The Club of Hate
Posted on March 21, 2015 by Baron Bodissey
Below is the latest offering from our Israeli correspondent MC.
The Club of Hate
by MC
I would posit that, if it were not for semantic nuances, socialism and Islam would be seen as two related sects of the same ‘club’ of hate. It is dangerous to be an unbeliever in a Stalinist state, and it is life-threatening to be a dissident in an Islamic State.
Running through each sect is a jumble of words, words that do not mean what they intend to mean, and are designed to deceive and confuse their victims.
Modern socialism emerged following the Stalinist victory in WWII, where the military need to support Russia on the basis that my “enemy’s enemy is my friend” required undue co-operation with Soviet agencies, who in their turn were not slow to exploit the trusting generosity of their hosts for the benefit of their evil empire.
In the same way Islamists, too, have, in the form of the overtly fascist Muslim Brotherhood, penetrated and influenced Western thought processes attuned to that same modern socialism.
Both organisations lay undisputed claim to the moral high ground, they see themselves as righteous “kings of the castle(s)” and that their opponents are the “dirty old rascals”.
A huge, mind-blowing atrocity was committed by an organisation espousing something called National Socialism. It “lost” that war, an atrocity mirrored and superseded many times over by the International Socialism which “won” and, as we all know, semantic meaning (as well as history) is written or rewritten by the winners.
So instead of being the result of socialism, Auschwitz became the result of “racism” and “nationalism”, and entered into the psyche of the West accompanied by these definitions. Islam was thus able to turn this murderous event in which it fully participated (and may, according to Nuremburg testimony (Wisliceny), have partially instigated and, although this testimony is disputed, it is certainly in character) into something it had nothing to do with.
With the twisting of history came the warping of political reality. Socialism and the Left retreated behind a human shield of Antifa and claimed “it wasn’t us — it was those ‘racist’ nationalist ultra-conservatives over there” and became virulently and openly “anti-fascist” whilst never pausing to define exactly what fascism is.
Islam followed suit, and used this new holocaust mythology to rebrand themselves victims of that same “racism”.
Everyone, in their hearts, is a Holocaust denier. I too would rather believe that it had not happened, and I too might well have condoned or even participated in it given the correct social conditioning (brainwashing). For those people for whom the desires of their hearts overcome the truth of the horrid realities, there are two ways of rationalizing that horror: (1) belittling it to the point of denial, or (2) blaming the “other”. Or both.
Socialism, like Islam, is very much an emotional choice. Socialists and Islamists in reality have to live with a huge burden of guilt which, quite naturally, they are very eager to dissipate through Newspeak (taqiyya in Islam) and through a fantasy of moral conceit and self-delusion.
This makes both parties prone to manipulation from those prepared to stroke their egos. As a result, the ruling elites have a willing tribe of useful idiots and suicidal fanatics.
So what of the infidels, those who, rather than stroke egos, point out the unpleasant truth?. Well they must, of necessity, be silenced and eradicated. Dissent is unpleasant, especially when it is truthful and pops the bubble of self-delusion.
Dissent in Islam is a capital offence, and in Socialism it tends to be a one way street to a “social gulag” (if not a real one).
When in a house of cards, one must not break wind, and that can be excruciating. One must at all times be correct and not cause a stink. So one becomes very adept at holding it in, and, if one should accidentally let slip, then to immediately glare at one’s neighbour. Since morality is relative; a lie is only a lie when found out, so one can easily accuse one’s neighbour without a conscience. Truth is both irrelevant and inconvenient.
So what is the difference between Islam and Socialism? I would say that it is more a metaphysical difference than anything tangible. Deep inside is a yearning to be acceptable at any cost, and the rest is just nurture. If Socialism were not so fashionable, there would be fewer socialists. There is also the aspect of irresponsibility: both Islam and Socialism provide cradle-to-grave freedom from having to take responsibility for one’s own actions. This is a huge pull.
But Islam is a religion with political overtones, whilst Socialism is politics with a religious fervour.
Both are deeply and spiritually damaging because they remove the very free will which defines our humanity, and substitute an animal-type predictability and behaviour. Just watch an ISIS movie and compare it with any big cat documentary — the animals are much more civilised: they only kill to eat.
http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/03/the-club-of-hate/#more-35840
