The Leftist and Islamic War on the Family

warThe greatest threat to the totalitarian state is the family. In Nazi Germany, in the Soviet Union and in the Islamic State, children were split apart from their families, subjected to ruthless indoctrination and taught to turn on their parents at the slightest hint of dissent.

In our more enlightened liberal society where the family is being displaced by the state, children are merely taught to view their parents as ignorant, racist, sexist, homophobic and outdated. The classroom and popular cultural inflate the self-esteem of the next generation by assuring them of their moral superiority to their parents and offering them independence from the authority and values of their parents in exchange for accepting the values and authority of the benevolent liberal state.

It’s a system that is less overtly cruel, but equally determined to replace the family unit with detached citizens cut off from being able to maintain and pass on a set of values opposed to those of the state.

The War on the Family ends with children, but begins by disrupting the relationships between men and women.

While liberalism’s War on Women meme and the sexism of Islamic law may seem like two opposites, they are actually mirror images of each other. Muslims teach men to hate and fear women. Liberals teach women to hate and fear men. Liberalism promotes paranoia about the intentions of men while Islam teaches men to be paranoid about the intentions of women.

Liberalism treats masculinity as a pathology. Islam treats femininity as the root of all evil. Both ideologies insist that one gender and everything related to it is inherently tainted and that the only way to maintain a good society is to purge that gender and everything it represents from the public square.

Liberalism and Islam both seek to create conditions of divisiveness that make trust between the sexes impossible. Even when men and women do connect, both ideologies work to create power imbalances, social, religious and legal, that make family life inherently unstable. Their goal is to prevent the family from becoming the center of human life. Instead the family is transformed into an alien condition that can and does end at any moment by preying on the fears and weaknesses of its participants.

Islam drives women out of public spaces by encouraging predatory male behavior. Liberalism encourages predatory male behavior by disrupting the moral values that keep it in check and then profits from the chaos that it has caused by promoting paranoia about predatory male behavior.

The unspoken truth of the War on Women is that the breakup of the family has made life more dangerous for women and men. It’s a statistical fact that crime rates increase for children from single parent households. Sixty percent of rapists grew up in single parent households. The real War on Women began with the War on the Family. That is also where it ends.

Unlike liberalism, Islam does not seek to eliminate the family, but to maintain its functionality at the purely mechanical level without allowing for healthy relationships. The members of the Islamic family are alienated from each other. The women learn to fear their husbands, fathers and brothers. The men know to distrust their mothers, sisters and daughters. A misstep can easily end in an honor killing.

Both genders view each other as dangerously unpredictable and predatory. Normal human relationships collapse under the weight of mutual distrust. The Muslim family is outwardly intact, but inwardly broken. Its members are united only by an even deeper suspicion and hostility toward the outside world. Muslim men know that women on the outside are even more immoral and untrustworthy than their female relations and Muslim women expect men outside the family to be even more dangerous.

The sex grooming scandals in the UK are an interaction between two networks of broken families. On one side are Muslim men who have been taught that women are barely human. On the other side are the young casualties of a nanny state that killed the family and replaced it with apathetic social workers and callous cops. The same phenomenon is taking place in Western cities across the world.

Islam destroys the family to create men with nothing to live for. The Muslim terrorist does not die for his family. The idea of dying to protect his wife and children has no emotional resonance for him. He can use women and children as human shields because they matter less than he does. It is his own honor that moves him far more than the lives of his family. Kill his children and he may forget. Humiliate him and he will never forgive. Promise him paradise and he will willingly die for a better world than this one.

The Muslim Jihadist does not submit to Allah. He submits to his own ego and kills in its name.

Liberalism however destroys the family to create helpless individuals looking for the next handout. The protégé of the nanny state is a coward. He is eager to join mobs, but does nothing as an individual. He creates nothing, and therefore has nothing to lose except his material possessions which he uses as gateways to the ‘fun’ that consumes his life. He is capable of violence, but only when he has numbers on his side. Family is a means of sharing resources, but not responsibilities. Like his children, it is disposable.

When families die, human beings begin reverting to a feral state. The inability to sustain family leads to the collapse of civilization. Liberalism and Islam both feed off the social failures that they manufacture.

The violent gangs of Jihadists that can pop up anywhere are symptoms of a society with large numbers of feral men. The rapists and killers of ISIS are animated by a profoundly different ideology, but behave similarly to gangs in Latin America and the United States. Islam and liberalism both produce large numbers of feral young men with no meaningful human relationships who derive their sense of identity from gang membership.

It is why Islam spreads so effectively in prison. The penal system is the ideal Islamic environment. It is a world without family and without choice where the only attribute is honor. It is also the inevitable consequence of liberalism. Liberalism kills the family producing young men destined for prison. Islam sweeps in to pick up the pieces and gives them purpose and meaning by turning them into killers.

Islam is a religion of the clan, not of the family. Liberalism organizes people along the lines of the group. Islam militarizes the clan into an expansionist force through conflict with other clans. Liberalism militarizes group identity into a struggle with every other group. Both promote conflict and isolation, uniting combatants through paranoia and hate, while dividing them so that they cannot make peace.

Liberalism and Islam both perpetuate the crises that keep them going through dysfunction. They can only thrive by maintaining a constant supply of unhappy people who have lost the ability to live fulfilling and meaningful lives. The biggest threat to their empires and caliphates of dysfunction is a strong family.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • 11bravo

    ” The purpose of the education system should be to make children as “unlike” their parents as possible”; Woodrow Wilson, US President.
    This has been going on for a century. Commie bastages!

    • Bamaguje

      That’s not always a bad thing.
      I wish we could get somehow get Muslim children away from their toxic Muslim families… and bring them up as non-Muslims.
      That would be an effective way to end Islam.

      • Legs2

        Read the article again. Muslims do not I’ve in a social atmosphere that is conducive to families and according to Western attitudes do not have ‘families.”

        • marsha982

          before I looked at the bank draft of $5497 , I didn’t believe that…my… brother was like trully bringing home money in their spare time on there computar. . there brothers friend has done this for under twenty two months and just now cleard the dept on there apartment and bought a new audi . hop over to this web-site …..>> -> FINANCIAL ANALYSIS!!! <-

    • http://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/ Edward Cline

      What is the source of this Wilson quotation? I’ve done an Internet search for it and it turns up nothing but your quotation here.

      • 11bravo

        Check Thomas Sowell, Hayek. I have read it in numerous places. It is no secret – not even a controversial statement.
        Wilson wanted to prepare children for the coming new world – league of nations, world government etc.. He saw what Lenin and other totalitarians were doing with their societies – he (just like all progs) lamented how the constitution keeps getting in the way of their anointed views. Same for TR.
        Have you not read up on this type of stuff? Why are you here?

        • http://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/ Edward Cline

          11Bravo: I’m here because I’m well read up on “this type of stuff.”. I’ve read Sowell, Hayek, et al., not to mention Auberon Herbert, Locke, and etc. Read my columns on Rule of Reason, Capitalism Magazine, and Family Security Matters and judge for yourself. Your Wilson quotation look precise and so had to have had a source. That’s all I was asking. I’ve also read Herbert Croly and his intellectual ilk. Wilson and Croly were two peas in a pod.

      • Daniel_Greenfield

        This would appear to be one source for it.

        “It was for that reason I used to say, when I had to do with the administration of an educational institution that I should like to make the young gentlemen of the rising generation as unlike their fathers as possible.”

        http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/first-principles/primary-sources/woodrow-wilson-asks-what-is-progress

        Wilson was saying that the fathers were “out of touch with the progressive forces of society”

        Variations of it can be found in some of his speeches

        https://www.google.com/#q=+%E2%80%9Clike+to+make+the+young+gentlemen+of+the+rising+generation+as+unlike+their+fathers+as+possible.%E2%80%9D

        • http://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/ Edward Cline

          Thank you, Daniel.

