The ADL, like most anti-hate groups, is a hardened enemy of free speech, but it's uniquely duplicitous and hypocritical too

Any time there's a news story about an alarming rise in hate speech or the need for more moderation on social media (i.e. censorship), there's a good chance the ADL is the expert reference, and often the impetus behind it. They've become one of the most powerful NGOs in the world, providing training to local and federal law enforcement, having extensive say on what we are and aren't allowed to say in politics, and are treated with great reverence at congressional hearings and the like.

The ADL was founded in 1913 in response to the controversial trial of Leo Frank, a Jewish superintendent at a National Pencil Company factory accused and convicted of murdering a 13-year-old girl, Mary Phagan, that worked there. The case became a national news story and the trial was assailed as unjust by many on the thinness of the evidence against Frank: based almost entirely on the testimony of an admitted accomplice in the aftermath of the murder, the black janitor Jim Conley. After a national pressure campaign and some attempts at appealing the case, Georgia governor John M. Slaton commuted Frank's sentence from death to life in prison. This enraged the public and led to a group of armed men kidnapping Frank from jail and lynching him. The ADL would serve to defend Jews against such defamation.

There is one little problem with the story: if it wasn't Leo Frank that was responsible for the murder, it was very likely the black janitor, Jim Conley. The consensus of historians seems to be that it was him, but it interestingly shows that there was tension between the ADL's mission to defend Jews specifically and the interests of other peoples from the beginning, a complication generally glossed over.

The ADL identifies itself as an advocacy group for Jews (as in, it works for civil rights for all but with a special focus on Jewish-specific interests), in what most people would see as the understandable sense of fighting anti-Semitism — actual malicious hatred of Jews — as well as more controversially, advancing (very) special interests like supporting the state of Israel and aggressively defending the right to practice circumcision, internationally. As you'd expect, the ADL has a long history of controversies arising from where its exclusive interests conflict with those of other minority groups, including examples of behavior that would be considered hateful and extremist by its own standards.

Most organizations dedicated to combating hate and extremism favor censorship over free expression and are biased against the right. The ADL though stands out as uniquely hypocritical given its split agenda. Their steadfast support for Israel should be a big problem for their relationship with the left — it has been at times — but luckily for them it's something of a taboo subject in mainstream politics. Regardless, that's where they're most vulnerable, due to the blatant conflict in the respect and authority they're afforded in a society that's gone insanely progressive on everything else.

It's odd for a group like the ADL to make supporting a foreign country a significant part of its mission and particularly so with the state of Israel, given the country's controversial human rights record. Despite that, the ADL lists "stand[ing] up for Israel" as one of the five things do, dedicating a whole section of their website to the issue.

One of the ADL's most damning controversies was over recognition of the Armenian Genocide. Though their relationship has since fallen apart, Turkey was once considered a vital ally of Israel as part of its “coalition of the periphery” strategy of finding what friends it could beyond a hostile Arab world. Turkey had long denied that what happened was genocide and the ADL lobbied heavily against a U.S. Congressional motion to recognize it in a bid to maintain the trilateral relationship between the U.S., Turkey, and Israel. The hypocrisy of an organization dedicated to educating the public about the Holocaust, denying another people's genocide, did not go unnoticed. The ADL would later yield in the storm of controversy that followed and support the motion but their reluctant and half-hearted endorsement would continue to be seen as controversial. It's the height of irony that the ADL, through its high-powered lobbying of the U.S. government and others, may actually be the world's biggest genocide-denying organization.

The ADL, through its high-powered lobbying of the U.S. government and others, may actually be the world's biggest genocide-denying organization

In recent years, one of their main causes has been waging war on the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, which is widely seen in Israel and by its supporters as an existential threat to the country. It's worth noting that BDS is controversial even within pro-Palestinian circles (Noam Chomsky and well-known academic and anti-Israel commentator Norman Finkelstein are two prominent critics) as the movement's insistence on the Palestinian “right of return,” the right of Palestinian refugees from the 1948 and 1967 Arab-Israeli wars to return to their homes in what's now Israel, is seen as unworkable because the Israelis would never accept it (because it would tilt the demographic balance in the country to an Arab majority, or something close to it, a concern that one can imagine would be viewed differently by the ADL in other places). Workable or not though, the cause is clearly beyond the business of an American human rights/anti-hate group.

The ADL's actions against BDS include lobbying state governments all over the U.S. in favor of anti-BDS laws, which has found them in the embarrassing position of being opposed by another major U.S. civil rights group, the ACLU, in support of laws the latter deems to clearly infringe the First Amendment. Their fight against BDS has at times led to a number of what must be seen as unwelcome intrusions in Democratic and progressive affairs. The Women's March, one of the leading forces of opposition to the Trump presidency in its early days, would be dragged down by accusations of anti-Semitism with tension over BDS explaining much of it. It's also led to them repeatedly attacking Ilhan Omar and other members of “The Squad,” a trailblazing group of young “woman of color” congresswomen who have frequently come under siege for their mild criticism of Israel.

This is alarming. BDS doesn't just criticize Israel's gov., it denies its right to exist as a Jewish State. @IlhanMN also said she supports a two-state solution. Rep-Elect Omar, you owe it to your new constituents to clarify your views https://t.co/KkTFFfuPu8

— ADL (@ADL) November 15, 2018

Supporting Israel isn't the only way the ADL serves the exclusive interests of the Jewish community. In 2018, Iceland threatened to become the first country in Europe to ban the practice of circumcision on account of the procedure being considered medically unnecessary, potentially harmful, and its legal status incongruous with an existing ban on female genital mutilation. The measure had broad support across Iceland's different political parties and was popular among the public. The ADL contributed to the international Jewish community's furious lobbying campaign to stop the bill by threatening to ruin their tourism industry in a letter, promising that the ADL's reports would highlight neo-Nazis and white supremacists celebrating them making their country “Judenrein” (a deliberately inflammatory Nazi term meaning free of Jews) and smear them by association, as they themselves note, “even if that association is not justified.” Yielding to the pressure, a key judicial parliamentary committee recommended scrapping the bill, which ended any chance of its passing.

Again, this is supposed to be an anti-hate group, representing universal principles of tolerance and whatnot. That's the basis for the authority they're afforded to regulate so much of our speech. Clearly they don't deserve it, and it's not just us on the right that should see that but everyone.

Little of this information is new but curiously, the ADL tends to get away with it, and continues to be taken seriously as a leading authority on hate speech and extremism. One explanation may be that there's such a large and consistent demand for reporting on such things that the ADL's credibility, being seen to be only occasionally marred, is of secondary importance. It also doesn't help that accusing a Jewish organization of being powerful and having ulterior motives is treated as inherently anti-Semitic. Well, that's what they'll say anyway, but as explained, what they're guilty of is much worse and it's just a matter of calling them out on it.