Right-wing European “ally” against jihad really not an ally

posted at 10:42 pm on October 29, 2007 by Allahpundit

If you liked the post about Nick Griffin and the BNP, you’ll love this. LGF’s been taking heat for the past 10 days for daring to point out a few inconvenient facts about the enemy of our jihadist enemy in Europe. It began with this post on the Swedish Democrat party; tonight comes the follow-up. Take three minutes to read through the new one as it’s a useful primer on how crypto-Nazi parties “mend their ways” as they attract more support and try to make the move towards mainstream politics. The metamorphosis in the party logo says it all: from a flaming torch (modeled on the British National Front logo, no less) to a dainty little flower. One or two of our readers actually defended the BNP on similar grounds in our earlier thread, claiming that their worst transgressions lay in the distant past and that they’d turned over a new leaf. I’ve got a funny hunch that “nonviolent” Islamist political parties like the Ikhwan and Hizb ut-Tahrir wouldn’t get the same benefit of the doubt.

Takeaway: “They never cleaned up their act, they simply polished it.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

The funny thing is, normally European “conservatives” are moderates by our standard. One would logically think that their “far-Right” are like our conservatives. Unfortunately, they mean it in this case!

Damian G. on October 29, 2007 at 10:46 PM

Why are Nazis always described as “far-right?” They’re pro-abortion, gun-control, pro-union, big-gov’t leftists!

jgapinoy on October 29, 2007 at 11:03 PM

Ahhh, pay more attention as to whom is making that claim.

LOL jk, its clear you already have.

allrsn on October 29, 2007 at 11:06 PM

What will the left make of this? Conservatives rejecting a convenient alliance on principle???

Not that I’m suprised that the left had no comdemnation of Democrats subtle religious and racial attacks on Jindal… just what hay could they make over this? This is the kind of thing that wins the middle. Bravo Allahpundit.

Theworldisnotenough on October 29, 2007 at 11:06 PM

Yeah…I thought the BNP sounded fairly reasonable until I read their party manifesto a couple years ago.

flipflop on October 29, 2007 at 11:19 PM

Wow! And the threat that Europe, the continent which perfected ethnic cleansing, will soon fire up those crematoria ‘they’re so fond of’ becomes a closer reality. How a year changes things in world politics.

thedecider on October 29, 2007 at 11:23 PM

It’s part of the checklist for hangin’ with See-Dub: Do you hate Nazis? Is just a little bit Nazi OK with you, or do you have, like, zero tolerance for Nazis? Did you cry when the guy’s face melted in Raiders? When drunk, do you sing A: Garth Brooks or B: the Horst Wessel Song? When you watch Where Eagles Dare, are you rooting for Clint Eastwood and Richard Burton or the freako Frau Farbissima scopolamine lady and the Gestapo Anderson Cooper lookalike?

Is it all OK if the trains run on time?

If you haven’t answered these questions yet, you need to make up your mind. They’re important.

see-dubya on October 29, 2007 at 11:29 PM

The Scourge of the Swastika” and “Black Like Me” might be worthwhile reading on the Continent.

And, Anne Frank wasn’t gassed.

She died of typhus.

Big difference, right?

profitsbeard on October 29, 2007 at 11:34 PM

Why are Nazis always described as “far-right?”

jgapinoy on October 29, 2007 at 11:03 PM

Because some like to tar the right that way. Nazis were actually for the most part not conservative at all. They were not for the most part really leftists either. They were pretty “centrist” for the most part. Extremist, but “center” extremist. I know that sounds like an oxymoron to some, but it is not. There is a very good and comprehensive book on that very subject that I read many years ago. The author made this case very well. Much better than I could make it. Unfortunately his name does not come to me right now.

MB4 on October 29, 2007 at 11:42 PM

Takeaway: “They never cleaned up their act, they simply polished it.”

You can’t polish a turd.

It’s part of the checklist for hangin’ with See-Dub: Do you hate Nazis? Is just a little bit Nazi OK with you, or do you have, like, zero tolerance for Nazis? Did you cry when the guy’s face melted in Raiders?

I grew up on Wolfenstein 3d. Nothing beats a day of mowing down Nazis. Nothing.

