Islamic deja vu (Dems repeat their Vietnam betrayal in Iraq/Iran)

The Washington Times ^ | May 23, 2007 | Arnaud de Borchgrave

[Yardstick]

Karl Marx said that nations would pass through a socialist stage on their way to communism. Thus Fonda was echoing Marx, who was a communist. Perhaps you’ve heard of him.

In America communists aren’t able to practice communism, because the government doesn’t own the means of production. But this doesn’t mean that the communists here aren’t communists. It just means they’re frustrated communists.

In this way they’re a little like Marx and his friend Frederick Engels, who lived fairly bourgeois lives in 19th century England. Marx worked at a museum if memory serves. He also was supported by Engels, whose family was very wealthy thanks to the businesses they owned. Now you, being so very strict with your categories, would probably deny that Marx and Engels were communists, right? After all, what communist lives off his family’s (or his friend’s family’s) capitalist profits? Right? But this would be silly wouldn’t it, being that Marx and Engels were communism’s founders and all.

You could also turn the tables and look at it from the other side. Were Soviet dissidents like Solzinitzen and Sharansky not really liberal reformers since they probably held jobs at state-owned businesses and participated, at least in the day to day sense, in the Soviet communist system? Were they really communists and not believers in liberty? You would have to say yes.

By your ultra-rigid thinking, Jane Fonda, who prayed for communism and wished to see it realized in the world, wasn’t really a communist, while guys like Sharansky, who hated communism, were the true communists.

Do you see the problem with this?

Getting back to your friend Jane, the fact is that Fonda was a communist during the 60s when she was helping to lead the protest movement. It’s a similar thing today. The intellectual core of the anti-war movement is full of people who are literally communists. Granted those core people are surrounded by a large herd of liberal useful idiots who are not communists. But it’s the core that leads the way and sets the pace, so they’re important and it’s important to recognize who they are.

***...except for them bad, us good.***

Uh oh, moral relatism. So you’re a lib then, correct?

If so, this is pretty much all I need to know in order to understand why you’re so confused about this stuff.

[Yardstick]

relatism = relativism