More footage from the swelling socialist/communist crowd outside the building where Chris Simcox spoke at DePaul. It should be noted that DePaul required the DCA to come up with $2,500 to pay for security from their own students. You would think that DePaul would be required to provide security for anyone who is threatened by extremist groups that is invited to speak at the school by a University Club. After all, this event was closed to the public and was for students only.

The black and white signs that say “NO MORE RAIDS!” and “No One is Illegal!” “The Workers Struggle Has No Borders” are from Obrero Socialista - the Socialist Worker with the communist-looking clenched fist emblem.

Of course the signs that say “Stop the Racist Minutemen /KKK” belong to International ANSWER - the Chicago Chapter.

When looking at those professionally done signs one has to wonder how they paid for them to be made en masse like that. It’s obvious that they’re very well-funded. Aren’t these supposed to be penniless students?

Here is Jake and MJ’s post - which they will be updating with more. It’s amazing how hateful these leftists were when they surrounded MJ with jeers and the finger.

My previous post with video on this here. I give them a lot of credit for staying there as things got more hysterical and it got dark.

I’ll have more video up shortly.

It might be the land of his ancestors, but it would appear none of them bothered to learn how to spell. When I pointed out the mis-spelling of ‘ancesters’ the little guy called me ’sexist’. HUH?

Just got back from DePaul. Jake and MJ are still there - they got the ‘inside scoop’ because they are in the inside - and the media and the public are closed out of the minuteman speech; it is for DePaul students only because the socialists called up with threats. When we left, they were chanting their silly chants and making some pretty unbelievable claims.

Footage and a few pictures to follow shortly.

Jake and MJ will have some up, too, but I’m sure they’ll be getting home a lot later than me.

I particularly liked this sign:

But of course, the people who supported the minutemen were soft spoken while the socialists were rude and getting all the attention.

Lots of media was there - and I guess they were having a fit over Simcox’s speech not being a public event.

But in a way the socialists still got their way; they limited the free speech of someone who has every right to be heard.

This is an interesting article that I stumbled upon this morning. It’s worth reading the whole thing. I might add some commentary when I get back later.

Why We’re Losing Our Right to Speak Out
By Chuck Colson
Thursday, May 1, 2008

David Woodward is a political science professor at Clemson University—one who has first-hand experience on how dangerous it can be to speak out in favor of traditional values: He almost lost his job over it.

In 1993, Woodward was asked to testify about the political power of homosexual groups in American life. He agreed to serve as an expert witness for the state of Colorado, which was fighting to defend the recently passed Amendment Two, which made it illegal to give protected status based on sexual orientation.

In his new book, Why We Whisper: Restoring Our Right to Say It’s Wrong, co-authored by my friend, the able South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, Woodward writes, “In that one decision, I unexpectedly jeopardized my academic career and entered . . . into the fiercest battle of the emergent culture wars.”

To publicly oppose the campaign for same-sex “marriage” and gay rights was, he writes, “the equivalent to being sent to the university Gulag.” He was denied an administrative position on the grounds that he was “ideologically incompatible” with the values of the university. He often found the word homophobe scribbled on his office door. The press viciously attacked him for his views.

But in private, Woodward was hearing a different message. People would call to whisper encouragement. So did parents and university staffers. Some students came into his office, carefully closed the door, and whispered their support. “The one thing they all had in common is that they were all scared, and they all spoke in whispers,” Woodward writes.

Homosexuality is not the only issue Americans can no longer speak freely about: Speaking up in support of any traditional belief will earn you attacks from secular elites. “Whether individual, parent, church, or business, Americans holding traditional values are trapped in a ‘whisper zone’,” Woodward and DeMint write, “surrounded by invisible electric fences that threaten to ‘shock’ them if they cross unmarked legal lines.”

This week marks the illustrious second Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week with events planned on over 105 college campuses across the country. From a letter written by David Horowitz:

Islamo Fascism Awareness Week is an effort to bring the truth into the suffocating ideological bias of our universities. It comes as no surprise that the radical left is organizing to stop their speakers. This is what happened last fall when they shut down David Horowitz’s speech at Emory, threatened former Muslim Nonie Darwish at Berkeley, and disrupted several other speakers.

They want to kill this event because they knew know that awareness about Islamo Fascism means the end of their political monopoly on campus and the beginning of a student movement that honors and supports our country. Because of this threat, they are once again forced to pay for extra security to ensure their speakers’ safety. We’re asking for your financial help today to offset this extra cost to the David Horowitz Freedom Center. Please follow this link today to make a donation of $35, $50, $100, $250, $500 or more.