Bad Candy on October 29, 2007 at 11:46 PM

posted at 10:42 pm on October 29, 2007 by Allahpundit

I guess they’re kinda like Hitchens in that way.

Darth Executor on October 29, 2007 at 11:53 PM

One or two of our readers actually defended the BNP on similar grounds in our earlier thread, claiming that their worst transgressions lay in the distant past and that they’d turned over a new leaf.

Yes but you never established whether or not PRCalDude, Thomas the Wraith and jihadwatcher genuinely believe that the BNP has cleaned up its act or that said commenters are crypto-fascists looking to usher in a new age of Nazi terror under the ageis of the BNP. I mean even if they were wrong (which I believe they were) why are you so certain they were operating from a set of pro-fascist beliefs?

Personally I like the UKIP who (along with Dr. Theodore Dampryle) identify the Labour Party and Tony Blair as fascists who have done more to destroy Britain than any outside force could possibly conceive.

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:09 AM

NAZI= Nationalist Socialist Party

Anyone things thats a ally for conservatives??

If so I think you are probably not very much a conservative.

Now for Europe I fear that if their current turn to the Right(read American Conservative right)doesn’t hold and instead fall to the ole European LLL’s, we may just be stuck with the results. I don’t think the average European no more than the average American, hates themselves nor their history/nation so much that they would be willing to commit national suicide like the LLL’s happily would. Tag that with the possible evils of ole Europe and you get a answer that is not conservative but ummmeeehhh ole school . The more you ignore a growing problem the worse it gets and the worse the cure/treatment gets.

C-Low on October 30, 2007 at 12:11 AM

see-dubya on October 29, 2007 at 11:29 PM

heh.

I grew up on Wolfenstein 3d. Nothing beats a day of mowing down Nazis. Nothing.

Bad Candy on October 29, 2007 at 11:46 PM

That game rocked. If you look around online you’ll find most sites won’t even sell it to German residents.

Bravo to LGF for cleaning house, and same to you AP. The people you banned generally put forth good conversation, but there are no compromises when it comes to this stuff.

BadgerHawk on October 30, 2007 at 12:15 AM

I’ve got a funny hunch that “nonviolent” Islamist political parties like the Ikhwan and Hizb ut-Tahrir wouldn’t get the same benefit of the doubt.

They get the same benefit of the doubt, if not more, from the British Government which says quite a lot if you ask me.

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:16 AM

See-Dub, I like the way you think. Okay, on this topic, anyway. We don’t see eye to eye on a lot of things, but yeah, when I think neo-Nazi, I hear John Belushi saying, “I hate Illinois Nazis.”

Meryl Yourish on October 30, 2007 at 12:16 AM

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:09 AM

Because the evidence was pretty much irrefutable, the quotes given were simply too damning, and there’s no way you can explain those away.

Bad Candy on October 30, 2007 at 12:18 AM

BadgerHawk on October 30, 2007 at 12:15 AM

You ought to try Return to Castle Wolfenstein, also a kickass game.

Bad Candy on October 30, 2007 at 12:19 AM

Yes but you never established whether or not PRCalDude, Thomas the Wraith and jihadwatcher genuinely believe that the BNP has cleaned up its act or that said commenters are crypto-fascists looking to usher in a new age of Nazi terror under the ageis of the BNP.

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:09 AM

I, like you, remain unconvinced of their guilt, but then, also like you, it is not my “court room”.

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 12:21 AM

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:16 AM

He’s commenting on said banned commenters, not the British gov’t.

Bad Candy on October 30, 2007 at 12:22 AM

Europe has made it a habit to allow its problems to fester and grow unheeded until, finally, they ignite into a violent backlash. While I like to think that the USA is different, and so far we have been for the most part, if the illegal immigration mess continues unabated I fear that someday the same thing might happen here.

FloatingRock on October 30, 2007 at 12:23 AM

Yeah…I thought the BNP sounded fairly reasonable until I read their party manifesto a couple years ago.

They’re complete scum. One of the things you’ll notice about them if you look carefully is a lot of their members have visible physical defects (Nick Griffin has different coloured eyes). I remember growing up watching them on TV half-pitying them for their dilapidated appearance (some grotesquely scarred) while railing against “imperfections”. It was so obvious they had developed deep insecurities about their own outward appearance.

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:23 AM

Because the evidence was pretty much irrefutable, the quotes given were simply too damning, and there’s no way you can explain those away.

Pretty much? I guess we’ll never know since the issue has been officially silenced. I’m as anti-BNP as they come but I don’t think PRCalDude and Thomas were knowingly supporting holocaust denial.

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:37 AM

I’m as anti-BNP as they come

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:37 AM

I am not as I don’t think that they are worth the bother. Islam (some would say “radical” Islam) is the problem, not some goof balls with delusions of being nazis. If I asked folks out in “real life” what BNP was, any that had an answer would probably save British National Petroleum. Maybe I am naive, but I just don’t think they are the threat.

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 12:48 AM

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:37 AM

Nor do I. I have a real problem with this. The parent is not necessarily the child. I supported and pushed SIOE and the rest with absolutely no clue about any nazi-type links. I think just about everyone did. Those at the top of the chain are going to have to separate themselves because this affiliation is screwing up everything – just as CAIR and the like wanted.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 12:51 AM

Maybe I am naive, but I just don’t think they are the threat.

No, they’re not the threat. Neither are Sinn Fein/IRA yet they still shoot/drown/mutilate my fellow Irish citizens. I was threatened myself a few years ago and was warned to talk a little softer if I didn’t want a beating or worse. So I do consider it a “real life” issue.

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:56 AM

Neither are Sinn Fein/IRA yet they still shoot/drown/mutilate my fellow Irish citizens.

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 12:56 AM

So this bunch of goof balls that took the initials of British National Petroleum are not just a bunch of goof balls but are actually a serious threat and are doing what Sinn Fein/IRA are doing? This is getting very confusing.

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 1:06 AM

So this bunch of goof balls that took the initials of British National Petroleum are not just a bunch of goof balls but are actually a serious threat and are doing what Sinn Fein/IRA are doing? This is getting very confusing.

No, not at all. I just meant that local, isolated (potential) fascist movements shouldn’t be dismissed as harmless out of hand. I suppose the BNP are a bunch goof balls though when I think about it. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

aengus on October 30, 2007 at 1:09 AM

Meryl Yourish on October 30, 2007 at 12:16 AM

We see eye to eye on a lot, especially the big stuff, and I’ll toast “Death to the Nazis, and F— the Facists” with you all night.

see-dubya on October 30, 2007 at 1:32 AM

See-Dubya will love this: Illinois Nazis…

mram on October 30, 2007 at 1:51 AM

… I supported and pushed SIOE and the rest with absolutely no clue about any nazi-type links. I think just about everyone did. Those at the top of the chain are going to have to separate themselves because this affiliation is screwing up everything – just as CAIR and the like wanted.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 12:51 AM

Yet you gave me grief over saying Republicans have an image issue when it comes to race. Both you and BuyDanish got all bent over out of shape.

Bottom line is that any energy expended defending this crap makes our side look farcical. Why give them ammo tying us to racist/separatist wingnuts?

Republicans have to be smarter and more calculating than Democrats, because they (typically) think they are better than us.

The Race Card on October 30, 2007 at 1:51 AM

Ultimately, all extremists are cut from the same cloth.

Being anti-Communist and extremist does not make one “far Right” automatically. What I meant was the text-book definition of “far Right,” not that Nazis actually qualify as such.

Sorry for the confusion.

Damian G. on October 30, 2007 at 2:18 AM

Ah, warms the cockles of my racially inferior little heart, mram. And as a former Jawa Report co-blogger, I also love this: Indiana Nazis.

see-dubya on October 30, 2007 at 2:24 AM

The Race Card on October 30, 2007 at 1:51 AM

Precisely why I want to hear from Spencer and Mattera, which Hot Air supports.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 3:03 AM

Thread at Robert’s site.

Has anyone contacted him or Jason Mattera for comment?

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 12:33 AM

I saw this comment on the thread you linked to and found it interesting:

The neo-Nazi thing is totally out of kilter over on LGF.

There is definately less racism in Europe than in the US [I am not so sure 'bout that, maybe he meant more?]. But the idea that there are Nazi’s lurking behind every bush, or that the Nazi’s could make a major comeback is just preposterous.

