[lit-ideas] Re: Leftism and Islamism
- From: "Judith Evans" <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 19:40:37 +0100
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Helm
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 7:09 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Leftism and Islamism
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release Date: 05/08/2006
Other related posts:
