Posted on 01/31/2007 2:09:19 PM PST by knighthawk
WHY is it, asks British journalist Nick Cohen, that apologies for a militant Islam, which stands for everything the liberal Left is against, come from the liberal Left? Why are you as likely to read about the alleged conspiracy of Jews controlling American foreign policy in a literary journal as in a neo-Nazi hate sheet? Why, after the bomb attacks in the London underground, did left-leaning British newspapers run pieces excusing the suicide bombers, these same young men who were motivated by "a psychopathic theology from the ultra-Right"? Why, in short, have Left and Right changed places? Nick Cohen is not the first to write about the unholy alliance between Western liberals and extreme right Islamic fundamentalists, but he does it in a particular and powerful way in his new book What's Left? How Liberals Lost Their Way.
The book is not available yet in Australia (there are extracts of it on The Observer's website), but in Britain it is already one of the most discussed books of the new year. "At the very least it forces, or ought to force, anyone on the Left to think carefully about where their movement has ended up in the modern world," wrote Martin Kettle in The Guardian.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.news.com.au ...
Ping
Fair question and glad it's being asked.
I always want to ask Bush-haters and terrorist sympathizers if they realize that Sharia law would look a lot like the Holocaust with homosexuals carted away first.
I think they like to think they are standing up for the underdog. They like to rally around the groups they consider to be the downtrodden. I guess it makes them feel better about themselves.
One thing the mideast needs is a healthy dose of liberalism. It would certainly take the fight out of them.
Followed by atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, and Hindus. Then musicians, actors, pornography stars, alcohol producers, narcotics users, most teachers and professors, comedians, many writers, ETC ETC ETC.
The lunatic left would rather go extinct than find itself on the right side for once. A hippy socialist feels more threatened by Jerry Falwell than by OBL. It isn't hyperbole - I know some people very well who hold these sentiments (and I unfortunately also know people who feel more threatened by two gays having bumsex than by militant Islam).
Bravo. I would not expect this sort of self-analysis to cross the pond, though.
Two myths in one sentence.
Myth #1. There never was such a thing as a "Principled Left". The left simply attached itself to causes that it felt could advance it's quest for power. It was never involved for the sake of the cause itself but only as a means to elevate it's image and/or to hopefully bring about revolution. The left has always been the most cynical faction in society be it whitewashing Lenin and Stalin's atrocities or being militantly anti-War to support the Hitler-Stalin pact of 1939 then suddenly and without the slightest blush jumping to pro-war when Hitler invaded the Soviet Union.
Myth #2. Confusing the "Left" with Liberalism. They are if anything, at opposite ends of the spectrum and in reality, the only 'liberals' left in the Western world are today called neo-Conservatives and totally derided by the left.
Why does the left support militant Islam? Because militant Islam has the same objective that the left does --- the destruction of Western civilization.
The left has nothing but blind, unrelenting hatred for Western values and civilization, especially as practiced and represented by America. The Islamofascists share this hatred, so naturally the left allies with them.
Thing is, the left is as equally blinded by their own arrogance and hubris as they are by their hate for the West. They actually think that once the Islamofascists bring down the West, they will be able to sit down and reason with them to spare their own sick, perverted nihilistic selves, and their lifestyle and world view.
The left thinks that they can tame the crocodile, and in so doing he won't eat them last after all. But crocodiles can never be trained.
They all work for the same boss.
Why? Because liberalism is a disease.
The Left views all its current allies as transient. It is acceptable to throw someone to the wolves if they stand between you and power. To the Left, it has always been about POWER--not principles. Right now they are throwing (or have thrown) the Jews overboard--except most Jews haven't realized it yet.
Give it another three decades, and they will have thrown the gay and women's rights groups overboard too. In fact, you will be hear that wearing a burka is the ultimate in woman's liberation, because it separates the woman from her sexuality. Its the old Slavery=Freedom ploy. The Womans Studies Departments on campus are busy rewriting their doctrine as I type--count on it. It may take them a tad longer to jettison the gays, because they are SO DARN USEFUL in destroying organized religion, long held morals, and keeping the non-Muslim population down.
But why do all this for the Muslims? Four things are at work here:
1. The Left sees the Right Wing as more of a threat to their power than the Islamists (who probably vote for Leftist candidates anyway). The Right is closer and more numerous--therefore, they are the greater threat. Of course, the Right doesn't behead anyone, but that doesn't enter into their equation.
2. The Islamists are not evil Westerners, therefore, their motives are pure. Ever notice how Muslims are described in the MSM as "devout" while evangelic Christians are labeled "fanatical"?
3. The Left admires the fact that Mullahs have almost total control over their adherents. This is something they have been striving for for decades. After all, if you can convince someone to blow themselves up, getting them to pay higher taxes should be a piece of cake.
4. Lastly, the Left are cowards. They know they can spit on Christians and Jews with impunity. However, mock a Muslim, and people will riot and things get blown up. Its ironic--they continually accuse the Right of trying to censor free speech. Yet the Left advocates censorship whenever Muslim sensibilities are involved.
"...I always want to ask Bush-haters and terrorist sympathizers if they realize that Sharia law would look a lot like the Holocaust with homosexuals carted away first."
The people who oppose this fight the most would be the first to fall, but you can never seem to get that through to them. When I posed to a very liberal neighbor of mine the question of what the problems that the presidents of Iran and North Korea pose, and to a lesser degree the president of Venezuela, all I get is these gems:
"They keep Bush in check"
"Do what the ISG told them to do and let Iran and Syria reshape Iraq"
"Korea needs to be unified and SOUTH Korea needs to stop resisting this" (emphasis mine)
It's hatred, sickness, or both, and they still benefit by others who keep the fight up.
There is an old saying that a liberal is a man who won't even take his own side in a fight. Their minds are so open that their brains have fallen out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.