Paradise Lost; Why the Left Loves Muhammad

American Thinker ^ | January 27, 2007 | Timothy Birdnow

[neverdem]

"For who can yet believe, though after loss,
that all these puissant legions,
whose exile hath emptied Heaven,
shall fail to reascend Self-raised,
and repossess their native seat?"

John Milton
Paradise Lost
Book one, verses 631-634

Conservatives seem baffled by the animosity held by liberals towards Christians and Jews.  Christianity requires the believer submit to authority, accept the rule of government, be charitable to his fellow; in short, be a model citizen.  Ditto the Jews, who held these requirements even longer than the Christians.  Why are liberals so hostile to both? For that matter, why do liberals seem so smitten with that 7th century holdover known as Islam?  Why do those on the Left seem less than eager to defend our freedom and way of life from the ravages of Islamic Jihad?

To understand this, it is necessary to examine the intellectual underpinnings of modern Liberal thought. We must begin with Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Godfather of modern liberalism, in his treatise The Social Contract:

"MAN is born free; and everywhere he is in chains."

Why?  George Bush, of course, but also because

"It was in these circumstances that Jesus came to set up on earth a spiritual kingdom, which, by separating the theological from the political system, made the State no longer one, and brought about the internal divisions which have never ceased to trouble Christian peoples. As the new idea of a kingdom of the other world could never have occurred to pagans, they always looked on the Christians as really rebels, who, while feigning to submit, were only waiting for the chance to make themselves independent and their masters, and to usurp by guile the authority they pretended in their weakness to respect. This was the cause of the persecutions.

"What the pagans had feared took place. Then everything changed its aspect: the humble Christians changed their language, and soon this so-called kingdom of the other world turned, under a visible leader, into the most violent of earthly despotisms.

"Several peoples, however, even in Europe and its neighborhood, have desired without success to preserve or restore the old system: but the spirit of Christianity has everywhere prevailed. The sacred cult has always remained or again become independent of the Sovereign, and there has been no necessary link between it and the body of the State. Mahomet held very sane views, and linked his political system well together; and, as long as the form of his government continued under the caliphs who succeeded him, that government was indeed one, and so far good."

So, Christianity and Judaism, by giving the World Separation of Church and State, destroyed the old pagan order and splintered the power of the collective will. To those who believe in this collective and the exercise of the will of society over the individual, there can be no worse crime. The results were ‘the most violent of earthly despotisms' while the Islamic world, that model of theocratic benevolence, offered a government ‘so far good'".

(It is ironic that the Left would use that very Christian concept of separation between Church and State as a tool to eliminate the author of this division.)

Those who would revolutionize society, who would remake America in their own neo-pagan, atheistic mold, find the fundamental weakening of the power of the State intolerable (since it is only by that power that their will can triumph), and would prefer to institute a system more akin to that of Muhammad.  They admire Islam for maintaining the ancient regime, although they ultimately plan to displace Allah with a Man-centered deity.

Of course, the liberal also hates being constrained in any way, and traditional morality flows, as they perceive it, from the Church down. By raising Islam as an alternative to Christendom, the liberal hopes to bludgeon the keepers of morality. Islam can help with the dirty work of crushing the usurper ideologies of Christianity and Judaism, and then, of course, their turn will come.

Then, too, we can look to Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, who believed not in the rationality of Christendom, but in a mythical Greek paradise ruled by "Dionysian" creative forces - emotionalism and irrationality.  These forces were vanquished by the rise of Socratic intellectualism and the coming of Christianity. Nietzsche argued further against a fixed reality in his unpublished work `On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense', claiming that what we think of as truth is merely a convention agreed upon by society, thus freeing Man from the tyranny of concrete reality. 

This wild spirit, this vision of the anti-mind slithers throughout liberal thought and can be seen in numerous left-wing positions; being soft on crime, spiritual environmentalism, their admiration for dictators such as Castro and Mao, and in their current love affair with radical Islam.  Terrorism is the ultimate irrational force, a violence aimed at random destruction and mayhem.  It holds kinship with the bloodlust of the Marxists and Nazis, and, as such, is a ``creative force`` by Nietzschean standards. (Oh, and Nietzsche also hated Christians and Jews, and was a prime inspiration for National Socialism; copies of Thus Spoke Zarathustra were issued to German soldiers during World War One, gaining the interest of a certain corporal...)

