Replies

Paris has always been a hotbed for Communism. They teach the most brutal brand as practiced by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Ho. Their strategy can be summarized as , "Come into my parlor said the spider to the fly."

In 1968 the Vietcong were wiped out during the Tet Offensive. But the North Vietnamese kept the fiction alive by ....

The leftist activists and the MSM created and perpetuated the myth that the U.S. had suffered a terrible defeat rather than a resounding victory. Rather than correct the record, the "best and the brightest" in Johnson's administration, most of whom he kept from the Kennedy administration, were secretly supporting the enemy, not unlike the collusion with Russia during the FDR era.

During this period, many American leftists openly supported a Communist takeover in Southeast Asia. Among the most notable spokespeople of this position was the popular actress Jane Fonda and her husband Tom Hayden, whose public comments were unambiguous in their expressions of contempt for America and sympathy for the Communists. On November 21, 1970, Fonda told a large University of Michigan audience, "If you understood what Communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that we would some day become Communist."[11] At Duke University, she elaborated, "I, a socialist, think that we should strive toward a socialist society, all the way to Communism." The dual villains of Southeast Asian conflicts were, in her view, "U.S. imperialism" and "a white man’s racist aggression."[12]

We are witnessing a rerun of that now. The left is mounting the same campaign, with many of the same characters like Fonda, Kerry, Kennedy, and Hillary (whose inter circle still includes Ickes, Bloomingthal, Lake, etc.) at the forefront. They are banking on short memories, rewritten history in our schools and universities, and the efforts of activists and the MSM to pull it off.

This is what is promised:

From the moment it ascended to power, the Khmer Rouge characterized its newfound preeminence as a turning point in human history. "The Khmer revolution has no predecessors," said the party leaders. "What we are trying to bring about has never been accomplished at any time in history."[17]

This is what is delivered:

Pol Pot was prepared to pay any price to realize his goal; his currency of choice would prove to be the rivers of tears and torrents of blood flowing from the broken spirits and bodies of his own people. The result would be one of the most pitiable chapters of human suffering in the recorded history of mankind.

The infirmed were simply permitted to die unattended and uncomforted; they were considered "useless mouths" that could only consume but could not produce, and thus their deaths were welcomed by the Khmer Rouge.[33]

Terry Shiavo?

In short, people were turned into beasts of burden; the idea that human life had any special value distinguishing it from that of a goat or a spider was dismissed as a sentimental absurdity. "Losing you is not a loss," went one popular adage, "and keeping you is no specific gain."

Abortion?

People were forced to repress their personalities entirely; their individual character traits were deemed inconsequential....All traces of human creativity, ingenuity, and individualism utterly vanished from the country.

Political correctness?

As Cambodian life and culture collapsed under the weight of Pol Pot’s disastrous policies, a key tactic of the Khmer Rouge was to keep people ignorant of all ideas contrary to its own dogmas.

The MSM and the Democrats?

While Pol Pot was carrying out his genocide, numerous American leftists functioned as his apologists. Notable among these was the American-hating MIT professor Noam Chomsky, who viewed Pol Pot as a revolutionary hero. When news of the "killing fields" became increasingly publicized, Chomsky’s faith in Pol Pot could not be shaken. He initially tried to minimize the magnitude of Pol Pot’s atrocities (saying that he had killed only "a few thousand people at most").[64] He suggested that the forced expulsion of the population from Phnom Penh was most likely necessitated by the failure of the 1976 rice crop. Wrote Chomsky, "the evacuation of Phnom Penh, widely denounced at the time and since for its undoubted brutality, may actually have saved many lives."[65] In a 1977 article in The Nation, Chomsky attacked those witnesses and writers who were shedding ever-brighter rays of light on Pol Pot’s holocaust; he accused them of trying to spread anti-communist propaganda. In 1980, when it was indisputable that a huge proportion of Cambodia’s population had died at the hands of the Khmer Rouge, Chomsky again blamed an unfortunate failure of the rice crop rather than systematic genocide. He also quibbled about the number of dead, saying that most estimates were inflated, and that the actual number could not have exceeded a million. Finally, he concluded that whatever had in fact occurred in Cambodia, the U.S. was to blame.[66]

Sound familiar? Chomsky is once again preeminent among the left.

Contemptuous of religion in general, Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge targeted people of faith aggressively.

Sound familiar? Are the perpetrators of threads about evolution versus creation or ID precursors of this? Just a question.

In an interview given shortly before his death, Pol Pot claimed that he had never intended to kill so many people; that the calamities brought about by his regime were the result of his inexperience in government and his inability to rein in the zealous movement that he had started; and that all his actions had been "[f]or the love of the nation and the people."[91]

Typical unintended consequences of leftist policies and the "It's not my fault" excuse?

It should be noted that the atrocities of Pol Pot were not at all unique among Communist revolutions. His extermination campaign had many parallels with those of Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, who between them may have killed 100 million people who stood between them and the progressive future. In each case, there was the systematic extermination of the class enemy as they sought to wipe clean the slate of the past and usher in the dawn of the new; in each case there was the creation of vast slave networks and concentration camps; the widespread use of torture; the implementation of crackpot economic theories inspired by Marx, the paranoid perception that enemies of the regime lurked everywhere; the determination to stamp out every last dissident, both real and imagined; the designation of particular classes as being "enemies of the people," unworthy of the most rudimentary human rights; the complete subjugation of the individual; an omnipotent state that sought to control every imaginable aspect of people’s lives; and the banishment of all spiritual rites and beliefs, effectively making the dictator the only "deity." In short, the abominations of Pol Pot were not an aberration, but a culmination of the Communist fantasy, a fulfillment of the long, grotesque tradition of the movement for "social justice."

"If you understood what Communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that we would some day become Communist."[11]

Are these the people we are going to listen to? The coming elections will determine how many of us do.

I know that you know all this, DoughtyOne. I simply used you as a jumping off point to pontificate.