The World Turned Upside Down

Pages: 1 2

There are few more trenchant, fearless, and necessary cultural critics than Melanie Phillips. A columnist for London’s Daily Mail and winner of the 1996 Orwell Prize for journalism, she is the author of a number of books, most notably the brilliant Londonistan (2006), which chronicled the cultural decay that paved the way for England to become the epicenter of “Eurabia.”

Now her wide-ranging new book, The World Turned Upside Down, provocatively subtitled “The Global Battle Over God, Truth, and Power,” chronicles how the West has moved from the Enlightenment to the Age of Unreason, when rationality and truth have given way to ideology and propaganda. “Power,” she writes, “has now hijacked truth and made it subservient to its own ends. The result is a world turned upside down.”

I was honored to meet Melanie Phillips at her speaking engagement Monday at the Beverly Hills Four Seasons Hotel, and she graciously agreed to an interview.

MT: Ms. Phillips, you begin your new book by saying that on diverse issues ranging from Princess Diana to the war in Iraq to global warming, “society seems to be in the grip of a mass derangement.” What made you suspect that these random issues might be connected, and what explanation did you find for this phenomenon?

MP: Over many years, I wrote about a number of controversial issues which appeared to be all different from each other — ‘child-centered’ education theory, the consequences of divorce and lone parenthood, immigration, multiculturalism, minority rights, man-made global warming, the war in Iraq, Israel and the origin of the universe. Because they were all so disparate, it took me some time to realize that they had a couple of big things in common. They were fundamentally anti-west (yes, even the militant atheists who were after all gunning for the core beliefs of western civilization). And they were all issues on which, in the progressive circles that controlled public discourse, only one point of view was permitted. All dissent was mocked, vilified, and treated as totally beyond the pale. But since that dissent very often consisted of stating the facts in the face of ideology, prejudice or even – as with the deranged and obsessional hysteria against Israel – genocidal bigotry, reason itself along with the defense of life and liberty seemed to be turning into truths that dared not speak their name.

Please don’t mistake me – I’m not saying that there aren’t legitimate differences of opinion on such issues. But what I’m talking about goes beyond genuine disagreement. I’m talking about the sheer impossibility of bringing facts and evidence to the table, as it were, because the ‘progressives‘ hold that there simply cannot be any alternative to their ‘received truth’.  They are in short impervious to reason, so that those who try to inject some evidence or alternative ways of thinking into the debate are demonized as evil or insane. These ideologies rest very often upon distortions, fabrications and lies, and yet intimidate opposition into silence. And that’s very frightening. It’s a totalitarian mindset.

At the same time, I also noticed that society seemed to be becoming generally more and more irrational. Emotion was increasingly taking the place of reason. There were displays of mass hysteria, as seen on the streets of Britain with the death of Princess Diana when epidemic ‘grief’ over someone no one knew other than through her carefully manipulated (and distorted) media image created an ugly mood that even threatened the monarchy itself. A very similar mass irrationality around a cult of personality onto whom people projected their hopes and fears took hold in America, when Barack Obama gained the Presidency having been portrayed, literally, as a second Jesus Christ – and during a campaign in which the copious evidence of his extremist background and associations was simply air-brushed out of the picture.

In addition, more and more people were subscribing to a range of weird and wacky beliefs, superstitions and cults, ranging from parapsychology, séances and ‘healing’ crystals to bizarre conspiracy theories involving the US government, UFOs and – almost invariably – the Jews.

I came to the conclusion that these apparently disparate issues and phenomena were intimately connected. Western society – particularly in Britain, but many of these trends were also on display in the US and other western countries – was just losing the plot wholesale. It seemed to be experiencing a wholesale repudiation of reason and progress, and was moving backwards into a darker, pre-modern pattern of anti-enlightenment and bigotry.

This was particularly striking, since western society tells itself that it is the very acme of reason – so much so that, particularly in Britain, progressives dismiss organized religion as just so much irrational mumbo-jumbo which stands in opposition to science, human rights and modernity. Yet these very people want to return the west to some pre-industrial nirvana of mud huts and communal living in order to ‘save the planet’, take the side of jihadists who want to destroy human rights, and mount a kind of secular inquisition to destroy the careers and reputations of those who dare assert scientific evidence against ideological dogma.

I came eventually to the conclusion that, far from ushering in an age of perfect reason, equality and human rights, the secular onslaught against the Judeo-Christian heritage had seriously undermined rationality, the equal dignity of all human beings and their human rights. And indeed – curious as this may seem – at the very core of all these civilization-busting ideologies lies an animus against Jews, the religious codes of Judaism or the right to national self-realization of the Jewish people.

Pages: 1 2

  • Herb

    Ms. Phillips makes a most trenchant critique of the current malaise that can be called "Suicide of the West" (the title of a 1963 classic). She is correct in pointing to the climate of Jew-hatred as the seed of this suicidal impulse among the intelligentsia. It's pervasive – Israel was once regarded as small but heroic, now it is demonized and made a pariah state (though how five million Jews can both oppress and hold at bay three hundred million Arab Muslims is beyond me).

    But the New Antisemitism is never referred to as Neo-Naziism. Wonder why.

