Unholy Alliance - Radical Islam and the American Left

September 7, 2005

The one thing I enjoy when there is a long holiday weekend is the time I get to spend reading books. Visiting the Blanchard's in Skaneateles, New York further forces you to read books since their lake-side home doesn't have a television. I bought a book several months ago titled Unholy Alliance - Radical Islam and the American Left, that intrigued me when I saw it in the bookstore, but I never seemed to find time to read it.

I don't claim to know all the political answers or who is more right - the Left or the Right. I would venture to say that there is fault both on the Extreme Left and the Extreme Right. But what really intrigued me about this book was that the author, David Horowitz, is a lifelong civil rights activist and one of the founders of the New Left movement in the 1960s. So how is it that someone that had such deep-seated roots in liberal and Left-leaning causes would write a book condemning the Left and associating the Left as allies of Islamic terrorists? What caused David to turn from his Left allies and take a much more conservative approach when it came to the War on Terror? That's what intigued me when I read the book's jacket cover. Indeed this book is not written by an extreme right-winger novelist by any stretch of the imagination, so I couldn't just lump this as some sort of extreme right-wing propoganda trash. I had to buy this book and I was not disappointed.

So why would Leftists make common cause with extremists within a religion that are diametrically opposed to everything the Left stands for? (civil rights, homosexuality, democracy, women's rights, etc.) David Horowitz explains that it is quite logical given one of the extreme Left's principles: America is the biggest evil and anything or anyone opposed to America is good.

The first part of the book is a history of 9/11 through the end of major combat operations in Iraq and the Left's actions during this time. David cites a few examples of the extreme Left, but one that stuck in my mind was Anthropology Professor Nicholas De Genova of Columbia University when he said that he hoped for "a million Mogadishus." (in Iraq) Specifically he said, "Peace is subversive, because peace anticipates a very different world than the one in which we live--a world where the U.S. would have no place." De Genova continued: "The only true heroes are those who find ways that help defeat the U.S. military. I personally would like to see a million Mogadishus. U.S. patriotism is inseparable from imperial warfare and white supremacy."

The second part of the book is a history of the American and international Left and the Left's love for communism and their evolution into what Horowitz calls Neo-Communists or Neocoms. He explains that the original American communists believed in the Soviet Union with the same religous fervor that many people believe in God. Americans who spied for the Soviet Union didn't see themselves as traitors to America, but rather loyalists to a commom cause for a utopian society for humanity. When the Soviet Union fell, they still carried their flawed belief system in a socialist America and instead focused their attention on attacking the American system at every turn.

Part three explains why the Left has made unspoken alliances with Islam, Even though Islam doesn't share the Left's belief system, Horowitz explains that they are but a small enemy as compared to the American capitalist system and they they will do anything to bring about a revolution that brings down the American system.

So why is the Left allying itself with radical Islam? Horowitz says that the Neocoms still believe in Marx's dictum that "religion is the opiate of the masses." According to the book, once private property is abolished (the root of the "class" system), the need for religion will vanish, and Islamic radicals will stop being Islamic and radical. The only thing standing in the way of the revolution is the United States of America.

Unholy Alliance is absolutely chilling in its exploration of the depths to which the extreme Left will sink in its attacks on America. It is truly sad that the once great Democratic Party, of which I used to consider myself part of, has been hijacked by the extreme Left. For the record, I voted for Clinton twice, Gore over George W. Bush, and lastly George W. Bush over Kerry. So that's 3 Democratic votes to just one Republican vote.

In summary, David Horowitz has done a billiant job of analyzing the history of the Left and how they have evolved from supporting communism to using the power of the media to spread their propoganda.

What happened to the progressive moderate Democrats, like John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and others? Clinton was more moderate than the current crop of Democratic leadership, i.e. Howard Dean, Senator John Kerry, Senator Ted Kennedy, Sen. Barbara Boxer, and Sen. Charles Schummer and a lot of the reason is that extreme Left such as MoveOn.org and others have raised millions of dollars to help fund far left-leaning candidates such as Howard Dean.

I don't believe President Bush has done everything perfectly but if you were to listen to Democratic leadership President Bush has done everything wrong. That is just lunacy and pure propoganda designed for political gain. Unwarranted attacks on the office of the Presidency no matter which party is in power designed for mere political gain stinks to high heaven and I hope this plan backfires come election time. The extreme Left is pushing me further and further to the right of center. Please Democrats, I implore you... save me from becoming an extreme right-winger before it's too late!

Comments to Unholy Alliance - Radical Islam and the American Left

Tracey Schelmetic :
September 7, 2005 4:12 PM

"So how is it that someone that had such deep-seated roots in liberal and Left-leaning causes would write a book condemning the Left and associating the Left as allies of Islamic terrorists?"

In the same way a moderate Republican could condemn a ranting televangelist for saying that working women and birth control should be made illegal. There's a vast difference between the Left and the extreme Left, just as there's a difference between the Right and the extreme Right.

Tom Keating :
September 7, 2005 4:47 PM

I thought I made that distinction between the Left and extreme Left? Guess I could have put the word "extreme" in front of all the Left instances.

But for better or worse, it seems now that any time an articles references the Left they are referring to the extreme Left, just as when they refer to the Right they are referring to the extreme Right. Or maybe that's just my observation? That's probably why I started the post using the word "extreme Left" and then switched interchangeably to just the word "Left".

Seems to me that only when you want to indicate a moderate Left individual or a moderate Right individual do you see the word "moderate" placed in front.

But even then you don't typically see the word "moderate Left" or "moderate Right". Both seem oxymorornic, no? Instead you see moderate Democrat and moderate Republican or the phrases "slightly left of center" or "slightly right of center"

So just to clarify, I wasn't speaking of moderate Democrats. I like moderate progressive Democrats and like my post states, I'd like to see more of them.

Dav :
September 8, 2005 10:18 AM

Amen!

Tom, I've been reading you (tech) blog for a while and I like it quite a bit. Even though I share your view on this subject, I can't help but chastise you on introducing politics in a technical blog (and just hotlink to other sites instead? )
BTW, when mainstream media and political leaders take the same radical positions as the 'far left' the position is no longer considered far but mainstream (there goes the democratic party!)

My $0.02

Tom Keating :
September 8, 2005 12:03 PM

I hear ya Dav. (Dave?) I normally do keep politics out of my blog unless of course I'm using a funny political metaphor within a technology blog post.

However, most bloggers do like to post some "personal" blog posts so their readers can better relate to the bloggers and it adds some personality to the blog. Thus, I figured a book review of something I just read would be OK. I've seen other technology & VoIP blogs talk about the NY Mets, football season, their vacations, etc.

I wouldn't just speak about politics for the sake of just discussing politics in my blog. There are plenty of political blogs out there for that.

My next book review will be less controversial, I'm reading a book on pregnancy. Then again, a male reviewing a book on pregnancy? That might upset some of my female audience, i.e. "What the heck do you know about pregnancy unless you've been there."

Hmm, reminds me of Rambo in First Blood:
Calling me baby killer and all kinds of vile cr-p!
Who are they to protest me?! Who are they?! Unless they've been me and been there and know what the hell they're yelling about!

Maybe I will stick to technology book reviews after all. : )

Fitch :
September 9, 2005 9:51 PM

Thanks for the tip on another source. I've been writing about how the modern Democratic party's agenda is derived from communist ideal-ism. I will be sure to check out this book. Very well written review.

Randell Jesup :
September 12, 2005 11:20 AM

The person who made the distinction (that Horowitz glosses over I assume) between "Left" and "extreme left" has it correct. I know a large number of leftists (not to mention democrats, which are far from synonomous with "left"), and not a single one voiced anything like what Horowitz implies is the norm - support for radical islam. Hell, I don't know one that "hates America"; quite a few that hate W, but none that hate America.

There's also the assumption there (and in your comment) that Democrats == leftists, with the exception you added for "moderate" democrats. If you're using Horowitz' definition of 'leftist', there are very few in the democratic party. The extreme leftists have been ignored for a LONG time by the party, and finally in 2000 started leaving for the Green Party (not that even they are as extreme as the people Horowitz apparently quotes).

I personally once was a moderate (socially liberal) connecticut republican (back in the 70's, until the social conservatives forced Anderson out and started on the rest of them (Weicker, etc)). Seemingly without changing any of my positions, I find myself now a full-bore Democrat. The parties have shifted (or rotated if you will) over time. My inlaws vote democrat but think they're all spineless for not standing up to the republicans more.

(continued in next post)

Randell Jesup :
September 12, 2005 11:39 AM

(continued)

Horowitz (like Nader) has always been primarily a self-promoter; he's been out of the limelight for a while before this.

And he's not a liberal or progressive; he's actually been associated with the Republicans and the Right for quite a while. I'll quote it, but please read this page - there's a lot more there:

http://www.guerrillanews.com/articles/article.php?id=1010

(quote)
In 2000, leading Republican Congressman, Majority Whip Tom DeLay distributed a pamphlet to all his Republican colleagues entitled The Art of Political War: How Republicans Can Fight to Win. Its author David Horowitz writes, “Politics is war conducted by other means. In political warfare you do not fight just to prevail in an argument, but to destroy the enemy’s fighting ability…In political wars, the aggressor usually prevails." (end quote)

Randell Jesup :
September 12, 2005 12:00 PM

Personal Disclosure:

I volunteered for a congressional candidate in a tight race (tightest in the country) last year. Lois Murphy is a fairly moderate democrat, formerly ran Gov. Rendell's compaign locally, worked in the Justice Dept's Civil Devision, and was head of Pennsylvania NARAL. The Republicans ran smear ads (repeatedly, saturating the airwaves and telephone lines with "push-polls") against her, accusing her of supporting the t a l i b a n and abuse (actually worse, but I think the filters here block the word) of women all because she accepted donations from Move On. And it worked. She lost by 6000 votes (3500 switching, 1%, would have swung it).

On that same webpage there's an account about this same race.

p.s. I know some of the people in Bush's crowd personally; I went to school with Jim Baker's son; my uncle was a classmate of G.H.W. Bush for 13 years and roomed with him at Andover. (My uncle was a lifelong Republican; P-51 fighter pilot over Germany, stock broker, police commissioner in New Canaan for many years to keep busy, etc. He has now switched to independent and campaigned actively against Bush.)

John Seeley :
September 12, 2005 12:01 PM

>And he's not a liberal or progressive; he's actually been associated with the Republicans and the Right for quite a while. I'll quote it, but please read this page - there's a lot more there:

I think Tom's point and whole theme of his book review was that Horowitz WAS a liberal and then became a Republican.

How better to know why enemy than to formerly be thy enemy? It certainly puts an entirely different perspective on things since he has been on both sides of the political fence.

I don't think the majority of Democrats are "extreme left" but the extreme left sure does scream the loudest - drowning out all moderate Democrat voices - both the citizenry and Congress. It's sad what the extreme left has done to the Democratic Party. They may be great fund raisers, but they are helping to lose more elections than anything the Republicans are doing.

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

VoIP & Gadgets Blog

Unholy Alliance - Radical Islam and the American Left

Trackback Pings

Comments to Unholy Alliance - Radical Islam and the American Left

Recent Entries

Latest Whitepapers

Blogroll & Links

VoIP & Gadgets Blog Home Page

Categories

Recent Comments

Archives