Thursday, July 05, 2007

Oft Ignored Analogy of Judeo-Christo-Fascism vs. Islamo-Fascism

Digg This!Netscape BookmarkReddit BookmarkDel.icio.us Bookmark

It is sad that political moderates see nations around the world allowing their 'tails to wag their dogs', but it is absolutely true that we see a vocal minority alive and well for 1000's of years, whose hate and vitriol is most often ignored until they commit massive genocide. Then they are noticed and briefly stifled but never extinguished. Somehow, in these cases, patience is seen as a virtue by the remaining logical and responsible majority.

But, patience and tolerance are the worst things we can exercise in the presence of such extreme potential damage to our world, politically, economically, morally and in regard to the ultimate preservation and protection of life and liberty.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
We have, in recent years in America, seen the rise of a new fascism in the form of a rabid and rapid growth of power among a group that has gone so far as to call itself the "Moral Majority" when they are neither moral nor a majority at least in the populace. They may very well have the majority of power at the moment. Of course, throughout history, those in the middle have always kept quiet until entirely too much damage has been done. Such forces fed racism and slavery in early America; then later led the further impoverishment of poor whites and blacks through their exercise of voter suppression efforts, sharecropping and now the building of a military industrial complex that threatens to destabilize the entire world.

All of this throughout history, in its various phases, has depended on an inner fear fed by an institutional prejudice against those different than ourselves.

More have been killed in the name of religion than any other factor. We could go back further in world history, but let's just begin with the initial foothold of extremism among Christians that led to the holy inquisition, wars and the killing and slavery of millions. Eventually, Protestantism quelled the fervor, ironically in Germany with Martin Luther, and even Henry the 8th of England did his part in the establishment of the Anglican Church, which initially slowed the killing (if you don't count Henry's wives). Queen Elizabeth led a period of balance against the Catholic-led killing of those with whom they disagreed.

However, fighting fire with fire, the English became the new imperialists with their new found power and they began killing and enslaving their foes until the Americas stood up to them and their Spaniard equivalents and declared independence, relatively successfully, or so it seemed. Franklin, Washington, Jefferson, Payne and others led a secular movement in recognition that religious states were not the answer to permanently ending the potential for imperialism and hate. They thought they had created a system impervious to such separatism, but they failed to address the seeds that they themselves fertilized, those of slavery.

They didn't see that this would grow into a new religion of bigotry, justified by Christianity still, in an insistence that we were not to be "unequally yoked", thus they ignored their own words that " all men were created equally" and they built America on the backs of a new underclass of slaves and non-landowners.

Of course, they later pretended that they were fighting a civil war in order to liberate slaves, but they only continued it in the form of sharecropping as they had not attacked the real problems of "royal inheritance" and the resultant reestablishment of an oligarchy in the US.

France destroyed its royalty and established a form of socialism that has apparently endured, but we are still waiting for the other foot to fall there, as they never dropped the arrogance of "national pride" which feeds bigotry even today. England didn't destroy their royalty but instead, created a system that put them in a luxurious prison (Buckingham Palace) and creating a toothless House of Lords, hoping that would keep them quiet and content while they pursued a parliamentary form of government augmented by relative socialism. Russia removed their Czar and began a period of seeming egalitarianism, but maintained a firm authoritarian form of government which still allowed the re-growth of abusive wealth, again fed by other forms of bigotry and scapegoating despite their false pretense of "communal" sharing.

Meanwhile, Asia experienced a much more successful and enduring form of communism that maintained hierarchy but redistributed wealth. Their homogeneity and isolation seemed to allow their systems protection while enduring social philosophies of Confucianism, provided transition slowly but surely toward an interesting mix of capitalism and socialism which exists today, despite a close call while Japan enslaved them briefly.

Japan and Germany were led by similar dreams of racial supremacy in which they had agreed to carve up the world into the "best whites" (Protestant Christians) and the "best Asians" (a successful industrialist system led by a figurehead royalty). Japan enslaved Korea and China while the Arian Germans did the same with Western Europe, and appeared invincible until the US regained its strength after its civil war.

Having seemingly dealt with its domestic divisions, the US was ready to provide moral authority over the world and with the assistance of technology and natural resources we firebombed Germany and Japan, dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then proclaimed ourselves policemen of the world with the threat of a newfound nuclear superiority. Though Russia had also eventually developed their own nuclear weapons and had struck a deal to share Europe, they didn't have reliable delivery systems. By the time they did, both sides had built enough weapons to guarantee "Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD)" which became the fear necessary to keep neither US nor the Russians from taking over the world.