    • Tom

      Because Nazism and its Neo- varieties espouse militarism, and these modern delusions are largely anti-militaristic. It is this real difference that allows them to think they are polar opposites from the Nazis, when in fact they have so much in common,

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Actually, it is far worse that just 300 million Arab/Muhammadans. It is the entire Islamic ummah. For instance, Israel isn’t even recognized by Indonesia and Israelis are forbidden from visiting. Indonesia is a predominant Islamic nation.

      In the West, wherever Muhammadans mass immigration has occurred, during the Second Lebanon War in 2006, we saw Muhammadan demonstrations denouncing Israel and vilifying Jews while praising Hezbollah.

      What is happening in Israel is not just a conflict between Arabs and Israeli Jews. Instead, it is a jihad that involves the entire Islamic ummah, and furthermore that jihad being waged against Israel, like also the greater global jihad at large, is both perpetual and permanent.

      In other words, regardless of all peace processes, the jihad being waged against Israel by the Islamic ummah will continue as long as Israel exists. Therefore, the only solution is to render the Islamic ummah too weak to wage jihad.

      Likewise, the greater global jihad at large will also continue as long as the un-Islamic world exists, and the only solution is also to render the Islamic ummah too weak to wage jihad, i.e., ban and reverse Muhammadan immigration from the West, confiscate their oil wealth and oil assets, and isolate the Islamic world.

  • Jaafar_1946

    Herb, if you want to understand how the five million can oppress the 300 million, try saying it over and over again. If that doesn't work, maybe say it to yourself real loud while holding your breath and putting your fingers in your ears. :-)

    • Herb

      And your point is what, Jaafar?

      • bdouglasaf1980

        If I read his comment correctly, I think the point is to believe it because you are told to believe it by the intelligentsia. If you repeat it long enough maybe you will.

        The point is made using sarcasm.

        • Jaafar_1946

          You win the gold medal, bdouglas! There are lots of "facts" out there which can only be taken to be real facts by a sort of self-brainwashing. Single mothers, no problem! (In fact, they are heroes!) Only negative comments about Christianity are allowed, while we permit only positive comments about Islam. (Cultural suicide: it's the new fun thing!) Jews are the new Nazis! Bush was Hitler! Obama is going to make the world a Much Better Place! Pacifism makes a great foreign policy! Everything in the world is America's fault, and is especially the fault of the Demon Bush!

        • Herb

          OK, the sarcasm blew past me but I have had Arabs tell me that Israeli successes are due to the fact that dem JOOOOOOOZ are such a fiendishly "clever" people.

          I replied to them that when five million Arab Muslims are surrounded by three hundred million screaming JOOOOOZ then I'll more better understand the Arab viewpoint.

  • Gavin

    It's all been predicted and foretold in the Old Testament.

    • bdouglasaf1980

      Absolutely. This bizzare world psychosis can't really be explained without the context of spiritual warfare.

      • bubba4

        Yep, you two obviously are all about reason.

  • Cuban Refugee

    When I was a young teen, I was a screaming fan of the Beatles — who were beneficiaries of a cult of personality for their time. Today, I am a huge admirer of another Brit, Melanie Phillips, and in awe of her insight. I filled out countless of losing entry blanks to "win a trip to London" to meet the Beatles. Today, I would give my eye teeth to have tea with Melanie in her Londonistan, or have a bagel and coffee in my New York, just to sit and listen to her wisdom — anyone who knows me can tell you that "the world turned upside down" is a phrase I have been using with more increasing frequency as of late. I have added Melanie's latest book to my list of "next reads," and thank you, Mark, for an excellent interview with the author.

    • mark

      Melanie was among few that spoke up in the Brit press in an excellent Spectator.UK column concerning wholesale support of Obama. She asked the question: are we really going to do this thing? (elect Obama) It was an astounding article, and those in opposition when I was into commenting on blogs hated it mightely. They respond the same to mention of Hayek's excellent "Road to Serdom."

    • http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/author/mtapson/ MarkTapson

      Cuban, you're welcome, glad you liked it. Like you, I'm a huge admirer of hers (and the Beatles!). It was my pleasure to meet and interview her.

  • Phobic, rationally

    Thanks to the gifted and insightful Melanie Phillips. Read LONDONISTAN…..Also read Brigitte Gabriel's books. Read Ariana Fallaci and Robert Spencer. The West is under seige…not just from Islam….but from within….from the anarchist left. The left wants the West to suffer and be broken…and is only too happy to acquiesce to radical fundementalist Islamists to be their hatchet men…unfortunately, the atheist Berkeley to Boston leftists are going to be taken apart by their Frankenstein monster, once it gets out of control.
    One of the most misused and , actually, meaningless words is "progressive"…most of the leftists and liberals who identify themselves as "progressives" are actually backwards 1930s style socialists, Marxists and conformity obsessed Orwellian types…They are deluded into thinking open borders, sanctuary cities, multiculturism, mosques in every town will lead to utopia…….This is the decline and fall of the West.

    • barny

      "conformity obsessed Orwellian types…"

      Like you all blindly accept and follow a guy who calls himself a Scholar of Islam?

      A man who niether speaks, writes, understands Arabic… a man who is too cowardly to hold a (live) debate with a moslem scholar?

      A man who is a fake and liar!

      Guys…. $$$$$$$$PENCER has just pulled the big fat woolly burka over your very own eyes.

