That which was once removed is now introduced at a faster speed and with impressive determination.
Suddenly she asks, “What is apartheid?”
She has probably heard me talking about apartheid a bit too much. I have started nagging. She is young. 14 years. I have only known her for less than a year.
To her, apartheid never existed. She doesn’t have a clue. She couldn’t know. And if she had known anything about apartheid, she’d probably think that it couldn’t have been that bad. It solved itself in the end. Today, IS has taken its place.
But now she wants to know and I begin to tell her. I reflect for a second if I know the answer myself. When I start talking, I hear myself repeating stories of my mentor, Tor Sellström. Not as articulate as him, or as visual, but for a moment I am glad to remember the many hours we spent together on Sveavägen and in Pretoria:
It started in South Africa, a country very far away. A beautiful country. A rich country. In this country, there were few white and many non-white. We can call them “the others”. The white came from Europe. With armed force, they took over large areas. The white could never get enough. They wanted more power, more power.
Most white people went to church. They went to an all-white church. In church they were taught that all are equal. God sees all as equal, but here on earth, the white are worth a little more. Not a lot more, just enough. Early on, “the others” started questioning this. It wasn’t right, not fair; they started fighting, but only a little. Just enough.
The white started introducing new laws. Laws that separated, segregated the white from “the others”. The few white people got large areas. Areas where they could harvest. Areas where there were diamonds. Areas with a view of the ocean. “The others”, who were so many, got the left over areas. Not a lot. “The others” continued to fight, or rather – tried to fight. The accessed weapons. Simple weapons. It didn’t work. The white got modern weapons from us in the north. Big ships were filled with weapons and transported to Cape Town and Durban. “The others” accessed weapons through smuggling. They were carried over the border on dangerous roads.
At an extraordinary speed, “the few” continuously declared new laws. Laws that prohibited “the others” from leaving their communities without special passes. If they lived in one area, they could not travel to the next. Different passes were introduced. The system became increasingly sophisticated. Eventually, very few could grasp the surveillance system. Everyone was eventually a part of the system, but not everyone knew about it.
The white and “the others” could no longer meet. In TV, in church, in school they talked about “the others”. The message was always the same. “The others” are dangerous, they are evil. In parallel to explaining how evil “the others” were, they promised safety, the South African police offered protection against the evil.
Appropriate bible verses were found in the New Testament, but more often in the Old Testament. Verses with prophecies which confirmed that they were not stealing, not killing – only doing what they had a right to do. The few had a sacred mission to transform the country, civilize the ignorant. The few were convinced that they had God on their side.
But there were meeting places. The white children met “the others” who changed the white children’s diapers, cooked their food, built their houses, mowed their lawns. They did all the heavy work.
“Ok,” says the girl. “But this happened a long time ago. Why are you talking about this now? It doesn’t exist anymore.”
I didn’t think so either. It was first when I came to Jerusalem, 2003, that I understood that the same system had been established in yet another country. A country that would like to belong to the EU.
The land is stolen, the houses are demolished.
Large areas are converted into military zones. People are crammed together in small areas, trapped in ghettos. They cannot come in and they cannot come out. Now it is no longer in church where verses are used to legitimize the oppression. Now it sometimes takes place in other buildings where one is taught that the country belongs to “us” and not “the others.” Now “the others” are Christian and Muslims speaking Arabic. An ideology is developed that gives the oppressors the right to demolish houses, to steal land, to create military zones, build walls, segregate, kill.
In Knesset, Sharon took over the rhetoric of P.W. Bothas. With similar words and logic. The same underlying message. It worked then! It works now! Will it work tomorrow? It is at the same time a political strategy that divides Israel. The Israeli peace movement and part of the the Israeli media, some Israeli politicians, the private sector are together dreaming about a different future. Five hundred rabbies urge Israel to stop demolition of Palestinian homes. Stop the insanity.
Israelis and Palestinians live under different laws. Within the same area, some are brought to civil court and “the others” to military court. Continuous confrontations arise. Society crashes. When the settlers take over land and move in, the crash is heard across the whole world. In the White House, Obama reacts and wants the settlers stopped. Obama reacts but does not act.
South Africans visiting or working at the representative’s office in Ramallah see something they thought had been buried – homelands, passes, military laws. That which was once removed is now introduced at a faster speed and with impressive determination.
The world is watching.
Journalists write daily articles that explain and highlight how the innocent becomes homeless or children get killed. Diplomats write secret reports about things that everyone already know. They who opposed apartheid in South Africa were captured and tortured. In the same way, the list of imprisoned young Palestinians in Israel is long. Palestinians who were defending themselves when their house was demolished, land was stolen or when the wall of humiliation was built.
Just like in South Africa, it has taken a long time for the democratic world to recognize the oppression. Still, we cannot call apartheid what it is. Still, we deepen our ties with the oppressor. Still, someone who writes a text like this can be accused of being anti-Semitic.
