-
The SPLC: Big Bucks, the FRC, and Jimmy Carter
May 7, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Mark Levin Talks to the NRA
May 7, 2013 | 0 comments
-
POLITICO: RUSH LIMBAUGH MAY PART WITH CUMULUS
May 5, 2013 | 13 comments
-
The Problematic Frank Luntz’s Stockholm Syndrome
April 25, 2013 | 11 comments
-
Dead Terrorist Tamerlan Tsarnaev Channeled Islamic Videos
April 19, 2013 | 67 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Indeed, you just can’t make it up.
Over at the Huffington Post, there is an admiring post from Nicholas Graham. The post is headlined: Westboro Church Protest Against Jews Hilariously Interrupted By Brick Stone (VIDEO). (Viewer warning: the video shown is just a tad on the obscene side.) The video shows an interviewer named “Brick Stone” (Real name? Who knows. But someone has imagination) interviewing members of the Westboro Baptist Church as they protest something or other involving Jews. Westboro Baptist, you will recall, are the charming folks who stand outside military funerals yelling that God hates “f…gts.” They hate Jews and gays, among others. Got it?
On the surface, the interview achieves Brick Stone’s objective: mocking the Westboro Baptist people who are, accurately in my book, described by the HuffPo’s Graham as “loathsome.” The video is something that obviously has Arianna’s crew chortling or they wouldn’t have posted.
But wait a minute.
Westboro Baptist, as far as the rest of us know, simply shows up and shouts offensive things about Jews and gays.
Elsewhere on the HuffoPo, back in April of last year, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf made an appearance. The Imam, you will recall, is the driving force behind the Ground Zero Mosque. In his article praising Sharia Law, among other things, the Imam said that:
Islamic law is about God’s law, and it is not that far from what we read in the Declaration of Independence about “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.”
Really? Sharia and the Declaration philosophical soul mates, eh? Nonie Darwish, the Director of Former Muslims United, has posted a piece explaining exactly what Sharia Law entails. Sharia, she the Cairo-born ex-Muslim says, mandates that “Homosexuality is punishable by death.” And the Imam seems to have trouble opposing Hamas, the lovely people who want to wipe Israel — homeland of the Jews — off the map.
So let’s see. What do we have here?
The HuffPo’s Nicholas Graham finds Brick Stone’s mocking interview with the Westboro Baptist people hilarious. Westboro’s Jewish and gay policy is to yell names. Meanwhile, Imam Rauf graces the pages of the HuffPo advocating Sharia law — which Ms. Darwish pointedly says includes executing gays. And, of course, there is that Hamas thing.
Will Brick Stone have the cojones to show up outside the Mosque site and mock its supporters about executing gays? Will Nicholas Graham tee off on the Imam and his Hamas problem?
What do you think?
A tour through the liberal mindset is always interesting.
View all comments (75) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Jeffrey Lord
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/08/27/huffpowestboro-and-the-mosque
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
DRed| 8.27.10 @ 6:17PM
"Just as the Constitution has gone through interpretations, so does Shariah law.
The two pieces of unfinished business in Muslim countries are to revise the penal code so that it is responsive to modern realities and to ensure that the balance between the three branches of government is not out of kilter.
Rather than fear Shariah law, we should understand what it actually is. Then we can encourage Muslim countries to make the changes that achieve the essence of fairness and justice that are at the root of Islam."
I'd certainly be interested in hearing Mr. Rauf's views on homosexuality. I imagine I wouldn't agree with him at all. But he clearly doesn't embrace a fundamentalist concept of Sharia, as you'd know if you'd bothered reading the article you linked to.
Jonathan M.| 8.28.10 @ 10:05AM
The only "unfinished business" in Muslim countries is wiping them and their people off the map. You can't make improvements to a group of dirty, backward, camel-humping liars and cheaters.
Jeffrey Lord| 8.27.10 @ 6:29PM
DRed...
But I did read it.
You apparently believe with the Imam that the only real problem with Islam and gays is "revising the penal code." Revising it? To what? Lashes instead of execution? Stoning? Prison?
Wow.