      • Spirit_Of_1683

        Off you go back to Pakistan, terrorist-loving fiend. Nobody needs to understand Arabic to know what Islam is after 9/11, Bali, Beslan etc. They only need to study 1,390 years of the history of Jihad, and how countless infidel civilizations were destroyed by these savage barbarians over those 14 centuries, and all to sate the appetite of an utterly wicked mass-murdering, raping, thieving, misogynistic, illiterate and barbaric paedophile called Mohammed. I'll bet you salivated when news of the murder of 350 kids and their teachers in that school broke, because you are nothing but a hate-filled Islamist in the Bin Laden mode who wants Sharia law imposing on infidels, and we and you know it.

  • BS77

    Print comment

  • USMCSniper

    Onhar Ghate: Multiculturalism rests on the anti-mind idea that no individual can objectively know reality; he can know only "reality" as filtered by the particular collective he happens to belong to. So males and females, whites and blacks, Westerners and Africans, each inhabit their own "realities" and have their own "truths." This is also the reason behind the revival of mysticism: the spread of creationism in the curriculum, the popularity of psychics on television, the reading of tarot cards at corporate functions. If people absorb the idea that the rational mind is incapable of knowing reality, they will turn for guidance to some irrational substitute, such as faith. Ignoring the death of a leading academic philosopher is not significant. But ignoring philosophy itself is–because it means we will remain in the grip of our culture's anti-mind philosophy.

    • Liberty Clinger

      Faith is any belief in that which cannot be physically observed – any belief undiscoverable by science. Yes, faith in the God of creation is irrational (because God can't be seen physically), but the atheist must accept the irrational belief that our universe created its self (violating Einstein’s law of mass/energy conservation – E=MC2), or that our universe is eternal and un-created (a belief based on something which cannot be physically observed, i.e.: observation of something whose beginning is in the eternal past – belief in a universe that had no beginning).

      “Where revelation comes into its own is where reason (science) cannot reach. Where we have few or no ideas for reason (science) to contradict or confirm, this is the proper matters for faith…that Part of the Angels rebelled against GOD, and thereby lost their first happy state: and that the dead shall rise, and live again: These and the like, being Beyond the Discovery of Reason (Science), are purely matters of Faith; with which Reason (Science) has nothing to do.“ John Locke

      • USMCSniper

        Let us define our terms. What is reason? Reason is the faculty which perceives, identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses. Reason integrates man's perceptions by means of forming abstractions or conceptions, thus raising man's knowledge from the perceptual level, which he shares with animals, to the conceptual level, which he alone can reach. The method which reason employs in this process is logic — and logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. What is mysticism? Mysticism is the acceptance of allegations without evidence or proof, either apart from or against the evidence of one's senses and one's reason. Mysticism is the claim to some non-sensory, non-rational, non-definable, non-identifiable means of knowledge, such as "instinct," "intuition," "revelation,' or any form of "just knowing."

        • Liberty Clinger

          Reason is the ability to see, understand and accept self-evident truth, i.e.: reason is tantamount to science. Faith is any belief undiscoverable by science, which is to say any belief based on that which is unobservable and untestable.

          Religion contains faith that eternal God created matter; an irrational, supernatural belief not based on direct observation. Atheism contains faith that matter is either eternal or created it's self; an irrational, supernatural belief not based on direct observation. By definition there can be no conflict between Science and either Atheistic Faith or Religious Faith since all faith is outside the domain of science, and science is likewise outside the domain of any faith. As John Locke observed true faith and true science are, and always have been, mutually exclusive and never in conflict.

  • BS77

    ONe of the most carelessly misused words is "progressive". Liberals and leftists think they represent "progress", when, in fact, they represent regression to 1930s collectivist socialism and obsessive conformism to dogmatic group think…..as Orwell so brilliantly portrayed in Animal Farm and 1984. Melanie Phillips, Brigitte Gabrielle, Robert Spencer and many others are the Paul Revere's of today. Unfortunately, the left is actually extremely irrational and anti intellectual despite their academic pretensions…and embraces a crazy quilt of open borders, sanctuary cities, multiculturism, an ironic acceptance of one of the most dictatorial and intolerant ideologies ….the "religion of peace"…..Thanks to Melanie Phillips …check out her website.

  • Chezwick_Mac

    If you ever want to glimpse into the collective mind of the Left, visit the 'comments is free' section of the 'Guardian'. Philips is referred to there as "mad Mel", and after reading their comments, you'd think she is every bit as malevolent as Osama bin Ladin (or perhaps more so).

    A rational discourse with such people is impossible…which is what is so disheartening. These are mostly WESTERNERS, born and raised in the same culture as ourselves. And yet, based on their ideological/philosophical proclivities, they might as well come from Mars.

  • stosh

    Voegelin's Book "From Enlightenment to Revolution" is a good start.

  • alexander

    A person in burka ( a man? a woman? a child?) was let on an airplane in an airport WITHOUT checking, because a muslim man said it is his wife and should not be pat down…….15 minutes ago by Mark Stein on Rush Limbaugh show.
    START PROFILING!

    • ziontruth

      What a parable this is of our times: In which the innocent have to go through degradations, while those most likely to be perpetrators of evil keep their undisturbed comfort.

      • bubba4

        maybe, if it's true…which is probably isn't…Rush lies constantly.

