Open Season on Preachers?

Morris Dees knows how to get what he wants. With the deceptively named Southern Poverty Law Center basking in a $120 million endowment, even those who hate his guts must acknowledge he's a wily opponent. Mr Dees has gotten rich in his chosen profession—which is getting rich—by scaring little old liberals with lurid visions of white supremacists lurking under their designer beds. In Mr Dees' mind, anyone who disagrees with him is a white supremacist, so he wakes up every morning ready to confront a target-rich environment. It would be a mistake for us not to take him seriously, so we must learn about him the same way a backpacker must learn about rattlesnakes.

What makes Mr Dees noteworthy is his recent attack on two of the League's best-known ministers, Rev J. Steven Wilkins, and Rev John Cripps. In the most recent Intelligence Report on www.splcenter.org, both of these highly regarded leaders come under fire because of their association with the League, which Dees paints as a "white supremacist organisation" (surprise!). Rev Wilkins, according to Morris Dees' Intelligence Report, is guilty of spreading "extremist interpretations of the Bible," which means he actually believes what it says—an unquestionable proof of extremism in this day and age. The report goes on to say, "In Mississippi, John Thomas Cripps is pursuing a similar course."

The inevitable question is: Why single out two ministers?

Mr Dees does not do things for fun or principle. Civil rights attorney Stephen Bright denounced him in a 1996 letter as a "fraud and a conman." As Lake High reminds us, "Follow the money." That's Mr Dees' ultimate goal. Whenever we witness an otherwise inexplicable, blatantly unfair attack on one of our leaders, we should wonder what the attacker wants.

One likely explanation would be that he hoped to provoke a League member into a foolish retaliation for an unfair slam, such as writing a threatening letter to Dees. That, of course, would be falling into his trap. What better way to incite someone in the League to commit an offence that could spark a juicy lawsuit than to smear two of our finest religious leaders? The fact that Rev Wilkins and Rev Cripps have earned our respect as Southern gentlemen and respected ministers of the Gospel only makes them better targets. Unable to argue law, history, or the Constitution with the League, Dees took the only course he could and mounted a cowardly personal attack.

Similar logic might explain why the same two religious leaders were subjected to equally unfair attacks from John Ainsworth, the founder of a "re-establishment" group he calls TIGER, which stands for "Truth in Government, Everyone's Responsible." Angry that he'd been unsuccessful in converting other leaders in the North Carolina League to his views, plus having been rejected for membership in the League, he had collared Rev Wilkins at the League national meeting in Pensacola last October and tried to win him over. Because Rev Wilkins would not agree with him, Ainsworth announced at the October meeting of the Charlotte League of the South that he'd "lost all respect" for Rev Wilkins. The packed room was aghast and confused.

A little background: "re-establishment" supporters claim they can resurrect old governments simply by claiming to represent the popular support for old constitutions. The most notorious example was Richard McLaren, whose "Republic of Texas" group claimed to re-establish the Texas Republic under the authority of the original Texas constitution. When quizzed how they could represent the people of Texas without an election, they claimed that "the people" consisted of those who acknowledge the legality of the original constitution, which, coincidentally, happened to be the members of the "Republic of Texas" supporters. By their unique line of reasoning, McLauren and his small band of followers constituted the legitimate government of Texas. And talk about frugality in government—the entire movement worked out of a mobile home in West Texas. However, with no popular support, the state troopers were able to swoop in and deposit the entire McLauren administration in jail without stirring up a popular outcry. That's what happens when you establish a government in the name of your people without first winning over your own people.

John Ainsworth, on the basis of a "unanimous vote" from his handful of followers, proclaimed himself the "Chief Magistrate" of the re-established "Republic of North-Carolina" and so informed the United Nations and Janet Reno. He also sent a registered letter to North Carolina governor Jim Hunt to let him know that he, John Ainsworth, now led the legitimate government of the "North-Carolina American Republic" (sic) under the authority of the 1776 North Carolina constitution. Copies of this proclamation and the letter to Governor Hunt can be seen at http://skyboom.com/tigernetwork/. Because of his claim to being a head of state, as well as his insistence on openly promoting his own agenda at League meetings while denouncing the League's purpose of legally working within the system, he was rejected for membership.

Despite his rejection and having been asked not to return to a League meeting, Ainsworth arrived unannounced at the Charlotte Chapter League meeting in October, and did his best to discredit the entire organisation. He underscored that message by disparaging Rev Wilkins. He again repeated his belief that participation in the existing political system is wrong, and took a swipe at Reverend John Cripps, whom he dismissed as a "usurper of power" because of Reverend Cripps' ongoing campaign for governor of Mississippi.

What's significant is that Cripps' campaign was a dream come true for the League, which has from its founding espoused a legal, out-in-the-open effort to create a mass political movement and to run candidates for public office as a giant step toward independence.

But in the colouring-book simplicity of the re-establishment worldview, the idea of struggling within the political system to win popular support is incomprehensible. They actually believe they can resurrect Camelot, or the Republic of Texas, or Xanadu, or whatever they please. Just gather a few friends together, sign your names on the dotted line, and you're a citizen of the country of your choosing.

Like Dungeons and Dragons® role-players who've hypnotised each other with their shared fantasies, re-establishment adherents act as if their imagined republics actually existed.

Some even go so far as to renounce their American citizenship, stop paying taxes, and issue their own drivers licenses. The results of their role-playing are more likely to be arrest records for driving with invalid licenses and vehicle registrations rather than actual political independence. This is nation-building in the sandbox, which would be amusing were it not being played by ostensible adults.

Whenever we hear slurs against our most respected leaders, we need only consider what the possible motivation could be. Like Morris Dees, John Ainsworth wanted something for himself. Ainsworth needed the reinforcement of additional supporters for his self-proclaimed government, and by poisoning the well against any group he could not use for his own purposes, he probably sought to persuade disillusioned League members that his was the only choice left.

Lesson learned: when outsiders attack our finest leaders, ask yourself what they could gain by such an attack. For some, it's money; for others, it's power—even if it's only make-believe power.