Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How the West Lost the Cold War

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How the West Lost the Cold War

    Brussels Journal, Belgium
    Aug 25 2007


    How the West Lost the Cold War

    >From the desk of Fjordman on Sat, 2007-08-25 04:34

    The girlfriend of a politician from the Sweden Democrats, a small
    party critical of mass immigration, was recently attacked at her home
    outside Stockholm. The young woman was found bound with duct tape in
    the apartment block where she lives with Martin Kinnunen, chairman of
    the youth wing of the SD. Three men had forced their way into the
    couple's apartment and held the 19-year-old at knife point. Kinnunen
    tells of several threats and anonymous phone calls to the family. He
    blames the media for systematically portraying the SD as monsters and
    thus for legitimizing aggression against them, and claims that the
    Swedish democracy is a sham.

    Antifascistisk Aktion, a group that supposedly fights against
    `racists,' openly brag about numerous physical attacks against
    persons with their full name and address published on their website.
    Only a week after this group harassed a Swedish judge and vandalized
    his house, members demonstrated alongside the Swedish police, the
    Swedish government and the Swedish media establishment during Pride
    Week, Stockholm's annual gay celebration, in August 2007. At the very
    end of the Pride Parade marched a group of black-clothed and masked
    representatives of AFA. Adjacent to them marched a number of
    policemen, including members of the Swedish Gay Police organization.

    At their website, AFA claim to have beaten several homophobes during
    the event, at least one of whom ended up in a hospital. They are
    Socialists, and as Socialists they are convinced that progress can
    only be made through struggle, and it is implicit that they mean
    violent struggle: `If we want to fight against capitalism, the
    working class needs to be united, and in order to be so intolerance
    cannot be tolerated. However, if we want to fight against intolerance
    we have to defeat capitalism as an extension of that struggle. Hence
    anti-fascism, feminism and the struggle against homophobia go hand in
    hand with the class struggle!'

    According to Politikerbloggen, AFA have produced a manual about how
    to use violence in order to paralyze and hurt their opponents, and
    they encourage their members to study it closely. Meanwhile, senior
    members of law enforcement are too busy waving plastic penises to
    care. It's all for tolerance, and then there is this small group at
    the back, behind the police, the media and the cultural and political
    establishment, ready to assault, beat up and hospitalize anybody
    deemed to be insufficiently tolerant.

    Several of the Centre Party's offices were vandalized before the
    elections in 2006 in protest against a proposal for new labor
    agreements. This was done by a coalition of left-wing extremists
    calling themselves the Invisible Party. AFA participated, as they
    proudly proclaim on their website. The centre-right coalition
    government which gained power that year consists of four parties
    including the Centre Party. A year later, representatives from this
    government walked alongside the same group which had attacked their
    offices a few months earlier.

    Broderskapsrörelsen (`The Brotherhood'), an organization of Christian
    members of the Swedish Social Democratic Party, has decided to
    establish a network for people of other faiths, which largely seems
    to mean Muslims. Its leader Peter Weiderud says that `I'm incredibly
    happy that a unanimous congress now leaves the door open for Muslims
    and others to work together with us in the Brotherhood; this is going
    to enrich us all and help the [Social Democratic] Party to better
    influence the Swedish society.' For Abdulkader Habib, active within
    the Muslim Brotherhood, the decision is a historic step which shows
    that the dividing lines in society do not go between religions, but
    within religions: `Faith and politics are intertwined for many
    Muslims, which is why the decision to create this network is a key to
    the crucial work for integration that we need to do.' `We shouldn't
    disregard the importance of people's [religious] faith,' says deputy
    leader Cecilia Dalman-Eek. `At the same time, this is both
    instructive and inspiring for us Christians within the Brotherhood.
    This is about an exciting growth of new mass movements and is a part
    of the new Sweden.'

    The Social Democrat Ola Johansson, a member of the Brotherhood, has
    referred to the book Social Justice in Islam by Sayyid Qutb, the
    notorious Muslim Brotherhood member who has become the spiritual
    guide for Islamic Jihad terrorists worldwide, as a proof that Muslims
    support the welfare state and can thus make common cause with the
    Socialists.

    According to writer Nima Sanandaji, the Social Democrats have started
    fishing for votes with the help of radical Muslims clergies such as
    the influential leader Mahmoud Aldebe. In 1999, Aldebe proposed that
    sharia, Islamic law, be introduced in Sweden. In 2003 he involved
    himself in a heated debate regarding an incident of honor killing
    where a Kurdish girl was murdered by her two uncles. Aldebe
    forcefully defended the perpetrators and viewed the debate regarding
    honor-related murders as an attack against the Islamic religion.