  • wasicu36

    A favorite saying on the left is "A mind is like a parachute, it only works when open". We eed to embrace the opposite: A mind is like a screen door – leave it open for too long and you get invaded by vermin!

    • Liberty Clinger

      A mind open to truth is a sane mind, but opening the mind sumultaneously to lies and truth is insanity.

      • sebyandrew

        Here is another: An open mind is like an open mouth, made to be closed on something solid.

        G.K. Chesterton

    • sebyandrew

      Here is another: An open mind is like an open mouth, made to be closed on something solid
      . G.K. Chesterton

  • barny

    Indeed, Phillip's writes Conspiracy Theories… well, that's what many academics and historians say about "Eurabia" and Bat Ye'or.

    No serious academic takes this cr ap seriously.

    If so, THE PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION should also be seen as a serious piece of academic work.

    This site is full of re tards… seriously!

    • stern

      barny, thank you. In just a few short paragraphs, you have provided a stunning example of absolutely everything Ms. Phillips has written. "No serious academic" – yup, check for the intelligentsia, as pointed out my MP. "Conspiracy theories" – there you go. And finally, the coup de grace, the ad hominem attack, the insult, the absolute certainty that because we disagree with you, we must be either insane or just plain dumb.
      Way to go barny!!!

      • http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/author/mtapson/ MarkTapson

        Right, stern. "Serious academic" is the Left's way of saying "Academics we agree with."

      • sebyandrew

        Better leave that one bullet in your pocket Barn.

    • Cuban Refugee

      Barny, I have come to believe that we are engaged in the ultimate battle between good and evil. It now seems that the powers of darkness are winning, but as we know from Revelation, light and truth will be victorious. You'd better get on the side of the, as you call us, "re tards" before it's too late — is that why you came to visit this site … just to test the water?

      This is off subject, Barny, but I have been thinking that there has been Divine intervention in order to prove Obama's ineligibility to be President. First, the presidential seal mysteriously fell off the podium when he was giving a speech, and then during his visit to India THREE TIMES the red carpet that had laid on the tarmac flew off to the point that they dispensed with using it. What do you think, Brilliant Barny, could this be a sign?

    • ziontruth

      "No serious academic takes this c–p seriously."

      With a few exceptions like Victor David Hanson, no academic should be taken seriously, because no academic takes reality (over his or her theory of how the world works) seriously.

      Saying no academic takes an idea seriously is, therefore, a point in its favor.

  • barny

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUGVPBO9_cA

    You haver all been had by the antiGentile, Zionist, Phillips (like Geller) … her only loyalty is with ISRAEL. These poeple cliam to be British patriots but they aren't.

    Seriously, they are abouit to shaft Europe (and the West)…we had enough of them, (for over 3000 yrs they've been trouble causers and a nuisance).
    http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/expelled.htm

    When will you guys ever learn.

    • Herb

      Barmy, everyone from Hitler to Arafat to Rauf to Obama knows that when something goes wrong, anywhere in the world,

      IT'S DEM JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOZ!!!

      ;^)

    • umustbkidding

      Isn't it Barney?

    • Spirit_Of_1683

      It seems we have living proof here that Adolf Hitler isn't dead after all. He's still alive at the ripe old age of 121, has converted to Islam, learned pidgin English, and is posting here under the pseudonym Barny.

    • MixMChess

      We all see through you barny, your only loyalty is with Islamo-facism. When will we ever learn?

    • sebyandrew

      Better put that (only) bullet back in your pocket Barn.

      Sheriff Andy Taylor

  • stern

    Ah, Barny, we've been waiting for you. All this column needed was a prime example of the mindset Ms. Phillips has so brilliantly exposed – and here you are!

  • Spider

    My dad had the perfect term for todays "intelligentsia " he called them
    EDUCATED IDIOTS.

    • Morrismajor

      As opposed to the right who are mainly UNEDUCATED IDIOTS

      • ziontruth

        The Right is as educated as you are, if not more so. The question is what you're educated in. That makes a world of difference. Have you gone through the braingrinder of Marxist-directed Public Education, or have you sought out the pre-Marxist classics of your culture? That's the principal question.

    • alexander

      liberals are educated beyond their intelligence – they can be full of verbiage but the logic is missing.
      Wisdom comes from individual thinking, not from reading, in their case, socialist/communist drivel.

  • Morrismajor

    Obviously Ms. Phillips must Imagine there was a time when everything & everyone was so rational. Sorry Mrs Spock, but it wasn't After all we also have the right with their fundy evangelical nonsense, Creationism, a cult centered around a vacuous media celebrity from Alaska being fed by egomaniacs.

    • http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/author/mtapson/ MarkTapson

      And obviously you haven't read the book, you're incapable of understanding her argument, and you only popped on to spew your bigoted leftist cliches. You're a perfect example of the close-minded self-righteousness she's highlighting.

      • bubba4

        Thanks Mark for showing us how it's done.

        Nebulous, evil boogeymen don't do anyone any good unless you can shut down debate with them.

        • http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/author/mtapson/ MarkTapson

          bubba4, you're going to have to clarify. Show how what's done? What nebulous, evil boogeymen? If you mean shutting down debate with the previous commenter, he didn't come to debate. His comment was just a hit-and-run attack on, irrelevently, creationism, Sarah Palin, and fundy (?) evangelicals, that showed he doesn't know or care what Phillips' actual point is.

