home | Archive | analysis | videos | data | weblog

news in other languages:
Editorials in English
Editorials in Spanish
Editorials in Italian
Editorials in German


Commentary on Let's have Marxist Love Island...

By Aleksander Boyd

London 17.07.05 | Going over Sunday's papers whilst lazing round after the weekly intake of pancakes is just such a great time to analyse and reflect about issues. In today's Times I have found an article penned by Rod Liddle, that starts thusly:

Ladies and gentlemen, put your hands together, please, for Mr Karl Marx, the sage of Trier, who has scooped the top prize in Radio 4’s exciting competition, Who’s the Bestest Philosopher Ever, Ever, Ever? Step this way, Karl, and collect from Lord Bragg your prize — a fabulous, all-expenses-paid trip through time to visit the Soviet gulags, Mao’s fabulous Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s wacky Year Zero, three days in a Düsseldorf basement with Ulrike Meinhof fiddling about with gelignite — and ending with the complete and utter defeat of every philosophical, political and economic idea to which you owe your reputation.

The trip is called — guess what? — the Historical Inevitability Tour.

It's shocking to see how many residents of advanced societies, where access to information is a given, still revel with Marxists seudo revolutionary theories. My wife and I were talking this morning about the reasons that prompt young men to turn into suicide bombers and the above quote serves as a good starting point. Demonstrably Marxism is a complete and utter failure, there are no examples that one could point at that confirm the "exception to the rule" maxim. But people still think; a) that Marxism is worth pursuing and b) that its founding father is an intellectual heavyweight. Apologists will go to extreme lenghts in defending the failed system and blame others for its failure.

Now moving to the issue of suicide bombers, with the aforementioned in mind, could anyone please tell me where can I find a successfull, progressive, respectful of civil, political and personal liberties fundamentalist society/country? Borrowing again from today's Times "London-based radical salutes bombs 'victory'":

A LONDON-BASED Islamic radical has praised the suicide bomb attacks on the capital. Hani Al-Siba’i, an Egyptian-born academic, described the attacks that killed at least 55 people as “a great victory” that rubbed the noses of G8 countries in the mud.

Let's go back to the Marxists whose finest living exponent is Fidel Castro, celebrated and admired the world over by swarms of useful idiots. With respect to the recent bombings in London Marxist cheerleaders, for the most part, agree that the city "reaped Blair's involvement in Iraq". Worth bearing in mind that the same crowd of braying moonbats proudly count themselves among the legion of Castro, and his toyboy, admirers.

Radicals, of the fundamentalist type, have the notion that crimes committed against what they perceive as the enemy; i.e. people who have adopted free enterprise, democracy, human rights, capitalism, economic growth, in sum the 'evil' aspects of advanced societies, are to be heralded as victories. So how do the leaders of the democratic world deal with terrorists, extremists and their ideological soulmates? Has appeasement worked anywhere? The answer to that is a rotund no, the moment the fanatics realise that by bombing people here and there they can get governments on their knees, as it happened in Spain with that idiotic socialist prime minister, they will only have to threaten with more horrendous attacks to advance their wretched agendas.

For Westerners suicide bombing is a much uncomprehended issue as the Japanese kamikazes were. No one knows for sure what moves a person to strap an explosive belt and blow him/herself up for the defence of religious ideas/concepts. Certainly dying for some unfeasible and extremely oppressive project -much as those proposed by Marx- written by equally deranged and unknown people many years ago, is not a concept easy to grasp. The first world's armchair revolutionaries won't be caught dead dying for their beloved ideals. However there seems to be a never ending source of suicide bombers eager to die for whatever their cause is. Another problem nowadays being that there's no Islamist Emperor who will order them to stop. Contrary to preceding events during the war, the modern day kamikazes do not seem to perceive any particular administration or individual as the primary and sole enemy. As Hani Al-Siba’i stated “The term civilian does not exist in Islamic religious law. There is no such term as civilians in the western sense. People are either of Dar al Harb [literally, house of hostility, meaning any non-Islamic government] or not.” Thus all citizens living in countries governed by non-Islamic governments are potential targets.

So the questions have to be; what sort of atrocious act -read Hiroshima and Nagasaki- will deter these radicals? Secondly, what will it take for the ideological sympathizers, read Marxists, to realise that terrorism can not be counteracted by appeasement? Thirdly, when will the world's leaders realise that leniency towards those who foster and support terrorism must stop?

Whatever the future strategy is it has to start by learning what makes these fanatics tick, perhaps talking to Marxists could be a good starting point.

send this article to a friend >>

Keep Vcrisis Online

top | printer friendly version | disclaimer