Why is Apple supporting the SLPC when they attack liberals? | Hacker News Reader

Why is Apple supporting the SLPC when they attack liberals?

nytimes.com

9 pointsgooseus8 comments

This title is rather disingenuous. The author is upset because the SLPC designates her as an "anti-Muslim extremist".

I wasn't familiar with her before, so I went looking at her Wikipedia page. And I immediately found

> In a 2007 article in Reason magazine, Hirsi Ali said that Islam, the religion, must be defeated and that "we are at war with Islam. And there's no middle ground in wars." […] She reiterated her position that the problem isn't just a few "rotten apples" in the Islamic community but "I'm saying it's the entire basket."

I don't know about you, but that sure sounds like anti-Muslim extremism.

Similarly, she brought up Brandeis University withdrawing an offer of an honorary degree. It turns out that it was withdrawn because she was accused of hate speech by multiple people and organizations, as well as Islamophobia. And so far it looks like this wasn't an unfair characterization.

I'm inclined to say that the Southern Poverty Law Center is in the right here.

TL;DR Apple pledged $1M to Southern Law Poverty Center after the Charlottesville attack.

The author, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, believes that

> ... the center’s founders seem more interested in profiting off the anxieties and white guilt of Northern liberals than in upholding the civil rights of poor Southerners, or anyone else.

They specifically reference their unfair treatment as "anti-muslim extremists" when they seek conversation rather than extremist actions and actively speak out against the extremists they've encountered.

They make a very good case that I, personally, agree with.

I will throw out the idea that you haven’t read the other side of the story. The article has a link to the SPLC’s complaint, I suggest reading it. Go read her Wikipedia page. Consider that many of the stories she tells of her upbringing are probably false, according to multiple sources, and as far as I can tell she did, indeed, resign from parliament “in disgrace”. I suggest caution in siding with her.

If you think Ayaan Hirsi Ali wants conversation rather than extremist actions, I believe you may have missed the bulk of her work. For example, this Reason interview (http://reason.com/archives/2007/10/10/the-trouble-is-the-wes...) with the following exchange:

Reason: [...] Do you think Islam could bring about similar social and political changes?

Hirsi Ali: Only if Islam is defeated. [...]

Reason: Don’t you mean defeating radical Islam?

Hirsi Ali: No. Islam, period. Once it’s defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It’s very difficult to even talk about peace now. They’re not interested in peace.

Reason: We have to crush the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims under our boot? In concrete terms, what does that mean, “defeat Islam”?

Hirsi Ali: I think that we are at war with Islam. And there’s no middle ground in wars. Islam can be defeated in many ways. [...]

First off, can we remove the editorialized title and use the original? Even with the original title, I don’t even know what “liberals” has to do with it. Did we all just assume that the SPLC considers liberals off limits? I’ll betcha that’s not in their charter.

As to the complaint, I suggest one goes to the SPLC link that the author conveniently provides. Read the quotes from this woman. Go cross-reference if you like, and make sure she’s quoted correctly and in context. Now come back here and try to argue that the SPLC doesn’t have a point.

> Why is Apple supporting the SLPC when they attack liberals?

SPLC

You mean you've never heard of the Southern Loverty Paw Center?

(/s)

Here's another story about SPLC from last year, about Maajid Nawaz who you might find more sympathetic:

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/ma...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com