Chris Lamke | 8.27.10 @ 6:35PM
The Westboro folks are inviting debate, serious or otherwise, by their actions. In reading the Imam's interview on HuffPo, you picked a few words to reinforce what you decided to say here, rather than considering that the Imam was trying to explain the origin and intent of Sharia law and calling for its reform to conform with modern culture. The Imam is trying to bring peace and understanding and you are deliberately distorting his words to support your goal of falsely equating the Imam with Westboro Church.
The Westboro crew seems to be more than a little mentally ill on average. You appear intelligent enough to be aware of what you're doing. Please try to open your mind a crack so you can see that Muslims (and especially Liberals) are a diverse group, not the unvarying and unthinking golems you portray here.
The One We've Been Waiting For| 8.27.10 @ 7:12PM
We're buying shrimp, my fellow Dems. Don't look into the Westboro church. You'll find a Democrat. Strangely enough a civil rights lawyer who has run as a Democratic candidate for governor many times. We don't want that out there. Keep it quiet.
Westboro Burro| 8.30.10 @ 5:00PM
Phelps and his cult are no different than the Beck cult.
Phelps is dog poop, and Beck is cat poop.
Two cults, just different perversions.
DRed| 8.27.10 @ 6:41PM
I don't know. As I said, I expect I'd disagree completely with his views. It would be great if someone would find out, but I would be pretty surprised (and disgusted, obviously) if he advocated death, lashes, or stoning.
Homosexual activity was criminalized in America until 2003, you know.
Interested Conservative| 8.27.10 @ 7:22PM
2003? Really - was this in the news? I must have missed it. What does this mean to all my gay friends from the 60s and 70s? Were they just daring non-conformists?
Jim Hlavac | 8.30.10 @ 4:08PM
Gay sex, indeed, just gays holding hands in public or dancing together, was indeed illegal in many states until Lawrence v Texas in 2003, when the Supreme Court ruled in a 5 -4 decision that laws against gay sex, and gay relations in general, were not constitutional, striking the few that remained, and overturning the 1986 decision Bowers v. Hardwick which also by a 5 - 4 decision basically said any jurisdiction in America could make any law against gay people it saw fit.
Therefore, all of us gay guys in the 1960s-70s-80s-and-90s were essentially criminals every time we so much as kissed our boyfriends. Under conspiracy laws we were essentially conspiring to commit a crime every time we entered a gay bar, or met someone at a social event. That the laws were so unenforced after the 1969 Stonewall Riots in NYC that it was laughable that they still existed or that anyone, like the State of Texas in 2003, wanted the laws on the books, didn't mean the laws weren't there. It was only that the police forces would no longer bust down the doors of gay bars and arrest everyone and send them to jail.
That four justices on the Supreme Court in 2003 still wanted to keep the anti-gay laws is still a bit "wow" to me.
Not only was this reported in every news outlet in the land, but also in the pages of this publication, which I recall wanted to keep such laws, and was not happy with the Lawrence decision.
Apparently you did miss the news. Welcome back from wherever you were.
Jeffrey Lord| 8.27.10 @ 7:03PM
DRed and Chris....
Ronald Reagan used to emphasize that the problem between America and the Soviet Union was not that they we didn't trust them because they were armed, we didn't want them armed because we didn't trust them.
There are a couple of very big problems here. In terms of the Mosque, no rational person of any faith would say they want to build X to build bridges...and when confronted with an outraged population both locally and nationally, persist. Whatever else we now know, this idea is a bad one. The project has backfired big time. If one is truly interesting in bridge building the right answer is: let's meet, let's put it somewhere else, I'm sorry I offended you. Please. Let's come together.
To say the least, that's not what's happened. Which of course, get's back to the core of the Reagan point. There is no trust here. Indeed, the very name "Cordoba" suggests blatant triumphalism. (Look it up in history - Spain and all of that.) As if, after winning World War II, the US decided to rename Berlin or Tokyo for FDR or Jefferson or Lincoln. Why poke a finger in such a sensitive eye? Where is my right to vist Mecca? It doesn't exist. Which says much about the real Muslim concept of tolerance. Muslims are welcomed in my church any time.
This isn't rocket science. It's simple human manners and understanding. At this point, the Imam's insistence seems to indicate a determined attempt to stake out the US as future Muslim territory. With the murder of almost 3,000 Americans as a marker of what is to come. Not a graceful acceptance of religious freedom, free speech - and plain old fashioned "love thy neighbor as thyself." Humility - not hubris - is the order of the day. Absent that - and it is spectacularly absent - the trust of which Reagan once spoke simply is not that there.
