Enter your keyword

Sunday, August 29, 2010

The Liberal-Islamist Alliance

The Ground Zero Mosque debate is only the latest in a long series of incidents in which liberals have chosen to side with Islamists, while denying their victims a fair hearing or any hearing at all. Opponents of the mosque are painted as "Islamophobic Extremists" representing nothing but bigotry and hate. This is much the same way that the liberal cultural elite has placed the blame for over a thousand years of Muslim persecution of Jews on "Zionist Extremism". While a Koran in the toilet becomes a front page story, the ongoing persecution of Hindus, Zoroastrians and Christians in Muslim countries is only a footnote in the State Department's human rights report.

This ugly bias is the product of a political alliance between Liberals and Islamists. And the cost of that alliance may be the world as we know it. That alliance is the reason why the US and Europe attacked Yugoslavia on behalf of a Muslim separatist group in the name of a non-existent genocide, while refusing to take any action against the very real and very horrifying Sudanese Muslim genocide of Africans. It is why Israel is constantly barraged with hateful propaganda from the same left, which defended Saddam's sovereignty in Iraq. The very same media propagandists who champion the flotilla on behalf of Hamas rule in Gaza, have next to no interest in Saddam's rape rooms, his ethnic cleansing of the Marsh Arabs, or his use of chemical weapons against the Kurds. While the American media becomes wildly exercised over a Disney employee's right to wear a Hijab or some other trivial bit of Islamic lawfare-- hardly any newspaper outside of Der Spiegel has covered allegations that Turkey may be using chemical weapons against the Kurds.

This is worse than mere bias. It amounts to ignoring mass murder and genocide because it is inconvenient. It means that the United States entered a war on behalf of a Muslim terrorist organization over a lie widely promoted by the media, which refused to call for armed intervention in the actual genocides taking place in Africa. The media has eagerly demonized entire ethnic and religious groups, because of Islamic hostility to those groups. The persecution and assaults on Jews in Europe today, can be added to the ugly tab of a media that has vigorously taken the Muslim side, and promoted their hatred of a minority group in Europe and the Middle East.

The excuses do not hold water. In the name of fighting racism, the media has been unapologetically racist. In the name of tolerance, it has been wickedly intolerant. In the name of preventing persecution, it has turned a blind eye to ethnic cleansing and genocide by Muslims-- while provoking and perpetuating Muslim separatist conflicts In Asia, Europe and the Middle East. And tricking the American public into a war on behalf of one such separatist group under false pretenses. These are crimes. More than that, these are the actions of bigots whose biases are rigid and fixed, and who like the Nazis, use a political ideology as the basis for valuing some lives below those of others, based on ethnic and religious criteria.

But the question is why. What is so appealing about the Islamists and their ideology, that the left is willing to go to such horrifying lengths to champion their cause. The answer may lie in the liberal view of religion as a tool of social change. The theology behind this goes by many names in different denominations and religions, from Liberation Theology to Prophetic Justice to Tikkun Olam, the common denominator is that they hijack religion to serve as a vehicle for social justice. Indeed the Communist party itself was born out of The League of the Just, a Christian organization. The common denominator is religion becomes reduced to the lyrics of the The Internationale, its only mandate to uplift the "downtrodden" and usher in a utopian age of mass equality and brotherhood.

Seen from that angle, it is not surprising why the Islamist agenda would appeal to liberals. It is after all also religion used as a tool of social change. Islamist groups are revolutionary, they want to overthrow the existing order in order to build a perfect society as defined by Sharia law. They operate social services centers for their followers and claim to be fighting for justice. But what liberals fail to understand is that while for them religion is a means, to the Islamists, religion is an end. Both liberals and Islamists equate religion with social justice. But for liberals, social justice is equivalent to religion, for Islamists religion is equivalent to social justice. While liberals talk about religion in order to bring about what they believe is a better society, Islamists talk about a better society in order to impose their religion on all Muslims and non-Muslims alike. If liberals were able to understand this, they might wake up long enough to realize the "deal with the devil" they had made.

The paradox of champions of equality allying with a religious cult that seeks to impose unequal rights on all seems absurd. However, this is nothing new for liberals, who have frequently allied with narrow interest liberationist groups such as the Black Panthers or La Raza, who did not believe in universal equality, but were fueled purely by racial or sectarian anger. Most have forgotten the racist origins of socialism, whether it was Jack London proclaiming, "I am a White Man first, and only then a Socialist", Marx sneering at the "Lazy Mexicans" or Woodrow Wilson and FDR promoting segregation. The socialists frequently pandered to racism, both in the US and Europe, in order to win over a working class and rural base. Then they jettisoned that base, for another, while still employing racist tactics.

Within a generation, the Democrats went from protecting racist white rioters to protecting racist black rioters. It did not make much difference to them. They had come to think of people as groups that they could manipulate like building blocks for political coalitions. The socialists too went from arguing that working class solidarity was urgently needed to prevent racial and ethnic minorities from taking the jobs of white workers, to championing racial warfare. The differences were not so much philosophical, as tactical. In the same way, Russian Communists were for the rights of minorities before they took power, and morphed into Russian Nationalists once they were in power, and needed to consolidate their grip on an empire.

