Blair in NYC: Islamism is to today what fascism was to the 1930s
posted at 10:11 am on October 19, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
And Iran’s the engine. I understand the temptation of this analogy; I’m sure I’ve used it myself. But coming from someone as influential as Blair, all it does in the public’s mind, I fear, is implicitly minimize a grave threat by measuring it against the yardstick of ultimate evil. If you want to note the similarities, and there are plenty, simply explain Islamism to them and let people draw the connection themselves. Saying “it’s 1939 all over again!” I think leaves most people who don’t follow this stuff regularly rolling their eyes in a real-world manifestation of Godwin’s Law. Blair seems to agree as he went out of his way to note how historical analogies are imperfect, but he had to know how the headlines were going to read tomorrow.
Islamist extremism is similar to “rising fascism in the 1920s and 1930s”, Tony Blair said last night in his first major speech since leaving office…
He told the audience, which included New York governor Eliot Spitzer and mayor Michael Bloomberg, that Iran was the biggest exporter of the ideology, and that the Islamic republic was prepared to “back and finance terror” to support it…
“Analogies with the past are never properly accurate, and analogies especially with the rising fascism can be easily misleading but, in pure chronology, I sometimes wonder if we’re not in the 1920s or 1930s again…
He added: “There is a tendency even now, even in some of our own circles, to believe that they are as they are because we have provoked them and if we left them alone they would leave us alone.
“I fear this is mistaken. They have no intention of leaving us alone.
“They have made their choice and leave us with only one to make – to be forced into retreat or to exhibit even greater determination and belief in standing up for our values than they do in standing up for their’s.”
The emcee apparently joked several times about a Blair candidacy in 2008, which, sadly, would be completely unviable given the current bent of the Democratic Party even if it was constitutionally possible. Don’t cry for him, though. There may be a presidency in his future anyway.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
I don’t know. I think what he said was right on. It needs to be said by someone in leadership.
Rightwingsparkle on October 19, 2007 at 10:20 AM
That last part of his quote bears repeating – over and over again.
nailinmyeye on October 19, 2007 at 10:21 AM
“Either the argument will be as our enemies want it framed as Islam versus the west. Or it will be as we want it framed as moderates of whatever faith, colour or race against extremism however it manifests itself.”
uh our enemies and most people on the right in the USA
zane on October 19, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Is that what you meant, as in the right seems to be the only group in the U.S. with the will to fight the extremists?
BadgerHawk on October 19, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Especially by leadership on the left. The left-right schism over this issue takes the Islamist wedge in a perfect fit.
shaken on October 19, 2007 at 10:33 AM
Blair said it waS only our enemies who describe it as Islam v The west, but i have heard many people here, on lgf etc saying exactly that, and saying we need to fight Islam and Muslims and stop pretending. In fact someone here only yesterday was saying pope Urban should be reanimated.
zane on October 19, 2007 at 10:35 AM
If I were to make a speech similar to Blair’s, I wouldn’t emphasize how Islam is like Nazism. I would let people draw their conclusions. I would discuss instead how the people in the 1930’s responded to that threat–for instance, how the French left condemned France’s military spending even as the Nazi menace was becoming clear, how the universities like Cambridge and Oxford thought there would be no war, how the delighted crowd clapped for Neville Chamberlain’s “Peace For Our Time” speech.
thuja on October 19, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Islam is not a proper religion, but the very source of the problem.
Ask Ayaan Hirsi Ali about it
TheSitRep on October 19, 2007 at 10:48 AM
isn’t saudi wahhabism islamism’s biggest proponent?
ernesto on October 19, 2007 at 10:48 AM
That is the way it is. Islam vs. the West. The ideals and principles in the immutable texts of islam make it completely incompatible and hostile to our ideals and principles. Blair is still talking PC nonsense. This is not a problem of a few terrorists. This is a phenomenon of a creed completely out of step with civilization. Recent polls in Britain revealed that 35% of muslims want to abolish freedom and democracy and live under Sharia law. They are not terrorists those 35%. They are simply observant muslims. And their numbers are growing.
Muslims are not the enemy. The creed itself is the enemy. It is only a question of how many muslims will take their creed to heart.
jihadwatcher on October 19, 2007 at 10:50 AM
He’s right except for the part about Iran being the biggest exporter of islamism. That title goes to Saudi Arabia. They’re the ones who use OUR oil money to finance madrasses and mosques all over the world and pay our own universities to brainwash our kids with wahabbi propaganda indoctination in middle east studies classes originally meant to *study* our enemies, not edify them.