Build a Mosque next to me? Be my guest. I'd love to be invited.
Warrior | 8.27.10 @ 8:52PM
I find Muslim tolerance to be only slightly less than liberal/progressive tolerance. The greater majority of Muslims see our tolerance as weakness and like liberals use our tolerance against us.
Nate| 8.27.10 @ 8:48PM
This community center has a small prayer space -- about the size of the prayer space where Muslims worship in the PENTAGON, at the very spot where the plane hit on 9.11.
Really. What the FUCK is wrong with you people????
This is AMERICA.
We don't establish religion here. Indeed, we celebrate religious pluralism and respect the free expression of religion.
You people are going to be left BEHIND.
JP| 8.28.10 @ 8:30AM
The Mosque is planned to hold over 1000 worshippers at any one time. Not exactly a tiny chapel as proponents say. Check out what the developers have been telling potential financiers.
Nate| 8.28.10 @ 11:24AM
I did look this up and you are right. The prayer space is much larger than the one at the Pentagon.
I actually don't know where I heard what I originally claimed as its size and should've looked it up first.
However, JP, I still don't see what it matters. 100 or 1000 worshippers still does HONOR to the tradition and present reality of America's greatest strength: it's PLURALISM.
Martine| 8.29.10 @ 1:00PM
Nate, just because they CAN build a mosque there doesn't mean they ought to. That's all anyone is saying.
Why? Because it's indecent and disrespectful. Mr. Lord is right -- let's see some humility.
Building bridges my ass.
monty.crisco| 8.28.10 @ 11:44AM
No one is debating that, you moron. Never miss an opportunity to miss the point....
Tim*| 8.28.10 @ 2:55PM
Actually , Nate's kind will be left behind on November 2nd.
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .
67 Days To November 2nd
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 1:36PM
No MORON, your 'BEHIND' [along with the rest of your radical extremist domestic terrorists friends] will be grass after 11/2/10!!!!!!!!!!
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 1:40PM
Here MORON, feast on these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-hqVOLEgec
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djb_oSoZLDc
Jeffrey Lord| 8.27.10 @ 9:23PM
Nate...
"Muslims worship in the PENTAGON"..
No conservative I know is disputing religious freedom. Those most affected object...its a question of sensitivity, not rights.
But since you view worshiping in a public building as no big deal, I'm very pleased to know you support school prayer and putting the creche in the town square.
Way to go Nate! Back to the future!
Nate| 8.27.10 @ 11:35PM
Mr Lord,
Your stereotypes of liberals don't quite work with me. I fully support school prayer and I have no problem with Christmas decorations, creches and so on. (And honestly, I don't know a single liberal who does and am perpetually baffled about who does.)
Mr Lord this issue is NOT about "sensitivity." This is America and this issue goes back to our founding. It may hurt your feelings, but these people have the right to worship as they wish.
But let's get serious.
What HARM could there be in it?
The world will see when the community center is built (TWO BLOCKS from ground zero, not at ground zero) what kind of people we are.
We are NOT, as a people, fearful, bigoted, foolish, angry, rash, prejudiced, hateful, or ignorant. We are brave and strong and we will not be deterred in the advancement of LIBERALISM in this world, the advance, that is, of the political and economic autonomy of all people -- not just people who look and worship and speak like you.
Warrior | 8.28.10 @ 8:03AM
Telling you want the advancement of LIBERALISM and not LIBERTY. Liberalism is sapping the freedoms, resources and abilities of all people. By the way Nate, screw you and your over simplification of these issues. The Constitutional only states that Congress shall pass no law. It does not limit the state, county or town provinces from executing the will of the people.
Nate| 8.28.10 @ 11:21AM
Warrior,
It DOES limit the state, county and town province when it comes to the first amendment, friend. It's called "incorporation," the legal process by which protections guaranteed by the Constitution are extended to local governments. The first amendment is FULLY incorporated. It's not even in QUESTION by anyone who knows what they're talking about.
The tendency of LIBERALISM is to extend political and economic opportunity to people who have yet to enjoy it.
