SPLC scandal underscores how the demand for racism outstrips the supply | Bobby Burack

Blanche argues that instead of dismantling extremist networks, the SPLC "was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred."

If that is true, it is not just corruption. It is the logical endgame of an industry that depends on the existence of the very problem it claims to combat. It also suggests something many of these organizations cannot admit: macro-level racism is not nearly as prevalent as they claim.

And to the SPLC, that is a problem.

Groups like these need a steady stream of examples to prove their cause is widespread, urgent, and perhaps even lethal. Their funding, relevance, and influence depend on it. But when the real-world supply of those examples falls short of the demand, something has to give.

This dynamic is not unique to one organization. It is structural.

In 2023, OutKick profiled the Human Rights Campaign, one of the most powerful LGBTQ advocacy groups in Washington, and found the same underlying problem.

The HRC was founded in 1980 and built its power around the fight for same-sex marriage. That fight concluded in 2015 with the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, requiring all 50 states to recognize those marriages.

That should have been the finish line. Instead, it created a dilemma. When your entire institution is built around solving one problem, what happens when you actually solve it?

You find another one.

The HRC shifted its focus to so-called "trans rights." Trans rights are not a real crisis. Trans people have the same rights as every other American. But the HRC understood it had to attach itself to another dilemma, even if it meant creating one.

That is how the system works.

The same incentive structure applies here. Organizations built around fighting racism need racism to feel constant, systemic, and unresolved. Without that sense of urgency, the justification for their scale disappears. So does the funding.

Put simply, there is an obvious incentive to exaggerate, stretch, and, in extreme cases, manufacture the problem.

The Democrat Party has long considered this dynamic. As the civil rights movement neared its end in the 1960s, legal equality was no longer enough to sustain the same level of political urgency. So the argument shifted. The party introduced affirmative action to address the issue.

There is value in racial tension, both politically and financially. It mobilizes voters, justifies policy, and sustains entire institutions. As long as Americans are convinced racism is a constant and growing threat, the people and groups that claim to fight it remain in demand.

That is the through line.

There's a reason the groups that talk the most about racism are the ones that need it the most.

The SPLC is no different. It does not benefit from a world in which racism is rare and isolated. It benefits from a world in which racism feels pervasive, urgent, and in need of a solution.

Like most crises, racism sells. And when it fades, groups like the SPLC are not built to step back and declare victory.

They are built to keep it going, even by creating the supply itself.