In fact, the Neo-Nazi marched on our state capitol in Lansing back in 2006 trying to exploit the high-unemployment of the state and find an even bigger stronghold, here. Considering the history of the area this was an incredibly bold move. I ended up going down there more out of curiosity than anything else, but got caught up in the protest as the thing started to deteriorate near the end. Needless to say it caught the city by surprise, though, the opposition to them organized relatively quickly.
But, we've always been at war with Eastasia...
Slight Delay
I didn't do as well a job documenting as i thought. The letter was a collaborative effort. I steered the process in the direction I wanted it to go and published under my name after giving everyone else the opportunity to take the credit. It was mostly done on a newspaper forum. It didn't occur to me to archive the discussion threads on my hard drive, and they went behind a pay wall with the story. I'm sure I have a copy of the letter somewhere, but it's going to take me some time to put my hands on it. I can always run downtown and pay a buck for a hard copy if I need to, and I don't mind doing that at all. Here's what I have for now that might give you a little insight.
An important detail I just remembered. I was consciously limiting the argument to a question of rights. Even though this guy was protesting the war, the letter made no mention whatsoever of the war. That would be the biggest dead giveaway that a lefty was writing the letter, and I eliminated it on purpose. The argument was basically:
Look what's happened to this guy while he was exercising his First Amendment Rights --> It's unjust --> we are all vulnerable to the same treatment --> call to action. And I actually had several people looking at it and agreeing that there was no legal justification for the way the guy was treated by the legal system, so everyone knew we were in the right.
And I must say, it worked like a charm. 20 people ended up coming out, and that's a lot when you consider where I am, and that this was a VERY hippie guy who had been standing by the road with no one other than his wife the week before.
Here's the post I wrote when the drafting of the letter began. Not very useful for Damon's purposes, I think, but better than nothing. The first two links go to posts I wrote analyzing the original incident and challenging members of the forum to chime in on the incident. The link to the original newspaper story is dead because it's now archived behind a pay wall.
Hope this doesn't seem evasive. I want to share this with anyone who would like to discuss, and I want second opinions on the argument I used in the published letter, so I will get it up here; just pressed for time tonite.
This is all great
And it makes clear why the white supremacist came out of the woods, too. Something to ponder.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Good
I was afraid that wouldn't make sense.
I am wanting to get the the text of the letter as it appeared in the paper and do a deeper analysis of the rhetoric than I am able to do from memory. I think I am onto something with the psychological angle.
I believe I understand the institutional architecture of this movement. Or, I should say, I am AFRAID I understand it. That's where I'm going next. I am fairly shocked by how much I know about this stuff, when I really think about it.
The blogosphere is so noisy I need to give up playing whack-a-mole with the issue of the day. I need to settle down soon and focus on one thing and write one or two really good posts about it per week. Do you think this general issue is under-reported, and do you get the impression that the people who spend most of their time on this would appreciate a little help? Just curious.
We can play whack-a-mole
It has to be done, since the balloon must be kept in the air, and that can only be done with a constant infusion of hot air... But those of us who have been doing that for years can do that.
Please concentrate on your area of expertise!
Yes, I think the issue is underreported. I think we all need help on this.
And I'm especially interested in what you say about non-violence. I believe it's the only way forward, but most of us are sorely ignorant of the theory and the practice, so that you can speak from experience on it is really great.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Okay
I'm going to stay on white supremacy until I feel as though I've done what I need to do, and then see where I am.
On non-violence: It's the antidote to the fear that keeps us in our place, and it's the only shot we have at doing better than simply replacing the dehumanizing power structure we have with a new one does the same thing. It's not something I studied formally, and I have never been tested in a fray. I know some things about the theory and some things about the practice as it's worked in other times and places. I am trying to understand how to apply it in the here and now.
Don't feel bad about being woefully ignorant most of us are. I looked at it in passing when I studied social movements theory. Over the last couple of years I have come to believe that it is essential to get where we need to go. Because at some point, whether now or in years to come, we're going to need it to avoid riots and violent responses to provocations. It's how we get to solidarity. Go and look at what TPTB did to the activist coalition in the 60s. Study the labor stuggles and socialism. To the ruling classes, we are livestock. When we get to the point where we're starting to express ourselves in the real, concrete world in a meaningful way, they will do everything they can to legally harass, infiltrate, divide, and conquer. So for me, non-violence is a practical matter.
I believe I can write a post or two sometime explaining why it was effective in South Africa and India. I understand Dr. King's approach a little better, and I agree with it in general. I revisit him now and again, and I am convinced that he is right, and that it is particularly relevant to our situation, especially if the next few years are going to play out the way I think they are.
All that said, I want to be clear that I am trying to get a handle on this and understand it well enough to live it and teach it. I think I have most of the other tools I need to accomplish my mission in life, but I am still very much deficient in this department. It is easy to talk about non-violence, but difficult to live it. It must be lived or it won't work. By live it, I mean incorporate it into your day-to-day existence.