She is 14 years old. Maybe she will experience the day when the illegal wall is torn down, when the illegal settlers move out. Maybe she will again be reminded that we were ourselves foreigners in Egypt.
Where are Arabs happy?
Facts:
Arabs are happy in Israel but not in Muslim ruled countries!
1: In the 2013 World Happiness Report, based on data from 156 countries between 2010 and 2012 the ranks are:
Jordan =74.–Lebanon =97–Egypt =130—Syria=148–Sudan=124.Iran=115.–Iraq =105–Tunisia=104–Syria =148.
*** Israel ranked 11th.******
(United States ranked 17th, United Kingdom placed 22nd)
2: Results of Israeli Arabs poll are:
72% of Israeli Arabs prefer to live in Israel than in any other country in ME.
They graded that the life is much better for them and more prosperous that it would be any place else.
Arabs in Israel recognized that they have rights and privileges that Arabs/Iranians living in Muslim regimes can only dream of.
3: Abdel Bioud from Algeria wrote:
–If you’re a citizen in Israel, you can live peacefully, raise a family, and send your kids to competitive and globally recognized universities.
— This simple basic respect for human dignity put them light-years ahead of any Arab state.
—-Israel is the only place in the Middle East where your potential can be fully expressed.
—-Based on the values it stands for and the principles that it was founded on, Israel is a force of good for that region and for the world.
5:Dr. Hamid the Chair for the Study of Islamic Radicalism at the Potomac Institute and formerly a member of the radical terrorist group Al-Gama’a Al-Islamiyya group in Egypt:
“”You have one million Arabs living in Israel with the Jews, and they are not suffering like the Arabs who are actually controlled by Arabs elsewhere in the region””
6:Khaled Abu Toameh (خالد أبو طعمة)- an Arab Israeli journalist wrote:
*The law of Israel DOES NOT DISTINGUISH between a Jew and an Arab.
“If Israel were an apartheid state, if, for example, would not be allowed:
* to work for a Jewish news paper or live in a Jewish neighborhood and own a home.
*Supreme judge George Karra would not be allowed to send president katsav to jail.
*Rana Raslan couldn’t possibly been nominated for Miss Israel.
*The real apartheid is in Lebanon, where there is a law that bans Palestinians from working in over 50 professions.
Can you imagine if the Knesset passed a law banning Arabs from working in even
one profession???
*The real apartheid is also in many Arab and Muslim nations, like Kuwait, where my Palestinian uncle, who has been living there for 35 years is banned from buying a house.or Saudi Arabia where no other religion but Islam is permitted.
7:**Arabs are representing Israel in all ages of the national football teams.
***Arab Professor Hossam Haick runs in Israel Technion University a nano technology course that received high marks worldwide.
**Arab Nissren Kader won first place on one of Israel’s most successful Israel popular television show.
*** Arab New Generation in Nazareth is thriving with 20 high tech startup
companies in providing Arab entrepreneurs with a platform to turn their ideas/
**Arabs in Israel have more opportunities than in any other country in the Muslim world.
—20 percent of students at Israel’s Technion a globally recognized university. With 3
Nobel Laureates and 4 Nobel Laureates associated with the university.
A parallel doesn’t exist in Muslim countries .
—100 Arabs graduated from Technion’s NAM (Outstanding Arab Youth) program
embarked on successful careers in hi-tech and engineering.
—The Chairman of “Druze for Israel” Mendi Safadi explains, Arabs, Christians, Druze and Jews are all equal in Israel. Mendi was born in the Golan Heights on the border with Syria and highlights Israel’s humanitarian aid to the beleaguered civilians of Israel’s neighbor.
Where are muslims least happy? In the Israeli besieged ghetto called Gaza.
People form Gaza have a choice.
NO to the Hamas government:
No Jihadist government
No Islam over all ideology
No charter to murder all the Jews
No terror hub against civilians
No hate children indoctrination
No shoot behind civilians
No shield behind civilians
No usage of Mosques, schools, hospitals as hiding terrorist
People for Gaza -say yes to:
Build a better life
Build a 21 century society
Build an education system teaching peace, coexistence/
Love life and not death
A government for the people and not people for extremists.
——————-
UN-USA and EU:
By avoiding learning and changing you are not part of the cure, you are part of the problem!
The only way to help to promote a real peace is to change the funding system and establish an effecting managing system of the use of the funds only for peaceful projects.
UN and EU should not be part of the managing system.
—
THE PALESTINIANS RECEIVED THE LAST 19 YEARS ALREADY MORE THAN FOUR TIMES AS MUCH AS THE EUROPEANS GOT FROM THE MARSHAL PLAN AFTER WW2.
—
Europe used the funds to build in a short time a prosperous democratic society with high moral values.
—-
Prevent the next round of violence- Israel and Palestinian people suffering and distraction of all the investments.
The new funds should:
1: Stop funding the terror machine!