Those nations who had not the burden of massive military industrial complex were free to acquire wealth through industrialization. Meanwhile, the thing which fed worldwide "progress" became oil. It lubricated and energized. It made the wastelands of Texas and the Middle East the most valuable land in the world. Business alliances were made between the two and both found a new tool to maintain social control, a fear which again fed on religious bigotry.

England had been so weakened by WW2 and their own internal civil war between Catholics and Protestants, that they had to reassert a continued and strengthened alliance with the US. Still, much of the world kept their nose clean and developed stable socialism, i.e, Europe, Japan, China and Korea.

People had not noticed, but a similar rift began to develop between the Shia and Sunni Muslims, analogous to Catholic and Protestant Christians. No one really understood its significance as there was little expertise in Arabic language or culture outside the Middle East. The British, French and US had failed to imperialize them along with back-to-back failures to capture the hearts and minds of India and Indo-China (Vietnam/Cambodia). The Russians tried to add Afghanistan to their fold but found that you could not win a war militarily if you failed to win the hearts and minds, no matter how hard they tried.

Meanwhile, Russia was financially weakened by their failed attempt in Afghanistan, and their military spending in the Cold war against the US and they crumbled into several parts, all wanting what they thought the US had, capitalist luxury and freedom.

What the world didn't realize was, that the US had not dealt with its own inner bigotry before they started trying to evangelize the world with its form of democracy. We still had a serious problem with a racial fascist tendency and only succeeded in changing laws but we failed to change our minds (de jure vs de facto). Our civil rights movement looked good in theory but failed in practice and eventually, a backlash of racism created a new system of private schools (primarily white, some wealthy, some simply racist) and public schools (primarily poor and middle class whites and minorities).

The US, still driven by white Christian bigotry, elected conservative Ronald Reagan and a "thunder on the right" gave the impression that most Americans were in agreement that we were a "Christian Nation". The reappearance of Arian supremacy was inevitable as we had not truly addressed and condemned the racist whites across our nation. The wealthy industrialists saw a fertile collective mind in which racist fear could be fueled by religious ignorance. Christians didn't understand each other, much less the growing Muslim nation. Internally, Christianity was still very conflicted; Catholics vs. Protestants, Race vs Race, and Fundamentalists vs Moderate Scientists.

Fundamentalism became a magnet for political demagogues to feed on the citiizen's fears both in the Mideast and in the US. It was easy to twist the superstitions as industrialists began to attack the only potential savior against ignorance, education. Slowly but surely while pretending to improve education in the US, the "New Conservatives/Neo-cons" began to destroy and dismantle the public school system as this would make it easier to plant seeds of fear. They fed on the differences in our diverse nation and suggested that the very thing that made us great initially, was a threat to the "American way of life". This threat was political dissent.

Somehow it never occurred to people that the very thing upon which our nation was built, was under attack. Protection of the establishment is now the law of the land after easy passage of the Patriot Act after 9/11. It was a convenient excuse to remove the liberties we had previously fought for. The very thing that built our nation, revolution, has become renamed, "terrorism" and anyone who did not support our military solutions became labeled as traitors and those who were willing to kill and let poor people die for oil became the patriots.

Together, oil and the military have marched forward, raping us of freedom, political stability and our last dime if we let them. At this moment, 24% or less of America pretends it is the majority and all of us serve the benefits of a much smaller percentage of super wealthy. As they take away more of our freedoms and education, they dig in further to protect their power while destroying ours.

Many in the middle are confused and reacting with embarrassment to the loud cries by the vocal minority that anyone who opposes them is a traitor. But the real traitors are the Fascist extremists of Christianity, Islam and even Zionism; strange bedfellows indeed, except that, at their core, they don't care about religion at all, other than the religion of "money" and the power that money creates. We have created a new race of superhumans who consider themselves "Gods" and many confuse them for the Gods of their respective religions but they are really the very thing that all their religions are supposed to oppose.

The capital of American military industrialism and oil is Texas, and the message of Protestant Christian Fascism is resounding through puppet Bush as they walk hand in hand with their Saudi Arabian Royal Sunni Muslim Fascist partners who, in turn, use the fear of their people to promote weakness and violence as they partner with the Shia Fundamentalist Fascists and their puppet, Ahmadinejad. They scream that they hate each other while making deals behind closed doors. We and they condone killing women and children and tell the people that the enemy is other nations and their religions.

Israel, a religious nation, joins the US, a religiously controlled oligarchy, and Saudi-Arabia, another religious controlled oligarchy, have joined forces and whether for or against Iran, another group of Islamo-fascists, they carve up the economic world by controlling energy.

Wow, sounds complex, but it is so clear when you break it down. Somehow, the rest of the world, basically devoid of religious bigotry, sees us for who we really are, the greatest threat to the Earth in its history, a combined menace that envisions a world government led by religious extremists.