I really need someone to discuss this with from time to time, and I can locate some resources that might be useful.
Two more things . . .
And then I'm out.
1. I'm only applying non-violence to resistance to organized authority, such as oppressive states (does no good with brigands!).
2. Look at this youtube, if you haven't already seen one of my links to it elsewhere. Pay attention to what this guy says right at the end about being impressed by the minister who responded to his threats and intimidation with love, even after having been subjected to all these horrible things. That is key.
Also
Some of this is slightly OT, but I need to get it down here. I’m looking for some things that aren’t getting attention, and that are desperately needed. I have three so far
1. It’s good that we are taking authoritarians seriously, but the focus is almost entirely on how they operate and what we can learn from the BAD actors in the history of fascism. That’s a natural thing to do, but I believe we have enough information on that side of the equation to understand the important lessons. I cannot overstate how important David Neiwert’s work is in this regard. What I don’t see many people doing is looking at the GOOD actors. Just because a cataclysmic war was required to deal with fascism doesn’t mean there were no resisters from within. We need to understand more about these resisters. For example, Reich’s book on the mass psychology of fascism was smuggled into Germany and distributed underground at one point; if you are not familiar with his work, here is an entertaining summary in pictures put together by a group of guerrilla activists.
2. Theories of learning are not understood widely enough. Marketing, political persuasion, and education all rely on the same cognitive processes to a large extent. This is fairly well-understood in the academic community, and I promise you, formal classes in the academy are not required to understand this stuff. It just needs to be communicated in a way that more people can understand, and in a way that allows them to use it as a tool for organization.
3. We have INSTITUTIONAL problems, and as with 2. this is something where the fundamental principles are understood by experts. Instututions are engineered and they have logical architectures. But very few people are talking about this in a way that is useful to your average politically active person. It is important to shine the spotlight on bad individual actors and groups of them, and bloggers are doing this very well, but too few people are focusing on fixing the dysfunctional relationships that allow these institutions to function in the first place.
If, when you say that nonviolence is the only way forward for us, you have in mind using strategic nonviolence to disrupt the flow of power with the goal of changing these institutions and making them work for the people, I believe that 2 and 3 are awfully important, and we have a lot of work cut out for us. Both of those are sort of old-school fields of study; the younger scholars that I have had contact with aren’t really interested in them, and I believe that is a feature of our system, rather than a bug.
Should this have been a post rather than a comment? I can’t decide. I’ll be glad to put it in one as a discussion topic if you like. But I have much more to say about all this, and my intention here is to give you more insight into where I am coming from, and lay out some things to flesh out in much more detail over the course of the next few months. (my writing agenda was already about 3 weeks long before I added this stuff to it).
I’m keen to know others' thoughts on this stuff from the perspective of movement-building. I’ve been racking my brain on it for years, and have expended an awful lot my personal resources figuring this stuff out, and I have no idea whether any of it is useful to anyone other than me, but I think it's time that I offered to share and see what happens.
I’ll be around later this weekend
grrr. useful stuff is always disappearing behind paywalls
one of the many things, seemingly insignificant by themselves, that add up to become real barriers to democracy.
is this the protestor you were talking about? i [heart] youtube.
You're the Greatest!
I was largely responsible for that. I had help, and someone else got the media there. But I was the agitator who stirred up those people with those signs to the point that they wanted to come and stand on the street.
That's me in the brown hat at about the 30 sec mark.
dude! you rock!
we need all the agitators we can get.
Tilting at Windmills
Can sometimes be productive.
All Documented
I'll post a copy of the letter for you to look at this evening. I took pains to document as much about the incident with the protester and my response to it because I'm trying to learn what works for getting people to respond in the real world.
I don't think it was clear from the letter that I was a leftist, or reality-based. It was an argument about LIBERTY, not about TOLERANCE, it was very short, and I was trying to cast a wide net for Mississippians. But I'll give you what you need to judge for yourself ASAP.
Keep in mind that these people understand all about constitutional rights, and use them as an instrument of power politics. And if they think they can turn a person with skills to the dark side, they'll take a chance try to have a friendly conversation with them, right up to the point they see that the person they're targeting has drawn a line and put them on the wrong side of it.
Hope this helps for now. Won't be back around until after 6 eastern because I can't do this from work.
I've heard of the MM, and that march is an alarming sign to me. I decided to do this because I need to get this out and start comparing notes with folks who are more up on this than me.
Critique of the state
That's the important part about this, to me -- that's the overlap. We can't get contaminated by it, since we make a critique that may seem similar, at least in terms of the destruction of constituitonal government. Now, as to the restoration, I think our views would be, er, dis-similar....
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
I agree
It's pure poison, and it starts with the hate. We are angry (all the time it seems), but we are not hateful people.
It helps a lot to firmly reject violent political means altogether, and make nonviolent resistance an essential element of the shared identity. That places a sort of boundary around the group that helps to keep the contagion out. IMO.