  • camp7

    Well said Daniel, very well said. People need to know the enemies of family to sustain the true values of human existence. Your analogy is precision.

    Men and women (are) complimentary and family is the master civilizer. It is the model of loyalty, love and service that extends to community, national and universal governance that progresses civilization – or should.

    “Ground control, we have a problem.”

    So how does a universe of mass and motion manifest thought, reason, humor, music, philosophy and religion? It’s not an accident, it’s a pattern of Intelligent Design. Give the Source a name. Family is a universal truth and reality based on spirit origin. The liberal and Islamic weeds of humanity are nothing more than a scourge that will fall by the wayside in their attempt to invade the innate convictions of family morals and genesis.

    Plant seeds of fruit. Remove the debris that chokes the garden of family growth. Their threat is our victory. That’s the real plan and I’m sticking to it.

  • TruthSeekerJew

    Daniel, this is one of your most insightful articles. It clearly outlines the corrupt, perverse, ideologies of both the atheist femi-nazi leftists and their allies the Islamo-Nazis in regards to the family.

    Both of these perverse ideologies, Islam and atheist leftism, are at war with the traditional concept of the family as taught by the Jewish Bible and rabbinic sages. Only authentic Judaism (not the fake Judaisms we see today), teaches the path to a healthy family relationship between men and women.

    • pupsncats

      Authentic Catholicism (not the fake Catholicism we see today), also teaches the path to a healthy family relationship between men and women. It also teaches that without the foundation of truth, who is God, at the helm of society, society cannot function properly. Since God has been either denied or relegated to the inside of a church and thrown out of the public square in all Western nations, they are all crumbling and heading towards ushering in a darker world than humanity has ever seen before.

  • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

    The comparison strikes me as somewhat forced. The welfare state did destroy the family and create a self-perpetuating dependency. That goes back to the Moynihan analysis. But the causality was socialism, with the result being the destruction of the family. The family wasn’t destroyed first. Like all dependency, it becomes addictive.

    The Islamic example is of a dysfunctional family. You call it a clan in the end but it is still an extended family. If I remember correctly, half of all marriages in Iraq are between cousins. The family is everything. It’s a perverted concept of the family and you describe it well.

    Now let’s go to southern Europe for another example. Take Spain and Italy, for example. The family is big (in concept and reality). Yet Spain has 25% unemployment with 50% unemployment for those under 25. The labor laws created a stagnant economy. But they exist to protect the family. It is very hard for fire an employee in both private and public jobs (like our public servants.) This is to protect the main bread-earner. Unemployment for the main bread-earner is 12%, not far from European norms.

    Socialism has many causes. Broken families play into it but even strong families don’t bring immunity.

    • joe kulak

      The image of the large Italian family is outdated. Europeans, including Italians, aren’t producing at a rate sufficient (2.2 children per family) to even maintain their numbers. The ‘big Italian family’ exists only in the past and in ads for pasta.

      • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

        That’s true too in Spain (and Mexico, too). The labor policies were created long before the birth rate dropped.

        But I’m not just talking about the number of children. It is not unusual for children to live at home with parents and grandparents.

        The labor policies were created long before the birth rate dropped. Again, it’s a question of causality: what came first, socialism or the change in the family?

  • seewithyourowneyes

    What a great article.

    • lyndaaquarius

      Daniel Greenfield should become Special Advisor to the President in the next Republican administration.

      • HettyT

        Many great insights he made. I’ve seen Islamists and Progs as being on the same mission to destroy America and individual freedom, but haven’t thought about this dimension: the family.

  • loumindes

    Dennis Prager explains it best – If it damages America, it’ts food for Democrats http://www.dennisprager.com/damages-america-good-democrats/

  • Prof. L. Wessell

    I submitted the comment below two hours ago and I am still waiting. Why so long, so too long?