2: Support projects that will create a healthy economy and higher income to the people
3: Help housing projects for all the people leaving in Gaza, West bank and other Palestinian sites in the ME.
4: Provide know-how to create an education system teaching coexistence, peace and cheer life and not death.
5: Disarm Islamist Hamas terror organization and other Jihad organization in Gaza and their seeds in the west bank and other Palestinian sites in the ME.
6: Fund only Palestinian media that will avoid being an instrument of incitement
7: Advice Palestinians legislators how to build a political system without extremism.
8: Reshape UNRA mandate and provide funds only by settling down each year 10% of the Arabs refugees.
UNRA preserves the Palestinian refugees as tools of endless conflict
Only in 2012 the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees managed to resettle ca. 1,000,000 of worldwide refugees. Since 1949 up today UNRA has resettles
— ZERO Palestinian refugees—.
Over 30.000 personal are working for UNRA.
Many are Islamist Hamas activists
9: In case of any type of terror attack the help should be automatically stop and renewed only after the terror group will be brought to justice.
10: No funds and works will proceed as long as the Palestinians are preaching violence
The people on the West Bank made all the choices you ask the Gazans to make, and it hasn’t done them 1 bit of good. they are still occupied and oppressed. why should Gaza follow the West Bank’s example when Israel has made it clear they will not grant freedom in return for peace?
“THE PALESTINIANS RECEIVED THE LAST 19 YEARS ALREADY MORE THAN FOUR TIMES AS MUCH AS THE EUROPEANS GOT FROM THE MARSHAL PLAN”
–ever hear of ‘inflation.’
“1: Stop funding the terror machine!”
–source? i should hope development funds are not still being diverted to terrorism!
Here’s an Anti-Zionist example of education of children.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgkCeDrlGLo
What do you think of that?
Actually, discerning least & most happy for any group is difficult at best. By the same token, there seems to be a lot of joy in this crowd, does there not?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4l267pCGdA
She gets it in the penalty box. Is that good to you?
Arabs is worst than apartheid:
****Christians in Arab states:
Christians now make up 5% of the population, down from 20% in the early 20th century mainly because emigration due ethnic, religious persecution and killings.
Google search: wikipedia. Christianity_in_the_Middle_
*****Qatar slavery: the kafala sponsorship system which gives employers complete control over their workers
*****
In the 21 century, in Mauritania, between 10 to 20% percent of the population are slaves!
Google search: youtube. /watch?v=5yQlOPD8mNo
****Iran Destroying Graves of Baha’is Executed for Teaching Sunday School Classes
Google search: .huffingtonpost /shastri-purushotma/iran-destroying-graves-of_b_5257708.htm
***Arabs where a major blacks slave traders.
25 millions marched the slavery roads and many killed.
Google search: Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions,David Livingstone,p 62,1888@DragonlordXV
Which is worse? Arab oppression of Non-muslims or Israeli oppression of non-Jews? Granted both are wrong…
I got an idea! lets butt out of the Middle East so we don’t have to take sides… picking the lesser of 2 evils is a fools game.
The trouble is that ISIS is fascist, as are many movements in the Islamic world, such as Hamas. Fascism relies in part upon religion to obtain its goals, although it may do so peculiarly. In the case of Spain, Franco uprooted an elected government to keep a “Christian” country from being threatened by “communism.” To do this, he used Muslim troops to conquer Spain. Now, just as all Christianity was not part of the fascism of Germany & Italy, so it is true that all Islam is not part of the fascism of, for want of a better word, Islamism.
The reason Islamism is not a good word is because ISIS/al qaeda/Hamas, etc, etc., etc. is a real variant of Islam, just as Father Tiso was a real Catholic priest, just as the Protestant theologians in Germany who supported Nazi Germany were in fact real Protestant theologians.
Just because ISIS is bad, doesn’t mean that we in the West are saints….
I’m not convinced the current crops of Western leaders are very different from Franco or Mussolini at all. That is why we the people must act to restrain their violent tendencies.
Fascism should be studied by you. The belief in the State as an organic entity, the belief that that entity can be embodied in a single individual, & the belief in the value of endless territorial acquisition are simply not present in Western countries these days.
Consider this very fascist quote:
“For a long time, the enemies have been planning, skillfully and with
precision, for the achievement of what they have attained. They took
into consideration the causes affecting the current of events. They
strived to amass great and substantive material wealth which they devoted to
the realisation of their dream. With their money, they took control of
the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses,
broadcasting stations, and others. With their money they stirred
revolutions in various parts of the world with the purpose of achieving
their interests and reaping the fruit therein. They were behind the
French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions
we heard and hear about, here and there. With their money they formed
secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others
in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies
and achieving Zionist interests. With their money they were able to
control imperialistic countries and instigate them to colonize many
countries in order to enable them to exploit their resources and spread
corruption there.”
Surely those believing such nonsense are, morally speaking, chocolate coated rat droppings, are they not?