Reactionaries perceive this increase of liberties for some as a threat to their own liberties, which is why they engage in ceaseless campaigns to demonize and marginalize those aspiring to greater autonomy.
The reactionary is just that: a reaction against the aspirations of those who hope to enjoy the fruits of liberty and of their own labor.
TiM*| 8.28.10 @ 3:23PM
Deconstructionists are just that : Deconstructors of The Constitution , American Traditions , Affiliations , Culture and The Free Market .
The Constitution was ratified on June 21st ,1788 and even years after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment the Supreme Court in United States v. Cruikshank, still held that the First and Second Amendment did not apply to state governments. However, beginning in the 1890s, a series of United States Supreme Court decisions interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to "incorporate" most portions of the Bill of Rights, making these portions, for the first time, enforceable against the state governments. "
Soooo, more than a hundred years after the Founding Fathers ratified The Constitution , it's " INTERPRETATION " was Changed by some 1890's Federal LawBoys .
This is part of the Reason that We Tea Party Rebels have moved into escalating rebellion and will continue to do so until we get back the country some Federal LawBoys helped take from us , more than a hundred years after the Constitution was ratified..
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .
Rise Up !
Take viagra!!!| 8.28.10 @ 4:47PM
What a deluded armchair warrior this petered out sissy is.
He pisses his pants when a firecracker goes off.
Just more proof how stupid and foolish these childhood dreamers are.
Rise up with VIAGRA. Easy enough.
Tim*| 8.28.10 @ 5:14PM
Get Bent Limp One.
Warrior | 8.28.10 @ 4:21PM
You are too stupid to even be a useful idiot Nate. The Bill of Rights was always intended as list of things the federal government could not do. There is no federal allowance for freedom of religion. To assume anything like that, then we must assume a devil worshiping cult could commit a human sacrifice in the name of religion and it be protected by the Bill of Rights. Just as you now will assume that under Sharia law it would be legal to kill gays or stone women. You need to open you eyes to the realities of the world and stop your delusional belief that government is the answer for everything.
Nate| 8.29.10 @ 1:47PM
Warrior,
I don't know where you went to school, or what your parents taught you, or what web sites you are reading, but you don't know much about the Constitution or American history. Of that I'm sure.
The 1st amendment has been interpreted to protect the free expression of religion since the earliest days of the Republic, and it was incorporated in the early-nineteenth century.
While the 1st amendment does not give anyone the right to commit human sacrifice, it does give broad liberty to religious practices. (See...the history of the United States in a local library.)
I'm not sure what you're smoking, but it's not working for you. Try a good cup of black coffee and maybe some Yoga.
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 3:39PM
Nate, I'll bet you spend much time inside of a library..............WITH A MOP AND BROOM!!!
Warrior | 8.29.10 @ 4:37PM
Nate, unlike you, I was able to ride in the long bus.
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Now, in your deluded government educated mind you can argue about interpretations. I interpret your head being lodged shoulder deep into your ass. Tell me why doesn't religious freedom extend to polygamy or even human sacrifice?
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 3:49PM
Nate, You're correct in one [and only] respect, and that is your usage of the word OPPORTUNITY. Everyone is BORN EQUAL [and laws guarantee OPPORTUNITY], but your preferred liberalism seeks to guarantee that opportunity through WEALTH RESIDTRIBUTION, which is false, incorrect, illegal and immoral [which is what this current socialistic government seeks to accompolish]. Government can guarantee opportunity or access, but it's up to the each individual person, according to his/her ABILITIES to EARN those material assets, not to have same STOLEN from those rightfully owning same, in order to transfer same to others [who did not rightfully acquire same]. Go back to school, you socialist MORON. This country is CAPITALISTIC [not a SOCIALISTIC] !!!!!
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 1:42PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6eVVVKFHu0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3QukhG78Ms
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djb_oSoZLDc
Yosemeti Sam| 8.28.10 @ 12:35AM
Um, does Astrology factor into this Cordobamite maneuver?
Is it a wondrous Pegasus or a Trojan-like stalking-horse maneuver?
Yo - El Cid!