Tony737 on October 19, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Ernesto, I didn’t mean to steal your point, sorry ’bout that.
Tony737 on October 19, 2007 at 11:01 AM
I agree that Islamism is today’s fascism but I disagree that Iran is the engine. Saudi Arabia has put $80 billion into evangelizing Wahhabism around the world and where ever Wahhabis go, violence follows. Virtually all terror attacks have at least an ideological thread leading back to Saudi Arabia, if not financial, logistical, and training support.
While Iran may be a threat because it is working on an atom bomb, Pakistan already possesses what it calls an “Islamic bomb,” an arsenal of atom bombs, the research for which was paid by Saudi Arabia. Pakistan is just a few heartbeats away from coming under the control of its own radical Islamists. The Pakistanis are far more radicalized than the Iranians. Radicalism is on the rise in Pakistan while the Iranians have had it up to here with the mullahs and want them gone.
Iran has only weakly and sporadically promoted terror beyond its borders. Saudi Arabia has a covert foreign policy of religious imperialism which it vigorously funds and promotes with a steady stream of terrorist atrocities.
Saudi Arabia is our true enemy. It is the Saudi princes who are the conduit for petrodollars to the Wahhabi death cult. The moment that financial link is severed is when most terror cells will die on the vine and Islamism will whither away. In short, Saudi Arabia must be destroyed.
Tantor on October 19, 2007 at 11:02 AM
You are exactly right. The real comparison to the 20’s and 30’s is how the left either caters to these people or sticks their heads in the sand with regard to the issue. And the general public’s attitude in wanting to remain isolationist and not deal with the problem that is coming closer and closer to our shores. (in the form of nukes or a bio-attack)
conservnut on October 19, 2007 at 11:05 AM
I disagree with Blair for two reasons:
1) The Islamists aren’t anywhere near as competent as Germany was back then. It took the combined might of pretty much the rest of the world to stop them. The Islamists can’t even fight a conventional war and are stuck taking pot shots while any country they defend gets overtaken in a matter of weeks. Stupid evil is not as dangerous as brilliant evil.
2) We don’t have a complacent Chamberlain holding us back. We have far more dangerous retards consistently and purposefully aiding our enemies and doing everything they can to prevent us from defending ourselves.
IMO, the real danger is from within. Fanatical nuts come and go, and with our tech superiority they don’t really stand a chance. Being destroyed from within on the other hand only needs to succeed once.
Darth Executor on October 19, 2007 at 11:15 AM
No, it’s much worse than back then. Our Chamberlains are just one step away from wielding an AK and yelling “Allahu Akbar!”
Darth Executor on October 19, 2007 at 11:16 AM
These acts of violence against innocents violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith. And it’s important for my fellow Americans to understand that.
- George W. Bush
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 11:18 AM
I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace.
- George W. Bush
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 11:33 AM
We respect the vibrant faith of Islam which inspires countless individuals to lead lives of honesty, integrity, and morality.
Islam brings hope and comfort to millions of people in my country, and to more than a billion people worldwide. Ramadan is also an occasion to remember that Islam gave birth to a rich civilization of learning that has benefited mankind.
- George W. Bush
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Islam is a faith that brings comfort to people. It inspires them to lead lives based on honesty, and justice, and compassion.
- George W. Bush
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 11:38 AM
I hear there’s rumors on the Internets…
- George W. Bush
Darth Executor on October 19, 2007 at 11:39 AM
I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it is meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.
- Pope Urban II
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 11:44 AM
Hm except back then the German immigrant populations were small except in Czechoslavakia and Austria. Today everywhere in Western Europe is the Sudetenland.
aengus on October 19, 2007 at 11:45 AM
speaking of gratuitous Nazi comparisons…
“voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
-Hermann Goring, former second in command of the Third Reich
crr6 on October 19, 2007 at 11:45 AM
Most beloved brethren, today is manifest in you what the Lord says in the Gospel, ‘Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them.’ Unless the Lord God had been present in your spirits, all of you would not have uttered the same cry. For, although the cry issued from numerous mouths, yet the origin of the cry was one. Therefore I say to you that God, who implanted this in your breasts, has drawn it forth from you. Let this then be your war-cry in combats, because this word is given to you by God. When an armed attack is made upon the enemy, let this one cry be raised by all the soldiers of God: It is the will of God! It is the will of God!