    In 2006, the Muslim Association of Sweden demanded in a letter,
    signed by its leader Mahmoud Aldebe, separate family laws regulating
    marriage and divorce, public schools with imams teaching homogeneous
    classes of Muslims children their religion and the language of their
    original homeland, and a `mosque in every municipality to be built
    through interest-free loans made available by the local
    municipalities.' This to demonstrate `Islam's right to exist in
    Sweden' and to `heighten the status of and respect towards Muslims.'
    The demands were rejected by the Social Democrats then, but it now
    appears as if they have recognized that they need to cooperate with
    the fast-growing Muslim community if they want to regain power, so we
    shouldn't be surprised to see calls for the use of sharia law in
    family matters by an otherwise officially feminist party.

    The Social Democrats narrowly lost the elections in 2006, and appear
    to have decided that the way to regain and maintain power is to
    import voters, a strategy adopted by many of their sister parties in
    Western Europe. The Muslim Association of Sweden is generally viewed
    as ideologically inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood.

    The current leader of the Social Democrats, Mona Sahlin, thinks that
    `the Sweden Democrats are a right-wing party. It is a misogynistic
    and xenophobic party.' The `party is a threat to a Sweden that I
    believe many of us love - an open, unprejudiced and tolerant Sweden.'


    Whatever else one thinks about that party, I'm not so sure the Muslim
    Brotherhood are less `misogynistic.' According to journalist Kurt
    Lundgren, Sahlin, expected to become the next Prime Minister, was a
    participant in the Pride Festival where she was graduated, after
    several questions, to the F***ing Medal Award. Has she given some
    thought to what effect this will have in a country with exploding
    rape statistics? According to the blogger Dick Erixon, the number of
    reported rapes in Sweden is now three times as high as in New York.
    NY has roughly the same number of inhabitants, but it is a
    metropolis, whereas Sweden is a country with mostly rural areas and
    villages. Swedish girls are called `infidel whores' on a regular
    basis and are increasingly scared to go outside, yet the nation's
    arguably most powerful woman takes the F***ing Medal Award. How will
    that be perceived by Muslim immigrants?

    Moreover, how will her views on sexual liberation be reconciled with
    her party's cooperation with the Muslim Brotherhood, since several of
    its senior international leaders have indicated that gays should be
    killed? The Swedish Church has recently announced that it will allow
    gay couples to marry in church. Will Sahlin and the Social Democrats
    also make sure that gay couples should be allowed to marry in mosques
    controlled by the MB? More interestingly, will AFA attack them for
    homophobia if they refuse?

    Marcos Cantera Carlomagno in 1995 published a PhD thesis at Lund
    University describing a series of letters sent by Per Albin Hansson,
    leader of the Social Democrats and Prime Minister between 1932 and
    1946, who worked for the establishment of `Folkhemmet,' the People's
    Home, as the Swedish welfare state model became known as. Hansson was
    a dear pen pal with Italy's Fascist leader Mussolini and praised the
    corporate, Fascist system where the entire economy and each
    individual were intimately tied to and subordinate to the state.
    Hansson was positively disposed to Fascism and saw his welfare state
    as a related concept. After mentioning his work in a local newspaper,
    Carlomagno was called by his supervisor who stated in anger that his
    scholarship would be cut off. Carlomagno's work was totally ignored
    by the entire media and political establishment in Sweden when it
    appeared in the 1990s.

    Why did this information meet with such repression? Because the power
    of the political and cultural establishment is not based on reasoned
    discussion but on shaming opponents and branding them as evil with
    words loaded with emotions and taboo. Terms such as `racist',
    `Fascist', and `Nazi' automatically shut down any rational discussion
    of a subject. The irony is that a similar strategy was employed with
    great success by.....the Nazis.

    Adolf Hitler described how to use `spiritual terror' to intimidate
    and silence opponents, a technique he learned from watching the
    Socialists and the Social Democrats. He understood `the infamous
    spiritual terror which this movement exerts, particularly on the
    bourgeoisie, which is neither morally nor mentally equal to such
    attacks; at a given sign it unleashes a veritable barrage of lies and
    slanders against whatever adversary seems most dangerous, until the
    nerves of the attacked persons break down and, just to have peace
    again, they sacrifice the hated individual... Conversely, they praise
    every weakling on the opposing side, sometimes cautiously, sometimes
    loudly, depending on the real or supposed quality of his
    intelligence.'