The little green footballers know little about Europe and Fjordman is incredibly patient with his attackers. But its also the herd-mentality that drives them over there, almost like the Koz-kidz: when Charles sez ‘jump’ they all follow, not exactly convincing.

Free speech or differing opinions make you an endangered species, and Charles is quick to boot you off if he doesn’t like your opinion.

That’s why I appreciate JW, at least we can discuss things seriously here.
Posted by: sheik yer’mami [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2007 3:44 P

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 3:29 AM

Yet you gave me grief over saying Republicans have an image issue when it comes to race. Both you and BuyDanish got all bent over out of shape.

The Race Card on October 30, 2007 at 1:51 AM

That’s right and none of this stuff changes how I feel about that. Stick to the topic, please.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 3:29 AM

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 3:29 AM

Yes. I read that. Not sure anyone else here did, however.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 3:30 AM

And btw, two of my best cyber acquaintances are SJackson and Alouette from FR. Both conservative Zionist Jews.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 3:44 AM

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 3:30 AM

I saw another interesting comment over at the JW thread that you linked to. This one is by a commenter that is, IMHO, one of the best commenters over there:
*
USorThem

“On a somewhat related note, I and another regular poster here at JW were booted from LGF last week…”

Hey join the club! I was booted a long time ago for being against the Iraqi adventure and against Bush.

I used the Hugh Fitzgerald argument and was attacked for being a “Moby”, “KosKid” and for having “BDS”. Then I called Bush a sellout to the Arabians and said they were the ones with BDS (Bush defense syndrome)……in response I was sent to guillotine! chop!

Don’t worry I will get back on there one day…nobody is dead forever. Truth always wins in the end…

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at October 27, 2007 9:16 PM

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 3:56 AM

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 3:56 AM

Robert disassociated himself with the nazis, but continued his association with the juniors anyway. Perhaps because he understands how big the Islamofacist threat is. I don’t think anyone here would associate Robert with nazis or neo-thereof.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 4:05 AM

On a somewhat related note, I and another regular poster here at JW were booted from LGF last week…”

Hey join the club! I was booted a long time ago for being against the Iraqi adventure and against Bush.

I used the Hugh Fitzgerald argument and was attacked for being a “Moby”, “KosKid” and for having “BDS”. Then I called Bush a sellout to the Arabians and said they were the ones with BDS (Bush defense syndrome)……in response I was sent to guillotine! chop!

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at October 27, 2007 9:16 PM

Personally I don’t see much point in a web site were everyone has to dance to the same tune. I would not even want to have or comment on a web site where everyone agreed with me. What would be the point?

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 4:12 AM

I don’t think anyone here would associate Robert with nazis or neo-thereof.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 4:05 AM

I sure wouldn’t.

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 4:13 AM

Whose word do I accept?

American bloggers, like LGF and this one, who don’t even know what these parties are.. and most go hunting on the internet for whatever info they can find.

or American bloggers, like Atlas Shrugs and Robert Spencer, who actually went to Europe to participate in some networking and planning. Am I to believe that fierce Jews like Pam Gellar and ehtical Christians like Robert Spencer are knowingly taking up with NAZIs?

I’ll take the later’s word rather than the hearsay of the former.

VinceP1974 on October 30, 2007 at 4:58 AM

There is definately less racism in Europe than in the US

I can’t honestly say if it’s more or less, rather it’s different.

As for the networking in Brussels, from what I was told, it was just a lot of informational talking and networking. Looked almost boring. :-)

yggdrasil on October 30, 2007 at 6:56 AM

george lincoln rockwell was basicly the wwii version of the ivaw. his whole schtick is based on his returning from war, and being “awakened” from the “delusion” that he had been sent to protect america, and discovering that “true” patriotism was resistance to “zionist controlled war-mongerers”.

jummy on October 30, 2007 at 7:15 AM

I have already stated a couple of times at Jihad Watch that I was not involved in the planning of the Counterjihad Summit, and that I didn’t know all the other participants. The real motives and loyalties of some of them are, obviously, hotly contested. There was no racist or neo-Nazi content to the conference, and if there were any actual racists or neo-Nazis involved, I repudiate and disavow them and everything they stand for.

Robert Spencer on October 30, 2007 at 7:41 AM

One of my proudest achievements as a father is spending many hours at the xbox with my daughter teaching her how to mow down Nazis.

