1 - HAMAS CRIES UNCLE: AFTER STARTING IT, HAMAS NOW CALLS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION TO STOP ISRAEL'S COUNTERATTACK.
2 - OBRADOR CRIES FOUL: AFTER LOSING THE OFFICIAL RECOUNT THE LEFTIST CANDIDATE SAYS HE WILL TAKE IT TO THE STREETS.
Why are Leftists and their jihadist cousins crybabies?
Well, basically Leftists are against freedom and liberty and think that thuggery is viable means to an end - an end they mean to prescribe or force on everyone. This shared "prescriptive utopianism" is what creates the natural alliance between Leftists and jihadists - it's the essence of Baathism and also what fuels Sheehan and Moore and Kos.
When they are unable to force their way they cry like the little narcissists they are. More on Leftist/jihadist narcissism HERE and HERE and HERE.
2 - OBRADOR CRIES FOUL: AFTER LOSING THE OFFICIAL RECOUNT THE LEFTIST CANDIDATE SAYS HE WILL TAKE IT TO THE STREETS.
Why are Leftists and their jihadist cousins crybabies?
Well, basically Leftists are against freedom and liberty and think that thuggery is viable means to an end - an end they mean to prescribe or force on everyone. This shared "prescriptive utopianism" is what creates the natural alliance between Leftists and jihadists - it's the essence of Baathism and also what fuels Sheehan and Moore and Kos.
When they are unable to force their way they cry like the little narcissists they are. More on Leftist/jihadist narcissism HERE and HERE and HERE.
11 comments:
I like how you have equated Hamas with the Left. That's righteous.
most of the poverty in gaza/west bank is the result of corrupt leftists - like arafat, the mugabe of palistan, and until his death a socialist in good standing in the international.
from today's nytimes:
The West has cut off most aid, and Israel is withholding the $55 million a month it collects for the Palestinian Authority in customs and duties.
"The Israelis are stealing our money," he said. "This is politics and ideology, but my kids are hungry and need milk."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/world/middleeast/07gaza.html
the palis DEPEND on their state, and as we know that is the very definiton of SERFDOM.
even IF their rulers were benvolent they would still be serfs.
and as we know their rulers are notb enevolent - they are willing to send their children to suicide/genocide missions, and starve their neighbors, and subject them to the fury of the idf.
all things they MUST'VE KNOWN would result fromthe idiotically provocative kidnapping of shalit.
their jihadism and leftism are related to eAch other and compound their suffering.
they will suffer as long as they are dominated by these hateful/harmful/self-defeating ideologies.
Yes, Arafat was a leftist, or at least he pretended to be. Honestly, I think he was merely a nihilist, like Nero, but that's another argument.
I tend to think of Hamas as being a right-wing fascist organization. But obviously they do derive power from handing out goodies, so I guess that is leftist.
I don't think the handing out of goodies was ever actually their priority. It was just a means to an end. But then, of course, I guess that can be said of most leftists as well.
Ultimately, Hamas may simply be nihilists as well. Certainly, their Charter offers little more than apocalyptic nihilism as a philosophy.
However, all that being said, the reason I thought it was brilliant of you to call Hamas a leftist organization is because they wouldn't be able to go on existing without the support of their leftist friends in the EU.
Whatever way you want to look at it, they are sustained by the Left, they use Leftism as a philosophy in a utilitarian manner, and they depend upon the dependance of their people.
It walks like a duck, etc.
Dear Pastorius,
You are right that Hamas is a fascist organization:
"I tend to think of Hamas as being a right-wing fascist organization. But obviously they do derive power from handing out goodies, so I guess that is leftist."
However, fascism is not a "right-wing" phenomenon. Fascism is a form of leftism. Mussolini was a socialist. Hitler was a socialist (no, Naziism is not exactly the same thing as Fascism, but remember that the official name of the Nazi party was the "National Socialist German Workers' Party.)
The fact that Fascists and Nazis opposed the Communists does not mean that they were "right-wing." The fighting between Fascists and Communists was an inter-necine struggle among statist leftists, and in Germany, the Nazis and the Communists competed for the same voters.
So Hamas is authentically leftist. It is statist. It grounds its statism in an Islamist ideology, but after all, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin AL Husseini, wrote Hitler that from his standpoint, Naziism and Islamism were identical -- and the Mufti knew more about Islamism than I do, and more about Naziism than I do.
The reason that the left sustains Hamas is that Hamas promotes the same aim promoted by the leftr: statism, totalitarianism, a unitary ideology, and anti-Semitic genocide.
All the best,
Gandalin
what gandalin said.
btw: the trqditional left versus right schemata was designed by commie academics trying to distance themselves from hitler.
hitler was a leftist as was mussolini - but they were NOT marxists.