As I wrote last week in Why the Left Hates Democracy,when liberals talk about equality, they mean "Actual Equality", not "Legal Equality". That means Constitutional equality or a state of affairs in which everyone has the same rights under the law, is not what they are after. Their goal is "Actual Equality", a state of affairs in which they overthrow all the existing power structures, in order to build a society where no one has any advantages over anyone else anymore. So naturally arguments which point out that Islam is discriminatory have minimal impact. Cuba after all has racial segregation. That hasn't stopped liberals from flocking to kiss Fidel's ring, no more than the USSR's ethnic cleansings prevented the socialists of their day from doing the same.

Liberals are not concerned with Islam's treatment of women or gays. Eldridge Cleaver's description of his serial rapes as an "insurrectionary act", did not dissuade liberals from gushing over the Black Panthers. The Nation didn't fire Eric Alterman for his homophobic remarks. To liberals, these like all other minorities, are just building blocks in their political coalition. Not people, building blocks. They still think of Muslims the same way. And the Islamist way seems to them to coincide with their own social justice agenda.

Joining forces with the Islamists, helps build a new left wing consensus in the West, and Islamic revolutions across the Middle East that will topple the old royalist and military regimes associated with the West. That is how the left sees it anyway. And the growing power of the Lib Dems in the UK and Barack Hussein Obama's rise to power in the US seem to be testaments to the power of the Liberal-Islamist Alliance. Anti-Semitism helps seal the deal and silence the cries of pain from their first victims. Hurling insults at the troops gives the Muslim Rage Boys and Leftist Rage Girls something in common besides their Keffiyahs. A common enemy for a temporary alliance.

Both Liberal and Islamists believe in a mandatory overhaul of society from top to bottom, but they differ in the details and the question of the final authority. And collaborations between them before in the Middle East have invariably ended with leftists in prison cells and Mullahs on the throne. The liberal betrayal of the First World will end the same way, given enough time and leeway. The Islamists feed leftist radicalism, and vice versa, but such political and cultural vandalism eventually runs into a wall, when both sides have amassed sufficient power so as not to need the other anymore.

European Socialists think that Islamic immigration will give them for rearranging their countries any way they please, in reality they will find that Islamic immigration means that their Islamist allies have a base, and they have Dhimmis and rape victims. Israeli leftists think that terrorism will lead to a dismantling of Israel in favor of a one state solution, they are right about that, but their role in such a state will be the same one as the Jews in Iran, and the token minorities that any genocidal regime displays to prove it really isn't as monstrous as its actions suggest. American liberals think that Islam is their latest wedge against the establishment and the rights and freedoms of ordinary Americans, they are correct, but what they have not considered, is that when the dust settles, it will be with them firmly at the bottom.

The Liberal-Islamist alliance is the death sentence of the free world, an alliance between a fifth column and the barbarians at the gate.

(Spanish language translation at)


  1. Anonymous29/8/10

    If the leftist in a democracy are an extension of Communists and socialists, then why they hate Hindus in India just like the Muslims hate Hindus, and so too the Communists (and also Christian missionaries) do is not surprising. Hinduism being the indigenous religion of the Indian subcontinent should be supported over non-indigenous elements that historically persecuted them, one would think. But communist and socialist hate indigenous culture, and see indigenous culture and religion as a obstacle to the society they are trying to create. Communists, Socialists, Muslims, Christians, the fake liberals and pseudo secularists (who are really just anti-Hindu) are all about transforming India into their utopian ideal of society, and all India's indigenous cultures and religions are not good enough, especially the one with the largest population, the Hindus. I never could get why "liberals" would not side with Hindus after centuries of persecution, when they supposedly stood for freedom and respect for people who were persecuted. In truth, those liberals and secularists are not real liberals and secularists but left wing that is communists-lite and socialists-lite. Islamists and Communists are temporary allies. This is why Communist China has been allied with Pakistan and Iran for decades.

  2. Islam has a proven history of bringing down JudeoChristian culture in a way the communism has always failed to do.

    The koran was written by a human monster to highlight the weaknesses of the JudeoChristian culture (which includes most liberals), and use them against the Jews and the Christians (and anybody else who does not see the rabid wolf at the door).

    "love your neighbour" can so easily become "love your executioner", or "love the enslaver of your sons" or "love the serial ravisher of your wife and daughters"

    At Hevron in 1929, the muslim mob shouted "the government is with us", the atrosities that followed would make even Nancy blanche.

  3. Daniel

    I know you have written about this before, but one of the most worrying aspects of the leftist-Islamist alliance is in Israel itself where, as a result of years of indoctrination by left-wing teachers and lecturers, young secular Israelis are increasingly becoming part of the alliance. I have just posted an article about this, which includes an incredible story from the left-wing Israeli film industry:


  4. Anonymous30/8/10

    No offense. I like a lot of what you write. But this is such a broad brush you wield here, and Conservatives have no more been for legal equality or free of racist tactics. We can agree that too many Liberals (not all Communists, by the way), are wrong and duped into supporting interests that don't care, but once more, so do Conservatives fall prey to manipulation. No one group has a monopoly on righteous, but there is no doubt to me that the threats are real and discussion is hindered through the sword of political correctness and ignorance.