    In 2006, the newspaper Dagens Nyheter reported that following
    recommendations from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, priests in the
    Swedish Church applied German race laws from 1937 onwards. According
    to Lund University's Professor Anders Jarlert, who led the research,
    any Swede who wanted to marry an Aryan German was forced to sign an
    affirmation stating that none of the German's grandparents were
    Jewish. History Professor Stig Ekman told DN that Sweden's culture of
    silence and secrecy is one reason why this is appearing only now,
    generations later. In 1937, the Swedish government was controlled by
    the Social Democrats, yet despite this evidence that they applied
    Nazi race laws, party members still get away with denouncing critics
    of their immigration policies as neo-Nazis, racists or Fascists.

    In the book The New Totalitarians, the British historian Roland
    Huntford in the early 1970s pointed out that Socialist professor
    Gunnar Myrdal and his wife Alva, both highly influential ideologists
    in developing the Swedish welfare state, had intimate connections
    with the German academic world during the Nazi age. Gunnar Myrdal
    served as both a member of parliament and later as a government
    minister for the Social Democrats during this period. According to
    Huntford: `The professor was then a Nazi sympathizer, publicly
    describing Nazism as the movement of youth and the movement of the
    future. In Myrdal's defence, it must be pointed out that, whatever
    his other propensities, Hitler did have advanced ideas on social
    welfare, and that the social ideology of the German Nazis and the
    Swedish Social Democrats had much in common. Until the mid 1930s,
    Nazism had considerable attractions for those who favoured a
    benevolent and authoritarian state.'

    Gunnar and Alva Myrdal promoted the idea of positive eugenics and
    forced sterilization programs against those with `weak genes.' This
    started in Sweden even before Nazi Germany, and it continued longer.

    The Nazis called themselves national Socialists, and they took the
    Socialist component of their ideology quite seriously. They never
    nationalized all assets of production as the Communists did. They
    left nominal ownership in private hands, but production was in
    reality controlled by the state. The Nazis were thus to the left,
    economically, compared to many of the labor parties in Western Europe
    today. As Adolf Hitler stated in 1927: `We are Socialists, enemies,
    mortal enemies of the present capitalist economic system with its
    exploitation of the economically weak, with its injustice in wages,
    with its immoral evaluation of individuals according to wealth and
    money instead of responsibility and achievement, and we are
    determined under all circumstances to abolish this system!'

    The Muslim Brotherhood were also fans of the European Fascist and
    Nazi movements in the 1930s, as they are of welfare state Socialism
    now. In Origins of Fascism, historian Walter Laqueur notes
    similarities between Islam and Nazism: `A German Catholic émigré
    writer Edgar Alexander (Edgar Alexander Emmerich) published an
    interesting work in 1937 in Switzerland entitled The Hitler Mythos
    (which was translated into English and reprinted after World War Two)
    in which he compared National Socialism with `Mohammedanism' (...) He
    referred frequently to Hitler's `Mohammedanism' but made it clear
    that this referred only to external organizational forms (whatever
    this meant), to mass psychological effects and militant fanaticism.
    Alexander believed that Mohammed's religion was based on sincere
    religious fanaticism (combined with political impulses) whereas
    Hitler's (political) religion and its fanaticism had different
    sources.'

    In Laqueur's view, Fascism was less monolithic than Communism, as
    there were significant differences in theory and practice from
    country to country. The French Marxist Orientalist Maxime Rodinson
    wrote a polemic against the influential philosopher and fellow
    left-winger Michel Foucault who welcomed the Islamic Revolution in
    Iran. According to Rodinson, Khomeini and Islamic groups such as the
    Muslim Brotherhood constituted a form of `archaic fascism.' Ibn
    Warraq has used an outline of the Fascist ideology made by Italian
    novelist Umberto Eco and found that most of its defining hallmarks
    are shared by Islam.

    German sociologist Theodor Adorno was a member of the Frankfurt
    School and was influenced by Georg Lukács, one of Gramsci's fellow
    cultural Marxists. The Authoritarian Personality, a book carrying
    Adorno's name but in reality produced by the combined efforts of a
    number of people from the Frankfurt School, was extremely influential
    in the United States in the generation following WW2 and contributed
    to the Allied denazification program in Germany. Working at the
    University of Berkeley, California, during and after the war, Adorno
    and others such as the German-Jewish thinker Max Horkheimer through a
    large number of interviews tried to establish that what led to the
    rise of Nazi Germany was the predominance of a particular kind of
    authoritarian personality, which happened to be closely tied to
    conservative viewpoints. In their view, this was not just the case in
    Nazi Germany; there were large numbers of potential Fascists all over
    the Western world.

