Monday, February 16, 2009

from NY to Israel Sultan Reveals The Stories Behind the News







The IslamoCommunist Revolution, or the Sickle and the Crescent


Posted: 15 Feb 2009 08:11 PM PST


The United States of America is a unique entity because it remains
the ultimate global embodiment of that intersection of politics and
economics that makes for a free market democracy, a system
based around individual freedoms rather than collective
obligations. That also is why America remains the ultimate target.


America is not the only free market democracy in the
world, but it
is the largest, and its insistence that its way of life is
reproducible by other nations makes it a threat. And while other
nations may experience economic booms, as recent events
demonstrate,
the rest of the global economy is very much dependent on
the
American economy.

Subsidiary nations such as China or the UAE or for that matter Russia,
have experienced parasitic economic booms that came from
supplying
products to America and Europe. When the American and
European
economies suffered setbacks, their crumbled. This should be a
reminder
that Lenin's quote "the capitalists will sell us the very rope
that we will
hang them with", is now more relevant than ever. The
countries that pose the greatest threat to us, are also economically
intertwined with us.

Our dollars represent their prosperity.

This has shifted the nature of the war away from military campaigns, and
toward political ones. The dictatorships of the world have long
realized that they cannot
defeat first world countries in all out wars, even
when they have overwhelming numbers on their side. The Israeli-Arab wars
were an extensive and extremely expensive laboratory experiment by the
great powers that demonstrated just that. Nor were they the only such
example. Korea and Nambia are just two of the more obvious examples.

The Russian bear did not refrain from sweeping through Germany and
across Western Europe out of fear of American nukes. The Soviet Union
had never
worried overmuch about absorbing civilian casualties, and it is
doubtful that
the United States would have been willing to touch off a chain
of events
leading to the deaths of tens of millions of Americans to defend
Western Europe, unless the USSR were to launch first. The bear stayed
home because Russia did not believe its armies could defeat NATO. No more
than it could have defeated Germany in a straightforward invasion, had
Germany not first bled all across Eastern Europe in a prolonged effort to
seize and hold territory too vast for it.

The most potent Soviet weapon was not in the Red Army or any particular
piece of equipment. Those were barely good enough to beat back an
overextended
Wehrmacht, and to crush what was left of the resistance
across an already crushed Eastern Europe. The most powerful means of
attack the USSR had at its disposal was not military assault, but political
subversion. The ideology
of Communism gained the Soviet Union fanatical
adherents and fight columns all across the world, spies in the heartland of
the enemy, and allies and sympathizers in the highest spheres of its cultural
and political elites.

Islam too knows quite well it cannot defeat America. Still stuck in its early
revolutionary stages and waiting around to seize a nation to use as a base
for its Caliphate, Islam's most powerful weapon is political subversion.

Relying on cobbled together alliances of new Marxists, and
post-Communist oligarchies, Muslim terrorist groups have revived the
old radical networks that spread subversion across the free world. Or rather
they hitched a free ride on them in a cynical marriage of convenience between
left wing
radicals and right wing fascist theocracts.

But what does political subversion really mean? Beyond the campus and
newsprint
radicals who spread dissatisfaction in specific circles,
without really managing to
achieve much, politics has to be grounded in a
daily reality accessible to the average person. And the fundamental daily
realities are underpinned by economics. The power of Communism lay in its
economic agenda. It promised a reordering of society away from the individual and toward the collective.

That idea predated Communism and it never truly died. Instead
the words
changed, code words like "Community-centered" replaced
"Communism",

"Act Locally, Think Globally" replaced "Revolutionary imperative". The idea
was to rebrand those same radical collectivist ideas under the guise of a more
"individualistic" radicalism. Call it "YouCommunism".


(The great efforts of late 20th century marketing endeavors have one
thing in common, an attempt to convince the individual to identify with
something greater than himself, by scaling it down to his level
and personalizing it.
It makes no real difference whether the product being
sold is a lifestyle that involves drinking Coca Cola or a radical commitment to
ending human freedom. As the Obama campaign proved, they can both be
marketed the same way.)

Islam, like Communism preaches the collectivist response to
human inequities.