A return to the "good old days" of the 7th Century, to a time before paradise was lost to the tyranny of Judeo-Christian intellectualism seems preferable to modern liberals, who have flatly rejected Hobbes` view of primitive life as solitary poor, hard, nasty, brutish, and short.  We especially see this in the neo-paganism of the environmentalist movement; they dream of a lost pastoral Eden where mankind could be free of the drudgery of industrial life and the endless intellectual toil. A great many on the Left wish to overthrow the current order, replacing it with this twisted Nietzschean/Rousseauian mirage stolen from the Book of Genesis.

Of course, to those who do not believe in a concrete reality, as many liberals do not, one system is as good as another, and we have no right to judge the Moslem on how he conducts his affairs. Since the Jihadist's reality is equally valid as the Westerner's, we are practicing moral Imperialism if we force our Judeo-Christian moral law on them.  This is exacerbated by the fact that they are Third World peoples; many liberals, deep in their hearts, are pulling for what they perceive as the underdog - in this case the terrorist murdering thug-at the expense of their own culture.  A racist, sexist, homophobic, power-mad society such as ours deserves to be taught a lesson! Even if the teacher is racist, sexist, homophobic, and power-mad, they aren't Western, Christian, or White!  They aren't Dick Cheney! Power to the people!

There is a strain of masochism involved here as well; the white liberal perceives himself as having unfairly benefited from his station in life, having lived well on the backs of the poor.  Somebody must be punished for this! He will flagellate himself in his mind, and will support those who will punish his country, because justice demands retribution, and America has lived far too well. If we must endure terrorist attacks to atone for our sins, so be it!  Perhaps we should do the decent thing and die; let others have their turn at the table.

Here Socialist thinking comes into play; there is only so much to go around, and we have been hogging it for too long.  For those in the Arab world to live better, we must exit the stage. It's only fair!

The Liberal ultimately believes that the culture we have built, the triumph of Judeo-Christian values, is diseased and must be erased.  If Islam can do their work for them, so be it.  Islam, like the State under Marx, will ultimately wither away, and the paradise which predated Christ and Abraham can be restored.  At least they like to think so.

Much like Milton's fallen angels, they believe they have been dispossessed of their rightful station by a tyrannical spiritual entity, and they are determined to repossess their native seat-the fallen pastoral paradise promised them by Rousseau and Nietzsche-via the triumph of their Collective Will. This is their prime mover, their principle motivation. It is why they were so enraged at the loss of their political power, and why they hate the ``usurper`` George W. Bush; they were driven out before they could attain paradise.  This concept-lifted from Christian doctrine-that History has an ultimate end in a Humanistic Eden cannot be overstressed; the Left is consumed with this.  They feel that, by losing their political power, they have been cast into the Lake of Fire.

"They, looking back, all the eastern side beheld
of Paradise, so late their happy seat,

waved over by that flaming brand, the gate

with dreadful faces throng`d, and fiery arms."

Paradise Lost
(Book XVII, verses 642-644)

Timothy Birdnow blogs at Birdblog.

[Basheva]

The answer is simple. Whilst Christianity and Judaism do require one to be a law abiding citizen - that only applies to obedience to a righteous government - not a despot or wicked government.

The left wants absolute obedience to government no matter what- i.e. as in China or the Soviet Union.

All private initiative is to be given up to government.

Christianity and Judaism, while relying upon G-D also require that one be responsible for oneself as well as each other.

The first thing the left/socialists/progressives/maoists/stalinists/democrats/liberals want to do is to undermine religion with the end result of abolishing religion.

That will leave government in full control.

They don't want a higher authority than government.

[edpc]

that all these puissant legions......

I know the word puissant is French for powerful. Oddly, it's not the first thing that comes to mind when I see it, however. I'm not sure if it's due to a historic opinion of French soldiers, or perhaps something else....

