Ignoring Calls for Holocaust


Visit NewsReal Blog

Remember in our most recent video from UCSD when David Horowitz  said to the cleverer-than-thou college communist, “Enough. Enough. It’s boring. You’re boring”? That sentiment keeps repeating in my head these days.

Socialist journalist Chris Hedges writing at New Left Marxist Robert Scheer’s online magazine Truth Dig:

The oil pouring into the Gulf of Mexico, estimated to be perhaps as much as 100,000 barrels a day, is part of our foolish death march. It is one more blow delivered by the corporate state, the trade of life for gold. But this time collapse, when it comes, will not be confined to the geography of a decayed civilization. It will be global.

Those who carry out this global genocide—men like BP’s Chief Executive Tony Hayward, who assures us that “The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume’’—are, to steal a line from Ward Churchill, “little Eichmanns.” They serve Thanatos, the forces of death, the dark instinct Sigmund Freud identified within human beings that propels us to annihilate all living things, including ourselves. These deformed individuals lack the capacity for empathy. They are at once banal and dangerous. They possess the peculiar ability to organize vast, destructive bureaucracies and yet remain blind to the ramifications. The death they dispense, whether in the pollutants and carcinogens that have made cancer an epidemic, the dead zone rapidly being created in the Gulf of Mexico, the melting polar ice caps or the deaths last year of 45,000 Americans who could not afford proper medical care, is part of the cold and rational exchange of life for money.

I’ve confronted many of my “progressive” friends with the video of Jumanah “Genocide Girl” Albahri and the Palestinian Nazi assault to destroy Israel that it represents. The answer I get back from them is some variant of: well this is bad but there are plenty of extremists out there. Then they start talking about abortion clinic bombers, anti-gay cult leader (and registered Democrat) Fred Phelps, and violence in the Old Testament.

Next they start berating me for not focusing more on the “fat cats” on Wall Street and the horrific things that the super rich are allegedly doing to America. I ask them to tell me which books they’ve read on the economic crisis that I need to read too so I can become as enlightened as them. And they have no recommendations because all they’ve actually done is imbibed the articles of neo-communists like Hedges, Scheer, and their MSNBC representatives.

And… I… am… so… bored…

We are defined by who we choose to make our enemies. It’s a simple question that ultimately defines who we are politically: what is the single most dangerous threat today?

To leftists the answer is white collar criminals on Wall Street, corporations who accidentally pollute the planet, and anyone who stands in the way of universal healthcare (in other words, conservatives and Tea Partiers.) These are the Nazis, the “Little Eichmanns.” And what the neo-communist Left and the more moderate, “liberal Left” share is that both fundamentally agree on this point. The only difference is the methods each faction utilizes.

Genuine conservatives committed to the survival of free societies have a different answer to the question: those who are self-confessed Nazis, who display the Swastika, lionize Hitler, and are quite frank in their desire to enslave the world under the yoke of Sharia law.

And my progressive friends — who have not studied history or Islam since they’re so busy chronicling the excesses of capitalism — will then ask why.

And I’ll answer by conceding a point to them: the West certainly is like ancient Rome. If you want to call us an “empire,” fine. But remember why the Roman empire actually fell, who was responsible for it, and what Western civilization endured as a result. Barbarian hordes — who were far less advanced — sacked Rome and plunged Europe into centuries of darkness.

If we are Rome then Islamofascism is the barbarian at the gate. And just because we are more advanced technologically it’s no reason to think we are invincible. History clearly demonstrates otherwise. Brains will not save us. As the great Howard Bloom wrote in his must-read first book The Lucifer Principle,

Never forget the pecking order’s surprises. Today’s superpower is tomorrow’s conquered state. Yesterday’s overlooked mob is often the ruler of tomorrow. Never underestimate the third world. Never be complacent about barbarians.

  • Mike

    Very good article David!

  • Ron Grant

    And… I… am… so… bored…

    Muchiboy

    • xman

      so says he who echoes calls for another Holocaust …..

      *rolls eyes*

    • To the ignorant

      so says the ignorant, stupid uninformed that needs to be entertained to keep living!

      You are bored and I am soooooo sick of all of you dumb a…..

  • Cuban Refugee

    In our study of history, and the realization that — although civilization has been blemished by similarly dark periods — there never has been this tremulous certainty that we are currently hurtling to a collective suicide, and that we must take leave from the line of lemmings, and turn to the inner Wisdom — the light that conquers dark — or perish in a man-made hell.