Proof that this schemata (which puits nazis on the extre,e right and marxists on the extreme left, and democracies in the middle) is pure BULLSHIT is this: in this schemata there is NO LOGICAL PLACE FOR ANARCHISM.
but....
a true/rational schemata puts statists on the left and ANARCHISTS on the right, and then there is a logical place for democratic republics with some welfare states: THE MIDDLE.
in this schema one can SEE that marxists and jihadists and fascists and nazis have more in common with each other than they do with anarchists or democrats (small d).
also: if you actually read mein kampf it is OBVIOUS that hitler was a friggin socialist. and an ecology freak, too.
no faith in individual liberty and free markets, which are after all just where free individuals freely exchange stuff.
hitler v stalin was not unlike stylain v trotsky. and all have more in common with binladen and mugabe and fidel and arafat than they fo with washington, lincoln or reagan and gwb.
reagan and bush have faith in the people. tax cuts let people spend their own money the way they want to.
tax and spend lefties think they know better than you how to spend your money.
they are utopian prescriptivist statists. like khomeini/binladen/et al.
all the best!
the leftists and the jihadists are "BIRDS OF A FEATHER."
ive posted on this eleven times. google it at my blog.
Reliapundit,
I know you have posted on that subject. In fact, I became aware of that several years back from a quotation of Hitler's where he bragged about being a socialist. I know.
Here's the thing. Hamas is, at bottom, a fundamentalist religious organization bent on making people live by God's Law.
That to me is a right-wing organization. I admit that Hamas buys votes by providing services. So, they are a socialist organization. That's why I agreed with you. But, typically a fundamentalist religious organization is a right-wing party.
And remember, that is coming from a guy who defines himself as a fundmentalist Christian.
Dear Pastorius,
Now you're going to accuse me of quibbling, but I don't like to see the word "fundamentalist" applied to Islamists.
"Fundamentalism" was a term that once meant something rather specific in the realm of Protestant theology. It remains useful for describing the approach some Protestant denominations take to Scripture. But I don't think that it really applies to Islam.
Remember that Islam makes the claim that the Noble Qu'ran is the verbatim transcript of God's word. Not an "inspired" Scripture, but very literally the exact and inerrant word of God. Hence in that sense, all schools of Islamic thought are "fundamentalist."
However, the word "fundamentalist" is usually used uncritically and loosely to mean "extreme" or "serious" or "committed."
Hamas is committed to the establishment of an Islamic Emirate in what they call Palestine, as a bridge to the ultimate establishment of a worldwide caliphate, under which the entire world would be under one ideology, as one people, with one ruler. A great big totalitarian State. That is, properly speaking, a political agenda, rather than what we in the West would recognize as a religious agenda.
It is not the Hamas social-service infrastructure that marks them as socialists, it is rather their Statist ideology, in which all of the private and individual economic activities of society would be placed under the control of the caliph and his apparatus of government and terror. Buying votes with social services is not socialism; controlling all of the life of a society through a totalitarian ideology is socialism.
All the best,
Gandalin
wromgo pasto: left-wing is TRULY any statist ideology: marxism/hitlerism/moaism/arafatism/mohammedism.
they ALL want to use the power of an all powerful totalitarian state to enforce their own peciuliar utopian answers onto EVERYOME else.
the opposite is anarchism and the sensible middle is libertarian republicanism with a majoritarian democracy.
REPEAT: all ideologies which are utopianistic and seek to make the state more powerful so that they can IMPOSE their ideological answers on individuals and the marketplace are statists and have more in common with each other than not.
they are ALL on the left in any TRUE AND LOGICAL AND ACCURATE schemata, but NOT i the marrxist one you were brainwashed with in schoold (which put hitler/mussolini on the right and stalin/mao on the left, and then binladen on the right, too).
this is total illogical bullshit. it makes no sense and doesn;lt make a schemata which makes any sense.
the ONLY sensible schemata oputs statists of all tyopes on the left - with the totalitarians on the extreme left. and then puts anarchists on the extreme right.
the usa is middle right, and denmark/uk on middle left.
in the traditional shemata there is no logical place in the spectrum for anarchism.
within extreme statists/totalistarins there are religious ones like mohammed and binladen. and there are atheist ones like marx.
but they are ALL enemies of liberty, the sanctity of the inidiviual soul/democracy.
they have more in common than they libertarioans do with any of them.
they have true affinity.
they are birds of a feather.
I read your comments last night, and went away and thought about it, and lo and behold, you are right.
The Catholic Church was a statist institution in its days as a arbitrer of morality in Europe. It didn't hand out many goodies, but it was definately supported by taxes.
Hey Reliapundit, what do you think of this idea?
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2006/07/immodest-proposal-steal-their-women.html
Post a Comment