THE LEFTIST-JIHADIST CONVERGENCE IS NOT A THEORY - IT'S REALITY

ANDREW BOLT:

No wonder the far Left has trouble disowning Osama bin Laden. He’s one of them.

Read his latest message to the world, in which he appeals to the Left’s same neuroses, myths, prophets and demons - and to the same yearning for a totalitarian escape from the terrors of freedom.

Go through the list. [QUOTES FROM BIN LADEN'S LAST MESSAGE:]

The capitalist system seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations…

All of mankind is in danger because of the global warming resulting in a large degree from the emissions of the factories of the major corporations…

No to spilling red blood for black oil…

It has now become clear to you and the entire world the impotence of the democratic system and how it plays with the interests of the peoples and their blood by sacrificing soldiers and populations to achieve the interests of the major corporations…

Among the most capable of those from your own side who speak to you on this topic (or war in Iraq) and on the manfacturing of public opinion is Noam Chomsky…

You should liberate yourself from the deception, shackles and attraction of the capitalist system…

I invite you to embrace Islam.

Every line of the above - bar the last - you will hear echoed by the protesters outside the APEC meeting today. The only argument between them and bin Laden is over which totalitarian faith offers freedom from thought and responsibility - communism, Gaia or Islam. And on the extent of the violence one can use to achieve it.

THESE PHOTOSHOPPED IMAGES ILLUSTRATE THIS CONVERGENCE OF LEFTISM AND JIHADISM WELL:

BUT THESE PHOTOSHOPPED IMAGES MAKE IT SEEM LIKE THE CONVERGENCE IS IMAGINARY - WHEN IT IS NOT.

THE CONVERGENCE IS NOT JUST OUT OF THE MOUTHS OF THE JIHADISTS, EITHER. IT'S ALSO EXPRESSED BY THE POSTMODERN LEFT ABOUT THE JIHADISTS. HERE'S SOME ACTUAL POSTMODERN LEFTIST MORALLY RELATIVIST DRIVEL FROM THE WEBPAGE WHERE I GOT ONE OF THE BIN LADEN/CHE IMAGES:

The other

In recent post-modern philosophy, thinkers like Lyotard and Derrida stipulated that the role of interchange, or interaction, is crucial to any incidence of meaning. There is no absolute truth, only occurrences of shared or opposed interpretations. Occurrences; plural and concurrently. This insight became an important argument in the analysis of communication: meaning is established interactively, not defined unilaterally. This again means that there can be no question of ‘meaning’ without ‘the other’, i.e. without context. In other words, there is no single or privileged principle of explanation or interpretation. There is ‘difference’.

This may look rather theoretical, but in fact it had considerable practical consequences — at least in the West, with its individualized cultures. It shifted the focus of communication from analyzing and understanding messages as ‘singular expressions’ to reading them as the sediments of a multiplicity of sources.

The difference between mention of ‘a terrorist attack’ and ‘an action by freedom fighters’ lies not in the facts both refer to, but in the origin of the message. The wording reflects context — the message is an interpretation, not a fact.

TO THE POST MODERN LEFTIST, THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FREEDOM FIGHTER AND A JIHADO-TERRORIST. EVEN THOUGH ONLY ONE FIGHTS FOR FREEDOM.

THE IMAGES BELOW FURTHER PROVE THAT THE AFFINITY BETWEEN POSTMODERN LEFTISM AND THE JIHADISM IS NOT ABSTRACT. IT IS REAL.

IN FACT: THERE IS NO IMPORTANT IDEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A POSTMODERN LEFTIST AND A JIHADO-TERRORIST: BOTH OPPOSE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION, THE WEST, THE FREE WORLD AND ALL THE TRADITIONS THEREIN.

AND THEY BOTH SEEK TO DESTROY IT: ONE BY VIOLENCE; THE OTHER BY GRAMSCIAN ATTACK FROM WITHIN - AND BY APPEASEMENT.

WHICH IS WHY I HAVE LONG MAINTAINED, TO DEFEAT THE JIHADIST ENEMY ABROAD WE MUST DEFEAT THE LEFTIST AT HOME.

THIS WEEK'S HEARINGS IN CONGRESS DRIVE THAT POINT HOME.

IF THE DEMS WIN, THEN THE JIHADISTS WIN.

IT'S THAT SIMPLE.