I offer no solutions but provide a beginning by attempting to unravel the lies that obscure the truth, by logically dissecting the body politic that has developed. The one thing we should agree upon is that this dialectic of equal evils must be stopped before we no longer have the power to stop them, either through diplomacy or revolution. And there are many kinds of revolution.

As logical words can only be properly supported by a more complex logic at the core of the human mind, music best organizes my final thoughts.

"Revolution" is a song by The Beatles, written primarily by John Lennon and attributed to Lennon-McCartney.

Lyrics below YouTube presentation (3min25sec)


You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out
Don't you know it's gonna be all right
all right, all right

You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're doing what we can
But when you want money
for people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait
Don't you know it's gonna be all right
all right, all right,

ah, ah, ah, ah, ah...

You say you'll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don't you know it's gonna be all right
all right, all right
all right, all right, all right
all right, all right, all right

Editor's Note Post Publication:

The amazing thing is, no matter how careful one is with words, many moderate Christians find an indictment of the extremists (not really Christians at all, unless we ignore Jesus) is viewed as an indictment of religion itself.

Somehow, there is a kneejerk to any logical clarification and separation of extremism from moderation.

Some use words like "rhetoric" to describe only the positions with which they disagree. Meanwhile, they themselves use rhetoric without any logic to simply state conclusions without any facts to support them.

As this article focused on the "Fascism" within parts of organized religion, it was assumed by many that my failure to indict Lenin, Stalin and other despots was somehow an endorsement of them.

Such an assumption would be completely wrong. The definitions of fascism and/or consequent despotism are clear. The blind support, above all the interests, of a Federal govt. and its establishment elements is the purest and most dangerous part of Fascism.

When the people lose their ability to know when they are being enslaved, we are vulnerable to the "final solution" that every fascist state has brought forth.

Inevitably, once the despots have taken hold, they extinguish all signs of resistance. Yes, this has happened many times in history. And sometimes, it has been in the name of an entirely different religion of the worship of man to whcih Nietzsche referred.

Hitler called himself a Christian as a matter of Machiavellian bastardization and cooptation. It was only a tool of manipulation of the otherwise good Christians of Germany.

Even Popes have done such and I am often reminded of Dante's Divine Comedy and the Inferno, in which he suggests that the most severe parts of hell are reserved for Popes and false prophets. Some Popes have been ruthless; some were truly saints.

Lenin, Pulpot etc. were only espousing a religion in which they were evangelically hailing atheism or self as God. It is interesting we even find "churches" of Atheism all over the world, and on the web.

Their position of the non-existence of God makes them equally religious and zealous. Just as within the inquisitions before, they would eventually kill those with whom they differed.

Pulpot of Cambodia went so far as to kill all people who wore glasses, as he saw that as a sign of intelligence, thus a threat to his regime.

Whatever words we use for these blind expressions of faith, "religion" is what I would call it as it requires one to follow without scrutiny the spiritual commandments of the authors. Mind that I don't proclaim that religion is the problem but the twisting of good intentions with blind faith that threatens us all.

Sadly, I couldn't possibly cover the whole of historical ground in an essay, but to touch on many points in history which satisfy the argument. Arguments can be constructed to support additional positions and I invite the submission of points that our readers may Duly Consider to our email address.

I only hope to remain a servant of truth and an open mind and some may see my truth as lies. They can, I suppose, start their own sites. I hear the Nazi Party of America is looking for good writers. But please don't file your application here.

7 comments:

RFE said...

This is some of the most insightful commentary on the net! Kudos!!

Sam Tucker said...

I suppose this article was written to atract attention. Being unable to truly stimulate a mind of intellect with articulate argument the author resorts to the most basic of writing styles - simple rhetoric. The comparison between religious fundamentalists in America with those around the world is old hat, already discussed, and long since disregarded as the plain truth is; American Christians, as a whole, do not engage in, support, or condone tacitly, bombings, beheadings, burnings, or kidnappings in the name of God. Trying to revive a millenium old stain in Christian history, something practiced more by government than individuals of faith, is the weakest link in this article of biased and poor journalism. I encourage the author to find someone good to debate with, like me, to sharpen his sword of speech, because obviously he has been surrounded by softies who scratch one another's backs and feel comfort in their obvious superiority to common Americans. Don't underestimate the positive power of faith among the American populace, without it, the void may be filled with government moral control. . .

David Nichols said...

