Thursday, July 05, 2007

Every Nut Seems to Be Demanding Fascism... But, Who Plans on Delivering?

You know, I grew up watching the sci-fi movies that showed a future world where everyone lived in a semi-fascist state. I used to always wonder, "how did the subject civilization get to this point?" as the movies always took place after such a system had been established for a long time.

The obvious reasons for such a state of affairs would likely be based on the conclusions one might draw now from the increased attention on security. "How can you let Bush ruin our freedom?" they say. And yes, the police that would be required to maintain security might seem like a scary prospect, but it's the least likely to actually lead to a fascist superstate.

Everyone seems to be asking for some kind of fascism these days. The environmentalists want you to give up all of your technology and conveniences so that we can live in harmony with nature and stop the spread of evil global warming (they really mean capitalism). How do they propose to do this? By using legislation to limit what you do and how you do it. It would force an absolute lifestyle change, and those in power promoting it would be able to stay in power indefinitely based on the never-ending nature of the so-called threat (the very thing with which they use to persecute Bush regarding the War).

But even with their proclivity for a Stalinist "green" state, the environmentalists have nothing on Islamic fundamentalism when it comes to fascism. As was said in a comment to a previous post, the stated goal of Islam is world domination (I'm simplifying the language here, but ask any Muslim if Allah will tolerate a world with many faiths). The Islamo-fascists want to forcefully impose their will on you. The penalty for non-compliance is death. That's as close to good 'ole fashioned fascism as you can get.

Yet the people who whine about things like profiling act as if it is the end of the world. "Do you want Big Brother" watching over your shoulder?" they say. Well, given our choices, I'd say that being secure is a little more palatable. The fact that the only point of reference those opposed to increased security have is a work of fiction shows how little they actually know about the issue.

There are limits, of course. And luckily, no one at the Department of Homeland Security is advocating that you give up any of your personal freedoms to the degree in which Islamo-fascists and Environmental Fundamentalists demand. Yet, because of the political correctness that has been forced down our throats for generations, we are afraid to stand up against those who would do us harm because we are afraid of offending them! (if only they had such self-control...)

If we are to face down the real threat posed by Islamo-Fascism, it's time we elect leaders who take it seriously. Instead of accusing the President of being the enemy, these people ought to open their eyes and turn their attention to the actual enemies who want to kill us and remove the word "freedom" from our vocabularies - permanently.


Shafi said...

Dan, on Islam and other faiths, historically Islam has been the most tolerant of all three Abrahamhic faiths. When the crusaders were expelled from the holy land, one of the first acts was to invite the Jews and Christians back to Jerusalem. Some of the oldest communities of Jews live in North Africa where they were taken in after the inquisition. I read Frontpagemag, honestly a majority of it is sooo laughable, you can compare it to evangelical hate sites about LDS. They some how seem to connect every Muslim organization in America to the Brotherhood without even understanding the massive ideological differences between them and American Muslim Organizations, it is so silly, it is laughable. American Muslims are the most integrated into society in the whole western world, mainly professionals.

Conservative Futurist said...

I agree with you, Shafi. I am strictly speaking about radicals here. Heck, I am even more harsh when it comes to radical ex-Mormons who spend their entire lives badmouthing the LDS church. But that's a different issue.

Muslims have been very tolerant, historically (unless you count dhimmi status for non-believers as religion-sanctioned oppression). Unfortunately, without a Caliphate, modern Islam runs the gambit when it comes to political action... and it seems that the strongest willed get the most press.

When it comes to these radicals, the message is that its their way or the highway (to hell, via execution, in most cases). These are the guys I refer to when I use the term Islamo-fascists.