Tom Degan | 8.28.10 @ 6:39AM
It has always been easy to laugh at these people. Let's face it; the extreme right wing is a satirist's dream. But in the last year-and-a-half their message has gotten too strange to take with a mere grain of salt. Now they're encouraging the citizenry to hate a certain minority based solely on their religion. Tell me, just what the hell does that remind you of?
Deutschland! Deutschland!
Uber Alles!
Ah! The memories!
And that message is resonating, too. On Tuesday evening some genius by the name of Michael Enright hailed a cab on East 24th Street. After a few minutes of amiable conversation he asked the driver if he was a Muslim. When the man answered in the affirmative, Enright produced a knife and proceeded to slash him about the face and shoulders. The victim, who is doing fine by the way, told the press, "This is the first time I felt like I didn't belong in America." The hysteria is palpable.
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
Jeffrey Lord| 8.28.10 @ 11:44AM
Tom...
"Now they're encouraging the citizenry to hate a certain minority based solely on their religion. "
Really? Who is doing this? Rush? Hannity? Beck? Levin? Fox? Bush? Those of us who worked for Reagan and Kemp? Newt? Palin?
The answer is none of the above. Are there nuts out there? Always...all over the lot politically. In this corner we believe in religious freedom. You have created a boogeyman. You are the ones keeping prayer from schools, from graduation ceremonies, a cross from a national park where it has been for decades, etc etc. Your commitment to religious freedom is, I suspect, sudden.
But if you think its OK to put a Mosque at Ground Zero (and the building was hit, doubtless ashes all over the place of who knows what - possibly human remains) then I assume you find it OK to put a Disney Park on the Manassas Civil War battlefield, a Catholic monument opposing homosexuality in the heart of San Francisco or any city's gay community, a Ku Klux Klan bar next to the Lorraine Motel where MLK was assassinated. All of the above are perfectly free to do as they wish. Simple consideration for others, however, would obviously not be high on their list.
As for me, I do believe in showing a little human empathy for the survivors of 3,000 abruptly and horribly murdered people. Having respect for others - horrors!
Jeffrey Lord| 8.28.10 @ 12:39PM
Tom...
"Deutschland! Deutschland!
Uber Alles!"
PS: This is the inevitable Hitler reference. Hitler, as with Hamas, hated the Jews. Imam Rauf refuses to condemn Hamas, which wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and - yes - kill all the Jews. His refusal to take a stand here is startling. But he is refusing to condemn people who agree absolutely with Hitler. And Hitler, BTW, was a Socialist. As in National Socialist. Which is to say, a leftist of the day.
FYI...
Nate| 8.28.10 @ 1:06PM
Stalin was a Republican. As in "Union of Soviet Socialist REPUBLICS."
Republicans are all terrorists. Haven't you heard of the "Irish REPUBLICAN Army"?
Now, Mr. Lord. You're right about one thing. Comparisons to Hitler are almost always stupid and extremely offensive.
(FYI.... You need to bone up on your history a little. I think you don't really understand what the Nazis were all about. You should read Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich to learn about their actual relationship to German socialists. That is, their actual murder of as many socialists as they could get away with.)
monty.crisco| 8.28.10 @ 2:23PM
Wow, this is a BREATHTAKINGLY stupid argument not quite worthy of a fourth-grader...get a life, dude. Hitler was a leftist. Historical fact.
Nate| 8.29.10 @ 8:19PM
Monty --
In case you hadn't noticed, so is the argument that Nazis were really socialists because they had "socialist" in their party name. It's a stupid argument, but I'm not the one making it. Talk to Lord, Goldberg, et al.
Jeffrey Lord| 8.28.10 @ 3:00PM
Nate...
I have read the book.
What is not discussed, as I recall, is that Communists and Nazis were competing types of socialism. There are two types relevant here.
Type 1 - Russian - in which all is bureaucratic, everything run by the government.
Type 2 - German (Nazi) - While on the surface there appears to be a private sector, entrepreneurs etc, the government in fact tells everyone what and how to produce, at what prices, whom they should buy from and how much they can sell for.
Either way you slice it, this is socialism The market is a fraud. In fact, both Fascists and Nazis were socialist dictaorships. The Communists didn't like them because they wanted the same thing done their way - which once upon a time meant if you didn't do socialism the Russian way you weren't a socialist. Not so. All three are intolerant of freedom - religion, speech, etc etc. They were about violent coercion. Murder fellow socialists? Yes! Of course! What surprise is there in that? All three were run by murderous, socialist thugs.