- Pope Urban II
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Tony Blair for Secretary General of the UN (unless President Romney gives them the boot, we can only hope).
peacenprosperity on October 19, 2007 at 11:47 AM
It is not just the left that caters and appeases. Neville Chamberlain was a Conservative Prime Minister and the crowd that cheered his “Peace in Our Time” speech were presumably mostly conservative. Currently, we see Bush’s aid Karen Hughes walk wearing a head scarf and carrying a book by Karen Armstrong. Karen Armstrong fantasizes a peaceful Islam as Karl Marx fantasized a worker’s paradise. And you can read above where MB4 quotes Bush saying nonsense about Islam.
I really only trust two Republican candidates to be able to deal with Islam in a reasonable way: Tancredo and Rudy. I fear the most of the rest are likely to respond like Bush. And then there is Huckabee. Given the logic Huckabee uses to justify his pro-illegal immigrant stance, I fear he would be no better than Obama in dealing with the muslims.
thuja on October 19, 2007 at 11:50 AM
If you want to get technical, we’re really still fighting WWII. It never ended. Both the allies and the axis powers were engaged in battle for oil supplies. In the end, the axis powers didn’t get nearly any oil, Russia got Iranian oil, and the West got Saudi oil.
Things were cool until new players demanding oil entered the fray. China and India, moreso China, are going to pulling the oil exporting nations in their direction for some time.
The real problem is that all the oil exporting nations are staffed by crazy people. The moderate is Putin. Not a good sign.
gabriel sutherland on October 19, 2007 at 12:04 PM
thuja: What the problem with Huckabee in illegal immigration?
gabriel sutherland on October 19, 2007 at 12:06 PM
You just played into zane’s hands. The Crusades were not as peachy as you imagine them to be. In the end, it was Jews who got screwed over by the “Christian” soldiers.
mram on October 19, 2007 at 12:09 PM
See Tyson Foods.
Practice makes perfect.
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Where were Blair’s balls when he was in office?
PRCalDude on October 19, 2007 at 12:17 PM
We know well and good where the “extremism” manifests itself. It is not spread out among various religions at random.
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 12:18 PM
You got that right Darth. Although I don’t think Islamists are nuts – they behave rationally given their beliefs. Charles has an especially disturbing new post about the destruction of the UK. It’s complete with proposed pro-Islamic revisionist history, permitting immigration of people who are openly revolutionary, and allowing Iran nuclear weapons unopposed.
The rewriting of history always accompanies totalitarian movements. Even if nothing else can shake people from their torpor, proposals for revisionist history ought to do the trick. I hope…
forest on October 19, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Hitler behaved rationally given his beliefs.
Stalin behaved rationally given his beliefs.
Ahmadinejad is behaving rationally given his beliefs.
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 12:25 PM
No it doesn’t. It brings out the worst in Christians, again.
mram on October 19, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Where is that happening?
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Zane,
I just want you to know that I’ve changed my mind. Islam is a religion of peace and Christianity is the real danger, as it has been in the past. When the crowds gather in your city and on your block, simply recite the shahada as instructed:
then join them against the “those who’ve lost their way,” and “those consigned to hell fire,” screaming, “Allahu akbar!” They are the true enemies of peace in the world. Those damn Zionists and Crusaders. There will be no peace until you succeed and shari’ah, the rule of Allah, reigns in the land.
PRCalDude on October 19, 2007 at 12:34 PM
You’re right on all three counts. I wouldn’t call any of those men “nuts”. Calling them “nuts” is too kind and gives them too much credit. It is willful, deliberate evil in each and every one of them. It isn’t a flaw in their ability to think and reason, but rather a flaw in their character. In the case of the world’s worst tyrants, it’s a devastatingly awful flaw.
I fully admit that speaking of “evil” and “character flaws” invokes a value judgment, so it’s fair that I reveal the value by which I judge the character of all people:
It is wrong to deprive any other individual of life, liberty, or property through force or fraud except in the case of self defense.
