![]() |
|
![]()
October 29, 2008
Ideological heirs
During the discussion of Ayers' and the Weather Underground's genocidal plan to murder 25 million Americans, it occurred to me that focusing on tactics (like terrorism and murder) tends to sideline the murderous ideology that drives them. In what I think is an attempt to frame the debate away from ideology, typical "fact check" discussions of Bill Ayers downplay his ideology, with words like "communism" not being mentioned. From the Obama campaign "Fact Check" site: "Is Barack Obama consorting with a radical? Hardly. Ayers is nothing more than an aging lefty with a foolish past who is doing good. And while, yes, Obama is friendly with Ayers, it appears to be only in the way of two community activists whose circles overlap."Here's the WaPo's "Fact Checker" The FactsOther accounts are similar. What is being omitted (systematically, in my view) is that Ayers was -- and is -- a devout believer in to the most murderous ideology known to man. This was highlighted by the recent revelation that he and others sat around planning the murder of 25 million Americans - for the crime of disagreeing with that ideology! In the Communist ideological context, "reeducation" is simply a euphemism for making people agree under threat of death. Those who continue to disagree are simply murdered. Yet Communism -- and Communists -- excuse such murders as being something other than murder. They are "liquidations" or the application of "revolutionary justice" to "enemies" of "the people." Unfortunately, Ayers only stands out because of his involvement in terrorist acts. My concern is that the focus on terrorism misses this larger point, which is that his form of terrorism is incidental to and was always subordinate to the ideology of communism. Terrorism was but a tactic, and the fact that he does not currently engage in terrorist acts is tactical. His ideology has not changed in the least. So, the focus on Ayers' past terrorism (which must come as a relief to communists in general) avoids focusing on his past communism as well as his present communism, of which he is proud to this day. Here's Ayers on the past: Is one of those regrets that I took extreme measures against the United States at a time of tremendous crisis? No it is not. I don't regret that. The people of the world are being exploited and oppressed and militarized by the great imperialist powers, led by the United States. That is the situation today in my view.And Ayers on the present (from 2006): Is one of those regrets that I took extreme measures against the United States at a time of tremendous crisis? No it is not. I don't regret that. The people of the world are being exploited and oppressed and militarized by the great imperialist powers, led by the United States. That is the situation today in my view.Terrorism is in Ayers' mind excused, just as murder is excused if committed in furtherance of communism. Hence the picture of mass murderer Che Guevara is proudly displayed for the world to see at Ayers' web site. Personally, I think it's sickening. The only thing I can say in Ayers defense is that he's within his First Amendment rights in glorifying murderers. Yet Ayers and his supporters would disagree with my viewpoint. To him and those who think like him, Guevara is not a murderer, because his murders were committed in furtherance of his ideology. It will never be (and can never be) admitted by Ayers or his supporters that their ideology itself is murderous, and that communism cannot be imposed on people without murder, which of course it never has been. Ayers is now a teacher, and as he subordinated his terrorist acts to the greater picture of communism, he now sees his educational efforts the same way. Notice the way he conflates his past terrorism into merely a teaching opportunity in this YouTube interview with Chavista comrades (in front of the murderer's icon, of course). Via Ed Morrissey who excerpts some pertinent quotes: 3:20 - The particular crisis we faced with the Vietnam War was a crisis that called on us to escalate, to resist in more intense and, and, uh, uh, in more extreme ways. But one way of looking at it is that the Weather Underground was a great teaching moment. And, to the extent that we didn't fully realize what we were trying to do, we were bad teachers, and to the extent that we did good things, we were good teachers.Speaking of Guevara, if Investors Business Daily is right, his house was festooned with pictures of the murderer (I know it's getting tedious; perhaps I should switch to "dispenser of revolutionary justice") when Obama was there for his career-launching event: Obama says he barely knows him, but in the years when he was meeting and serving together on the Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Fund, as well as launching his career with a fundraiser in Ayers' Che Guevara-festooned house, Ayers made at least four Marxist pilgrimages to Caracas to praise Chavez's dictatorial regime.So, what's up with that? Why would a man who is now running for president launch his career at an event where pictures of a Communist mass murderer were proudly displayed? Again, except for mentions like that ,Ayers' murderous ideology -- Communism -- is largely overlooked, while the punditry focus on what was a tactic -- terrorism. Either Communism doesn't matter or people are afraid to use the word. What concerns me is that the focus on Ayers the terrorist turns inevitably turns into a debate over how old Obama was at the time of the bombings, how close his relationship was with Ayers, whether G. Gordon Liddy is comparable to Ayers, etc. and avoids any mention of communism, much less a serious discussion of whether it is appropriate for a president who (unless I am mistaken) sees nothing wrong with working with communists, and dispensing money to communists. One of the lesser known communists who managed to receive nearly $2 million from Ayers and Obama is a guy named Mike Klonsky. Andrew McCarthy (God bless him) has written a long, detailed piece about Klonsky, and he stresses what I have tried to stress in this post -- that the debate over terrorist tactics (and whether they are repented) avoids any focus on the murderous ideology behind the tactics: With what little media oxygen there has been sucked out by the largely uninformative discussion of Ayers (and his wife and Weather Underground ally, Bernadine Dohrn) -- in which the mantra "unrepentant terrorist" has been a pale substitute for the critical matter of the Ayers's ideology that Obama plainly shares -- much has been missed. Significantly, that includes another key Obama contact, Mike Klonsky.Did he share their ideology? Does he? Does anyone know? As far as I can tell, the only hint of a discussion by Obama of whether he shares their ideology was the description of Ayers as "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Does that mean only irregularly? posted by Eric on 10.29.08 at 10:58 AM
Comments
My impression of Liddy is that he's become something of a libertarian in recent years. If you want to look at neo-Nazis, look to the Obama Thugocracy. As for the Messiah himself, we should recall the words of Napoleon, when he was considering the proposed promotion of one of his officers to the rank of general. The officers' peers praised his many virtues, but Napoleon said, "But is he lucky?" Obama is clearly the unluckiest guy in the world. Although I gather from the way his followers deny that he's a socialist--and why wouldn't we take these noble souls at their word?--that he must be some kind of libertarian; as surely his voting record and public pronunciamentoes attest, And yet this dogged fighter for freedom consistently finds himself in the company of hard-core collectivists. He even married one! I say a man with this enormously bad luck in his associates is too dangerous to be president. Biden has been warning us that if we elect Obama, there might be a new 9/1l; and it does look like Obama the Unlucky would attract such a disaster like a lightning-rod attracts lightning. Bilwick · October 29, 2008 4:30 PM Thank you for your website :) createmo · November 2, 2008 8:23 AM Post a comment |
|
April 2011
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
April 2011
March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 Sarah Hoyt Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
A knee sock jihad might be premature at this time
People Are Not Rational No Biorobots For Japan The Thorium Solution Radiation Detector From A Digital Camera Voter Fraud? This war of attrition is driving me bananas! Attacking Christianity is one thing, but must they butcher geometry? Are there trashy distinctions in freedom of expression? Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Other accounts are similar. What is being omitted (systematically, in my view) is that Ayers was -- and is -- a devout believer in to the most murderous ideology known to man
Don't like 1st amendment much? Whether Ayers subscribes to a murderous ideology is a non-issue. He is not running for any office.
But I bet if he did, the Republicans who bankrolled his stardom and road to respectability by giving him almost $50 millions, would again fund him :)
How is it that you support a neo-nazi fascist like G. Gordon Liddy, who happens to be a good friend of McCain?
Nazi murderous ideology, apparently is kosher to you.
Isn't it ironic, dontcha think?