I don’t know what evidence, if any, people might have for such a anti-zionist belief. so I can’t speak to that.
Qtub & al Banna were definitely fascists. Anyone supporting them is fascist.
the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Qutb abd Al-Banna are founding members, is deeply embeded in the Obama adminsitration and thier polices:
http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/general-muslim-brotherhood-inside-obama-administration/
That does not change their fascist orientation. Instead, it proves there is fascist influence within the Obama administration.
I think the US, under Bush and Obama, are basically fascist themselves, independent of involvement with the Muslim brotherhood, and here is why:
— a massive domestic surveillance apparatus (i.e. NSA spying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center, https://nsa.gov1.info/utah-data-center/ ),
— a militarized domestic police force that shoots innocent people and gets away with it (i.e. http://www.alternet.org/how-swat-team-killed-innocent-man-outside-his-childhood-home),
— mass criminalization of the mentally ill (i.e. http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/we-spend-9-billion-year-lock-people-mental-illnesses-heres-what-we-should-do-instead),
— mass criminalization of racial minorities (i.e. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/tsr/education-under-arrest/school-to-prison-pipeline-fact-sheet/ ),
— has a massive superiority complex (i.e. http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/05/28/obama-i-believe-american-exceptionalism-every-fiber-my-being ),
— is imperialistic (i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases#Overseas, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_United_States_foreign_regime_change_actions )
— invades other countries on the basis of lies (i.e. Iraq)
— a news media system that is controlled by the corporate elite (i.e. http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6 ),
—has the highest percentage of its population in prison (i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate ),
—criminalization of dissent (i.e. http://www.whistleblower.org/truthjailing ),
—Black detention site(s) (i.e. http://www.whistleblower.org/truthjailing ).
Stalin also had a massive domestic surveillance apparatus. Stalin was a communist, not a fascist. Because Stalin is an element of the set “possesses massive domestic surveillance apparatus” as well as the set “not a fascist”, it follows that your conclusion is invalid.
Qutb & Al Banna were the sponsors of fascism within Islam. Any entity that reveres these two is fascist. Because the Muslim Brotherhood reveres Qutb & Al Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood is a fascist entity.
I don’t think you read the rest of my post… i gave 11 reasons why i think the US has become fascist, not just 1.
Why should we consider Qutb & Al Banna fascists? any evidence?
Together they certainly rendered unto Islam fascism nolens volens, Characteristics of WWII fascist powers included beliefs in: 1) an organic state or polity, 2) the possibility of embodying the state in a single person (dictatorship or kingship), 3) endless territorial conquest as a good, 4) reliance, genuine or otherwise, upon religious justification. The endless conquest was the supreme crime; had Nazi Germany not conquered Europe, the 600K Jews would have simply been expelled; for Imperial Japan it was everything. Spain, the Slovak Republic, & the Croatian State were not agents of territorial conquest themselves, were arms of the fascist menace.
The above, derived from dozens of sources, limns my view of fascism. Let’s begin with a Qutb friendly book: Sayyid Qutb and the Origins of Radical Islamism by Calvert, Oxford University Press, 2009.
p 96 Qutb’s starting point in these writings, which span approximately the years 1933 to 1941, was his assertion that Egypt possessed an integrity and wholeness in its collective life. Far from existing as a mere political unit, Egypt was a living, organic entity whose individuality unfolded from a central core of meaning.
No, yours is the incorrect definition of fascism. “beliefs in an organic state or polity” is a wishy washy meaningless terminology that could mean a million different things. Mussolini was deposed by the fascist council – which falsifies point 2 of your definition. Spain was fascist but did not participate in endless conquests of imperialism, which falsifies point 3 (I think imperialism is an important secondary characteristic of fascism, while militarism is the primmary characteristic). And I’m really not sure the extent to which historical fascist powers relied on religious justifications, especially Japan and Chile, but the problem I have here is that this seems to indicate that you could never have an atheistic fascist nation, and I don’t think that right either.
Here are 2 sources with better definitions of fascism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm
If we can agree on a definition of the term, then we can have a discussion about who is an is not fascist.
Neither wikipedia not Rense (a rotten Jew baiter if ever there were) are good for definitions; you can find the part about an organic state in the Oxford political dictionary, if memory serves. Let’s start, instead, with the philosopher whose thought generated fascism in the first place, Mr. Heraclitus.
. From “Ancient Philosophy” in A History of Western
Philosophy. by Lord Bertrand Russell:
From what survives of his writings he does not appear as an amiable
character. He was much addicted to contempt, and was the reverse of a democrat. Concerning his fellow-citizens he says: “The Ephesians would do well to hang themselves, every grown man of them, and leave the city to beardless lads; for they have cast out Hermodorus, the best man among them, saying: ‘We will have none who is best among us; if there be any such, let him be so elsewhere and among others.'” He speaks ill of all his eminent predecessors, with a single exception. “Homer should be turned out of the lists and whipped.” “Of all whose discourses I have heard, there is not one who
attains to understanding that wisdom is apart from all.” “The learning of many things teacheth not understanding, else would it have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras, and again Xenophanes and Hecataeus.” “Pythagoras . . . claimed for his own wisdom what was but a knowledge of many things and an art of mischief.” The one exception to his condemnations is Teutamus, who is signalled out as “of more account than the rest.” When we inquire the reason for this praise, we find that Teutamus said “most men are bad.”