    The authors developed the so-called F-scale (F for `Fascist') to
    measure the psychological indicators of an authoritarian personality.
    They identified several key dimensions of a protofascist personality,
    which included favoring traditional morality, close family ties and
    strong support of religion. It also included aggression, stereotypes,
    a preoccupation with oppression, dominance and destruction and an
    obsession with sex. The solution to root out this authoritarian
    personality was above all to be found in the breakdown and
    transformation of the traditional family structure..

    It is striking to notice that these writers were inspired by a
    Marxist worldview and consistently refused to see the heavy Socialist
    influences on the Nazi ideology. Adorno and others argued that `late
    capitalism' had developed tools to resist the rise of a Socialist
    society, above all the use of popular culture and education. They
    apparently concluded that what led to the rise of the Nazis were
    traditional and `conservative' viewpoints.

    But the Nazis weren't conservatives. They should more properly be
    understood as a revolutionary Socialist movement, albeit one with
    powerful racialist and anti-Semitic overtones. Judging from the death
    toll produced by Socialist regimes both prior to and after them, it
    is tempting to conclude that the destruction brought by the Nazis
    owed at least as much to the Socialist as to the nationalist element
    of their ideology. The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt,
    published in 1951, a year after The Authoritarian Personality, was
    somewhat closer to understanding the commonalities between the Soviet
    Union and Nazi Germany.

    However, since the Nazis have by now been dubbed a `far-right'
    movement, anybody considered to be a `right-winger' or conservative
    is thus supposedly closer to them than Socialists are, which
    automatically makes them suspect. Much of the power of the political
    Left throughout the West is based on such guilt-by-association, which
    is why it would be a disaster for their power base if it were to be
    demonstrated that the Swedish Social Democrats, the darlings of the
    political Left internationally, were close to the Fascists and the
    Nazis. They now display great affection for Islam, another thing they
    have in common with the Nazis.

    Many of the stories in the famous The Book of One Thousand and One
    Nights (Arabian Nights), though frequently based on much older
    Persian and Indian tales, are said to have taken place during the
    rule of the Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid in Baghdad in the late 8th
    and early 9th century. Few seem to remember that the first prototype
    of the yellow badge for Jews employed by the Nazis were developed by
    him, based on the regulations for dhimmis in Islamic teachings. He
    ordered Jews to wear yellow belts, Christians blue belts. This
    practice was later imported to Europe via medieval Spain and Portugal
    under Islamic rule.

    Muhammad Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Arab
    nationalist leader, a leading force behind the establishment of the
    Arab League and a spiritual father of the PLO, was a close
    collaborator with Nazi Germany and personally met with Adolf Hitler.
    In a radio broadcast from Berlin he called upon Muslims to kill Jews
    wherever they could find them. Dieter Wisliceny was the deputy of
    Adolf Eichmann, the organizer of the Holocaust and reportedly the
    inventor of the phrase the `Final Solution to the Jewish Question.'
    During the Nuremberg trials, Wisliceny stated that the Mufti `was one
    of Eichmann's best friends and had constantly incited him to
    accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied
    by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chambers of Auschwitz.'

    Serge Trifkovic in his book The Sword of the Prophet documents how
    al-Husayni recruited Bosnian and Albanian Muslims for Waffen SS units
    in the Balkans. Yugoslavia wanted to extradite al-Husayni for war
    crimes after WW2, but he fled to Egypt and continued his war against
    Jews. Orthodox Christian Serbs had to wear blue armbands, Jews yellow
    armbands. This clearly demonstrates that for Muslims this was a Jihad
    against disobedient dhimmis, and thus a continuation of the Turkish
    and Kurdish genocide against Armenians a few years earlier which was
    one of the inspirations for the Holocaust. More than a quarter of a
    million Serbs, Jews and Romani people (Gypsies) were killed by these
    Muslims troops. The leader of the Nazi SS troops Heinrich Himmler was
    impressed and stated to Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels that Islam
    was `a very practical and attractive religion for soldiers.'