  • tanstaafl jw

    Civilization is a fragile entity. But, like Sir Kenneth Clark, I prefer civilization to the absence of it.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/ADMINISTRAT0R ADMINISTRAT0R

    Good article! Thank you.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/sirdirkfan sirdirkfan

    If we are Rome then Islamofascism is the barbarian at the gate. And just because we are more advanced technologically it’s no reason to think we are invincible.

    Since that has already been proved, as with the fall of the Byzantine by invading Islam hordes, then those dignitaries that still keep telling us that Islam is peaceful must inwardly want the destruction of Civilization, because surely they are not really believing they can use reverse psychology since that is what it seems they are trying to do.

    That RP just makes the Islam feel more invincible, as well as coheses to their attitude that to die a martyr is the only goal they really have and it is the right one.

  • Guest

    The barbarian hordes who sacked the Roman Empire and instituted the Dark Ages in Europe for a thousand years, and opened the East to invasion from the south and east, were people who thought it would be great idea if they forced the Roman Empire to share its wealth with those less fortunate, and who were prepared to resort to violence if they found Rome (and Constantinople) to be resistive to that notion.

  • trickyblain

    "These are the Nazis, the “Little Eichmanns.” And what the neo-communist Left and the more moderate, “liberal Left” share is that both fundamentally agree on this point."

    An absurd statement. It's a dishonest attempt at making the middle complicit with the fringe.

    And just because David's "friends" do not agree that there are serious problems with Islamic extremism, it doesn’t mean that the entire "left" share this ignorance. After all, an artist, who would be considered a 'neo-communist" by most FPM standards, started "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day." Bill Maher rails on about retroprimitive Islam every week, but he also attacks those "capitalists" who poison our oceans and steal our tax dollars. You see, it is possible to hold views on a variety of areas.

    And comparing what some nutcase spewed at a Horowitz function to a nationwide, gov't endorsed persecution (Kristalnaught) os an insult to all those who suffered and died as a result.

    • To the ignorant

      What you just wrote is EXACTLY what the article is about.
      You just ignore what you are told over and over, promoting the idea that these are just a few nut-cases.
      They mean what they say and they represent over billion of them even though most of them prefer to stay silence about it but when the moment will come they will all gladly join-up with the killing and the taking in the name of their god, just trust them!!!!!!!!!

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/GaryRumain Gary Rumain

        Yes, that's part of their jihad obligation.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

      Same question I asked Lary9:

      When voting for a candidate who would you vote for:
      1. A free market conservative who wants to fight Islamofascism.
      2. A "progressive" on economics who denies the jihad and won't use the term "radical Islam."

      Those are the only 2 choices available to you. Which is more important to you, your big government economics or your supposed hawkish foreign policy?

      We know how Bill Maher answers this question. He supports leftist candidates and is hardly a foreign policy hawk even though he said some good things about Islam in "Religulous" and sometimes has decent anti-Jihad monologues.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lary9 Lary9

    As I already explained to the author, it is possible non-conservatives to walk and chew gum. Progressives are starting to realize that tolerance of intolerance, especially if it comes with a fatwah of murder, is hazardous to your health. Also, anything that weakens our republic's overall national fitness, like the nosferati of Wall St., can be just as dangerous to the walls of Rome—or the gates of Vienna—as home grown jihadism. Empires always fall from within and both these malignant challenges are internal.

  • Lary9

    As I already explained to the author, it is possible for non-conservatives to walk and chew gum. Progressives are starting to realize that tolerance of intolerance, especially if it comes with a fatwah of murder, is hazardous to your health. Also, anything that weakens our republic's overall national fitness, like the nosferati of Wall St., can be just as dangerous to the walls of Rome—or the gates of Vienna—as home grown jihadism. Empires always fall from within and both these malignant challenges are internal.

    • To the ignorant

      The progressive are not non-conservative and they do not understand or tolerate any idea but their delusional stupidity about multiculturalism and collectivism!

      • Lary9

        What are you trying to say? Did you even read my words? A dozen hamsters with word processors could have written your reply by trial and error. Woe to our public discourse when English becomes so difficult a language for so many to master.

        • http://madaboutmahound.blogspot.com/ Gary Rumain

          I understood his comment just fine. Leave out words 3 to 8 to better grasp what he said. I.e. The progressives do not understand ….

          • Lary9

            It's not sedition to disagree or as you termed it 'not understand'.
            What makes you think that rejecting free market capitalism as a failed(based on historic results) and unverifiable theoretical system constitutes a lack of understanding? People are always tempted to characterize the other guy as deficient in good sense just because he doesn't support their side's game plan.
            Maybe you've never spoken with an honorable, committed liberal who was well versed in fact and theory. Know any?

