Enter your keyword

Saturday, October 25, 2014

The Left's Worst Crime in the Middle East

The left's worst crime in the Middle East has been its support for the region's Arab-Muslim majority at the expense of its minorities. It has supported the majority's terrorism, atrocities, ethnic cleansing and repression of the region's minorities. Very rarely has it raised a voice in their support, and when it has done so, it was in muted tones completely different from their vigorous defenses of the nationalism of the Arab Muslim majority.

The left backed the Arab Spring which rewarded the ambitions of Arabist and Islamist activists at the expense of Coptic, African and other minorities. Its great regional obsession is statehood for the Arab Muslims of Israel, (better known by their local Palestinian brand), but has little to say about the Kurds in Turkey or the Azeri in Iran. The million Jewish refugees and the vanishing Christians of the region never come up in conversation. They certainly don't get their own lefty protest rallies. 

The Africans of Sudan could have used an entire UN organization dedicated to their welfare, which the Arab Muslims who had failed to wipe out the region's Jewish minority are the beneficiaries of. But they had to make do with third tier aid.

Unlike the Arab nationalists and Islamists of Libya, the French, English and American air force did not come to their rescue. It came to the rescue of the Libyans who showed their gratitude in the time honored way of the Arab majority by massacring the African minority and then killing some Americans. But what's a little genocide between friends?

The left embraced Pan-Arabism, a race based nationalism, in line with the Soviet Union's expansionist foreign policy. Pan-Arabism's socialism made it easy for the left to ignore its overt racism along with the admiration of many of its leading lights for Nazi Germany. The same left which refused to see the Gulags and the ethnic cleansing under the red flag, turned an equally blind eye to the contradiction of condemning Zionism for its ethnic basis, while supporting Pan-Arabism, which was ethnically based.

Under Zionism, Israel retained a sizable Arab minority. The Pan-Arabists however drove their Jews out with mob violence, political repression, prisons and public executions. The left's criticisms of Zionism are rendered moot by their own support for Pan-Arabism, and their own longstanding hostility to Jewish national identity, insisting that socialism demands that Jews assimilate into the dominant race, whether in Russia or Western Europe. In the Middle East and North Africa, Arabization has led to repression of non-Arab minorities and the destruction of other cultures through the insistence on unity through race.

As the sun of Pan-Arabism sets, the left has turned its attention to Pan-Islamism with equal enthusiasm. While Pan-Arabism allowed Christian Arabs some representation, Pan-Islamism excludes based on religion. Having endorsed a racial tyranny, the left has fallen so low that it now champions majority theocracies.

The left's fledgling support for Kurdish nationalism has faded as Turkey has gone from a secular ally of the Western powers, to an Islamist tyranny dreaming of empire. This perverse twist of affairs has the left abandoning the national struggles of an oppressed people when their rulers align themselves more closely with the bigoted regional majority.

The War on Iraq, which the left hated, removed a tyrant aligned with the region's Sunni majority and the Libyan campaign, which the left supported, removed a tyrant who had deviated too far from the positions of that majority. So too in Egypt, where Mubarak's excessive tolerance for minorities, led the left to endorse the Pan-Arabist and Pan-Islamist calls for his overthrow. And in Tunisia, where a government tolerant of minorities has been replaced by the Islamists.

The pattern repeats itself over and over again as the left rises in support of racial and theocratic rule. And for all the left's critiques of American and European foreign policy, its own foreign policy which endorses racial and theocratic rule and works to bring it about is a true crime and blot on the region.

It is no coincidence that the one country in the region that the left hates above all else, is neither Arab nor Muslim. Just as it is no coincidence that the Arab Spring replaces regimes tolerant of minorities with Islamists and Arabists. The left's true regional agenda is the racist agenda of its Arab members. The Arab Socialists and the Islamists who have defined its regional positions have turned the left into a vehicle for their racial and theocratic agendas.

For the left to shout racism when Americans empowered the Kurds in Iraq, or when Israeli soldiers stand watch over tiny strips of land where the region's oldest and most frequently oppressed minority finds shelter is the height of hypocrisy. It is the left which is racist. It is the left which backs theocracies and always supports the majority's oppression of the minority.

The idiots in their Keffiyahs eager to give everyone a lesson on the Middle East think the Assyrians vanished in ancient times, have no idea who the Circassians are, or the Arab Gypsies, think the Zoroastrians are a traveling circus, and couldn't begin to tell you anything about the Druze, the Bahai or the Ahmadis-- except that American foreign policy or Israel are probably to blame.

In the meantime they proudly wear a garment associated with the Pan-Arabists and their rejection of Turkish reforms-- while stupidly believing that it's all-purpose garments of revolution. But why should they care that they're endorsing a romanticized neo-feudalism that led to mass murder and the rise of a theocratic reactionary movement disguised as nationalism. Or that these movements have inevitably led to the repression of minorities and the ethnic cleansing and attempted genocide of the region's native inhabitants by their Arab Muslim conquerors.

