Posted on 05/06/2002 9:26:44 AM PDT by knighthawk
I will still vote for him, he will be remembered forever
IN MEMORIAM
PIM FORTUYN
1948 - 2002
Believers in the principles of the founding documents of the US, like us, simply aren't on their silly scale. Probably, most people who use the terms "left/right wing" haven't really considered what sort of language trap they're falling into by using the communist terminology. It came into widespread usage after WWII, according to some older folks I know.
That scale is used to foster the lie that National Socialism and Fascism are opposites of communism, when in fact they are simply variations of the same philosophy.The absurdity of the way the terminology is used becomes apparent when a Marxist homosexual is painted as "far-right wing" by the media, and he protests the label, but American republicans rally to him because they think of themselves as "right-wingers". It's ridiculous if you stop to think about it.
It's not ridiculous at all. It's all a matter of who is on what "team" at any given moment. "Left" and "right" come from the late 18th century during the French Revolution. It was in widespread usage for a century and a half before WWII. "Left" simply means those in favor of the revolution, "right" means those opposed to it. "The revolution" in today's context simply means the continued process of the deconstruction and destruction of the West. Parochial American obsessions with the size of government and neo-liberal economics are, quite frankly, a secondary issue. Which is why so many American conservatives who are obsessed with economics are so clueless on the whole left/right and communism/fascism diversion.
What's interesting about this is that the guy was right-wing but gay! Gays are supposed to be "flaming" liberals, didn't he know that? I guess he's hated by liberals because he's right-wing but he's gay too so that should make him all right. Now that he's been killed, what's the angle? Is it good riddance to a right-winger? Or is it a hate crime killing of a gay? See the dilema here.
No dilemma: the one overriding issue is whether someone goes along with the establishment/ruling class (which, unlike the old ruling classes, is mostly invisible). If you offend the establishment by objecting to immigration, you will be labeled a "right wing extremist" no matter what your other politics are. Being "gay" will not save you. The establishment is only interested in "gays" when they are serving as useful tools for tearing down and destroying Western civilation and traditional values. If a "gay" isn't doing this, then he isn't serving the interests of the ruling class and therefore gets no special priveleges. Hence, the resulting demonization of Fortuyn.
I don't normally follow Dutch politics, but I gather that he opposed the rising number of immigrants (1/8 of the population of the Netherlands now), that he wanted the Netherlands to take a stronger stand against crime, and that he generally supported local power and individual rights, with less state control. He made a strong point of distancing himself from Le Pen and Haider, saying that he was not anti-Semitic or racist.
My knowledge of this is based solely on recent articles, however. If some more knowledgeable person would like to correct this description or add anything, I'd appreciate it.
We can only hope that the backlash against the left, in response to this assasination, is so great the Pim's party is swept into power, the borders are then sealed and all illegal immigrants are deported.
That would be an example I would be happy to see followed, here, in the USA.
The reason the differences between the far right and the far left are confusing is because they are both very similar. Hint, they are both authoritarian. For a good over view of the political spectrum go to www.self-gov.org, and take the worlds smallest political quiz. It only takes a minute and is fun.
I agree with the above statement, though I'm not sure I can agree with all the definitions on the web site you suggested. F.A. Hayek, who is listed there as a libertarian, certainly considered fascism (and Nazism) to be on the left side of the spectrum.
The test called me a libertarian, I don't necessarily argue with that.
I have a question though: Lew Rockwell's site continually put the blame on the U.S. for 9-11 (which caused me to quit visiting it), if that attitude somehow follows from libertarianism, I don't think much of libertarianism. Does it? Or does Rockwell have the mistaken idea that because the U.S. has a record of opposing communism and totalitarianism, we are somehow not letting people have their freedom?
Some libertarians are so hung up on US foreign aid and meddling that they overlook the real reasons behind the attack. I think its pretty stupid and short sighted of them and not all libertarians see it that way.
I am libertarian, and I understand perfectly that 9-11 was not due to anything the US has done or not done, but because of who Americans are and what we believe in. Some people don't want to believe that anyone would hate us personally so they look for excuses.
I think so too, they hate us for who we are. In fact, hatred seems deeply imbedded in much of their culture.
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.