The campus coordinators - brave young men and women willing to go up against the radical left to get the truth to their fellow students - are working night and day against incredible odds to make the Week a success. And unless, the radical, pro-jihad groups succeed in silencing them, by the end of the week over 40 speakers such as Nonie Darwish, Robert Spencer and Frank Gaffney will have appeared on campuses across the country- from UC Berkeley to Columbia; from Ohio State and Michigan.

But the opposition is building, both in its intensity and its potential for violence. (Horowitz was forced to provide bodyguards for all speakers and the campus police have been on high alert at every school where they have appeared). The entire political left, from the Revolutionary Communist Party to the Young Democrats, is up in arms against them. The violent hardcore left is urged on in its rhetoric of violence with a wink and a nod by the “moderate” left.

Support the brave students who have invited them to bring the oxygen of truth to their campuses. This must be a permanent campaign to help these young people continue the awareness campaign; to organize on more campuses; to make sure that the left does not silence what some are already calling one of the most important public information campaigns of our era.

If you’ve given money before to this cause, thank you. But no contribution you’ve ever given before will have such a dramatic effect as what you give now. Every dollar you pledge will help us to keep building awareness about the Islamo fascists who hope to disarm our country and see it defeated in the War on Terror. This is our chance to strike back at them and to build a movement that will deny them an intellectual haven on America’s college campuses.

Coming soon!

Deleted scene: Columbia University’s Columbia Quiz! Check it out.

Evan Coyne Maloney is offering review copies of the movie for bloggers.

This is a great interview that points to why feminists are silent about the treatment of women under sharia law. It’s Jamie Glazov with Daphne Patai, a professor in the Department of Languages, Literatures, and Cultures at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

She is the author and editor of twelve books, among them her 1994 critique of women’s studies programs, written with Noretta Koertge, which was reissued in a new and expanded edition in 2003 as Professing Feminism: Education and Indoctrination in Women’s Studies. Patai is on the Board of Directors of FIRE (the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) and has long been a vocal critic of campus speech codes and harassment policies, as well as of the increasing politicization of academic life in recent decades. Her latest book, entitled What Price Utopia? Essays on Ideological Policing, Feminism, and Academic Affairs, will be published in March 2008.

Quite a resume.

When Gibbons was jailed and they were calling for her execution in the streets - American feminists were completely absent from the discussion. On the Said girls’ honor killing, not a pep. Aqsa Parvez, crickets chirping. And so it goes. As Daphne says here:

You can be as brave and outspoken as these women are, your life can be threatened by religious zealots, and yet feminists in the West will be hesitant to defend you, because you’re criticizing a group they’ve decided is off limits!

Yes, their heroes are sacrosanct, and they include murderers like Tookie Williams, and cop killers like Mumia.

This is a professor who maligns Israel and has a fondness for Hamas, and yet Columbia University is about to give him tenure. I can hardly believe it.

There is a petition online to DISMISS PROFESSOR MASSAD, directed at President Lee Bollinger of Columbia University. Massad teaches Palestinian terrorism in the classroom. From the petition:

Professor Joseph Massad’s dismissal from his position as modern Arab politics professor at Columbia’s Department of Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures, (MEALAC) should be made an imperative at Columbia University. Massad could obtain a tenured position and in light of these facts, this is simply reprehensible:

Professor Massad is one of the school’s harshest critics of Israel, which he frequently describes as a racist and Jewish supremacist state.

He is often cited as the prime example by critics of Middle Eastern studies in America, who say the field has an anti-Israeli bent.

Thoroughly discussed in the documentary “Columbia Unbecoming” and in national media reports, Professor Massad has been quoted as comparing Israelis to Nazis and Prime Minister Sharon’s cultural views to those of Joseph Goebbels. He has reportedly refused to allow students to dispute his allegations of Israeli atrocities in class.

A student of Professor Massad, told the Jerusalem Post (12/31/04) that Massad shouted at her: “If you’re going to deny the atrocities being committed against the Palestinian people then you can get out of my classroom!”

At a lecture at Oxford University, Massad declared: “The Jews are not a nation. The Jewish state is a racist state that does not have the right to exist.” Perhaps the most notorious allegation against Massad involves a claim that (at an off-campus event) he refused to answer a question from an Israeli student unless that student told Massad how many Palestinians he had killed.

Richard Miniter on Joseph Massad at Pajamas Media and The New York Post.

