Sunday, November 04, 2007

The attempted Zionist destruction of the French left

A tour de force article on the attempted Zionist destruction of the French left by Diana Johnstone (emphasis in red; BHL is Bernard-Henri Lévy):

“Although the label ‘philosopher’ is overblown, the writer BHL does have, like anyone else, a personal philosophy. It starts with his view that ideas shape the world – for better or for worse. Mostly for the worse, it seems. Ideas can spring up virtually out of nothing, hence the need for constant vigilance. What he calls his ‘left’ loyalty has nothing to do with socio-economic relations, much less with  opposition to war. Rather, it is a matter of denunciation of crimes: the Dreyfus case, Vichy, various real or alleged ‘genocides’ It is based, as he points out in detail, on his own personal gallery of ‘images, events and reflexes’. Never analysis. He proceeds as a sort of Isaiah crying out in the wilderness, who has no need for modern tools of research and analysis.”

This is a consistent theme in the new Zionist-influenced ‘left’:  replace socio-economic critique with denunciation of selected racism and hate crimes.  Johnstone continues:

“The rejection of analysis is more than a rhetorical trick, it is at the very heart of the BHL world view. He is only one of the most sophisticated proponents of the present-day widespread conservative Jewish rejection of any attempt to explain historical events by material or political causes. This rejection of analysis is central to the religious attitude toward the Holocaust, or Shoah (that is, the Nazi massacre of the Jews understood in religious terms). For the defenders of this contemporary religion, it is wrong to seek material explanations for events that must remain ‘incomprehensible’ in their magnitude. The mere attempt to explain the rise of Hitler by such factors as the shock of Germany's humiliating defeat in 1918, the loss of territories, ruinous inflation, and the great depression, is rejected as ‘making excuses’. Any explanation other than eternal and recurrent hatred of the Jews may even be denounced as anti-Semitism.”

This, of course, is the hidden theme of all modern Zionism, that gentiles are all irrationally and irredeemably anti-Semitic.  Thus, the pressing need for an ark for the Jews (Greater Israel), and the need for constant deception of the gentiles.  More:

“In his chapter devoted to the ‘progressive’ future of anti-Semitism, BHL treats the latter as a sort of demon that prowls through history taking different disguises. It is a ‘long cry of hatred’ that pursues through the ages ‘the People of the Word’. It is not possible to ask ‘why?’ One must only ask ‘how?’

To that question, BHL has the answer. Anti-Semitism will make its next inevitable appearance by way of the left. On this subject, which interests him most keenly, he actually makes some observations that are not false. He implicitly recognizes one reality that many other commentators ignore, that is, that the Holocaust is the real functioning religion in Europe today. Or, as he puts it, the ‘religion of the epoch’ is ‘ever more clearly founded on those three solid pillars which are the cult of the victim, the taste for memory and reprobation of the wicked (triumphant antifascism, love for victims and the duty of memory).’ This being the case, he observes with alarm that a certain competition for victimhood is feeding resentment toward Jews for having ‘hoarded’ for themselves, ‘human compassion’ and ‘victim capital’ ‘Shoah business.’ ‘What is left for the genocide of the American Indians? I was asked one day by the anti-Semitic Indian leader Russell Means’, he writes. At this point, BHL even makes a rare mention of the Palestinians, whose main enemy is said by some to be ‘this uproar over the suffering of the Jewish people which drowns out their voices’ (pp 316-318).  BHL's response is simply to reiterate that the Shoah is indeed unique in history, adding that the Muslims were on the side of Hitler and thus not innocent victims of Zionism, and that such complaints are manifestations of the new anti-Semitism. This is consistent with the position that there can be no explanations for anti-Semitism other than the eternal nature of anti-Semitism itself. Above all, there can be no causes for which Jews themselves, in this case the State of Israel, might be in some way responsible.

Instead of analyzing, BHL prophesies. He sees the threat of the next wave of anti-Semitism in the union of ‘negationism, anti-Zionism and victim competition’. And what is to be done about it? More exhortations, and a new ‘fascist’ enemy to combat: ‘Islamofascism’ or, as he prefers to call it, ‘Fascislamism’.

There is actually a theme in modern Zionism that the Palestinians are just getting what they deserve, having given Hitler the idea for the Holocaust!

It is not a coincidence that BHL is on the ‘Islamofascist’ bandwagon.  It is also not a coincidence that all the destroyers of the modern left are Jews.  I remain convinced that the destruction of progressive politics in the modern era is largely caused by an intentional Zionist program to corrupt the left and thus effectively promote the ‘New Right’ in order to increase the chances for the Israeli Empire.  This is one of the many reasons why Zionism is one of the largest problems facing the world today.