His contempt for mankind leads him to think that only force will compel them to act for their own good. He says: “Every beast is driven to the pasture with
blows”; and again: “Asses would rather have straw than gold.”
As might be expected, Heraclitus believes in war. “War,” he says, “is the father of all and the king of all; and some he has made gods and some men, some bond and some free.” Again: “Homer was wrong in saying: ‘Would that strife might perish from among gods and men!’ He did not see that he was praying for the destruction of the universe; for, if his prayer were heard, all things would pass away.” And yet again: “We must know that war is common to all and strife is justice, and that all things come into being and pass away through strife.”
His ethic is a kind of proud asceticism, very similar to Nietzsche’s. He regards
the soul as a mixture of fire and water, the fire being noble and the water
ignoble. The soul that has most fire he calls “dry.” “The dry soul is the wisest and best.” “It is pleasure to souls to become moist.” “A man, when he gets drunk, is led by a beardless lad, tripping, knowing not where he steps, having his soul moist.” “It is death to souls to become water.” “It is hard to fight with one’s heart’s desire. Whatever it wishes to get, it purchases at the cost of
soul.” “It is not good for men to get all that they wish to get.” One may say that Heraclitus values power obtained through self-mastery, and despises the passions that distract men from their central ambitions.
Dialectic analysis apart, there is much in Mr Qutb that reflects Mr Heraclitus.
I see absolutely no connection between this eclectic rant about people who have been dead 2500 years, and known 20th century fascists. I see absolutely no connection between this eclectic rant about people who have been dead 2500 years, and the definition of fascism you gave earlier. What constitutes fascism is bound to change with time, of course. why are the Wiki and Rense definitions bad?
When we have solved this riddle then you can try again explaining why are Qutb and Al-Banna of fascists (of course I agree that Islamo-fascist is a better descriptor that Muslim terrorist or Islamist extremist. Its just that I don’t know much about these founders of the Muslim Brotherhood).
IIgnorance is not something to be proud of. Did you live in WWII or
pre-WWII Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy or Imperial Japan as an adult,
where you had contact with high level government officials? If not, you
cannot say by personal experience that you know what WWII fascism
means. You might be able to derive knowledge from reading about them,
but that is not the same thing.
Just as anti-Black racism stems
from the notion that being Black suits one to be a slave, so Jew baiting
stems from the notion that being Jewish suits one to be slaughtered.
The classic formulation of this emerges from St. John Chrysostom, viz:
Just so the Jewish people were driven by their drunkenness and plumpness to
the ultimate evil; they kicked about, they failed to accept the yoke of Christ,
nor did they pull the plow of his teaching. Another prophet hinted at this when
he said: ‘Israel is as obstinate as a stubborn heifer’. And still another
called the Jews ‘an untamed calf’. Although such beasts are unfit for work,
they are fit for killing. And this is what happened to the Jews: while they
were making themselves unfit for work, they grew fit for slaughter. This is why
Christ said: ‘But as for these my enemies, who did not want me to be king over
them, bring them here and slay them’.
Mr. Rense is very much of a Jew baiter. The world view of his publication is such that one gathers he would line every Jew up & shoot them, given the chance. Being somewhat murderous is one’s right by the first amendment.
Do you share that Jew baiters view of things?
I’m afraid I haven’t read a single thing by Mr. Rense than the page I gave you from him.
No I’m not a Jew baiter.
As for St. John of Chrysostom. I can only offer the follow:
“There is an excellent study by Robert L. Welken, John Chrysostom and the Jews: Rhetoric and Reality in the Late Fourth Century. It is an essential work. It very convincingly demonstrates not only that St. John Chrysostomos was not an anti-Semite, but that his supposed writings against the Jews are actually against the “Judaizers,” a terrible mistranslation which convicts him unfairly of racism, when in fact his words are addressed to a theological element in the Christian Church. This work was published in 1983 and is a “must” for anyone wishing to understand the issue at hand.”
Are you a frequent ‘anti-semite card’ player? If so I can only laugh in your face.
Mr. Welken can do as he wishes, but that’s simply untrue; the Adversus Jew garbage says kill the Jews because they killed Christ. This was also in New Testament verses now known to be inserted, which also advocate the same stuff. St. John Chrysostom wanted the Jews dead, as he directly & emphatically said; the foulness of St. John Chrysostom’s Homilies Against the Jews is acknowledged by the Roman Catholic Church. The ultimate point is that the Jews could NOT have killed Christ. Crucifixion was reserved by Rome for traitors in its view of things. the Jews, a subject people, could no more have forced Rome to crucify Christ than they could have forced Rome to do anything else. Rome crucified Christ for reasons that lie in obscurity today; most likely, Christ was a revolutionary not to Rome’s liking.