[NavVet]

"The Liberal ultimately believes that the culture we have built, the triumph of Judeo-Christian values, is diseased and must be erased. If Islam can do their work for them, so be it. Islam, like the State under Marx, will ultimately wither away."

This is the most true statement in the article. The left believes it can enter into an unholy alliance with Islam much like the West did with Stalin in WWII, and once the common enemy, in this case capitalism, Christianity, Marriage, Western Civilization in general, is defeated, they will be left in peace by their new-found jihadist friends. I'm sure they even believe the Islamo-fascists will even join them in the workers' paradise. They have no idea how wrong they are. Once the Jihadist are done with us, the left will find the knife at their throats as well.

[IronJack]

the most violent of earthly despotisms.

Yes, because prior to the ascendancy of Christianity, despots were unheard of. None of the Pharoahs or Greek kings or Persian rulers or Roman emperors ever committed any kind of offense against their citizens. They were all benevolent, compassionate leaders in the mold of Marcus Aurelius.

Then there were the so-called "barbarians," those nature-loving tribes in Gaul, Germania, Britannia ... You know, the ones famed in song and story as fun-loving burghers who occasionally clashed with other villagers or were forced to defend themselves against invaders? The ones led by Atilla, who called himself "The Scourge of God?" And how 'bout them Vikings? (Not the Minnesota football team; the less said about THEM, the better!) Now THERE was a loving, caring group of seafarers. Not once did they ever raid an English coastal village and butcher every single man, woman, child, and goat. No sir. And let's not forget about Genghis Khan, whose army of Mongols was known as a roving band of do-gooders who rode quietly into neighboring towns and helped citizens build schools and hospitals.

All the atrocities in history emerged after Christianity cast its evil spell over utopian, pastoral Europe.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

Good article. Many salient points. I especially appreciate the idea that the neo-pagans (environmentalists) are trying to "return" us to a state they never really believed existed: the Garden of Eden. Thanks for posting.

I posted this the other day, one writer's analysis of the pathological hatred of Pres. Bush (and conservatives). It agrees with this article.

http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=13312

[goldstategop]

The Left admires Islam because it seeks a return to the Garden Of Eden. Descriptions of a garden of ease and comfort are vivid images in the Koran. Leaving aside the less attractive features of Islam, the idea of an other worldly paradise tugs at many people. The difference the Left has with Islam is it wishes to build that paradise in the here and now through socialism and what unites them is a common loathing of Western civilization and its emphasis on a realist as opposed to a romantic view of the future.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Brilliant]

I think it's simpler than this. The left bows to authority. They don't consider Christians and Jews to have authority because Christianity and Judaism work within the law, and liberals write the laws. In their minds, they have authority over Christians and Jews.

Muslims, however, do not work within the laws. They simply tell you the way it will be, and if you don't agree, then they kill you. In effect, Muslims have authority over liberals, and that is why liberals bow to Mecca.

[leilani]

Agreed - it's essentially the suicidal nihilist's version of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

[PGalt]

Lesser anti-truth, anti-freedom, anti-individual, anti-life collectives will join forces with the greatest collective in the history of civilization. These gangs will attack-destroy the smallest minority - the individual, (his) life everlasting - his family, and any positive collective (The United States of America, etc.) which promotes this bedrock of civilization.

[Fitzcarraldo]

If Islam can do their work for them, so be it. Islam, like the State under Marx, will ultimately wither away, and the paradise which predated Christ and Abraham can be restored. At least they like to think so.

The problem is, all records and practitioners of liberal thought will be erased from the face of the Earth if Islam has its way.

[neverdem]

"If they ever were to succeed in implementing their tyranny, we are witnessing, prophetically, only a portion of the rage and vengeance they would unleash upon the populace should we dare not to submit to their desires."

Thanks for the link.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

I still don't know why the left loves the proponents of the ideology of death and destruction.
Perhaps it's because of some similarities.
1. Both want the destruction of western civilization, including Christianity and Judaism.
2. Both are totalitarian systems that punish dissenters.
3. Both are irrational, unreasonable, and lead to contradictions.
4. Both want the establishment of a paradise on earth. One wants a communist paradise, the other wants a religious fundamentalist regime.
5. Both lead to poverty and misery for the masses.
6. Both concentrate power and money in the hands of a few.
7. Both function best with a dictator at the head.
8. Both feel that it is Ok to reach your goals By Any Means Necessary.

I've probably missed a few. Can anyone add some?

[Wilhelm Tell]

Great article. The left's problems with Western civilization go deeper than Marxism (although that is a major factor). The left is in revolt against the Enlightenment (and ultimately Greek and Roman thought) as well. I think Rousseau was mostly reacting against Enlightenment rationalism, so every savage is "noble" and every criminal is the victim of the artificial constructs of an "unfair" (read: rational, law-based) society. You see how easy it is to blend Rousseau's irrationalism with pseudo-Marxism?

The left is fundamentally anti-rational. Although leftists do use the word "science" from time to time, they want to use science much as the Nazis did -- twisted science put to brutish ends and at the same time constrained and empowered by a totalitarian ideology. Unable to distinguish between reality and fantasy, contemporary leftists as often as not go for pesudo-science (Al Gore's theearthismeltingbecauseofcapitalism, the world as "Gaia", cloning humans as the key to immortality and so on).

[achilles2000]

This is exactly right. The article intellectualizes the problem beyond the actual beliefs of 99.999% of the members of the left. Their actual consciousness is more accurately reflected in your post. I would add, however, that as the author points out, the left does believe that that they can bring about a humanistic millenium. They are also all extraordinarily narcissitic - they all secretly worship themselves. This is why Christianity s is blasphemy to leftists - it denies the government's and their status as gods.

[Vision Thing]

Once the Jihadist are done with us, the left will find the knife at their throats as well.

Crazed-out muzzies vs. the wussy libs: That's gonna be a lop-sided fight in which many libs will literally lose their heads.

[Wilhelm Tell]

I still don't know why the left loves the proponents of the ideology of death and destruction.

A century ago, the left thought that communism, because it was so progressive, would first take over the most advanced countries. The standard Marxist view was that societies would progress from feudalism to capitalism to socialism and finally, to communism. When communism instead took over relatively feudalistic countries like Russia and not advanced countries like France and Britain, this presented a problem. To explain this, the communists had to invent a "theory of imperialism" -- the advanced countries were able to avoid communism because they exploited the poor countries. This means that the "imperialist" countries have to be essentially destroyed and then communism will emerge from the wreckage.

What does this have to do with the left's attraction to Islamofascism? Everything. Here we have backward societies attacking modern, "imperialist" societies. The terrorists are merely "noble savages" who are setting things right by trying to destroy civilization. After the Islamofascists destroy everything, the leftists imagine that conditions will be right for them to establish communism. This sort of thing makes perfect sense to the pseudo-intellectuals who embrace communism and Islamofascism. All you need is to be ignorant of history and economics and be brainwashed to hate Western civilization. There are plenty of people like that.

[Gritty]

The Left admires Islam because it seeks a return to the Garden Of Eden.

Frankly, I think the Left admires Islam because it promises unlicensed sexual promiscuity in Heaven,... if there is a heaven.

If you're a Leftist, just imagine,... a future world where all your lusts are celebrated and indulged - just like the one you're in now (except for all those spoilsport Christians and Jews). The Left figures Islam has the right idea, but maybe not the only way to get there.

But why quibble about details? These can be negotiated with people of like faith!

So, it's no wonder the Left and Islam are constitutionally a$$hole buddies!

[Democratshavenobrains]

Its not that lefties love Islam. Its just that they don't care about it and don't think it warrants one second of distraction from their quest of global socialism and demonizing white Republicans.

[NicknamedBob]

"Christianity and Judaism work within the law, and liberals write the laws. In their minds, they have authority over Christians and Jews. Muslims, however, do not work within the laws. ... Muslims have authority over liberals, and that is why liberals bow to Mecca."

Aha! Ordinary pack behavior. The Liberal Betas perceive the Islamofascists as Alpha males, and cower in their presence. The anit-imperialist dogs.

Another brilliant point, Brilliant! (And Islam really isn't "submission," is it?)