Nate| 8.28.10 @ 3:25PM
Mr. Lord,
We're getting away from the topic (your topic!) at hand here, but this really won't do as an understanding of fascist Germany.
Are you saying that Sweden or any of our other socialist friends and allies are "really" fascist states, more like the Nazi system than our own?
Nazis used trade unions and other socialist organizing systems to gain power, but they were NOT socialists.
Fascism is actually very easily disentangled from socialism, and it's something political scientists have done for the past century.
Part of the problem with your view -- derived, I believe, from Ayn Rand, who refused to acknowledge the difference between fascism and socialism -- is that it eliminates the analytic use to which the political "spectrum" can be put as a tool.
Your way would simply collapse the two poles a liberal system avoids -- the far left (socialism) and the far right (fascism).
Imagine if Aristotle had done this. Rather than a Golden Mean we would have a muddle of claims but no good way of understanding what, say, a virtue is.
Aristotle's analytic tool allows us to see that courage, for example, is not just the opposite of cowardice. It's also opposed to rashness.
A liberal society, i.e. a rights based society that values pluralism and opportunity for all, is not simply the opposite of a totalitarian society. It avoids the pitfalls of socialism on the one hand and militaristic nationalism on the other.
S.L. Toddard| 8.28.10 @ 5:50PM
Regurgitating Jonah Goldberg, Mr. Lord? Really?
National-socialism specifically and fascism generally relied on a type of blood-and-soil romantic nationalism, which placed it on the right. Socialism, being internationalist in essence, was incompatible with that sort of romantic nationalism, and is placed on the left for relying on abstract universalist principles that deny and seek to destroy the traditions and folkways that bind people together into distinct peoples. Socialism is generally antagonistic to ethno-nationalism (which places socialism on the left), whereas it (ethno-nationalism) was one of the pillars of fascism (which placed fascism on the right). Socialism looks forward, it seeks "progress" - change, radical transformation: this places it on the left. Fascism looked to the past, it sought the rebirth of a golden age, the preservation and cultivation of ethnic greatness, which placed it on the right. Socialism stressed internationalism (Workers of the World Unite!). Fascism stressed nationalism (Italian, German). Socialism, like most left-wing ideologies, was egalitarian, whereas fascism rejected egalitarianism. Socialism sought global class revolution, fascism sought ethno-specific dominance and greatness. These are the differences that place one on the left and the other on the right, whatever similarities there were between Nazi Germany's corporatist economic system and that of the Soviet Union (or Sweden, or whatever). Now, that is not to say there is no overlap. That is not to say that Soviet Communism never glorified the Russian peasantry, or that German fascism never looked to the future. But the differences between fascism and socialism ARE the differences between Right and Left. If you want to argue that fascism was a Left Wing ideology then there is no such thing as a Right Wing.
"We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right', a Fascist century."
"Fascism is... opposed to Socialism to which unity within the State (which amalgamates classes into a single economic and ethical reality) is unknown, and which sees in history nothing but the class struggle."
"In rejecting democracy Fascism rejects the absurd conventional lie of political equalitarianism, the habit of collective irresponsibility, the myth of felicity and indefinite progress."
"Fascism... asserts the irremediable and fertile and beneficent inequality of men who cannot be leveled by any such mechanical and extrinsic device as universal suffrage."
"Fascism (is) the resolute negation of the doctrine underlying so-called scientific and Marxian socialism, the doctrine of historic materialism which would explain the history of mankind in terms of the class struggle and by changes in the processes and instruments of production, to the exclusion of all else."
- Benito Mussolini, founder of fascism, in The Doctrine of Fascism
Why does this bother conservatives? Must we really pretend that the history of right-wing thought is empty of villains and crazies? It is not enough that the left is saddled with Stalin and Mao, the greatest monsters of the 20th century?
Words have meanings. History has value. To pervert either in an effort to advance a political ideology is at best folly, at worst obscene.
Truth to Power| 8.28.10 @ 7:17PM
It is time for you to go back under your Debbie Schlussel rock. Say hi.