  5. Sultan is indefatigable. Very appreciated!

  6. Anonymous30/8/10

    Conservatives by their nature, seek to retain the status quo. I think Adams would have been considered quite un-conservative in desiring to overthrow the ruling order.

    Adams voted to buy off the barbary pirates. It was Jefferson, that built ships and fought them. Adams was willing to fight off English domination, but not foreign enslavers of Americans.

    This is not a new issue. What is new is the MSM news cycle that is overwhelmingly pro-Islam. The push back after 911 was seen as being worse that the attack or the very proof that the attack was valid.

    We will have to fight for our lives, there is civil war coming to this country and it will be the most violent the world has ever seen. It will be Christian versus secular / muslim and it will not be waged by new testament doctrines. The pent up volcano that is held inside by the Holy Spirit, I fear will explode.

    In that day, the country will be no more. It will fall on racial lines as well.

    The past is becoming our future because we refuse to remember. Europe is gone. They won't even fight Islam. Instead they continue to persecute Geert Wilders.

    At least no American blood will be wasted again on that continent.


  7. Under Sharia, Islam and Liberalism are incompatible. Eventually, Islamists will turn on neo-libs and force them to convert or die.

  8. Anonymous30/8/10

    Sultan, my theory is cruder than yours. I think that the western man is so weak (especially after the feminist ravages, (I'm a woman)) that he admires the brutality and fanaticism in Islam. When Israel won the war in 1967 the world admired us, the Jews loooved us. Today when Israel is weaker than water even Jews hate us and want us destroyed.
    To the Indian first anonimous: Please look at the Lebanon war in the 1970s, see where were the Christian nations when the Muslims were slaughtering Christians, where were they when Betlehem was taken over by terrorists who were using the church as a washroom?

  9. Just a couple of thoughts--

    1.Lberals are attacking opponents of the mosque as Islamophobic. Have they bothered to ask the survivors or family and friends of Muslims that were killed how they feel about the mosque? I don't imagine they're thrilled. In fact, I haven't read any articles in which they have been asked about it.

    Isn't that strange?

    2. I keep reading that the Iman and others that want to build it are moderate Muslims.

    Moderate Muslim...You either codenmn terrorism or you don't. Isn't being moderate Muslim similar to being a little bit pregnant?

    When it comes to something like 9/11 or the Holocaust any other than total condemnation is troubling.


    Daniel, I think you're absolutely correct that the social change tool is certainly one of the aspects that draws liberals to Islam.

    I think we can go even further and say that liberals, in addition to religion, also use the other "spheres" such as the arts and philosophy as social tools. Even modern science has devolved from its original purpose of discovering truths about G-d's creation to mere social manipulation.

    Thanks and keep up the great work.

  11. what is appealing to them, is that they both share a common goal, that of overturning the existing democratic order in order to create a totalitarian perfect society in the name of equality

  12. Trencherbone30/8/10






  13. Anonymous30/8/10

    I refer you to "Negationism in India - Concealing the record of Islam By Koenraad Elst" found here under "Books" http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/index.html

    Western Imperialism is often given as the reason for current Muslim jihad. But jihad needs no excuse, as the slaughter of tens of millions of Hindus in Asia who never attacked Muslims show.

  14. "They may not all be active terrorists, but they all have the potential because they all share the same murderous ideology."

    That is an excellent point, Trencherbone. Take the case of Muzzamil Hazzan who is accused of beheading his wife in their television studio.

    He was not that religious, she was, and yet the crime was something rarely seen in the US. But he was exposed to Muslim culture and the religion.

    I heard an interesting analogy today. People aren't afraid of robbers. They are afraid of the gun, knife, etc. It's the weapon that instills fear. That weapon can be a gun, knife, power and influence.

    I don't think the opposition to the ground zero mosque represents Islamophobia at all. It's just a building, but they are using it as a weapon of sorts. Shoving it in our faces. And heaven only knows what will happen once there is a large music there.

    It's not gonna be like Mercy Mosque on Little Mosque on the Prairie, much as liberals wish it would.

  15. Anonymous31/8/10

    Anonymous (Geveret?) No. 4:

    You raise several very important issues. I will not address all of them, but it strikes me that in citing the example of the atrocities of the Lebanon war, you may have brought down the prototypical modern response to Islamist violence. Sultan has cited parallel cases in Sudan and Malaysia. For those who would suggest a response different than these in Europe or America it seems that you have expectations that your society is incapable of meeting.

  16. Have you ever put the Baha'i filter on world events?

    Baha'i are the facilitators of the slide into Apocalypse... It's what they want to happen...

  17. This is a temporary alliance due mostly to the Hegelian thinking in the West. Of course, it won't last because "the enemy of my enemy is still my enemy". Islam can't and won't "co-exist" with the moral values of liberalism. I will cover the Hegelian dynamic in transnationalism to some extent on my own blog over the next two posts.




Follow by Email