Any so-called “media watchdog group” that is serious and professional does not need to resort to fallacious appeals in order to make their argument. If the political positions taken by an opposing group are wrong, than it is the duty of the accuser to prove them wrong instead of quoting those positions and baselessly assuming they are inherently wrong.
But seriousness and professionalism have never been the fortes of Media Matters for America. When they aren’t making stuff up about issues like affirmative action and right-to-work laws, they present adverse information about people they don’t like with the intention of discrediting those people. The second part of that last sentence is a modified version of Wikipedia’s definition of “poisoning the well,” the logical fallacy that MMFA used in a hit piece yesterday on the American Third Position Party.
Instead of explaining why the positions taken by A3P are wrong, MMFA simply quoted AP3’s positions on race and immigration and left its readers with the implicit, unproven assumption that those positions are wrong. At no point did MMFA even offer a rudimentary justification for why A3P's positions are to be feared. And that’s because MMFA is incapable of offering one.
For example, MMFA quoted the party as saying, “[A3P] exists to represent the unique political interests of white Americans. It exists to maintain the identity, culture, and way of life of the American people.” MMFA also quoted the party as saying, “A3P stands to protect White American interests.” In other words, A3P describes itself as an American institution committed to strengthening this great nation by promoting the advancement of white families. A3P also works to improve opportunities for white Americans.’
Wait a minute, those last two sentences sound suspiciously familiar. That’s because La Raza used those exact same words about “Latino families” and “Hispanic Americans.” Grammatically, how A3P and La Raza describe themselves are no different. It’s just that A3P advocates for whites and La Raza advocates for Hispanics and Latinos.
Yet, MMFA smeared A3P but gushed with praise over La Raza. Not only that, but in attempting to “correct” the “myth” that La Raza is a radical identity politics-driven group (as they quoted Michelle Malkin of saying), MMFA argued in one of its blue headlines: “In fact, NCLR's mission is ‘to improve opportunities for Hispanic Americans.’”
According to MMFA, the fact that La Raza advocates for Hispanics is proof that they aren’t driven by identity politics, but the fact that A3P advocates for whites is proof that they are a “hate group” who wants to “return the United States to white rule.” If MMFA actually had a thing that normal people call “ethics,” they would either condemn both organizations or support both. But by demonizing A3P and gushing over La Raza, MMFA proves yet again that it has an anti-white double standard. MMFA isn’t anti-racist, it is anti-white.
Thus it’s only fitting that on the same page La Raza says it “[promotes] the advancement of Latino families,” it cites MMFA on the bottom of the page as “proof” that its goals aren’t out of the mainstream. MMFA scratches La Raza’s back and La Raza scratches theirs. After all, they both share the same discredited ideology of progressivism.
In conclusion, MMFA’s hit piece on A3P is not to be taken seriously by anyone with objective or rational thought. Their complete and utter failure to explain why A3P’s positions are wrong, and their hypocrisy in how they treated A3P compared to La Raza, offers the latest evidence of MMFA’s intellectual emptiness and its moral bankruptcy.