Nate| 8.28.10 @ 7:57PM
Amen.
Jeffrey Lord| 8.28.10 @ 10:50PM
SL...
"Regurgitating Jonah Goldberg, Mr. Lord? Really?"
Actually, no. I love Jonah, although lately the feeling is not reciprocated. Be that as it may, this knowledge pre-dates the estimable Jonah.
I'm always amazed at those who would flee Hitler's murderers because Stalin's are more socially acceptable.
S.L. Toddard| 8.29.10 @ 10:42AM
You shouldn't. You're better than he is, however much I disagree with you (and our disagreements are usually centered on the GOP and the goings-on on the right I think, whereas we are more or less in agreement on the left).
And I am just amazed that Stalin's are more socially acceptable. How can that be?
Truth to Power| 8.29.10 @ 1:12PM
"Why does this bother conservatives? Must we really pretend that the history of right-wing thought is empty of villains and crazies? "
SLT is of course an example of a villain and crazy of right wing thought. Not everything in the world is symmetric. Our villains have not been as brutal as their villains. Ideologues like SLT are dangerous if they ever were taken seriously. Ron calling Rand a Islamophobe was a great moment of August. You know you have become a full blown Ideologue when something like that happens. Russel Kirk would not be happy.
I am still amused when you decided to become a Schlussel troll. Any port in a storm I suppose. Nate (Liberal Reader) seems to like what you got. That's something.
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 3:37PM
GD, Nate, with all of your artsy-fartsy knowledge, I'll bet you are quite adept as saying WELCOME TO MCDONALDS!!!!!!!!!!
Lord God Almighty| 8.29.10 @ 1:41PM
Will you fools ever learn?
We used to worry about the Reds, now we worry about the being financially in the Red.
We got rid of Union membership, as Brooks said correctly, faster than Hitlers Storm Troopers.
He made a deal with Krupp, and other German Industrialist to vaporize unions in rturn for their support.
Very similar to today's Tea Bagger philosophy.
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 1:44PM
http://www.youtube.com/watchv=c6eVVVKFHu0
http://www.youtube.com/watchv=J3QukhG78Ms
Nolann Ryann| 8.28.10 @ 2:39PM
Don't waste your time with this doofus. He is going to save the world and teach. Yeah it'll be great to see a generation of young people misinformed by "teachers" who only fight for freedom of religion when that religion is Islam. Thank goodness not one of my children lives in his school district. He clearly doesn't know there isn't a dimes worth of difference between the Nazis (Nationalist Socialists) and the commies or socialists they railed against. God have mercy on the poor souls who are unfortunate enough to enter a classroom and realize this guy is their "teacher." They'll be the fools in later life that claim community organizer/activist as a profession.
monty.crisco| 8.28.10 @ 11:48AM
Tom - you are a moron who clearly cannot use very well the computer sitting in front of you, or you would know that Mr Enright is on your naive side of the political spectrum and was probably committing this act so that he could stir up the hysteria and bigotry of people like you against the right. Of course, he didn't manage to get away due to his incompetence (like all libs) and we got to find out who he really is. So, as a liberal, do you defend his blatant racism and hate crime?
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 3:33PM
Hey, Yankee Moron, tell it to the families of the 9/11 victims in NYC!!!!!
martin j smith| 8.28.10 @ 8:37AM
Tom Degan: Did you know this 21 year old kid was tried and convicted in one day in our media and by Mayor Bloomberg. No need for the niceties of a 'fair trial " right ? Everything that you said is an allegation, still to be proven in the court of law--if you even believe in that. If I were a good lawyer i could get the case thrown out because of all of this pre-trial behaviuor. Next: Where is this kid now ? Have you heard a peep about him yet ? Not I. I he was helkp without bail ? Why ? Where is his family, no statement from a lawyer why ? this case looks to me a s Stalinist " Show Trial". I wouldn't be surprsied if he is doped and reads like Robot a "confessi0on" of all his anti_islamic guilt". This incient in my oppinion has been truly overblown,uncooincidental and high suspcisous es[pecailly considering that this guy was involved with the Marble Collegiate Church, supported the Mosque etc. So, Tom Degan --why don't you goe to Eurpe where you ahppier and I will happy to wave you good by. And, good riddence.