The left relies on the intellectual laziness of its followers not to notice that the nationalism they support is the nationalism of medieval conquerors and the resurgence of their colonial descendants. The only two nations with any historical roots in the region are Israel and Persia. In North Africa, where the Arab Spring has burned fiercest, the left is cheering the resurgence of an Arab Pretoria, racist regimes turning into even more racist theocracies run by the great-great-grands of the men who invaded the region and destroyed much of its history and culture.

The Arab Spring, with its purges of Coptic Christians and Africans, its outpouring of hostility toward Jews, is as perverse as if the left had suddenly decided that Africa needed proper Boer rule. It's the senseless behavior of racist idiots and totalitarian hypocrites who think that if they call you a "racist" first then they win the argument.

The left has endorsed Arab and Islamic rule over the Middle East, which means that it is in absolutely no position to criticize anyone or anything. It will talk your ear off about Gaza or Fallujah, but it won't have anything to say about Turkish chemical weapons raids into Kurdish areas of Iraq. The tens of thousands of political prisoners in Turkish jails, some there for no other crime than the use of the Kurdish language, don't exist for the left. Erdogan's casual threat to ethnically cleanse the Armenians again doesn't stir their interest.

It is no secret that the left is totalitarian and that it is attracted to totalitarian movements. But few have been willing to say it openly and clearly when it comes to its politics in the Middle East.

The left picked Pan-Islamists over secularists in Iran and Turkey. It picked racialist fascists in Egypt, Iraq and Syria-- and their local Palestinian militias. It backed Islamist and Arabist revolts again in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. And after backing every totalitarian majoritarian regime that wasn't too closely aligned to the United States-- their one great enemy is the region's only democratic state.

The left's worst crime in the Middle East is its craven love for tyranny, for grand empires built on race and religion, over the national and political rights of the minority. These Apartheid states are all they care about. Their greatest effort has been set not on resolving the stateless problems of the Kurdish minority, on the national borders of Armenia or ending the Turkish occupation and settlement of Cyprus-- but on adding yet another Arab-Muslim state to the region.

Palestine, the cynical project of Pan-Arabist and Pan-Islamist thugs, is the great obsession of the left. Because if there's one thing that the Middle East doesn't have enough of, it's totalitarian regimes built on Arab and Islamist identity. And the one thing it has too much of is democratic state with a non-Arab and non-Muslim majority. And that one thing is what they are committed to destroying.


  1. Once again you picture the entire ME story loud & clear but why has leftism been so successful in spreading its false narrative the last decades and why has the right that once had a fair number of well informed, intellectually and verbally powerful defenders of the historic truth fallen in such disarray, to such an extent that it even looks like the bottom has fallen out from under not only it's possible revival but even it's entire survival.

  2. Anonymous26/10/14

    Liberalism/Progressiveism/Marxism/Communism are all philosophies based upon the rejection of God. Their philosophies believe man can perfect himself if only the right people are given enough power to shape the mind and the environment. Those on the right have succumbed to the same false philosophy.


  3. Anonymous26/10/14

    Marxists have debated for 150 years the role of the unter-menschen. Marxists have always believed the ideal situation was a scientifically enlightened Europe and a stable host of other races ready to receive their marching orders. The master race idea existed long before the Nazis.

  4. Y. Ben-David26/10/14

    All the inconsistencies in the Left's policies in the Middle East come to make sense if you realize that they do not really care a whit for democracy, human rights or even Palestinian "self-determination" for that matter. What they do care about is war against what they call "Empire", i.e. American-lead global capitalism, and it offspring, Zionism. The Left believes that all the world's problems (as they see them) such as pollution, Global Warming, militarism, partriarchal family patterns, the gap between the rich and the poor, oppression of homosexuals and other Leftist favorite causes are caused by this "Empire" and once this Empire is eradicated, then all these problems will be solved. This also explains the bizarre "Red-Green-Brown" alliance (Marxists/Anarchists-Radical Islam or radical environmentalists and neo-Fascsists) who march together against Israel. They don't actually agree on anything except hatred of Jews and Israel, but they and the rest of the radical Left believe that the Arabs/Muslims will serve as the cannon fodder against Empire and Zionism since they generally won't leave their comfortable lives to actually fight against their enemy themselves. This explains why people who claim to support homosexual rights are enthusiastic supporters of the Ayatollahs' regime in Iran which oppresses this group. The Left says "we will use Iran against Empire and Zionism, which are the real enemy, and then once that enemy is disposed of , the homosexual problem in Iran will take care of itself.

    This is how a radical Jewish anti-Zionist and Jewish antisemite like Prof. Judith Butler can call HIZBULLAH and HAMAS "progressive" organizations. Anyone who hates Jews and Israel is "progressive" in the eyes of Leftist fanatics like her and her ilk. Keeping these facts in mind will make all the bizarre twists and turns of the radical Left clearer.

  5. In their calculus the Islamic radicals are the minority, and the left finds romance and kinship in their brazen brutality to achieve their objectives. Plus antisemitism.

