Saturday, April 14, 2007

In comment #7, Pepe said:

...even the most radical islamist doesn't advocate the complete eradication of jews from the planet.

I'm still bothered by this misunderstanding of Militant Islam.
Posted by at
Labels: ,

9 comments:

Tecumseh said...

MFT: Don't woryy, Planet Pepe has gone so much out in left field, that it's leaving behind any contact with reality. By now, it's circling Pluto -- tomorow, it's Andromeda, here I come.

4/14/2007 11:05 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...

Pepe is a little out of touch when it comes to grasping what "Radicals" and True Believers are capable of. I've met Marxists who can at least assess the threat that Militant Islam poses to the world, truly an alien concept to Pepe (as you also point out, AI).

4/15/2007 10:52 AM
Pepe le Pew said...

And so it goes that one is always under the impression that the other car is moving. We can discuss these arguments all you want, but ai suggests here that my positions are outlandish.
Seriously, if one considers what the positions of the rest of the planet and certainly of the civilized world, are on such topics as the appropriateness of terminating unwanted pregancies, whether or not capital punishment represents justice, whether it is desirable for the US to win its war on iraq, any many of these recurrent topics, which of us is in the mainstream and which is orbitting on the other side of the milky way?

4/15/2007 2:12 PM
Pepe le Pew said...

mft: here's the context.
Islamo-fascism is much more akin to Nazism -- they got that whole Jew hatred thing going on
You're somewhat stretching it here: even the most radical islamist doesn't advocate the complete eradication of jews from the planet.

The point was simply that islamist extremism doesn't quite compare with national socialism. It isn't the pro-islamist statement that ai strangely enjoys believing that i make.

4/15/2007 2:59 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...

The point was simply that islamist extremism doesn't quite compare with national socialism.

Uh, pardon me? This statement is about as off-the-mark as your the first one that started this post. The term Islamo-Fascism is a very close comparison to National Socialism. Even after Allied forces stomped out the Reich, Hitler's SS continued to harrass the Allied occupation force. We're seeing similarities in Afghanistan and Iraq today (there are differences, too, as Germany isn't Mesopotamia isn't Italia isn't Afghanistan).

4/15/2007 5:32 PM
Pepe le Pew said...

The term Islamo-Fascism is a very close comparison to National Socialism
The term islamo-fascism was marketing to bolster dwindling support for the war at the time when the administration thought it judicious to associate its "wot" to WWII. Comparisons with national socialism which is rooted in genocide are an overstatement not too different from the rhetoric of ai who associates everything left of Jesse Helms to stalinism.

4/15/2007 6:12 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...

Pepe, you can accuse me pushing a particular variety of propaganda, and I can in turn accuse you of the same — one of Orwell's famous phrases was that all art is propaganda.

When it comes down to it, Tehran (the gov't I'm speaking of) has a hold on the direction of commerce, industry, and private lives of all. National Socialism is rooted in just that: socialism at the national level. And socialism at the national level means that the private is anything but. The State has incredible official control over every aspect of what goes on within the geopolitical borders. In the past we've seen masses of humanity turn over their rights to the Great Utopian Leader, and that Great Utopian Leader does nothing more than drive the entire nation into the ground — see Scorched Earth Policy during the Soviet retreat, and even the Nazi retreat back to Berlin. When power is concentrated, there are chances that a good leader will percolate to the top, but there are far greater chances that some nut from Bavaria, or some True Believer with the Focus of Allah will get hold of the reigns, and tell his sheople exactly what they want to hear.

This is a Libertarian line of thought, and why Classical Liberals look with extreme suspicion at folks like yourself who say they have all the solutions in the world with their New Brand of Socialism.

4/15/2007 9:35 PM
Pepe le Pew said...

Tehran (the gov't I'm speaking of) has a hold on the direction of commerce, industry, and private lives of all. National Socialism is rooted in just that: socialism at the national level.
Perhaps but that isn't the most objectionable characteristic of national socialism. Take away the genocide and the warmongering, and the nazis would have been just another garden variety authoritarian regime. When one compares someone to nazis, the argument is about their most prominent trait, which is genocide Compared to it, the management of their social philosophy is a mere distraction.

4/15/2007 9:46 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...

When one compares someone to nazis, the argument is about their most prominent trait, which is genocide Compared to it, the management of their social philosophy is a mere distraction.

One can't initiate genocide — or let us say it's extremely difficult, if not impossible — unless one has managerial authority over the nation and society. The mythical ideal of socialism is noble. The realistic implementation is catastrophic.

I used to have these exact same conversations with budding undergraduate socialists at the U of Minnesota some years back. They always were aghast when I told them about my suspicions towards any form of human government, socialism included.

4/15/2007 10:50 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)