Despite your attempt to support that our founding fathers tried to establish a "secular" government, you, are using the false rhetoric which distorts accurate history. One only need to go to their local library and find documents containing the statements and practices of our founding fathers to find truth. Your attempt loses its credibiltiy when compared to reliable historical documents and accounts written at that time about these Christian gentlemen who sought freedom OF religion, not FROM religion.
As to your illusion that "White Protestant Christian bigots" effort to stamp out freedom of other religions, why don't you visit China, Iran, and many other governments which are the most intolerant of others' freedom and religion. Death is their swift "justice". By labeling and namecalling Christians as bigots as a whole, you are, in fact, demonstrating your bias and intolerance of a vast number of people who believe in Jesue Christ. Two quick rhetorical questions: 1. Is it Christians who support suicide bombings in the name of their religion? 2. It is the Christian religion that kills those who do not believe as they do? Our nation is becoming more secular and what is wrong is now called right with the attempt to create a valueless society. As on author wrote: Jesus taught tolerance, but not at the expense of truth.

Anonymous said...

I agree completely with your analysis. Unfortunately, there is also heavy use of propaganda, and the domestic spying of this country has fueled a hidden agenda that's primarily driven by economics and a human need to label and categorize. It's hard to fight something not out in the open, and much gets twisted and turned as a result. It's very difficult today to tell who the fascists are, who the patriots are, who the terrorists are. and who the dissidents are, because with such an undertow present, a vortex has erputed that's swirling it alll together and sucking us in. I am not a fan of inherited monachy or oligarchy, but there are natural rights. Establishing one's identity, the manipulation of perception and holding on to what is naturally yours is harder than ever in this swirling vortex. It is increasingly difficult to be individuals and come together, to be different, separate and equal.

Looney said...

"More have been killed in the name of religion than any other factor."

Huh? Stalin and Mao each killed more people than all of the religious wars of history combined, while the priests of liberalism denied it all. The "Oft ignored analogy of judeo-christ-fascism vs. islamo-fascism" is a mantra that is tirelessly repeated in the classrooms of America on government funding - in spite of being historically discredited. Learn some history.

Editor said...

The amazing thing is, no matter how careful one is with words, many moderate Christians find an indictment of the extremists (not really Christians at all, unless we ignore Jesus) is viewed as an indictment of religion itself.

Somehow, there is a kneejerk to any logical clarification and separation of extremism from moderation.

Some use words like "rhetoric" to describe only the positions with which they disagree. Meanwhile, they themselves use rhetoric without any logic to simply state conclusions without any facts to support them.

As this article focused on the "Fascism" within parts of organized religion, it was assumed by many that my failure to indict Lenin, Stalin and other despots was somehow an endorsement of them.

Such an assumption would be completely wrong. The definitions of fascism and/or consequent despotism are clear. The blind support, above all the interests, of a Federal govt. and its establishment elements is the purest and most dangerous part of Fascism.

When the people lose their ability to know when they are being enslaved, we are vulnerable to the "final solution" that every fascist state has brought forth.

Inevitably, once the despots have taken hold, they extinguish all signs of resistance. Yes, this has happened many times in history. And sometimes, it has been in the name of an entirely different religion of the worship of man to whcih Nietzsche referred.

Hitler called himself a Christian as a matter of Machiavellian bastardization and cooptation. It was only a tool of manipulation of the otherwise good Christians of Germany.

Even Popes have done such and I am often reminded of Dante's Divine Comedy and the Inferno, in which he suggests that the most severe parts of hell are reserved for Popes and false prophets. Some Popes have been ruthless; some were truly saints.

Lenin, Pulpot etc. were only espousing a religion in which they were evangelically hailing atheism or self as God. It is interesting we even find "churches" of Atheism all over the world, and on the web.

Their position of the non-existence of God makes them equally religious and zealous. Just as within the inquisitions before, they would eventually kill those with whom they differed.

Pulpot of Cambodia went so far as to kill all people who wore glasses, as he saw that as a sign of intelligence, thus a threat to his regime.

Whatever words we use for these blind expressions of faith, "religion" is what I would call it as it requires one to follow without scrutiny the spiritual commandments of the authors. Mind that I don't proclaim that religion is the problem but the twisting of good intentions with blind faith that threatens us all.

Sadly, I couldn't possibly cover the whole of historical ground in an essay, but to touch on many points in history which satisfy the argument. Arguments can be constructed to support additional positions and I invite the submission of points that our readers may Duly Consider to our email address.

I only hope to remain a servant of truth and an open mind and some may see my truth as lies. They can, I suppose, start their own sites. I hear the Nazi Party of America is looking for good writers. But please don't file your application here.

Gerry said...

Fundamentalism and the belief that some book or another is the absolute word of God should be dropped from our collective conscious in the same manner as the idea that the earth is flat or that man will never fly.

Related Posts with Thumbnails