There is more substance to this note and I'd almost be willing to exempt it from the response I made to Simon, that is, to his criticism of The US Right for not presenting a position, policy or presumably anything of substance. I have observed many interesting potential discussions being passed by in order to concentrate upon a quibble or a tangent. And your note remains in the quibble-category even though it is better developed than the others. I did say in one of my notes yesterday that I saw no reason to develop the entire history of Leftism. What we have at hand is an Islamist position, that of Hizbollah, Syria, etc arguing that Hizbollah is right and Israel is wrong. Omar argued to a similar end. Others on Lit-Ideas agreed with him. Omar agrees with Hizbollah. Leftists on Lit-Ideas agree with Omar in his agreement with Hizbollah. Omar disagrees with Israel. Leftists on Lit-Ideas agree with Omar in his disagreement with Israel. I didn't feel that I was making a terribly risky statement to observe that there was Lit-ideas Leftist support for Islamist ideas associated with the current Israel/Hizbollah war. I read the material you quoted. I read it prior to posting the reference. It doesn't counter anything that I've said. There is Lit-Ideas Leftist support for Hizbollah and opposition to Israel. By the way, It was you as I recall who posted a discussion with Bridget Gabriel and when Stan thanked you for posting a note so sympathetic to Israel that it made him cry, you were quick to back-pedal and announced that you weren't in support of the entire discussion and only posted it to show Gabriel was a Christian and not a Muslim and resolved never to post anything from FrontPageMag again. Do I remember that incorrectly? Why your reaction? It sounded as though you didn't want to be seen as being critical of Hizbollah or supportive of Israel. Lawrence -----Original Message----- From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Judith Evans Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 10:21 AM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Leftism and Islamism --- Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Here is an interesting open-forum discussion of the > association of Leftism > and Islamism: > Thank you, Lawrence. I don't entirely agree with "Spinoza" -- your source for "New Socialists" -- (who is anyway talking specifically about the Netherlands, of course) but thought I'd quote anyway: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should learn not to use the word 'lefty' for both social democrats and communists/stalinists etc. It's really stupid (escuzer le mot) to equate the moderate left with communism (totalitarian) and than to equate this with islamicism. The centre left (the vast majority of Europe's left) is mainly people like Schroeder, Blair, Jospin etc. and are the 'social democrats'. These are the typical PC brigade in Europe; they are the people that care too much for the weak in society: they are the people that think muslim immigrants should be shielded and protected. But they are in no way 'totalitarian'. Sure, their PCism may be suffocating from time to time, their view may be naive, idealistic and a sure recipe for sisater but they are not the new Pol Pots, Mao's or Stalins of this world. Saying such a thing would be the same as calling Bill Clinton a 'nazi' since on a world scale he's a moderate righty. The readical left is not a very homogenous group. There's actually at least 3 or 4 seperate groups. 1. the environmentalists (that's the kind of people that will try to harass genetic scientists, destroy crops, or release monkeys from the zoo) 2. the (new) socialists. 3. anarchists 4. communists/stalinists/leninists It's groups 3 and 4 that will resort to violence and vandalism, whilst it's group 4 that is usually in league with the islamists. Of course other lefties will march along with muslims and pacificts against globalism, 'american imperialism' etc. In Holland the most leftwing part are the socialists: they are actually rather HARSH towards muslims and their lack of intergration and would agree with a lot of what the late Pim Fortuyn (populist rightwing) would have to say about them. In general most of the excentric leftwing is quite anti america, pro palestine etc. and in some cases will work with Islamists (like in Belgium where the stalinists joined up with Abu Jahjah) but in other cases will be opposed to them. What does this mean? Well, the moderate left (social democrats cum suis) is lenient towards muslims, tollerant and sometimes willing to turn a blind eye towards the bad teachings of Islam. The extreme left is quite fragmented and either actively working with both radical or moderate muslims or opposing them quite a bit. In Germany the 'Gruenen' (Green Party) is extremely Peecee (although some of their ministers have been violent vandalists themselves in their time!) whilst the Socialists (not the Social democrats) in Holland are actively working on good citizenship for our new countrymen (many of which are muslims) and are also supporting bills to crub down their Islamic schools. <<<<<<<<<<<<< now: what's the "Left"'s stance on the war in the Lebanon/Israel? Judy Evans, Cardiff