And by that value, I can easily condemn an entire ideology as evil. Any ideology which maintains it correct to deprive any other individual of life, liberty, or property solely for the sake of religious purity is an evil ideology. Great swaths of Muslims, Christians, and Vegans (to name a few) fall under the shadow of condemnation with that trivial understanding, and that is precisely where they deserve to be.
Loundry on October 19, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Huckabee supports what amounts to open borders, though I’m not sure that he has said it explicitly.
I believe that the issues of open borders and surrender to the muslims are closely linked. First, consider Europe’s mistake of importing enough muslims that some countries will turn Islamic with non-European majorities. Second, opposing open borders is saying that our culture is not worth protecting against mass invasion. When one supports open borders and thinks our culture is something we may toss in the trash, what reason does one have to oppose Islamification?
thuja on October 19, 2007 at 12:51 PM
I think the Muslim swath is a RATHER LARGER SWATH as swaths go.
MB4 on October 19, 2007 at 1:02 PM
I agree, “nuts” is a bit dismissive. “Evil” is a better description. The only thing good about it is that evil is predictable, while crazy isn’t. It would be nice if more people would catch on, because a bad outcome is entirely predicatble if evil goes unopposed.
forest on October 19, 2007 at 1:23 PM
So, where are the Winston Churchills of our day? Where are the men and women who are willing to stand boldly and loudly against jihadist tyranny?
Is Blair all we’ve got?
Laserlawyer on October 19, 2007 at 1:45 PM
I agree completely. Islam is the only religion that mandates open-ended warfare and subjugation as religious duty. It is the worst religion ever.
Loundry on October 19, 2007 at 2:20 PM
If only we had a person with the eloquence of Blair and the ability to communicate so effectively. I’ve not always agreed with him, but since leaving office he’s made great strides in correcting what he said while in office and the dangers that await the freeworld if we continue to appease “the evildoers.” Pres. Bush, Ms. Rice, and the rest of the numbskulls in Washington seem bent on continued open borders, unlimited immigration from any 3rd world cesspool, and the amnesty of any/all illegals that manage to get here. I cannot think of what it would take other than the utter destruction of a major city to wake some in Washington up. As far as 1938/39, we’re missing the signs again and can’t seem to follow the breadcrumbs that are so neatly laid out. We underestimate our allies and their intentions – Russia/China/Pakistan/Saudi Arabia and a slew of others – to our peril.
24K lady on October 19, 2007 at 2:32 PM
It is indeed a battle of islam against all non islamic nations….that’s where many of our leaders still fail to make that proper distinction!
And if you study the last 1400 years, that bears itself out!
It is Islam proper that we are fighting against!!
Not some allegded misinterpretation of it…
Albertanator on October 19, 2007 at 2:36 PM
Well, Blair has been talking a good game since 9-11. His domestic record seems, shall we say, contradictory? Yeah, I think that’s about as polite about it as I can be.
Krydor on October 19, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Krydor,
I’m not so sure if it’s as much ‘contradictory’ as it is ‘disastrous.’ Those 12 years could have reversed what’s now happening to Britain, if he had acted.
PRCalDude on October 19, 2007 at 5:32 PM
Gee, I’d almost have him as the Republican nominee if it weren’t for his European welfarism (even though, by European standards, he was fairly successful in reducing welfare dependency).
JamesP on October 20, 2007 at 12:35 AM
The true believers in Islam (Jihadis) have declared their War on the Infidel West.
With China and the rest to follow.
Marginalizing and killing off these true-believing Mohammedan maniacs is the work at hand for all freedom-loving people.
Pretending that they are merely non-denominational “extremists” fails to counter the central ideological thrust of their attack.
And ignores the need to undermine their recruiting tool: the Koran.
Fighting the effects and not the cause is suicidal silliness.
Which is the plan of the West so far.
Warring against “Terrorism” and not “Their Dogmas”.
Pu$$yfooting around the problem- which is rooted inside the Muslim “holy” book- leaves our side swinging blindly.
While the Jihadis plot efficiently and coldly and at their own pace.
Laughing at our leaders’ naive blather about a “religion of peace”.
Their model was a brutal warlord.
Their playbook is a military manual.
Enough with the p.c. tapdancing.
Open the Koran, and face it.
profitsbeard on October 20, 2007 at 12:43 AM
If an analogy were ever “properly accurate”, it wouldn’t be an analogy. It would be an “instance”.
VerbumSap on October 20, 2007 at 4:24 AM
Comment pages: