ADL
Any organization that can call its operations logically consistent with increasing 'pro' unity narrative and thought and decreasing 'anti' unity narratives and thought, would not predicate its logic on a presumption that division is necessarily 'external' to it and making itself out to be the synthesizer of whatever it claims is exclusively outside it.
By declaring to the world that its logic is to use defamation against anyone who they say is not speaking correctly, then it is a logic that must itself introduce defamation where none exists, because its logic isn't ultimately grounded on pro unity. It only has 'anti-defamation'.
A logic of mere negation is fully parasitical on whatever is being 'negated' for speaking or acting in dissent from that logic of negation itself.
If Anon introduces logic of unity, then Anon need not introduce division where none exist.
The ADL unfortunately both attacks legit racism, and introduces its own racist attacks by smearing 'improper speech' which conveniently the ADL always presents itself as an authority.
The ADL had to be called out on uncensored social media they have already declared wanting to be censored, for its racist definition of racism page on their website, before they changed the definition.
Why was that even necessary to begin with?
Why did the ADL even have a racist definition of racism to begin with, if its ostensive purpose is to stop defamation and racism?
It is because their logic of 'negation' makes instantiated objects all but guaranteed to be introducing defamation itself.
The loudest mouths we're taught to trust are the world's worst deceivers.
They still have time, or not.