Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

FYI: Buchanan vs Neo-Cons and 'Islamo-fascism'

Expand Messages
  • Carl Davidson
    Islamo-fascism? by Patrick J. Buchanan September 1, 2006 President Likens Dewey to Hitler as Fascist Tool. So ran the New York Times headline on Oct. 26,
    Message 1 of 3 , Sep 1 6:57 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Islamo-fascism?

      by Patrick J. Buchanan

      September 1, 2006

      'President Likens Dewey to Hitler as Fascist Tool.'

      So ran the New York Times headline on Oct. 26, 1948, after what Dewey
      biographer Richard Norton Smith called a 'particularly vitriolic
      attack in Chicago' by Harry Truman.

      What brings this to mind is President Bush's assertion that we are 'at
      war with Islamic fascism' and 'Islamo-fascism.'

      After the transatlantic bomb plot was smashed, Bush said the plotters
      'try to spread their jihadist message I call – it's totalitarian in
      nature, Islamic radicalism – Islamic fascism; they try to spread it,
      as well, by taking the attack to those of us who love freedom.'

      What is wrong with the term Islamo-fascism?

      First, there is no consensus as to what 'fascism' even means. Orwell
      said when someone calls Smith a fascist, what he means is 'I hate
      Smith. ' By calling Smith a fascist, you force Smith to deny he's a
      sympathizer of Hitler and Mussolini.

      As a concept, writes Arnold Beichman of the Hoover Institution,
      'fascism … has no intellectual basis at all nor did its founders even
      pretend to have any. Hitler's ravings in `Mein Kampf' … Mussolini's
      boastful balcony speeches, all of these can be described, in the words
      of Roger Scruton, as an `amalgam of disparate conceptions.''

      Richard Pipes considers Stalinism and Hilterism to be siblings of the
      same birth mother: 'Bolshevism and fascism were heresies of socialism.'

      Since the 1930s, 'fascist' has been a term of hate and abuse used by
      the left against the right, as in the Harry Truman campaign. In 1964,
      Martin Luther King Jr. claimed to see in the Goldwater campaign
      'dangerous signs of Hitlerism.' Twin the words 'Reagan, fascism' in
      Google and 1,800,000 references pop up.

      Unsurprisingly, it is neoconservatives, whose roots are in the
      Trotskyist-social Democratic left, who are promoting use of the term.
      Their goal is to have Bush stuff al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and
      Iran into the same 'Islamo-fascist' kill box, then let Strategic Air
      Command do the rest.

      But the term represents the same lazy, shallow thinking that got us
      into Iraq, where Americans were persuaded that by dumping over Saddam,
      we were avenging 9/11.

      But Saddam was about as devout a practitioner of Islam as his hero
      Stalin was of the Russian Orthodox faith. Saddam was into booze,
      mistresses, movies, monuments, palaces and dynasty. Bin Laden loathed
      him and volunteered to fight him in 1991, if Saudi Arabia would only
      not bring the Americans in to do the fighting Islamic warriors ought
      to be doing themselves.

      And whatever 'Islamo-fascism' means, Syria surely is not it. It is a
      secular dictatorship Bush I bribed into becoming an ally in the Gulf
      War. The Muslim Brotherhood is outlawed in Syria. In 1982, Hafez
      al-Assad perpetrated a massacre of the Brotherhood in the city of Hama
      that was awesome in its magnitude and horror.

      As with Gadhafi, whom Bush let out of the penalty box after he agreed
      to pay $10 million to the family of each victim of Pan Am 103 and give
      up his nuclear program, America can deal with Syria as Israel did
      after the Yom Kippur War – for an armistice on the Golan that has
      stuck, as both sides have kept the deal.

      America faces a variety of adversaries, enemies and evils. But the
      Bombs-Away Caucus, as Iraq and Lebanon reveal, does not always have
      the right formula. Al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran all
      present separate challenges calling forth different responses.

      Al-Qaida appears to exist for one purpose: Plot and perpetrate mass
      murder to terrorize Americans and Europeans into getting out of the
      Islamic world. Contrary to what Bush believes, the 9/11 killers and
      London and Madrid bombers were not out to repeal the Bill of Rights,
      if any ever read it. They are out to kill us, and we have to get them
      first.

      Hamas and Hezbollah have used terrorism, but, like Begin's Irgun and
      Mandela's ANC, they have social and political agendas that require
      state power to implement. And once a guerrilla-terrorist movement
      takes over a state, it acquires state assets and interests that are
      then vulnerable to U.S. military and economic power.

      Why did the ayatollah let the American hostages go as Reagan raised
      his right hand to take the oath of office? Why did Syria not rush to
      the rescue of Hezbollah? What did Ahmadinejad not rocket Tel Aviv in
      solidarity with his embattled allies in Lebanon? Res ipse loquitor.
      The thing speaks for itself. They don't want war with Israel, and they
      don't want war with the United States.

      'Islamo-fascism' should be jettisoned from Bush's vocabulary. It yokes
      the faith of a billion people with an odious ideology. Imagine how
      Christians would have reacted, had FDR taken to declaring Franco's
      Spain and Mussolini's Italy 'Christo-fascist.'

      If Bush does not want a war of civilizations, he will drop these
      propaganda terms that are designed to inflame passions rather than
      inform the public of the nature of the war we are in, and the war we
      are not in.

      SOURCE: Creators Syndicate
    • fcamp10501@aol.com
      We must never forget that Pat Buchanan is a right wing, neo-racist critic of the Bush administration and not our ally. The devil does speak truth from time to
      Message 2 of 3 , Sep 5 10:31 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        We must never forget that Pat Buchanan is a right wing, neo-racist critic of the Bush administration and not our ally.  The devil does speak truth from time to time but he remains the devil: Read Buchanan's new racist-fascist diatribe against undocumented workers and Hispanics in his new book; read about how he persuaded Reagan to honor members of the Waffen SS as a part of their rehabilitation as "just German patriots," not the vanguard of the militaristic wing of the SS, the perpetrators of the genocide against millions of Europeans.

        So, refer to Pig Buchanan if you want to, but it is important to keep him in context.  Like many anti-Bushites on the right, he is still on the right, even though he might make some right-on points.  But then, true progressives can make the same points without all the immoral baggage.
        Rev. A. D. Redd

        Refers to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NoIraqWar/message/7750
        http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=pbu
      • mark or pam weinberg
        I agree with Rev. Redd s assessment of Buchanan but to assume because someone posts an article on No Iraq War (CAWI) or any other listserve or website it means
        Message 3 of 3 , Sep 5 4:07 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          I agree with Rev. Redd's assessment of Buchanan but to assume because someone posts an article on No Iraq War (CAWI) or any other listserve or website it means that they agree with all or part of it is wrong.  It was probably posted to show ideological divisions among conservatives which are important for the left to know about when discussing issues or strategizing.
           
          Mark C. Weinberg
          Open University of the Left
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006
          Subject: Re: FYI: Buchanan vs Neo-Cons and 'Islamo-fascism'

          We must never forget that Pat Buchanan is a right wing, neo-racist critic of the Bush administration and not our ally.  The devil does speak truth from time to time but he remains the devil: Read Buchanan's new racist-fascist diatribe against undocumented workers and Hispanics in his new book; read about how he persuaded Reagan to honor members of the Waffen SS as a part of their rehabilitation as "just German patriots," not the vanguard of the militaristic wing of the SS, the perpetrators of the genocide against millions of Europeans.

          So, refer to Pig Buchanan if you want to, but it is important to keep him in context.  Like many anti-Bushites on the right, he is still on the right, even though he might make some right-on points.  But then, true progressives can make the same points without all the immoral baggage.

          Rev. A. D. Redd

          Refers to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NoIraqWar/message/7750
          http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=pbu
           
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.