    He was far from the only person seeing a close correlation between
    Nazism and Islam. Karl Jung, in The Symbolic Life from 1939, stated
    that: `We do not know whether Hitler is going to found a new Islam.
    (He is already on the way; he is like Mohammad. The emotion in
    Germany is Islamic; warlike and Islamic. They are all drunk with wild
    god). That can be the historic future.' In The Second World War, Vol.
    I (The Gathering Storm), Winston Churchill wrote about Adolf Hitler's
    autobiography Mein Kampf: `Here was the new Koran of faith and war:
    turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message.'

    Medieval anti-Jewish pogroms in Europe could be brutal, but still
    normally of limited scope. To commit evil on a truly monumental
    scale, you need the support of ideology backed by bureaucrats,
    jurists and the machinery of a totalitarian state. Since Socialism
    generally leads in a totalitarian direction, which has also been
    facilitated by technological and industrial advances, a Socialist
    society will make large-scale massacres more likely..

    The Hungarian author Imre Kertész, Holocaust survivor and winner of
    the Nobel Prize in Literature, writes in the magazine
    signandsight.com that `the genuine novelties of the twentieth century
    were the totalitarian state and Auschwitz. The anti-Semitism of the
    nineteenth century, for instance, was as yet barely able, nor even
    would have wished, to imagine a Final Solution. Auschwitz, therefore,
    cannot be accounted for by the common-or-garden, archaic, not to say
    classical concepts of anti-Semitism. (...) Eichmann testified during
    his trial in Jerusalem that he was never an anti-Semite, and although
    those who were in the courtroom burst into laughter, it is not
    inconceivable that he was being truthful. In order to murder millions
    of Jews the totalitarian state had need, in the final analysis, not
    so much of anti-Semites as good organisers. We need to see clearly
    that no totalitarianism of party or state can exist without
    discrimination, and the totalitarian form of discrimination is
    necessarily mass murder.'

    Kertész also warns, timely in these Multicultural days, that `a
    civilisation that does not clearly proclaim its values, or which
    leaves these proclaimed values high and dry, is stepping on the path
    to perdition and terminal debility. Then others will pronounce their
    values, and in the mouths of these others they will no longer be
    values but just so many pretexts for untrammelled power, untrammelled
    destruction.'

    Following the Cold War, the West was stuck with a large fifth column
    in our media and academia of people who were disappointed after the
    sudden collapse of the alternative to capitalism. They are slaves
    emancipated against their will, desperately in search of a new
    master. Their hatred for the Established Order never subsided when
    Marxism suffered a blow to its credibility. On the contrary, on some
    levels it increased. Although their attacks on the Christian,
    capitalist West are less ideologically coherent than in the past,
    this does not make them any less passionate.

    They have decided to pursue the course of a gradual transformation of
    society through the education system and through destroying the
    family structure. The radicals have renewed hope of a violent
    upheaval. With the mass importation of Muslims, who have displayed
    such a wonderful talent for violence, and with rising ethnic tensions
    within the West, maybe they can finally get the armed revolution they
    were longing for.

    The Swedish Social Democrats were pro-Fascist and pro-Nazi during the
    1930s and 40s, appeased the Communists during the Cold War and
    cooperate with repressive and violent Islamic organizations today.
    They have consistently supported or appeased some of the worst
    societies and ideologies in human history, which between themselves
    have killed more than 150 million people in a few generations. Yet
    they are the good guys, the poster boys of the political Left
    throughout the world.

    Now they forge an alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood, another
    organization with close ideological ties to the Fascist and Nazi
    movements. At a time when native Swedes are raped, stabbed, killed
    and chased out of their homes by Muslim gangs, the Social Democrats
    agree to continue allowing Muslims to colonize the country in
    exchange for their votes. In the old days this would be called
    treason. Now it's called tolerance. It's remarkable how similar the
    two concepts have become. Two Fascist-inspired movements cooperate on
    exploiting and abusing the native population of a country, force them
    fund and applaud their own colonization and denounce them as bigots,
    racists and Fascists if they resist. The strategy is as brilliant as
    it is evil.

    Why do they get away with this? How come Socialists can stab their
    own people in the back, ally themselves openly with some of the most
    violent and repressive movements on earth and still manage to portray
    themselves as beacons of goodness? I am tempted to agree with former
    Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky: The West didn't win the Cold War,
    at least not as decisively as we should have done. The belief-system
    we were up against has been allowed to mutate and regain some of its
    former strength. We haven't defeated Socialism until we stage a
    Nuremberg trial and demonstrate clearly that the suffering,
    repression and massacres caused by Socialist regimes from Vietnam via
    the Ukraine to the Baltic were a direct result of Socialist
    doctrines.

    http://www.brusselsjournal.c om/node/2355
Working...
X