I never say the word “anti-semite” & am not an “anti-semite card player”. Now Mr. Rense is a mere fragment of pig manure, morally speaking; he is a private citizen peddling his Jew killing nonsense to any who will hear of it. He lacks no actual theological or political power to put his world view into work.
In any case, it is unwise to use a, morally speaking, fragment of pig manure to define anything. Wikipedia simply will not do for definitions of the fascist governments of WWII. Hence, you lack a good source for your understanding of fascism, at least the WWII stuff.
you make some interesting points regarding Chrysostom, I’ll have to read up more on it.
“… the Jews could NOT have killed Christ. Crucifixion was reserved by Rome for traitors in its view of things.”
–agreed.
If its any consolation to you the definition of fascism given on RensedotCom was written by Laurence Britt, not the guy you hate.
Here are some other sources:
Orwell on why defining fascism is so hard:
http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc
and Ency Brit gives these points:
-Opposition to Marxism
-Opposition to parliamentary democracy
-Opposition to political and
cultural liberalism
-Totalitarian ambitions
-Economic programs that
favor the wealthy
-Corporatism
-Imperialism
-Military values
-Volksgemeinschaft – a racially unified and
hierarchically organized nation
-Mass mobilization
-The leadership principle
-The “new man” – Fascists aimed to
transform the ordinary man into a ‘superman’
-Glorification of youth
-Education as character building
-Opposition to Decadence and Espoused
spirituality
-Exercised Violence in politics
-Extreme nationalism
-Populism
-Revolutionary imagery
-Antiurbanism
-Sexism and misogyny
-Acceptance of racism
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/202210/fascism/219376/The-new-man
Orwell is not the greatest of sources, although he did write a nice parable. The Encyc Brit lists characteristics, but is not much help as respects defining whether Mr. Qutb is a fascist. One might be able to take a few of those characteristics & define a great majority of persons as fascists.
Simply because Mr Qutb expressed opposition to decadence, espoused spirituality, used revolutionary imagery, opposed communism, opposed cultural & political liberalism, & viewed education as character building does not make him a fascist, in my eyes. I view education as character building myself.
You say Orwell is not a good source, but here we are discussing the definition of fascism at length and failing to come to a satisfactory common understanding of the 1 little word. It CERTAINLY appears Mr. Orwell was right.
I never said ALL Muslims were fascists. Just the extremist/terrorist ones.
If you had read the Britannica reference I gave it would have been QUITE clear that not all fascists have to match ALL the listed characteristics.
Anyways, I have said what is wrong with your definition… you have not said why you disagree with the Laurence Britt’s 14 points (other than that you dislike the purveyor of said information) or the encyclopedia’s 22 characteristics.
14 points did not work for President Wilson; neither will it work here.
One other item. There is a girl who is charged with encouraging a person to commit suicide, which he did in fact do; the crime alleged is involuntary manslaughter – that makes her, morally speaking, a pile of rat droppings. By encouraging the killing of all Jews, an entire group of people, Mr. Rense becomes, morally speaking, much worse – a pile of pig manure. The acts are morally equivalent because, had the fellow not committed suicide, the girl would not be charged with a crime.
Worse than either is actual murder of course. Mr. Caius Veiovus is a good example, whose case you would likely enjoy reading about. He is a leaking bucket of pit manure.
To the degree the word hate is applicable, you can see from that order whom I hate the worst, Mr. Caius Veiovus. Ultimately, the question is whether one loves life infinitely more than death or loves death more than life. That dichotomy is essential.
Murder trials are a fabulous way, en passant, of learning about the most important rights guaranteed by the US constitution, the rights that are important to the foulest individuals on the face of the earth. The most important rights to protect, to defend the US from dictatorship, are the rights of the axe murderer who kills your neighbors’ kids.
A fascinating murder trial now is going on, that of Mr. Aaron Hernandez. The poor man is having troubles in the court of law. Someone found his & the victim’s fingerprints on or in a car rented Mr. Hernandez at the time of the death. There are likely reasonable explanations for that piece of evidence, but none appear to my brain at present. What about you?
I’ve had quite enough of your irrelevant tangents… you are a MOST frustrating debate partner. Good day.
Well, if you want to say these people are not after world conquest, be my guest. They want to conquer the planet. This was also the major problem the US had at Nuremberg:
Chapter IX – LAUNCHING OF WARS OF AGGRESSION
1. THE PLOTTING OF AGGRESSIVE WAR
The aggressive war phase of the case against the Nazi conspirators is, in the view of the American prosecution, the heart of the case.
Everything else in this case, however dramatic, however sordid, however shocking and revolting to the common instinct of civilized peoples, is
incidental or subordinate to, the fact of aggressive war.