  • truebearing

    Superb insight, Daniel. The war on families you have described is the splitting of the human atom, the nuclear family, for the purpose of creating a giant nucleus around which everyone is forced to revolve, and from which no one can escape due to the force of its gravity.

    In essence, the goal of both of these cults is to warp human nature; to turn humans into thralls, dependent on the nuclear state, dependent on handouts, drugs, alcohol, or whatever toxins the nucleus provides. It is ultimately misanthropic — a war on humanity — intended to destroy us.

    • mollysdad

      The most effective agent for castrating a man is capitalism without a guarantee of full employment. If men can’t find secure jobs, they can’t be fathers.

  • Scar

    Another great article, Mr. Greenfield. One thing I would like to add to the narrative is the proliferation of same-sex marriage, both in the United States and other western countries. Whether i agree or not with someone’s lifestyle, what they do in the privacy of their own home is none of my business. But when it becomes political, as in the debate over same-sex marriage, then it’s everyone’s business. It is my opinion that legalized homosexual marriage further erodes the traditional family, prompting young minds and ignorant adults to accept abnormal behavior as normal. I believe the “gay marriage” movement is part of the liberal plan you explained so well, designed to destroy the threat of the traditional family.

    • meggy8868

      Henry Fairlie wrote a great book in the 70′s, The Seven Deadly Sins. He said the greatest shibboleth of our time is the idea that what we do in the privacy of our own homes is our own business. What is done in the homes soon leaks into the greater world. Behaviors, attitudes, beliefs influence the family and ultimately the street, the neighborhood, the state, and the nation until we come to the mess of today. The closet people have “come out” to the streets with in your face posturing and ultimately change morality with the help of the media and government. Nothing stays in the privacy of the home. “Lust and Luxuria” in The Seven Deadly Sins.

      • Scar

        I generally agree with what you’re saying, but it’s impossible to eliminate abhorrent behavior and ideas. In my humble opinion, the best way to handle the problem, in part, is to keep the traditional two-parent, male/female nucleus as the building block of civil society, and to stop pandering to the deviates so their best option is to stay in the proverbial closet. I don’t remember the author’s name, but a great book on this very subject is called “Homosexuality and the Natural Law.” If my aging memory is correct, the author was a professor at Claremont-Mudd College in California. You could probably track it on the Internet if you’re interested.

        • meggy8868

          Please stay in the closet by all means. Couldn’t agree more. It is against the philosophy that the argument is made.

  • wildjew

    Daniel Greenfied, don’t know if you’ve been listening to Rush Limbaugh this afternoon. He looks to be borrowing your ideas from yesterday’s column without attribution. Up til today, Barack Obama was just another “liberal” Democrat in the long tradition of liberals. Rush Limbaugh “knows liberals like he knows every inch of his glorious naked body.” Today Obama is a radical leftist (community organizer), who with fellow radical leftists are at war with the Nancy Pelosis and the Harry Reids (the old guard) of the Democratic party.

    • Daniel_Greenfield

      Limbaugh, unlike some other major conservative personalities, has always credited me. And he’s involved enough in politics that he would certainly know everything I said independently.

      But it’s good to hear

      • Dan Mesa/AZ

        Mr. Greenfield, B-i-g fist pump when Rush mentions you.

  • mollysdad

    The other point that needs making is that Muslims do not truly marry. In general, the formula by which consent is expressed contains provision for the groom to delegate to the bride his right to divorce. It is a formula for doing something other than marriage.

  • camp7

    If it’s not based on truth, it will fall. Not in our lifetime, but eventually it will self-destruct. In the constructs of time and space Islam is nothing more than a era of primitive belief based on tribal memes to promote savage subjugation.

    We have the civll, moral and technical capacity to take them out lickety-split if not for the indecision of liberal politicism. It would be tedious, testing the humanitarian tolerance of a civilized and global society waging a total war, but within our means. Similar to Cro-Magnon’s war against the Neanderthals – deliberate, consistent and effective.

    Christianity and Judaism are in fact exceptional despite the supposition of imperfection. They are the most spiritually enlightened human historical scripts on record of our relationship with a living God through prophesy, revelation, teachings and faith, IMHO. Of course, everything is subject to intellectual scrutiny and the relativity of objectivism, and doubt.

  • http://islesofmyst.webs.com Raibeart MacIlleathain

    Jews, and by extension, Christians both are taught the idea that families are sacred. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jakob created humans to be social, and to come of age within the confines of a home led by a father and a mother.

    While your treatise clearly lays out the symptoms of the problem, it fails to spell out the reasons behind the hatred for the family.

    The day is coming soon, very soon, when Leftists and their allies will be purged from the world in a systematic way, and the elimination of all Rebellion will be total.

    But, that does us no good in the here and now.

    So, let me state categorically that although hiding within the Repubiican Party like cockroaches are both Leftists and Islamicists, it is within the Democrat Party they are in full bloom and confidant enough to openly attack faith, family, and morality.

    I doubt more than a handful of Christians (the liberals, of course) would knowingly vote for Lucifer over Christ. However, each time a Christian pulls the lever to vote for a Democrat, that is EXACTLY what he or she is doing.

    To be blunt, the Democrat Party of 2014 is a far, far cry from the party of 1960 and JFK. Today’s Democrats are the Yankee version of Marxism-Leninism in theory and practise.

    In a word, the leadership of today’s Democrat Party is E V I L.

    Unlike the Republicans, Christians do not have the luxury of compromising with evil. Republicans tend to be milquetoast who believe Democrats want what they want, an orderly society.

    But, Democrats want the opposite of an orderly social construct. They are the descendants of Maximilien Robespierre, who famously said of the French Revolution, “One cannot make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

    And let us never forget the modern-day Robespierre who wrote a book Leftists use as their bible: Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky. He dedicated his book to the First Revolutionary, Lucifer.

    Whether or not, Mr. Greenfield, you believe Lucifer exists is not actually important. what is important is the recognition that EVIL imitates GOOD because Evil has no imagination, no creative spark of its own. Evil cannot build, it knows only how to destroy. Evil is not the two-year-old child building a sandcastle by the sea. Evil is the two-year-old that gleefully tramples that sandcastle and makes the other child cry.

    It was by no means accidental that fewer than twelve years after the English defeat at Yorktown, the Bastille was stormed and the French Revolution began. Whilst many a Tory in the colonies suffered being tarred and feathered for their allegiance to the English crown as they were being shipped off to Canada, what occurred in France during the Reign of Terror was an unspeakable horror for that time.

    Two revolutions. One ordained by men who understood the Bible, the other ordained by a-theists.

    Most of us had our first glimpse of Leftism in Charles Dickens’ novel “A Tale of Two Cities.”

    What Dickens didn’t expound upon in that novel, however, was how Leftists came by their name. Leftists are called leftists because it was their way of expressing their solidarity with the goats of the Bible.

    Leftist groupthink (there are no individuals) posits the radical reshaping of society from that which is ordained by our Creator. That is the reason, the sole reason, that in every Leftist revolution since the first one in France, religion is attacked, Christians are murdered, and in Germany of eighty years ago, Jews were gassed by the millions.

    Lucifer stated boldly that he would ascend to above the clouds, that he would be “like” the Most High.

    Why?

    Simple. It is called covetousness. Lucifer coveted what belonged only to God. Since the day he was cast out of the kingdom, Lucifer has attempted to build his own kingdom on earth. He breaks in, steals, murders, and destroys. Lucifer is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

    If their father is a liar and a murderer from the beginning, how can the children be any different? Leftists despise the family because they despise everything created by God.

    If, Mr. Greenfield, we enemies of the Left attack on the symptoms of Leftist mania, we shall never succeed in vanquishing them in the here and now.

    It is long past time to drag the Left out of the shadows into the light. And, although men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil, men can still be persuaded to do the right thing for the sake of their children.