  • Liberty Clinger

    “Power,” she writes, “has now hijacked truth and made it subservient to its own ends. The result is a world turned upside down.”

    “The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others… We are different from all the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we're doing… Power is not a means, it is an end… The object of power is power… Always there will be the intoxication of power… We are the priests of power… Power is power over human beings, over the body; but above all over the mind… The real power; the power we have to fight for night and day is not power over things but over men… You believe that reality is something objective, external, existing in its own right. You also
    believe that the nature of reality is self-evident… I tell you Winston that reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind and nowhere else; not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes and in any case soon perishes; only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the Party holds to be truth is truth.” George Orwell – 1984

    • Luis

      Don't mind that George Orwell was, gasp, a widely known leftist.

      But do quote him like he's some kind of a right wing illuminaire. I find it rather hilarious.

      • Liberty Clinger

        George Orwell might have been a leftist at some point in his life, but he changed and moved to the right later in life. Orwell was an anti-Communist on moral grounds.

        “It had long been realized that the only secure basis for oligarchy is collectivism. Wealth and privilege are most easily defended when they are possessed jointly. The so-called "abolition of private property" (Communist Manifesto) meant in effect the concentration of property in far fewer hands than before… It had always been assumed that if the Capitalist Class were expropriated Socialism must follow; and unquestionably the Capitalists had been expropriated. Factories, mines, land, houses, transport, everything had been taken away from them; and since these things were no longer private property it followed that they must be public property. Ingsoc (Socialist Principles of Oceania), which grew out of the earlier Socialist movement and inherited its phraseology, has in fact carried out the main item in the Socialist program with the result; foreseen and intended beforehand, that economic inequality has been made permanent.” George Orwell – 1984

      • Liberty Clinger

        “It had long been realized that the only secure basis for oligarchy is collectivism. Wealth and privilege are most easily defended when they are possessed jointly. The so-called "abolition of private property" (Communist Manifesto) meant in effect the concentration of property in far fewer hands than before… It had always been assumed that if the Capitalist Class were expropriated Socialism must follow; and unquestionably the Capitalists had been expropriated. Factories, mines, land, houses, transport, everything had been taken away from them; and since these things were no longer private property it followed that they must be public property. Ingsoc (Socialist Principles of Oceania), which grew out of the earlier Socialist movement and inherited its phraseology, has in fact carried out the main item in the Socialist program with the result; foreseen and intended beforehand, that economic inequality has been made permanent.” George Orwell – 1984

      • Liberty Clinger

        Oops, sorry for the double-post.

        • sebyandrew

          Good posts LC.

  • Liberty Clinger

    "I also noticed that society seemed to be becoming generally more and more irrational."

    “Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously (the lie and the truth), and accepting both of them (Insanity)… with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth… Those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is; in general the greater the understanding the greater the delusion; the more intelligent the less sane… If human equality is to be forever averted; if the "high," as we have called them, are to keep their places permanently; then the prevailing mental condition must be controlled insanity…" George Orwell – 1984

  • Luis Dias

    I haven't read the book, so everything I say here is merely based upon the interview.

    I find the obsession that many writers have with the jews incredible. No, the 5 million people that are having a bad time in Israel, not only with muslim fanatics, but also with ortodox jew lunatics, have very little to do with what is happening in general in the *west*, and even less to what is happening in the world.

    The only thing that keeps Israel on our mental maps is not the amazing nature of "Jewishdom", but rather the fact that Israel was west's invention, and it's still unresolved, and like all small problems that keep on being unresolved, they itch quite a lot.

    I also would like to point out that the generalization of "atheists" who are anti-west and thus for islamo-fascism, etc., is not a worthy generalization. I could well name all of the so-called "New Atheists", and all the people here would recognize the phenomenon that these people represent, a quest for less religion as a whole, and quite the furious attack on islamo-fascism, specially from Christopher Hitchens, and the defense of western values, Enlightenment, etc.

    Lastly, to point out that perhaps the stridentness that comes from the so-called intellectuals against homeopathy, creationism, etc.,etc., is more because of the increasing frustration on the fact that these loonies *do get to be heared and respected* for their crazy, dangerous, pathetic ideas.

    • ziontruth

      "The only thing that keeps Israel on our mental maps is … the fact that Israel was west's invention"

      No, Israel is not the West's invention, Israel is God's invention (by way of the fact that the Jewish nation is of His express design). Read the Bible sometime instead of spouting revisionist Marxist nonsense.

      "I could well name all of the so-called 'New Atheists', and all the people here would recognize the phenomenon that these people represent, a quest for less religion as a whole, and quite the furious attack on islamo-fascism,"

      Few and far between in comparison to believers who carry out that task, and even the best of them are unable to free themselves entirely of the notion of appeasing Islam through material gifts.

      "the stridentness that comes from the so-called intellectuals against homeopathy, creationism, … s more because of the increasing frustration on the fact that these loonies *do get to be heared and respected* for their crazy, dangerous, pathetic ideas."

      The day homeopaths or Biblical creationists fly planes into office buildings, I'll agree with you. Until then I say: Get a grip.

      • bubba4

        Everyone take note, this is the 2nd half of the reason why the Israeli problem simply won't be solved.

        • ziontruth

          Everyone take note how Bubba4 always demands of the Jews, and never of the Muslims, to take steps to solve the problem.