  6. Anonymous26/10/14

    brilliant article. yet again (and again, and again). but one brief p.s., daniel: the left loves the arabs because the left loves "the authentic". they think the arabs are the native, authentic dwellers of these lands, and that others -- say, American-looking jews and others -- are colonialist. and of course the kind-hearted left loves grievance. the louder and fiercer and weepier, the more authentic the grievance must be, and the more leftist empathy is aroused.

    -- spanky

  7. Anonymous26/10/14

    A good deal of the left conducts itself in similar fashion to the Islamists.Step out of line, you're in for it. The cult-like adoration of Obama's good war in Afghanistan after that Jackass Bush was duly booted was really shocking. It was like somebody just flipped a switch on these people. It's apparent that the can (and are) do terrible things when collectivism is the mode. - djr

  8. Anonymous27/10/14

    You are ascribing reason and accountability to the left. They hold no position by reason, and the narrative changes too often for accountability.

  9. Anonymous27/10/14

    A super aricle and very good comments! To Elaine: that´s my conclusion also. Allah is the Moon God. The moon cannot shine of it´s own. And so is Allah, - he´s a fake. The big liar - the monkey who tries to imitate God. Is it surprising, that the fake "God" tries to eliminate the real one? I´m convinced that we do not fight only against visible powers. How else can you explain this world-wide blindness and bigotry. Why is it that left and Islam also hate Christians so much? It´s because of their God, the GOD of Abraham, Isaac an Jacob.

  10. Anonymous27/10/14

    "Liberalism/Progressiveism/Marxism/Communism are all philosophies based upon the rejection of God. - "

    God does not exist. Marxism is a religion that worships the state.

    You pretend that man is incapable of reason and that makes you the enemy of man's mind and man's life just as much as the Marxists and Muslims are.\\\\\\

    Moist Von Lipwig

    1. Anonymous29/10/14

      Tell that to CS Lewis and GK Chesterton, who I suspect are much more capable of reason than you are.

    2. Anonymous13/11/14

      CS Lewis's embarrassingly irrational 'Lord, liar or lunatic' 'trilemma' demonstrated just how capable of reason that 4th rate, drivelling twit was.

  11. Anonymous27/10/14

    I will never understand how anyone who identifies as progressive can have sympathy for a group of murdering misogynists. Their treatment of women and girls alone should be enough to turn most of the world against them. I don't think one can intellectually separate their misogyny from the rest of their culture and thereby, excuse it as a rare occurrence, it is not rare, nor is it some aberration, it is a key factor in their society.
    Societies tend to die from within, if only Muslim women would find their courage and rise up, they could change the world.

  12. Y. Ben-David28/10/14

    To the last Anonymous - 27.10.14

    If you read my comment above you would have the answer to your question. They so-called "progressives" would say that if Muslim societies oppress their women, it is the fault of the Americans/Zionists/European colonialists. I am sure you have heard commentators say that those at fault for the fratricidal slaughter going on in Syria and Iraq is the fault of the British and French for creating those countries after the First World War and the Americans for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. Perish the thought that there is something wrong with the religiousand social culture in those countries that causes people to kill one another! I will explain further...they will say the US is reponsible for the chaos in Iraq because when Saddam's Baathist regime was ousted, normal police and security functions ceased. I am sure you saw the pictures of mobs rampaging in the streets of Baghdad and looting everything in sight. There was also a major increase in violence and murders, not just from ordinary criminals, but all sorts of old scores were settled. (BTW-the same occurred when Mubarak was overthrown in Egypt and the police disappeared). I now have to ask...suppose the police didn't show up for work in an American city one day. Yes, there might be a problem with the criminal element, but would ordinary neighbors start butchering each other because of some old clan feud or other grievances between neighbors? Of course not. So why is it considered natural for "progressives" to excuse such behavior among Iraqis or Syrians or Egyptians?

  13. If one had time to do homework, consider that Mr. Obama is a Sunni, having grown up with that tradition in Indonesia. His adoptive dad of that time was Indonesian. (There is no record he rejected his Indonesian citizenship)

    All the gangsters Obama backs are Sunni. We are even tepid about ISIS, a dedicated gang of killers. We did nothing to help Kobani other than reduce armaments ISIS stole form our other agents and drop Kurd arms into the city. Even Turkey was hoping for the Kurds to lose.

    The magic hand waving over the Middle East mess is the collapse of the price of oil. All the gangster nations and ISIS live off of oil revenue. They have no major source of revenue without it. A sustained $60 a barrel will push many profligate nations toward insolvency. Even jihadists need money.

  14. Anonymous30/10/14

    As Dr. Herb London of the London Center for Policy Research pointed out in a radio interview just yesterday, the 57 Arab and Muslim states and 106 unaligned states at the U.N. got together to pass the infamous and baseless smear that "Zionism is racism." The truth is, he said, "Arabism is racism." Brilliant article!

  15. Anonymous6/11/14

    The truth

  16. The Sunni are a minority in Iraq. Not a majority, as the author writes.

  17. It says regional majority. The Sunnis are a majority in the region.



Blog Archive