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

          When voting for a candidate who would you vote for:
          1. A free market conservative who wants to fight Islamofascism.
          2. A "progressive" on economics who denies the jihad and won't use the term "radical Islam."

          Those are the only 2 choices available to you. Which is more important to you, your big government economics or your supposed hawkish foreign policy?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lary9 Lary9

            You have me quite literally on the horns of a dilemma.
            While you might suppose that I would automatically reject a classic capitalist, I harbor no seething sentiments against 'true' free market economics with two caveats. 1] He/she should support federal regulations with teeth to guard the free marketplace like a junkyard dog. And 2] He/she must be as scrupulously clean as a hound's tooth.

            As far as the progressive with no insight on Islamo-fascism. I'd have to know the man. With enough upgrades, (e.g. slaps upside the head), any left-wing lemming with robotic politicus correctus can be converted to a Robert Spencer acolyte. Look at me!

            Besides what do you mean 'supposed hawkish'? You don't think a leftie can be an agressive, mean fighting machine when it comes to those mad mujahadin? Don't ever forget that progressives like me can be authentic military veterans. In fact, the record shows that Dems in the congress outnumber the GOP in veteran status by 2:1. Look it up.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lary9 Lary9

            ~(Addendum to pt1 of reply to D. Swindle)

            Anyhow—what's the choice? I'd need more facts, but I wouldn't summarily reject the conservative. I voted for Millicent Fenwick of New Jersey. She carried her own lunch to the House in a paper sack.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

            This isn't that complicated: when voting for a candidate which is more important, their foreign policy views or their economics views?

            David Horowitz runs against Michael Moore for a house seat. Who do you vote for?

            Dennis Kucinich runs against Dick Cheney for president. Who do you vote for?

            Yeah, I say supposed hawk because what does it matter if you're a Spencerite on Islam if you're voting for leftists? I mean how are you actually putting your anti-Islamofascist convictions to use? Are you going to pro-Israel rallies? Are you making donations to the Freedom Center and other anti-Jihad organizations?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lary9 Lary9

            I wouldn't even break a sweat over these choices!
            >Horowitz over Moore by an edge
            ('Cause I just don't trust the Irishman from Flint)
            >Kucinich over Cheney (Lynn or Dick…it doesn't matter.)
            ('Cause I couldn't bring myself to vote for a Cheney even
            if Prince Bandar bin Sultan held a gun to my groin.)
            OK? It's a split.
            Now—how I put my knowledge of Islamo-fascism to use is simple, direct and very effective. I'm a member of ACT for America for several years but even more importantly, I spread the word among the naive and uninformed on the left! And I have lots of access to progressive Dems who need enlightenment on 'jihadist real politic'. I've got plenty of notches on my gunbelt. So I know in my heart I'm contributing to that cause.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

            That you would pick Dennis Kucinich for president over Dick Cheney demonstrates that you don't take the war against Islamofascism very seriously.

          • Lary9

            That's absurd! You gave me a totally false choice. I don't expect either candidate to do my job as a Citizen soldier for me. I'll carry the colors myself on this issue.
            Do you you think it's fair to present me with a locked two candidate choice and then dismiss it so unreasonably? And I gave you an fair, honest response.What do you need in order to grant some respect to a person with a differing opinion?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

            It's not a false choice. I could just as easily have said Kerry vs. Bush, Obama vs McCain. One candidate takes the war on Islamofascism seriously the other does not. You just confessed to me that you're willing to vote into office people who don't take the war with Islamofascism seriously.

            Now you're made that I've unmasked you so you're whining about me not respecting your position.

            Is the war with Islamofascism the most serious issue of the day or isn't it? If it is then it should be priority #1 when deciding who's going to lead the country.

          • Lary9

            As I long as I permit you to ask the question, you can limit my answers to 'yes/no' type responses—but you're 'leading the witness'. Furthermore, intellectual life is not a true/false quiz. Sometimes a man must draw on a lifetime of experience to make a choice. And sometimes those choices leave us feeling ambivalent. Politics is a moral exercise and comes with built-in ambiguities. You know this. You didn't get through graduate school on multiple choice answers.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

            Voting for candidates or bills is a yes/no response. Everything isn't an intellectual exercise with infinite shades of gray. In life you have to take actions and make decisions. And the choice is between a candidate who takes the war on Islamofascism seriously and the one who doesn't. That's the way each presidential election is going to break down.

            And you're obfuscating on this because you know that it reveals that you don't take these matters as seriously as you want to think you do and want to make us think you do. You despise the Cheneys more than you care about defending America from Islamofascists. That tells me that all your talk about agreeing with Spencer and wanting to support the war on terror is really just talk.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lary9 Lary9

            You're as relentless as a rabid ferret. I should know better than to answer hypothetical questions about politics. Politics especially is never hypothetical. Electoral choices are always presented in real time, with real life pairing. Deftly handled such 'mind exercises' can be manipulated to produce contradictions and absurd, self-serving statements like— "You despise the Cheneys more than you care about defending America from Islamofascists."
            I refer you back to my membership in ACT and my missionary zeal among the 'lefties'. Why do argue so strenuously to prove that my positions are contradictory?
            Simply put, I don't think that government is solely responsible for barricading the 'Gates of Vienna'. As a conservative thinker you should like that kind of reduced reliance on the government. Right?
            ~cont~

  • Beelzebub

    "To leftists the answer is white collar criminals on Wall Street, corporations who accidentally pollute the planet,"

    accidentally? maybe it's due to incompetence and lax oversight because they know that in case of an "accident" they may have to pay a settlement (or none) that will be way below their profit margin.

  • Lary9

    Wow! You really have aptly chosen your ID user name! I can feel the flame and and smell the brimstone. Your obscurantist harangue is bubbling up all scary like the witches' cauldron in Macbeth (Act IV, Sc 1). Shame on you for such unprovoked rudeness.

  • Lary9

    How long has it been since you got laid?
    Can I say that here? If not—I'm sorry in advance. Excise it if you must—I'll understand…
    [Out! Out...damned spot!]
    Scheiße ! I do seem to be channeling Macbeth today!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lary9 Lary9

    cont~ [reply to DS]
    So then if I gave you a choice of either David Duke or Pat Moynihan… or either Calvin Coolidge or FDR and asked who would you take— this is not hypothetical? How about Orville Faubus vs Shirley Chisholm? (This is fun.) How about Ted Williams vs Mickey Mantle? You get it? These are hypothetical constructs and they are absurd because they're set ups—except for the last choice which is appropriate because it's about a real game with real statistical outcomes. The obvious choice here is Ted Williams.
    To respond directly: yes I would, as an independent, claim the right to support both. But I also reject the idea that a hard stand against Islamo-fascism is a conservative only posture.

  • Ruth Hirt

    Shake the conceding, complacent one in White House, give him private tutorials in economics, international diplomacy, policies and intelligence. Why is he there in the first place? I pray Heaven shield you, Folks.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

    Your final comment regarding my age again discourages me from dialoguing with you.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lary9 Lary9

    Oh please. It's called humor!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lary9 Lary9

    You've "unmasked" me, accused me of "obfuscating", challenged the authenticity of my most sincerely held beliefs and you're miffed over a joke about my age?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

    You have obfuscated this whole time. I've asked you a very straightforward question: which is more important to you in your political life, your foreign policy views or your economic views? And you've danced around the issue in comment after comment refusing to give me a straight answer no matter how I frame the question.

    Because my point is this: if you don't place foreign policy — the war with Islamofascism — as your primary priority you're basically going to spend most of your time supporting leftists who undermine your supposed foreign policy views. And thus you having Spencerite foreign policy views basically doesn't matter then.

    So sorry if I'm a bit frustrated when you decided to make a "joke" about the fact that I'm a "young scholar." I'm just a bit burnt out by getting demeaning references to my age when I'm trying to have an intellectual discussion with someone.

  • Lary9

    No sweat. I get touchy too but about being so old!
    Anyhow, I said up a few posts, I'm taking the 5th. Amendment on hypothetical questions from now on. I can't ever remember coming through any hypothetical Q&A feeling satisfied. In fact, I always feel like I just emerged from a car wash only in my clothes.Probably because there's no right answer to most of them. Sorta like… "When did you stop beating your wife?" That kind.
    I really do care profoundly about what I believe. I've earned that caring by assenting to each and every precious idea by a process of intellectual effort and hardscrabble experience. So I get defensive when my honor and credibility are impugned. I don't even care if the ideas are denigrated and rejected without mercy by an adversary. But I'm an honorable, moral man and that's not easily evident online— except by virtue of my publically posted ideas.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/DavidSwindle DavidSwindle

    If you're an honorable and moral man then you won't need to dance around the question, and this isn't a hypothetical at all, it's the reality of our political culture: which is more important to you, your leftist economic views or your neo-conservative understanding of the war with Islamic Fascism?

    When it comes down to the practical realities of how one votes and spends one's time then you have to make a choice.

    If you refuse to prioritize one over the other then just say so.

  • Lary9

    Jeez Louise! It's getting tighter than a Republican's wallet in this text frame! I'm starting a New Comment thread for this Reply below. Cont.~~~