          It's like on the Grauniad: You bring the Jewish nation's ancient connection to their land, the pond scum there reply, "Can we just let go of Bronze Age history?" But on an article telling how the Muslims still view the West through the lens of the crusades, with the author taking care to emphasize that the Muslims have long memories, if you dare to suggest that the Muslims shorten them a little, you get the Race and Islamophobia cards shoved at you quicker than a TSA pat-down.

          I'm sick and tired of those demanding separation of religion and politics. Non-religion in the form of Marxism has claimed 100,000,000 adult lives, as well as a constant stream of unborn blood (through abortion). Let's have separation of atheism and state. And I don't care if that makes me like the Muslims. I have no need of moral differentiation in order to be justified in fighting them; it's enough that they are a threat to me and mine, that's the best justification.

          • bubba4

            Don't worry ziontruth, anytime I write a comment to you, I send a letter to the West Bank and Gaza addressed simply to "Muslims" and I reiterate that they are part of the problem. Why don't you all give up on the "I'm more special in God's eyes that you are".

            "I'm sick and tired of those demanding separation of religion and politics. "

            I know…sheeesh…stupid founding fathers.

            "Non-religion in the form of Marxism has claimed 100,000,000 adult lives, as well as a constant stream of unborn blood"

            Non-religion…lol. What a scholar. I'm just reeling from how many people non-war has killed over the centuries…I'm sure we can rationalize killing millions with war when we see the stats on how many people have died from non-war…

            You're a moron.

          • ziontruth

            "Why don't you all give up on the 'I'm more special in God's eyes that you are'."

            The big problem that I (like a lot of people in the world, strange as it may seem to you) actually believe that the claims of my religion are true–that God is real, that the Torah is His word and so on. You want me to trash my beliefs for your theoretical construct (your conception that a world without religious beliefs would be a better place). Even if I gave your theory credence (which I don't, see above about non-religion), one's beliefs are not a button-switch choice to make, and people who believe act on their beliefs, otherwise they're hypocrites.

            "I know…sheeesh…stupid founding fathers."

            Your petard, your problem, Americans.

            "Non-religion…lol. What a scholar. I'm just reeling from how many people non-war has killed over the centuries …"

            Seems the last line you wrote describes yourself, or else you'd understand I meant non-religious ideology.

            Religion has good things to offer and bad things as well. Are the bad things the fault of religion? History says no. Marxism is proof for all who do not refuse to see: No religion is needed to produce undesirable symptoms like mass-murdering fanaticism. So even if it were possible for mankind to jettison religion, it would be all loss and no gain.

            But religion is here to stay, and the vision of an utopian world without religion must join the dumpster of failed 19th-century ideas. As for Islam, as I said: It's not because it's a religion that I oppose it, but because, like Marxism, it's a threat to me and mine. That closes the deal for me.

          • bubba4

            I didn't know that was my theoretical construct…um, again you are trying to make something from a negative. I was being pithy and making fun of you…you're the entitled one.

            "No religion is needed to produce undesirable symptoms like mass-murdering fanaticism."

            And I like pie. Who cares? So you can believe whatever you want since not believing it too can result in bad things?

            "But religion is here to stay, and the vision of an utopian world without religion must join the dumpster of failed 19th-century ideas."

            LOL…yes, you can't seem to get off this theme…That "not-believing" is it's own belief. Again it's FPM's favorite false dichotomy in a new suit. Yes the "utopian" idea…either someone is crazy like you or they are crazy like "lefty" with all his failed ideas. Before you give "lefty" another stern talking to, let's remember where this started. You have a divine claim. That's part of the problem in that part of the world. Simple.

          • ziontruth

            "So you can believe whatever you want since not believing it too can result in bad things?"

            Some vegetarian claims eating meat brings out the murderous tendency in people. A meat-eater brings him the example of Hitler as vegetarian whose murderous tendency needs no elaboration. What the meat-eater is saying is that, if vegetarianism is advocated on the grounds that it eliminates or even just decreases people's murderous tendency, then we can all keep on eating meat in peace.

            Of all the reasons to abandon religion (which, as I said, isn't something normally done at will), the idea that abandoning religion would serve world peace falls flat, just like the above vegetarian's idea that vegetarianism would cut down on the murder rate.

            "…let's remember where this started. You have a divine claim. That's part of the problem in that part of the world. Simple."

            The Middle East conflict has no need of religious claims to be the problem it is. In point of fact, for a lengthy period (c. 1920-80), both sides displayed their claims to their world purely on secular, materialistic, nationalistic terms: Jewish nation vs. Arab (and later the invented "Palestinian") nation. During those years, the conflict was no less intractable than it is now.

            Did I get it right that you complain religion makes a conflict intractable? If so, then my reply is twofold: First, a conflict can be intractable without religion (and the ghost of Neville Chamberlain could tell you about that), and second, a fact often forgotten today by the anti-religionists is that most religions today are at peace. The stream of news today of religion at the root of violence almost always involves just one religion. I leave it to you to guess which one it is.

            Bottom line: For minimizing the conflicts in the world, the culprit to be tackled is not religion but imperialism. That means any imperialistic ideology: Nazism in the past, Marxism and Islam today. It's OK to point a finger, but the finger must be pointed at the true object of blame. My complaint to you is that you blame the wrong thing.