Mr. Bingley on October 30, 2007 at 7:57 AM

Oh, and by the way, Jason Mattera has no need to say a thing about this. He is with the Young America’s Foundation, not the Young Americans for Freedom, who invited Griffin to speak.

Robert Spencer on October 30, 2007 at 8:08 AM

Nazi. This a pavlov rat word. Get out of the cage the left keeps putting everybody in who opposes them, and get back to business. Fighting Islamicfascism.

dhimwit on October 30, 2007 at 8:11 AM

In the long run, by turning over all these logs, Charles and Allah have done us all a favor by exposing some old worms of Europe. These are issues which were going to come to light eventually so to my thinking, the sooner the better. Lets have it out now, so that we may educate ourselves and clarify our thinking now. In another year, conditions in Europe may well have further shifted significantly in ways we cannot imagine or foretell.

In the short term, this is proving most painful and hurtful. I want to say here and now that I stand in no uncertain terms with the Baron and Dymphna at Gates of Vienna. I was truly saddened to learn that Charles Johnson had dropped them from his blog rolls and I do question the necessity of that.

Nyog_of_the_Bog on October 30, 2007 at 8:49 AM

It’s part of the checklist for hangin’ with See-Dub: Do you hate Nazis?

Nazis. I hate these guys.

crazy_legs on October 30, 2007 at 9:35 AM

We have finally achieved red on red conflict within the Jihadist movement, and they have finally achieved blue on blue conflict within the anti-Jihadist movement. This should make the centrists and anarchists very happy.

Lawrence on October 30, 2007 at 9:51 AM

Whose word do I accept?

Vince, I think that it’s short-sighted to write off Charles because other people took a recent trip to Europe. What facts has he gotten wrong?

MamaAJ on October 30, 2007 at 9:53 AM

. These are issues which were going to come to light eventually so to my thinking, the sooner the better. Lets have it out now, so that we may educate ourselves and clarify our thinking now. In another year, conditions in Europe may well have further shifted significantly in ways we cannot imagine or foretell.

Finally. Somebody comes to the point. Nationalist parties are on the rise in Europe in response to Islam whether you like it or not. That is the point. If some more “acceptable” political alternative does not arise that is actually capable of confronting Islam, the far right nationalists will grow stronger and stronger. That is the reality. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THAT???

Please don’t tell me how much you hate Nazis. It’s stipulated.

Have you seen the latest from Diana West on the Vlaams Belang? Is she personna non-grata?

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 9:53 AM

The Democrats were the party of slavery, Jim Crow laws and lynchings. They managed to redifine themselves quite nicely. And it’s not all 100 years in the past. For example, Robert Byrd is a former KKK leader, and we are fine with that.

Clark1 on October 30, 2007 at 10:15 AM

Neo Nazi parties are only draping themselves in the flag of nationalism to gain power. They aren’t so much about fighting Jihad as wishing to institute their own. The reason they can get a modicum of support is simply because they have pandered to the lowest common denominator.

The common thread in all these things seems to be based around deporting immigrants, introducing a mandatory state religion and universal conscription. It’s all under the guise of “strengthening the state” based on some unreachable ideal that, quite frankly, never existed.

Problem is, it suddenly makes a whole bunch of people within those states who are not immigrants a possible threat. Naturally, because it’s Europe, you have to start with the Jews. Things going bad? Jews! Wait, things still not great? Moral decay! Homosexuals! What? The ideal still not reached? Atheists and not the right kind of Christian!

Still impure? Foreign influence! We’ve taken care of the Jews, gays, atheists and wrongthinking Christians so it must be those people infiltrating through the free exchange of ideas by radio, tv and the internet. Best stop that.

On it goes. Doesn’t sound much different than the problem they were claiming to be able to fix. Because it isn’t.

Krydor on October 30, 2007 at 10:27 AM

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 3:29 AM

I’m curious how many people here also have a login at LGF. I have one but have only posted 11 oe 12 comments ever. I find that breaking from the party line gets you called a troll pretty quickly, which is annoying. I still visit the site almost daily, but rarely wade into the comments.

BadgerHawk on October 30, 2007 at 10:46 AM

They aren’t so much about fighting Jihad as wishing to institute their own.

You can’t have one without the other.

Problem is, it suddenly makes a whole bunch of people within those states who are not immigrants a possible threat. Naturally, because it’s Europe, you have to start with the Jews. Things going bad? Jews! Wait, things still not great? Moral decay! Homosexuals! What? The ideal still not reached? Atheists and not the right kind of Christian!

All these groups are lost if Jihadis succeed. All are lost if far right succeeds. Yet these people you rightly as their next victims haven’t a clue! In fact, they traditionally and loudly support the very liberals whose policies created this power vacuum in the first place– MULTI-CULTURALISM AND MORAL/ETHICAL RELATIVISM.

You say a pox on both their houses. Agreed. But what are you gonna do about the problem? You may be the voice of conscience, but who ever suggested that this was going to end prettily in Europe? Liberalism in Weimar Germany led to Nazism and world war. Post WWII liberalism has led us to the same place. You may be reading the tea leaves correctly as to where this all leads, but I’m seriously wondering if there is any way to avoid it. I believe that the only way would be to so decisively defeat the Islamists in the Middle-east that their ideology crumbles and they stumble in their faith. Bin Laden’s head on a stick kinda thing. Hopefully, that would wake the Muslims up in the West.

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 10:48 AM

JiangxiDad,

Well, I’ve been doing some rethinking with regards to the whole Weimar Republic, post WWI thing and think there are some more interesting parallels with pre WWI, decaying imperial powers and the rise of Anarchists. Same type of endgame, naturally.

The idea that Liberalism in Weimar Germany led to the rise of Hitler is a huge overstatement. The Nazis essentially paralyzed the German Parliament and promised to stop if Hitler became Chancellor. The all-too-convenient Reichstag fire (actually set by the guy the Nazis said set it, proving that Communists are pretty damn stupid) allowed consolidation of his power. His influence was on the wane prior to that. There’s a whole bunch of other things that helped Hitler, but Liberalism and so forth was hardly a factor that pushed him over the top.

How does Europe stop it? Well, they obviously can’t deport tens of millions, because that won’t work. Enforce the laws on the books and they will be fine. That kind of thing has been happening more and more. There are some leaders on the rise in France and Germany that seem to be doing well. If you undercut the neo-fascists, then they lose whatever grip they have. I expect the Conservatives in Britain will do the same.

The Islamists, however, will not be shaken in their faith any more than any other hyper-religious person. Hell, there are plenty of Muslims who drink and like bacon. The Islamists aren’t dominant without the backing of military force. Extremist ideologies are like that.

Krydor on October 30, 2007 at 11:37 AM

Naturally, because it’s Europe, you have to start with the Jews. Things going bad? Jews! Wait, things still not great? Moral decay! Homosexuals!

OH MY GOD!! THEY’RE COMING FOR THE JEWS….THEY’RE COMING FOR THE HOMOSEXUALS!! WHAT SHALL WE DO?!

Oh, wait, the real Nazis already got them…

HerrMorgenholz on October 30, 2007 at 11:40 AM

The idea that Liberalism in Weimar Germany led to the rise of Hitler is a huge overstatement.

I believe, after careful and long consideration, to the best of my ability, that it is the primary source. The depression being secondary. The Versaille Treaty being third. The rise of communism (enabled by liberalism) being fourth.

The Nazis essentially paralyzed the German Parliament and promised to stop if Hitler became Chancellor. The all-too-convenient Reichstag fire (actually set by the guy the Nazis said set it, proving that Communists are pretty damn stupid) allowed consolidation of his power.

Yes, Hitler filled the vacuum. That fact nor his methods are in question. The question is how the vacuum initially was created, and whether the then existing political parties made grave errors that we now understand and are able to avoid repeating. This I don’t know yet.

How does Europe stop it? Well, they obviously can’t deport tens of millions, because that won’t work. Enforce the laws on the books and they will be fine.

Sounds like our own immigration issue. “Just enforce the laws on the books???” That is exactly what I’m talking about. There is a vacuum created when laws are not enforced and politicians are unable to meet the challenge.

There are some leaders on the rise in France and Germany that seem to be doing well.

Agreed. Merkel and Sarkozy are a breath of fresh air. In Britain, not so good. Gordon Brown seems a dunce.

If you undercut the neo-fascists, then they lose whatever grip they have.

Only if you undercut the Jihadis at the same time. Otherwise, game over. And that is what the politicians haven’t been doing.

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 12:02 PM

Krydor- Should have added:

The Islamists aren’t dominant without the backing of military force.

Many would argue that the Islamist are, or are indeed becoming, the dominant political/social force in W. Europe. They have no military backing. They have primitive ideological backing coming from the mad Wahhabists of Arabia, Pakistan, and elsewhere, the mad Mullahs of Persia, and their own home-grown trouble-makers who recognized the cancer of liberalism eating western society and now so easily exploit it. Footbaths at airports indeed!

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 12:06 PM

The US didn’t align itself with Stalin against Hitler because he was a champion of free markets and civil liberty. It certainly would be nice to live in a world where nations could cherry-pick only ideal allies. Instead, we have to take what we can get. Sweden could declare itself the Fourth Reich and replace the cross on its flag with a yellow swastika tomorrow, and, distasteful as that might be, one would be hard-pressed to explain how it’d be remotely as great a threat as the global Jihad movement, a nuclear-armed Iran, or creeping European Sharia.

Blacklake on October 30, 2007 at 12:25 PM

The US didn’t align itself with Stalin against Hitler because he was a champion of free markets and civil liberty.

Had the same thought this morning when I woke up. This whole issue is scary, but deadly serious.

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 12:27 PM

Robert Spencer on October 30, 2007 at 8:08 AM

I’m glad you stopped by to comment. I knew you had repudiated them. I thought for sure someone here at Hot Air said Jason’s YAF did have some original affiliation with YAF. I’m happy that I got that part wrong. Still, the whole affair is very disturbing and disappointing. To discover that a hateful ideology is helping in the fight against another hateful ideology…but of course, our government actually uses that strategy…the enemy of my enemy…until the one becomes the other.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 12:34 PM

I thought for sure someone here at Hot Air said Jason’s YAF did have some original affiliation with YAF

Several did, some with links. I don’t know what to make of the whole thing.

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 12:35 PM

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 9:53 AM

That was a good post and expresses well my own concerns. One side pushes and the other pushes back. In a way, you could say the same about what the results of Hitchen’s push for atheism will be. It will only serve to make Christians stronger. But that is a benign analogy. What is happening with the nationalist movement has dangerous implications and it is absolutely necessary for middle ground to be found. One of the problems for Americans is that public educators and the media have really done a job on removing the sense of “old-fashioned” patriotism. Accomplishing that serves to take the middle ground away and then everyone is suddenly an “extremist. Either left or right.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 1:04 PM

I believe, after careful and long consideration, to the best of my ability, that it is the primary source. The depression being secondary. The Versaille Treaty being third. The rise of communism (enabled by liberalism) being fourth.

JD, (can I call you JD?)

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one. There were economic issues, like hyperinflation, and what amounts to anarchy. Hitler was all about restoring order and glory. I guess I’ll need to understand the context of Liberalism used in this discussion before I’ll concede the point.

Only if you undercut the Jihadis at the same time. Otherwise, game over. And that is what the politicians haven’t been doing.

The problem is that undercutting the neo Fascists necessarily means undercutting the Jihadis. If one group is using Muslim immigration as their wedge and pointing to the lack of action by the government, then all the government has to do is address the problem. Two birds, one stone.

They have primitive ideological backing coming from the mad Wahhabists of Arabia, Pakistan, and elsewhere, the mad Mullahs of Persia, and their own home-grown trouble-makers who recognized the cancer of liberalism eating western society and now so easily exploit it. Footbaths at airports indeed!

This “cancer of liberalism” thing sticks in my craw just a bit, to be honest. It’s more of a pile of socialist feelgoodism that allows fringe elements to flourish and leech off society. All that takes is a nice focus on free markets and the resulting demand for labour while setting standards for who can receive state aid.

Society does benefit, overall, with different cultures interacting. These same complaints aren’t leveled at the vast number of other cultures that populate western countries. They are focused on a really loud subset of people of a single faith. It’s not so much about liberalism and multiculturalism. It’s about having standards for who gets in and applying those standards.

There is something I’ve learned over the past few years studying this: jihadis are mostly stupid and occasionally lucky. The mostly stupid ones are rounded up quite quickly and the occasionally lucky ones damage the viability of any sort of western Islamic dominance.

Krydor on October 30, 2007 at 1:18 PM

then all the government has to do is address the problem. Two birds, one stone.

Of course. But they aren’t.

All that takes is a nice focus on free markets and the resulting demand for labour while setting standards for who can receive state aid.

Of course. But it isn’t happening.

It’s about having standards for who gets in and applying those standards.

Not happening.

jihadis are mostly stupid and occasionally lucky. The mostly stupid ones are rounded up quite quickly and the occasionally lucky ones damage the viability of any sort of western Islamic dominance.

It would be,and has been, a mortal error to underestimate anyone who could pull off 9/11, Khobar Towers, US Embassy bombings, USS Cole, Madrid bombings, London bombings, overthrow the Shah of Iran, take-over Afghanistan, threaten Pakistan, weaken Turkey, etc. I doubt the US Military considers the Jihadis stupid. The “lucky” ones as you call them, embolden the seething Islamic masses in Europe. Their actions don’t damage them in Muslim eyes. The only thing they damage is us.

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 1:36 PM

Have you seen the latest from Diana West on the Vlaams Belang? Is she personna non-grata?

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 9:53 AM

Diana West is so brilliant she makes my knees shake.

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 1:42 PM

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 3:29 AM

I’m curious how many people here also have a login at LGF. I have one but have only posted 11 oe 12 comments ever. I find that breaking from the party line gets you called a troll pretty quickly, which is annoying. I still visit the site almost daily, but rarely wade into the comments.

BadgerHawk on October 30, 2007 at 10:46 AM

I have a login for LGF, but have never used it. I do not want to participate in any jircle cerks.

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 1:46 PM

Diana West is so brilliant she makes my knees shake.

MB4 on October 30, 2007 at 1:42 PM

You are in agreement with Michelle and Bryan.

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 1:56 PM

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 1:36 PM

Again I agree.

The only thing they damage is us.

Especially if we are divided on what to do about them.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 2:03 PM

Especially if we are divided on what to do about them.

Connie on October 30, 2007 at 2:03 PM

Yes, but as you and I suggest, this situation won’t last forever. Imagine the only options left being European fascism and Islamic fascism. We better find our Roosevelts and Churchills.

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 2:16 PM

JD,

It would border on paranoia to overestimate a group of people who regularly blow themselves up when donning suicide vests in their living rooms, ask for deposits back on trucks used as bomb platforms, run around calling for death to the infidel in front of police and security cameras, can’t build a bomb without it being a dud or blowing up in their faces most of the time, poke their heads out of windows when their manhood is impugned and so on. That’s just the footsoldiers, don’t get me started on their mentally handicapped leadership.

They are, in a word, idiots. They make the same mistakes everyone else did, that being the apparent weakness of the west based on this vile liberalism. The Japanese thought the Americans would never go one on one, the Germans thought the British Commonwealth was full of effite snobs. The Jihadis think we are afraid of getting a paper cut, and dance about under the watchful eye of predator drones only to be blown away. Canadian soldiers take on the worst areas of Afghanistan and have an insanely high kill ratio with substandard equipment.

Krydor on October 30, 2007 at 2:23 PM

Krydor on October 30, 2007 at 2:23 PM

I think perhaps we are going in circles. I hope you are right and that the Islamic threat is overblown. I hope you are right that the western democracies are sufficiently healthy to counter these “challenges.” Clearly, I don’t think you are, but I have been accused by more than one person of being a pessimist. I try to fight that.

Finally, I don’t doubt our ability to mount a response. My whole point is what face the response will take. Will a moderate face be sufficient/capable, or will something else emerge. The British lost their empire and status as world power in order to vanquish the Nazis. The Japanese fought a different US than we are today.

Again, let’s hope you are right.

JiangxiDad on October 30, 2007 at 2:29 PM

JD,

The Japanese fought pretty much the same USA. Prior to being labeled “The Greatest Generation”, they were seen as slackers and ne’er do wells. I’m a firm believer in the concept of “free men will rise up”, and it has not let me down so far.

Krydor on October 30, 2007 at 2:43 PM