    This is a war begun long ago. Leftists cannot be bargained with. They cannot be reasoned with. The Left doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop until you are dead.

    The only way to defeat the Left is to do so utterly–not like the Marquis of Queensbury Republicans. The Left must be crushed, but short of that, they must be resisted, hindered, and repelled whenever possible.

    The War on the Family is but the symptom. If you want to win, you must endeavour to oppose the underlying disease–and never vote Democrat again until the grownups are back in charge and the two-year-olds get spanked for destroying another child’s sandcastle.

    • ScarletPimpernel

      Well said!!

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    Islam is undeniably the problem when it comes to terrorism.

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    The “fastest growing religion”, drawing new followers from prisons and mental hospitals and captives threatened with “convert or death”.

  • ScarletPimpernel

    Mr. Greenfield, this is undoubtedly one of the best pieces I’ve read explaining how Liberalism/the Left and Islam mirror each other vis-a-vis the family unit, and how each ultimately destroy it. Both ideologies are perverted. Something will always fill the void when the Biblical (i.e., Judeo-Christian) model of marriage and family, which is the basis for a civil society, is destroyed, and Islam is now filling that void. As Western Liberalism continues to undermine marriage, family, and relationships between men and women, Islam is coming in to complete the job.

  • Dan Mesa/AZ

    Muslims and Liberals are different branches of the same tribe

  • HettyT

    Not only “barefoot, and in the kitchen,” but afraid, according to Dan.

    • Prof. L. Wessell

      Alas, Hetty T, my ironic dig at Muslim men and their “intelliegent” tactic of keeping their women dumb does have a point that your dig at “barefoot, prenant and in the kitchen” does not fully grasp.

      Germany after WWII had lost multimillions of men and hundreds of thousands of women. After the war and through the 50s the motto was, so to speak, “Kinder, Küche, Kirche” or “‘Children, Kitchen, Church”. This is all made fun of today. For the moment I ask you to put aside all moral preferences and think cold and hard evolutionism. A species cannot survive if it does not reproduce itself, it makes no difference regarding the quality of life. The “KKK” model of the German 50s enabled the Germans to reconstitute their population with more than 3 children/woman. That society, with all of its “dumbing down” of women, was evolutionarily a society “fit” for survival. Flash forward to the “emancipated” society of Germany today. The family is played down as a cultural value, the full integration of women into the workplace is pushed, resulting in 1.4 children/woman >>>>> the death of German society!!! The “emancipated” Germans have a society NOT fit for survial. I do wish to make it clear that I like modern society here, but it is pitiful watching it progressively passing away in my lifetime (I am 75). Something was re survival fitness superior for three “K” society of the German 50s, whereas today’s Germany with all its progressive advances for women is dying out. This means that its societal values (most of which I applaud) constitutes a “culture of death”. I am not speaking morally, only with cold demographic figures. Something is needed for cultural survival that the West too does not presently have. What?

      I have no ready answer. Perhaps David Goldman is on to something. Consider his thought: Not only do Muslim societies die, but Western societies too. Goldman is proud that Israelis (particularly Modern Orthodox Judaism) have a birthrate of over 3 children/woman. Caroline Glick is so satisfied with the Israeli birthrate that she dares a one-state solution to the Israel/Palestinian conflct, i.e., the Israelis are outproducing the Arabs. I think that Goldman hit upon a key factor, “orthodox” religion, be it Judiaism or Christianity.

  • frodo

    Fun with false equivalencies (that are themselves false, or at least over generalized)!

  • dwayne roberson

    In Mao’s regime the family was often a target for the state. Any critics of The Great Leap Forward were often identified by intimidating children in Red school systems. The children were obligated to turn in their parents and submit to a government agenda obscuring starvation.

  • mtnhikerdude

    Liberalism , I give you Detroit and Ferguson as prime examples . Islam i give you ISIS ,Taliban ,Hijabs ,Burkas,

  • laura r

    excellent. one of your best pieces.