          • bubba4

            The only one talking about religion in very general terms and in terms of how many people it's killed or no…is you.

            "Did I get it right that you complain religion makes a conflict intractable?"

            I think YOUR religious beliefs make YOU intractable….and insufferable. It's all the fault of those dogs the Arabs…but while your leadership talks peace based on certain borders, you and some of your leadership feel that God owes you that and more. Be honest about says I.

            We weren't talking about conflicts in the world we were talking about conflicts in Israel and specifically your entitlement. But listen..you can have your irrational beliefs..no one can take them from you. Shalom.

            BTW…I think the invention of the machine gun and other fun technology made sure the 20th century pile of dead was extra high whether it was driven by god cults or cults without a diety.

          • ziontruth

            "The only one talking about religion in very general terms and in terms of how many people it's killed or no is you"

            Ah, I get it. You're talking about this regional conflict alone. In that case, I'm changing my type of response:

            What business of yours is this regional conflict? What gives you the right to tell any of the sides what to do?

            "…but while your leadership talks peace based on certain borders,…"

            My current leadership is deluded. My leadership suffers from Appeasitis, or Chamberlain's Disease, the cognitive defect whose symptom is the inability to imagine a conflict not solvable through reasoned debate and material incentives. And you're the same.

            "…you and some of your leadership feel that God owes you that and more."

            I specifically believe in the Torah's claims, yes, but I have plenty of compatriots who are just as "intractable" and "insufferable" as me, but with no recourse to the divine claim.

            To put it succinctly:

            We Neozionists believe that Palestine belongs to the Jews just as much as Thailand belongs to the Thais; and we believe the Arabs want everything we have and not just a few pieces of it.

            That's reality. We embrace reality. You cling to the rationalist folly no matter what reality throws at you.

            (contd.)

          • ziontruth

            (contd.)

            "We weren't talking about conflicts in the world we were talking about conflicts in Israel and specifically your entitlement."

            Mind your own business, anti-Zionist scum!

            "…you can have your irrational beliefs…"

            Says the one who believes mere discussions and land concessions ("peace based on certain borders") can bring peace to this area.

            Shut up. You and all other interventionists, just shut the h**l up. You and Obama and European Union leaders and all the rest. If it's America's aid to Israel that's bothering you (and giving you the idea that you have the right to dictate to the sovereign Jewish State), then don't worry, with the help of HaShem and Bernanke we'll be weaned off it soon. Other than that possible point, I repeat: Shut up! You have no right to carry out your half-baked ideas about peace in the Middle East on the Jewish State's expense.

          • bubba4

            "Mind your own business, anti-Zionist scum!"

            LOL. You brought it up. Now don't start hurling poor little victim smears. If you can't talk about it like a big boy, don't post.

            "Says the one who believes mere discussions and land concessions ("peace based on certain borders") can bring peace to this area."

            I never said that. I said that is what your leadership is doing in this peace process…and that if any of them are like you they are being dishonest.

            "Shut up. You and all other interventionists, just shut the h**l up."

            Dude, I really don't give a dead donkeys testicles about you or what the Israelis decide to do about their own country. We are discussing it. Or at least we were until you wet your pants and started throwing poop.

            Next time someone says euphemistically that the West "created" Israel…just let it go. Because you like to talk about what God owes you, but you don't like other people picking at it…so keep it to yourself.

          • ziontruth

            "Next time someone says euphemistically that the West 'created' Israel just let it go."

            Let lies go unresponded to? To say the West created Israel is a lie even from an atheistic point of view. It's part and parcel of the Marxists' Big Lie that Zionism is a White European Colonial Settler movement. The State of Israel is not the West's creation, for modern Zionism predates even the Balfour Declaration of 1917. And Zionism as a whole, Jewish nationalism, goes all the way back to Antiquity (as a matter of verifiable historical record, even if you don't take the Bible's word for it).

            To put the record straight: I'm not doctrinally anti-atheist. I don't care much about the issue except when people start spouting nonsense like how religions mucks up the world. But (and this is a huge "but"):

            I'm wholly, doctrinally, passionately, ferociously and fanatically anti-Marxist. (That I don't eat Marxists for breakfast is only because they aren't kosher.) So, every time a lie that even just sounds to me like being the standard fare of Marxism, like the idea of Israel as the West's creation, I respond. If I have the leisure for it, you can be sure I'm going to respond.

            I'll leave it between HaShem and you to sort out the differences you have regarding religious beliefs and entitlements, yada yada. But as for Marxism and its lies, there's no way I'm going to gloss them over if I have the time. No way.

          • bubba4

            I'm glad you know what you are against. Marxism doesn't have the first thing to do with anything we have talked about but whatever…

            You don't want to argue for your faith, you want to argue against Marxism or something and you keep going back to it…since you don't need me for that, you can continue by yourself.

            Your a kook…have a nice day.

          • ziontruth

            "You don't want to argue for your faith,"

            I was under the impression that FPM was a political forum, not a theology debate forum.

            "since you don't need me for that, you can continue by yourself."

            I hope you didn't hurt yourself when you climbed off your high horse. Kudos to you, as a lot of people prefer to stay on it.

            "Your a kook"

            No, this isn't a forum for academic discussion either.

