Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Follow Us:
Saturday, May 23, 2020
HomeOpinionObama, Leftists Want to Import Islamofascism Precisely to Put Nation at Risk

Obama, Leftists Want to Import Islamofascism Precisely to Put Nation at Risk

Obama-Syrian-Refugees-Behaving-Badly
Obama-Syrian-Refugees-Behaving-Badly

Barack Obama delivers a statement on the attacks in Paris from the press briefing room on Friday Nov. 13, 2015, left, and a Syrian refugee yells at a Hungarian border guard. (Photos: Pete Souza/WH/Reuters)

The untold casualty of the great wars of the 20th century, particularly World War I, was socialist theory as a sound intellectual school of thought. European socialists in Germany and France prior to the war believed in a “spontaneous harmony of interests” among the various proletariat parties in each country, which in their view, would put the common aspirations of all socialists above individual national interests.

Well, of course, they were wrong. As international relations realist Kenneth Waltz correctly argued in Man, the State and War, the harmony of interests and common aspirations “quickly broke down” as “each socialist party found itself bound to its national state by ties of emotional and material interest.” Vladimir Lenin chastised his statist counterparts for their failure to live up to socialist ideals and evolved the Marxist theory in a futile attempt to explain the more “problematic promises of socialism.”

Tom Nairn, who is often referred to as the heir to the Marxist school of social science, wrote that “the theory of nationalism represents Marxism’s great historical failure.”

Why? Because nationalism is more powerful than ideology.

Look, I don’t write opinion columns often. But, when I do, there is little regard for political correctness, feelings or potential offenses. In other words, you’ve been warned and, if you happen to be someone who cannot handle the empirical and historical truth because it invariably contains micro-aggressions, then stop reading.

Nationalism, or the concept of nation, has proven difficult to define–yet, much to the chagrin of statists–exists nonetheless. For the Left, it has proven far more difficult to defeat, and that has been particularly true of their efforts in America. As someone who has researched extensively and help define it, perhaps with and in more detail than any other before me, I can say without flinching that the American national identity is the most antithetical to statism the world has ever seen; and, that is definitively the case if we are limited to the history of the modern liberal nation-state.

So, after decades of trying to disprove or discredit the phenomena of nation, statists in all their forms refocused and dedicated their efforts to destroy it. Those efforts have been two-fold and include 1) redefining the ideological spectrum and, 2) pushing for a preferably more secularized, pluralistic society that diminishes Christianity, specifically the Protestant ethic.

Ideological Spectrum

Statism-Spectrum-Ideological-Spectrum

The ideological spectrum, as our founders understood it and as it truly exists, looks very different than the modern narrative pushed by the Left, which the Right has largely conceded. In order to get a better grip on reality, let’s look at the Statist Spectrum above. What is particularly noteworthy is where fascism falls on the Statist Spectrum for a number of reasons; among them being that fascism belongs to the political Left, not the Right as we are led to believe.

NAZI, after all, stood for the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. Regardless, our founders would’ve associated the far Left with “rulers’ law” and the far Right with “no law,” or anarchy. When we put this truth into perspective, then we come to realize that the modern Right is really our Founding Fathers’ political center. Perhaps that’s worth conserving, after all?

Which brings us to Islam and the Left’s insistence on increasing immigration from Muslim-dominated countries in the face of dire warnings from the intelligence community.

Pluralistic Society

Sharia-Law-Support-by-Muslim-CountryThose who understand Sharia as it is practiced in the Muslim world wouldn’t be very honest with themselves if they didn’t ask, “What could possibly account for the Left’s defense of Islam and their strong condemnation of Christianity?” Islam is not simply a religion. It’s a political, judicial, civil and spiritual way of life that also includes geo-political aspirations. In a majority of Muslim-dominated Middle East countries, large pluralities–and, in many countries majorities–support making Sharia law the official law of the land.

In fact, a majority of American Muslims desire the same. Don’t take my word for it. Raheel Raza, a Sunni Muslim and human rights activist, revealed the disturbing truth in a serious video recently produced by The Clarion Project.

For all intensive purposes that should scare the hell out of the so-called defenders of women’s rights, gay rights and the like. But it shouldn’t at all surprise us to learn not a single Muslim-dominated nation is truly democratic, let alone working toward republicanism. When pushed into democratically held elections by the international community, Islamists have seen the biggest gains. Egypt, Palestine and even Turkey, all have moved toward Islamist supremacy by popular support.

But these truths and dangers are secondary to the political benefit that Muslims bring to the Left. Islamofascism, whether politically correct a term or not, correctly underscores the cultural tendency of Muslims to follow dictatorial “rulers’ law.” Ben Carson was brave and fundamentally correct to say that Sharia is antithetical to American values and the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, and according to the polls most Americans know it.

On the other hand, Judeo-Christian values are as much opposed to Islam as they are to statism, plain and simple. Islam, unlike individualism and other values practiced in the American mainstream Protestant ethic, fits neatly with the statist ideology and adherence to centralized authority.

Let’s get one thing straight, Islam means submission, not peace or tolerance. Throughout the history of the Islamic world, there was only peace under a Pax Islamica, a world or region dominated by Islam. That was the goal 1,400 years ago and it has remained unchanged today.

It is intellectually dishonest to argue otherwise so long as Islam remains in its current form. The good news is that Muslim leaders like Egyptian President al-Sisi and King Abdullah of Jordan are willing to wage a war on those in their faith who follow Islamic law to the letter. The bad news is our president and the American Left, are not. It benefits them little to do so. Whether intentional, conscious or not, it is worth it to the Left to put our lives and our national security at risk because it puts our very nation at risk.

And, for them, that’s the ultimate goal.

[mybooktable book=”our-virtuous-republic-forgotten-clause-american-social-contract” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

Written by
Data Journalism Editor

Rich, the People's Pundit, is the Data Journalism Editor at PPD and Director of the PPD Election Projection Model. He is also the Director of Big Data Poll, and author of "Our Virtuous Republic: The Forgotten Clause in the American Social Contract."

No comments

leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial