Jihad and the American Left

American Thinker | J.R. Dunn | Nov. 7, 2007

A few weeks ago a meeting occurred between Iranian mullahs and assorted international left-wing figures in hopes of generating some sort of “revolutionary solidarity”. The guests of honor were the children of Che Guevera, Aleida and Camilo. The attempt ended in unintentional comedy when one of the mullahs present began to praise Che for his hatred for the Soviet Union, his loathing of socialism and communism, and his “godliness”.

When Aleida Guevara protested, the Iranians threw both her and her brother out, and the affair fell apart.

This isn’t the first time the Iranians have attempted a hookup with the international left. Ahmadenijad has been visited recently by both Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega. The results were not all that more impressive than those of the conference, Chavez being a clown and Danny Ortega’s glory days long behind him, despite his recent presidential victory. But it does clearly show how seriously the Iranians take the Western left, and how much they would value a relationship.

No Americans were present at the conference, no doubt due to ingrained Iranian hostility. But the question naturally arises: how open would the American left be to an alliance with the Iranian mullahs, and beyond them, the movement in which they play such a large role, Islamofascism?

At first glance, it might appear unlikely, the Jihadis being noted for such non-progressive activities as oppression of women, persecution of minorities, and the execution of homosexuals. But that kind of thing has never stopped the left before – their sole criterion has always been whether or not the other party is useful. It can safely be assumed that the mullahs feel the same way.

Up until now, the left has satisfied itself in responding to the War on Terror by attacking government actions, employing the Vietnam myth, and inciting as much domestic paranoia as humanly possible. But they’re getting more frantic. Time has passed, and they have failed to generate anything like a mass movement, while recent successes in guarantee they never will. There’s plenty of precedent for left-wing support of Islamic radicals, scattered and sporadic, but undeniable all the same. Recall Michael Moore’s characterization of Al-Queda in Iraq as “Minutemen.” Consider the left’s defense of John Walker Lindh. Consider the self-styled “human shields” who raced to protect Saddam Hussein. Or the effort that has been put into undermining U.S. programs to combat the terrorist threat, such as rendition, wiretapping, and profiling.

How large a step does it take to get from where the left is now to where the Jihadis would like them to be? And would they dare take that step?

more . . .

Comments

  1. Dean Scourtes says:

    ChrisB – What is your motivation for posting this article, and how is it related to Orthodoxy?

    Did you notice that the headline “Jihad and the American left” is contradicted by the content of the article which states, “No Americans were present at the conference”? The article provides a clear example of the fallacious debating technique known as “guilt by association”.
    http://www.opifexphoenix.com/reasoning/fallacies/guiltbyassoc.htm

    (Edited by moderator due to large off-topic quoted content.) Note to Dean, feel free to stop visiting and posting here if you don’t like the articles posted. I’m sure Al Franken, AlGore, Michael Moore and Hillary Clinton would love having you post on their blogs.

  2. Mr. Scourtes,

    Perhaps he was pointing out that politics (and political allegiances) makes strange bedfellows, no?

  3. Michael Bauman says:

    No, Cepik, I think he is pointing out the propensity of “liberal” American parties to support the cause of totalitarianism abroad while loadly screaming for unfettered “individual rights” at home in the name of a secular ummah.