All the dramatic story of what went on in Germany in the early phases of the conspiracy-the ideologies used, the techniques of terror used, the suppressions of human freedom employed in the seizure of power, and
even the concentration camps and the crimes against humanity, the persecutions, tortures and murders committed-all these things would have had little international juridical significance except for the fact that they were the preparation for the commission of aggressions against peaceful neighboring peoples. Even the aspects of the case involving “war crimes” in the strict sense are merely the inevitable, proximate
result of the wars of aggression launched and waged by these conspirators, and of the kind of warfare they waged. It was total war, the natural result of the totalitarian party-dominated state that waged it; it was atrocious war, the natural result of the doctrines, designs and purposes of the Nazi conspirators.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/chap_09.asp
Unless the philosophy of these absolute monsters is neutralized, all that will occur with the destruction of ISIS is the preparation of the next ISIS.
i didn’t read more than 2 lines of this ridiculous diatribe. stop wasting your time.
Tell me any objection you have to the following statement:
Aldous Huxley believes Qutb’s beliefs concerning Jihad are valid.
my objection is that you are being ridiculous.
You appear to believe Italy, Germany, & Japan vassals of the United States; correct that if it is a wrong inference from your words.
You find me ridiculous, but lack other objections to Aldous Huxley believes Qutb’s beliefs concerning Jihad are valid.
Japan’s constitution was written by the US.
Japan remains a free country to this day, in part because of our post-war actions towards her. A video of relevance:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EqRTWMVqMY
In sum, you support Jihad.
haha
So based on Britannica’s definition lets compare Qutb and Obama’s fascist characteristics:
-Opposition to Socialism/Marxism/Communism: Qutb – No, Obama – No
-Opposition to parliamentary democracy: Qutb – No, Obama – No
-Opposition to political and
cultural liberalism: Qutb – Yes, Obama – No
-Totalitarian ambitions: Qutb – No, Obama – Yes
-Economic programs that
favor the wealthy: Qutb – No, Obama – Yes
-Corporatism: Qutb – No, Obama – Yes
-Imperialism: Qutb – No, Obama – Yes
-Military values: Qutb – No, Obama – No
-racially unified hierarchical national organization : Qutb – No, Obama – No
-Mass mobilization: Qutb – Yes, Obama – Yes
-The leadership principle: Qutb – Yes, Obama – No
-The “new man”: Qutb – No, Obama – No
-Education as character building: Qutb – Yes, Obama – Yes
-Opposition to Decadence and Espoused
spirituality: Qutb – Yes, Obama – No
-Exercised Violence in politics: Qutb – Yes, Obama – No
-Extreme nationalism: Qutb – No, Obama – Yes
-Populism: Qutb – No, Obama – Yes
-Revolutionary imagery: Qutb – Yes, Obama – No
-Antiurbanism: Qutb – No, Obama – No
-Sexism and misogyny: Qutb – Yes, Obama – No
-Acceptance of racism: Qutb – Yes, Obama – Yes
Qutb scores 9 out of 21 characteristics.
Obama scores 9 out of 21
(and Winston Churchill scores a 7 out of 21)
I think Obama is a borderline fascist (despite his relatively low score on this definition/index, he scores higher on the ones i prefer). Therefore I must conclude you are right about Qutb being a fascist too.
The more points one gets on this scale is meaningless because the scoring system is meaningless. Ultimately, a reference to history is far better.
The most important issue is endless territorial conquest, the “aggressive war” of the Nuremberg trials. People have abused this, for example, saying that Turkey’s aggressive take over of Northern Cyprus puts them in the Nazi German/Imperial Japanese group; Russia, in its takeover of the Crimean peninsula, would be infinitely worse of course. Small potatoes were not intended by the Nuremberg statement; being referenced were the conquests of the German & Japanese fascists, wherein large chunks of entire continents were rapidly conquered.
“… the scoring system is meaningless. Ultimately, a reference to history is far better.”
The definition the scoring system is based on, is itself a reference to history… the reason I included Churchill was to show that it can be used on historical figures who were know fascists, or not… in this way the fascist ‘threshold score’ can be determined.
“The most important issue is endless territorial conquest, the “aggressive war” of the Nuremberg trials.”
–i disagree. Once again, Franco and Pinochet are historical fascists who did not engage in imperialist aggressions. The Nuremberg trials measured and judged war crimes, not fascism.
“People have abused this, for example, saying that Turkey’s aggressive take over of Northern Cyprus puts them in the Nazi German/Imperial Japanese group;”
–Precisely why we need a larger number of characteristics / criteria by which to judge contemporary regimes.
“Russia, in its takeover of the Crimean peninsula, would be infinitely worse of course.”
–why?
You may disagree with the territorial aggression, but in fact it was the leading problem at Nuremberg.
