What motivates the left?
A remarkable debate between David Horowitz, author of Unholy Alliance; Radical Islam and the American Left, and Daniel Lazare, writer for The Nation magazine. The premise of Horowitz' book is that anti-war movement is essentially an alliance between the old Communist left and the new Muslim radicals, each of whom wants the US to lose both in Iraq and the War on Terror. Lazare, rejects the claim at first, but ultimately concedes the point (while denying it all the same). Michael Medved is the host of the show.
An excerpt:
An excerpt:
Michael Medved:Now, do you think that – do you feel some sympathy for the so-called insurgents in Fallujah?Read the whole thing. (BTW, rather than withdraw the analogy, Lazare reiterates and extends it.)
Daniel Lazare: Oh, absolutely yes, total sympathy, total solidarity.
Michael Medved: You do?
David Horowitz: So who's the sophist here?
Daniel Lazare: Of course, absolutely. The insurgents in Fallujah are repelling a foreign invasion. They have every right to do it. Now, I’m not going to support every last action by every last fighter there, obviously, but certainly they have a right to repel a foreign invasion of their country.
David Horowitz: The people Lazare is referring to are the terrorists, of course; they're not the Iraqi people. They're a tiny minority of Sunni Muslims who are really upset because a monster has been taken down – their monster. This is the same ruse leftists used to rationalize their support for a Communist victory in Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh – an operative of Stalin’s Comintern who spent most of his life in Paris – was alleged to be the “George Washington of Vietnam.” Here we have a classic example of how the Left operates. Daniel Lazare is defending the Sunni terrorists in Iraq – the oppressors of the Iraq people – and pretending that he's doing it in the interest of the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people – the Shiites, the Kurds, the vast majority of the Iraqi people – hate the “insurgents” that we're fighting in Fallujah, but the American Left is choosing that side, the terrorists’ side, of this war.
Michael Medved: Okay, Daniel Lazare?
Daniel Lazare: Are you aware, David, that the other Nazis routinely referred to members of the French Underground as terrorists during World War II?
Michael Medved: Wait, are you just comparing….? We have to take a break. When we come back, Daniel Lazare, I want you to think very carefully about whether you want to compare the people in Fallujah, who do regularly blow up Americans, civilians, schoolchildren, power plants, women, and children, if you want to compare those people to the French resistance to the Nazis, which you just did. If Daniel Lazare stays with that, I'll be surprised, but I've been surprised before. We'll be right back with David Horowitz, author of Unholy Alliance, and Daniel Lazare.
6 Comments:
So, whats the problem? He is right. You invaded a country. The people of that country is NOT on your side. You came, you saw, you did not conquer. Bye. And give my regards to Rumsfeld.
Lazare is wrong as only the insular American left can be. Childish, offensive ideologues with no concept of the damage leftist reality has done in the world. Yeah, your Che shirt is really chic. Che was a mass murderer.
anonymous #1,
You said: "The people of that country is NOT on your side."
How very revealing.
SC
Anonymouse the First: In a hurry then? Off to spray "Bum" on the bus shelter and work on the next lager-powered Asbo? Jolly good!
Lol anonimous 2. When do you guys understand? There is no "insular American left". There is only "insular american right". Listen to the world, man. And learn.
There is some sympathy from the international left towards the Iraqi insurgents (as is obvious from Lazare's statements during the debate). Many months ago I happened upon a magazine published by Canadian socialists. There was at least one article in there about how "we should do everything we can to help the Iraqis fighting the Americans, to defeat the American capitalists and push them back", something of that sort. I didn't get a sense that they agreed with the radical Islamic world view, just that they saw the radicals of the Arab variety as useful to their cause of defeating capitalism, an alliance of convenience, if you will.
You get that sense from what Lazare says as well. The thing I keyed in on is he said he doesn't like the American use of power. What was hilarious was when he was asked what he wished for the region. He said he wished they would convert to socialism. When asked who else was doing anything to change the situation in Iraq before the Americans came in, he made some vague statement about democratic activists. Medved came back and said, "I didn't hear of any democratic activists. Where were they?" Got Lazare on the spot. Loved it! Lazare is one of those people who wishes for things that don't exist, and likely cannot exist, due to human nature, and doesn't like the way things are. He's someone who sets himself up to be perpetually unhappy.
Lazare said an interesting thing about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, saying that that was the Soviets trying to suppress Islamic radicalism in their neck of the woods. Interesting theory. I hadn't heard of that. I had always heard that the Soviets wanted to run an oil pipeline through Afghanistan, and this was the reason for the invasion. I know it sounds "Michael Moore-ish" now, but that was my understanding at the time.
Post a Comment
<< Home