  • waterwillows

    I fully agree with this article. The looney left when they confronted evil in the land, did not stand, but lost their footing.
    So they started to justify evil, or whitewash it, or excuse it. Very big mistake. Unless one can comprehend that evil, really is evil and nothing else, they soon slip into the delusional world of the upside down viewpoint. They have been devoured by evil and see things askew.
    There is a cure. They must return to the Lord, ask forgiveness and once again try to keep their footing when confronting evil. If they don't repeat previous errors and know that evil is what it is, without excuses; their sane view could return to them.

  • sflbib

    Truth and Power

    On his TV program, “Life Is Worth Living,” Bishop Fulton Sheen once posed the question, “Where are your sox?” To answer that question, he explained that traditional Western thought turns to reality to determine the truth of where your sox are and concludes that they are in your dresser drawer. Communists [and Leftists in general] would answer, “Wherever the party says they are!” So it is with any question. For example, in the case of the Ground Zero mosque, "who has religious freedom in the U.S.?" To the Leftists, it is whoever the “party” [i.e., their ideology] says. Did the pope cover up sex abuse scandals? Did Bush want Katrina to kill blacks? Was 9/11 an inside job? Do individuals have a right to own guns? Is the human fetus a person? Is SB 1070 unconstitutional? The party decides; not objective truth. To those [i.e., most of us] who turn to reality to find truth, the statements coming from someone on the Left seem patently absurd.

    The dictionary defines “racist” as, “1) a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others; 2) a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination; 3) hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.” When it was shown that some actions and statements by racial minorities fit one or more of those definitions, liberals quickly added the qualifier that only whites could be racists because “only they had the power to enforce their racism.” But look at the KKK. How much power do they have today? Very little, but no one would seriously consider that they shed any of their racism when their power declined. On the flip side, there is Jesse Jackson who has honed extortion [aka, shakedown] of white corporate America to a fine art, and even made it de facto legal. Now that’s power.

    The addition of the qualifier is a ruse because minorities, being human, are just as capable of being racists as whites, but the concept of minority racism just doesn’t fit liberal ideology. Hence, a minority statement or policy might not be correct logically or in reality [e.g., minorities can’t be racists], it is correct politically. "Political correctness" therefore is the intersection [Venn Diagramatically speaking] of illogic and ideology.

    If it [whatever “it” is] fits their pre-conceived ideology, it is true; if not, it is false. As Selwyn Duke once said about liberals, “Ideology isn’t rejected when it conflicts with truth; truth is rejected when it conflicts with their ideology.” The primary function of liberal-Leftist altruistic, selective arguments of religious freedom, “separation of church and state,” free speech, gun ownership, the person-hood of the unborn, racism, the constitutionality of this or that law, etc. is to conceal that fact.

    Since everyone, according to Leftists, has his own truth, why should we accept their truth?

    • bubba4

      Good thing you have a nice airtight box to put people in ideologically if they hold any number of opinions or thoughts that aren't like yours. In fact everyone that doesn't believe as you do make up an organized band of crazies…responsible for all the bad stuff that happens between people.

      Mix that god and politics.. yum yum.

      • sflbib

        Yeah. Sorta like the Nazi box that you put Tea Partiers in.

        • bubba4

          I've never called anyone a Nazi. But you find that person and argue your little heart out.

  • TG Browning

    Consider one book sold.

    Browning>>>

  • Max Beckett

    I though Melanie Phillips was an intelligent woman, but after this gobbledegook about Orwell it;s time for a rethink.

    She writes, 'George Orwell might have been a leftist at some point in his life, but he changed and moved to the right later in life.' This entirely fails to explain why Orwell canvassed for Attlee's Labour Party in 1945, supported that party in office, and on his deathbed lamented the return of Rolls Royces and women wearing fur coats to the London streets. He was still left enough to fear the return of laissez-faire capitalism and say that if it came to a choice between joining America or the Soviet Union, hateful thought it might be, he would opt for the Soviet Union. How far to the right is that?

    Max

  • http://www.mirti.com camelia2011

    This is exactly what Prix Timbres have been looking for, with the MS TAG you get better clarity and don’t need to worry much about cleaning your lens all the time u need to shoot. I will come back to read more updates on this.

  • http://how-to-build-a-treehouse.com/ Treehouses

    Like I surely relate to all the issues of the tree industry, I’ve noticed it to be significantly more difficult than anticipated to find non-repetitive and informative content.treehouses

  • alexander

    liberals are educated beyond their intelligence – very verbal, knowledgeable, but no thought of their own; they repeat statements of people they think are smart ("well, if he/she said so, it must be smart, so if I repeat that, I will sound smart").
    Whole Hollyweird goes that way…"Hey, Bush is stupid! … hah hah hah, bravo" – they cannot miss, in their opinion.
    Wisdom comes from thinking on your own, dudes and dudettes; try it.
    Liberalism is a mental disorder.

  • http://tampahairextensions.com Lindsay Martin

    The big question on most women's minds is often: Is it really possible to find cheap hair extensions? And, at the same time, provide an acceptable level of quality. The answers to those question are as diverse and varied as are the manufacturers of those very same extensions. Even so, there are a few basic "do's and don'ts", which are fairly essential to successful shopping.

    Hair extensions like any other product also come in different prices depending upon their quality and durability. One of the major factors that make them not preferred among people is due to their high cost.