Groucho| 8.28.10 @ 1:57PM
Glenn Beck is the next MLK!
Sarah Palin is the next Rosa Parks!
(And I'm the next Pope!)
Tim*| 8.28.10 @ 3:31PM
Another Poseur JewBoy Comment , Groucho .
Nate| 8.28.10 @ 4:55PM
It's always good to hear from a fascist, Tim*.
At least you don't try to hide it.
But I can't think of anything else to say, except ask why you don't kindly go fuck yourself?
Truth to Power| 8.29.10 @ 11:44AM
The inner Liberal Reader makes an appearance. How pathetic.
Oldefarte| 8.29.10 @ 1:45PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch v=c6eVVVKFHu0
http://www.youtube.com/watch v=J3QukhG78Ms
Tim*| 8.28.10 @ 5:11PM
As a Catholic , I don't take your Shit ObamaBoy Less than a Man NateBoy Nor Groucho ,who poses as a less than a Man Jew ,with a smart mouth against Catholics .
Wanna make somethin' of it Pussy .
Groucho| 8.28.10 @ 8:00PM
Do I "wanna make somethin' of it"?
Yeah. I wanna make somethin' of it.
I wanna spend a few minutes discussing with you the many ways in which you're a silly douche bag.
What do you say to that, genius?
Tim*| 8.28.10 @ 11:08PM
Well first , ObamaBoy Nate , I say you're a bloviating faux intellect , who comes on AS craving some negative attention , cause you can't get positive attention .
Then I say you're a GirlieBoy , who couldn't back her mouth up in person.
Wanna make somethin' of it Twat .
Nate| 8.29.10 @ 1:49PM
Here's the thing, Tim. I don't care what you say.
The One We've Been Waiting For| 8.29.10 @ 4:21PM
We're buying shrimp, Nate. I am really tired from all the golf I have played for the poor and I don't need to over here correcting all your bad work. Stop being so nasty. You must convince Tim* with you keen intellect. Ok, Tim* is smarter than you but we have given you plenty of talking points to confuse these people. Now get back on track. Whatever you do don't give Tim* a chance at you. Your wimpyness is legendary among your friends and they are all progressives. I have tried to tell you that this why we have union thugs. I am depressed when I think of you working on my behalf. Oh well.
martin j smith| 8.29.10 @ 8:12AM
Tim: do not join the Kindergardin crowd. It is truly foolish and what do you accomplish ?Spend time with grown ups will yuh ?
Tim*| 8.29.10 @ 9:33AM
So martin j. smith you're the thoughtful adult ,who earlier posted , " So, Tom Degan --why don't you goe to Eurpe where you ahppier and I will happy to wave you good by. And, good riddence."
Enough said .
Long Ben| 8.29.10 @ 9:19AM
Who at the HuffPo are craving Clitorectomies ?
martin j smith| 8.29.10 @ 10:01AM
I will not enter the Kindergarden.
Tim*| 8.29.10 @ 10:13AM
Ya already did sport ,when you scribbled at Degan with your crayon.
martin j smith| 8.29.10 @ 10:15AM
I have slight change o mind only this respect Tim: You only quotes my last sentence of a post that involved a lot material specificially questions for this Tom Degan and others. It is not quite grown up to not quotethe whole thing which has a lot of substantve questions. Not just throwing name calling around which is what you are doing and if that is what you want to do--fine --go ahead. But does it prove ? And by the way have we heard anythi9bg more about the arrest of a 21 year old kid who is the cause celebra of our Islamophobia ? Anyone out there ?
Tim*| 8.29.10 @ 10:44AM
Gee Smith , you're a bus callin' a canary " yellow " , 'cause it's not quite grown up or substantive to dumb down your argument to leave America .
I notice ya applied that highbrow intellectual solution elsewhere on your AS posts .
Take care of your own juvenile behavior before ya attempt to lecture others .
John DuBose| 8.30.10 @ 11:02PM
Modern Islam as practiced by many of the Islamic countries is not compatible with a 21 st. century world that either conservatives, liberals or (especially) libertarians want. We just have to be smart, patient and absolutely determined to keep the lid on their offensive ambitions for the next two hundred years or so till they find an excuse to become decent neighbors. Its going to be a long hard slog.