The solution to human abuses of freedom, is to end freedom. In Egypt, Gaza,
Lebanon, Pakistan and across the Muslim world-- a major draw for Islam is
social justice, with a dictatorship of "incorruptible clerics" governing by
Islamic law replacing the Commissars of the People's Republics. The
ideologies are different but the framework is the same. That is why
Marxist terrorist groups could turn Islamist so fluidly. They were
simply replacing one set of titles with another. The Commissar
becomes the Imam. Das Kapital becomes the Koran. The aim however
remains the same, revolutionary social justice for everyone.
For those who wonder how Western intellectuals can accede to Sharia
law seeing the horrors it has produced in countries such as
Iran and
Pakistan, should remember that Western intellectuals were
praising
Communism in the 30's, even as the Commissars had filled mass
graves
with millions of dead. Atrocities do not harm the image of
revolutionary
social justice movements, they give them credibility. Do you
imagine that
Che would be worn on a single T-shirt if he had not been a
bloody butcher?

Would Arafat have his own state to play with, and would Bin
Laden have
instant airtime for his latest videotape if they were not
accomplished terrorists?

Ever since the French Revolution, mass murder has been the biggest legitimizer
of social revolutions. Islam is not revered by Western intellectuals despite its
bloody nature. It is revered BECAUSE of its bloody nature. Atrocities
demonstrate revolutionary commitment. This is something that Osama
Bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and Jeremiah Wright understand-- and it
is
something that escapes the average decent American who
seriously
believes that most people want the same things he
does.

The American experiment created an oasis of decency, a sphere
of human
freedoms, an island in a dark sea. It is the American strength
and the American
weakness. It is a strength because it has enabled a society
capable of achieving
great things. But it is also a weakness because it has created
a populace incapable
of understanding the sheer hatred directed at them from
without, and from within.

The American revolution was a revolution of individualism, casting off the
shackles of collectivism and class, and replacing it with the monarchy
of the common man
as an individual. It was what Lafayette admired about
Americans, and what the
French Revolution, a collectivist class rampage of
bloody mobs and bloodier intellectuals, utterly failed to achieve. From that
contrast between the two revolutions, the eternal enmity between the free
American model, and the revolutionary collectivist tyranny model emerged.
In the aftermath of WW2 that conflict went global. Today it has gone viral.
It is a war being fought everywhere and nowhere at once. And it is also a war
that we are losing.

The drive toward a global Islamic revolution has absorbed both the lessons of
Communism and Nazism, it may be most obvious in its violence, but most
dangerous in its demographic, political, cultural and economic expansions.
9/11 may have been a wake up call, but it was an atrocity staged more for the
benefit of the Muslim world, than for us. The goal is an Islamic revolution
first in the Muslim world, followed by the conquest of the Western world
from within. And just as when confronting Communism, we have no
idea
how to fight back.




The free market economics that buried Communism
are no longer as simple
a solution because
Muslims can and do move to the West, partaking of our
standard of living, while planning their Jihads. Muslim countries
benefit from our economies by proving slave labor, as in the case of
Malaysia, or oil, as in the case of Saudi Arabia, parasitically leeching
off our economies. All the while a great mass movement of Muslim
immigrants streams into Europe and America, an invading army
positioning themselves on our shores as guest laborers to do the jobs
that we won't do.

If Communism confronted free market capitalism with an iron wall,
Islamism serves as the rat in the wall of the free market, gnawing its way
through, feeding itself off our leavings, and prepearing for the day when
it can bring the wall crashing down... to make way for Sharia finance instead.
The new agitators do not deliver speeches to the "Farmers and Workers"
in
public parks. Instead they speak in mosques and distribute tapes to their
followers. They quietly kill those who fall out of line. Occasionally they
practice acts of terrorism to intimidate or recruit, but mostly they
prepeare and wait.
Converts trickle in. Their numbers grow and little by little, they gain
more power. The conflict underway is one taking place between two
very different
political and economic systems. For Islam to win, the American
experiment must be conclusively destroyed at the economic level.

The followers of a collectivist system can only serve as the tail in a
free market economy. Only by transforming a free market economy
into a collectivist system, by suppressing individual initiative and
individual freedom, can the stars and stripes make way for the sickle
and the crescent. Only by bringing us down to their level of slavery,
can the submission-based ideology of Islam hope to triumph over us.




No comments:

Post a Comment