III. Statement of the Offense
All the defendants, with divers other persons, during a period of
years preceding 8 May 1945, participated as leaders, organizers,
instigators, or accomplices in the formulation or execution of a common
plan or conspiracy to commit, or which involved the commission of,
Crimes against Peace, War Crimes, and Crimes against Humanity, as
defined in the Charter of this Tribunal, and, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter,
are individually responsible for their own acts and for all acts
committed by any persons in the execution of such plan or conspiracy.
The common plan or conspiracy embraced the commission of Crimes against
Peace, in that the defendants planned, prepared, initiated, and waged
wars of aggression, which were also wars in violation of international
treaties, agreements, or assurances. In the development and course of
the common plan or conspiracy it came to embrace the commission of War
Crimes, in that it contemplated, and the defendants determined upon and
carried out, ruthless wars against countries and populations, in
violation of the rules and customs of war, including as typical and
systematic means by which the wars were prosecuted, murder,
ill-treatment, deportation for slave labor and for other purposes of
civilian populations of occupied territories, murder and ill-treatment
of prisoners of war and of persons on the high seas, the taking and
killing of hostages, the plunder of public and private property, the
indiscriminate destruction of cities, towns, and villages, and
devastation not justified by military necessity. The common plan or
conspiracy contemplated and came to embrace as typical and systematic
means, and the defendants determined upon and committed, Crimes against
Humanity, both within Germany and within occupied territories, including
murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane
acts committed against civilian populations before and during the war,
and persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, in
execution of the plan for preparing and prosecuting aggressive or
illegal wars, many of such acts and persecutions being violations of the
domestic laws of the countries where perpetrated.
____________
With this in mind, I assert not fascism in general, but that Mr. Qutb, Mr. Al Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood & Mr. al Husseini were in large part responsible for creating among the foulest part of Islam the worst aspects of the WWII fascists, the chief of which is aggressive conquest of the planet.
If you want me to restate my position
The Nuremberg trials only focused on aggression because the Allies wished their war crimes to be exempt from prosecution, and the Axis were the aggressors. The Nuremberg trials are irrelevant to our discussion about the definition of fascism and who is and is not a fascist.
According to these 2 sources you have it backwards. The Nazi’s inspired the Islamo-fascissts, not the otherway around as you would have it.
http://www.ausairpower.net/DT-Islamo-Fascism-2007.html
http://www.aina.org/news/2007070595517.htm
Are you serious man? Do you really think there is any moral equivalence between the Axis & the Allies?
Get real. The fascists wanted to conquer the planet. Look at the map. Germany conquered Europe. Japan conquered Asia. The bad quys appear indisputably on maps.
Or do you think Japan & Germany had reason to conquer Europe & Asia?
yep… and then what happened? the Allies conquered the Axis, and turned the countries they had conquered into Vassal States. Japan Germany and Italy still to this day have US bases on their soil and Constitutional restrictions on their sovereignty. The USSR dropped the Iron Curtain down on all the places in East Europe they had ‘liberated from the Germans’
Did I say that I that thought there was moral equivalence between the Axis and the Allies? No. Stop reading so far beyond my actual words, and making up where you think I’m going. Do I think there is moral equivalence? No.
Who killed the most civilians in concentration Camps? USSR. Then the Axis nations. The NATO nation skilled relatively few people in concentration camps, but we did have them.
Who carpet bombed the most cities? The NATO powers. Followed by the Axis. Followed by the USSR.
Who was responsible for the most civilian deaths overall? The axis.
Who relied on torture and mistreatment of POW’s the most? Japan, followed by USSR, followed by the other Axis nations. Followed by the NATO nations.
Who used nukes? The USA.
So stop pretending that the Allies were perfect and holy. Both sides did horrible things. Sure the Axis nations were far more horrible. Stop pretending the being the aggressor is the sole basis of morality.
You are now saying the deaths which happened in concentration camps are morally equivalent to those which happened in death camps, such as Auschwitz.
The Jihadists desires to conquer the planet are the foulest things about them. There’s just no doubt about that.
Your reasoning here is invalid. Just because Fascism and Communism both share a common characteristic – in this example, a massive domestic surveillance apparatus – does not mean they are mutually exclusive or that this characteristic cannot apply to fascist countries.
Do we know if Qutb and Al-Banna espoused creation of a massive domestic surveillance apparatus? Could it be that they don’t and you oppose inclusion of this characteristic for that reason? Begging the question fallacy.
Somehow, chopping off 21 heads on Libyan soil seems just a bit worse than this “Apartheid”. On the other hand, who knows? When a Palestinian suffers excess flatulence, the angels may well view that as more horrific than chopping someone’s hand off, as is done in so many Anti-Zionist countries.
–The land is stolen, the houses are demolished–
And still a super power takes pride in having special relationship with the invaders. Millions of Palestinians are wandering around in so many countries of the Middle East — there is no one to stop this barbarity — as a reaction so called fascist movements like ISIS, Al Qaeda etc etc will continue growing! Justice demands that justice should be rendered.