* In class and in public, Massad has argued that Israel massacred Palestinians at Jenin in 2002. A UN investigation found no evidence of a massacre at Jenin.

* Writing in the Egyptian weekly al-Ahram, he suggested that Israel poisoned Yasser Arafat. He cited no evidence. In reality, Israel provided for Arafat’s medical evacuation to France.

* Massad claims “Jewish colonists [in Israel] were part of the British colonial death squads that murdered Palestinian revolutionaries between 1936 and 1939 while Hitler unleashed Kristallnacht against German Jews.” Note the false equivalency between British police and Jewish residents and the Nazis.

And, of course, there is no evidence of organized Jewish involvement. Indeed, the British also took armed action against the Jews.

Mistreating students: Over the last few years, a number of students have come forward to talk about how Massad treated them in the classroom.

The movie Columbia Unbecoming is about how Massad treates people who don’t have the terrorist viewpoint in his classroom; kids who have a different-than-Palestinian view of the Middle East.

Lovers of sharia law seem to run rampant among the halls of academe today…it is a shame that a one-sided, even terrorist view of the world is given not only a voice, but a soapbox at an Ivy League School, through the eyes of a Palestinian, soon-to-be-tenured professor.

More-Here and here.

Download Full Size, pdf

This article at Frontpage by David Horowitz is an amazing read.

In true Nazi stormtrooper style, individuals at Columbia University are waging yet another attack to suppress the truth:

Why have some Columbians taken it upon themselves to conduct a hate campaign against students who want to discuss issues that affect us all?

I’m sure that’s just a rhetorical question.

Picture courtesy of Pipeline News.

In fact, the people who are opposing Islamo Fascism Awareness Week at Columbia are the anti-war crowd; comprised of International ANSWER, et al., who appeared at Berkeley on Wednesday, ‘protesting’ the military recruitment office.

Why, on the other hand, were many of these same groups determined to welcome to Columbia a dictator who is providing weapons to kill American men and women in Iraq, who has called for the extermination of the Jewish state, and who presides over a regime that has murdered 4,000 gays and hung women from cranes for alleged sexual improprieties? If the welcome mat was okay for Ahmadinejad, why do these people want to deny a platform to Columbia students who are concerned about the threat of Islamo-Fascism?

As the History News Network discussed in this article on September 20th, Ahmadinejad’s invitation to speak at Columbia is no different than what happened in 1933: Columbia president Nicholas Murray Butler invited Nazi Germany’s ambassador to the United States, Hans Luther, to speak on campus. Columbia U also held a ‘reception’ for him.

In 1936, Columbia sent a delegation to the 550th Anniversary of Heidelberg in 1936. Prof. Arthur Remy, was Columbia’s delegate, and later remarked that the reception at which chief book-burner Josef Goebbels presided was “very enjoyable.”

Columbia’s long association, support and fascination with fascist governments and murdering dictators and despots should not come as a surprise to anyone.

Is Islamo-Fascism a threat?

Was Nationalsozialist fascism a threat?

In fact, this is exactly the kind of question that will be discussed during the week of Oct. 22-26 at Columbia, unless campus leftists obstruct it the way they did Jim Gilchrist’s attempt to discuss the border issue last year. The fascist threat is real, and not just in Iraq or Iran.

Gilchrist’s appearance and the subsequent squashing of his speaking there when he was an invited guest - was a real eye-opener, and gives us reason to suspect that Columbia’s leftist students, egged on by terrorist-sympathizing fellows like Professor Joseph Massad, could entertain the idea of a repeat performance.

Writing in a recent issue of Spectator, Zahra Khimji, a Columbia sophomore, complained that Islam should not be part of this discussion, while suggesting that the Islamo-Fascists constitute “an incredibly minute minority” of her religion. Would this were so. Some polls estimate that 10 percent of Muslims support Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. An al-Jazeera poll put the number at 50 percent. In other words, somewhere between 150 million and 750 million Muslims support a holy war against Christians, Jews, and other Muslims who don’t happen to be true believers in the Quran according to bin Laden. This is not an “incredibly minute” cohort.

I am sorry that Khimji feels discomfort as a result of the fear that terrorists have struck in the hearts of sensible people, but this complaint should be directed at the holy warriors themselves, not at their current and potential victims.

In fact, the very term “Islamo-Fascism” was coined by moderate Muslims who were being slaughtered in Algeria during the 1990s. A group now calling itself “Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb” killed between 150,000 and 200,000 “unclean” Muslims during that decade. In holding Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week, students at Columbia will be standing up for the survivors and for all Muslims under the threat of fanatical terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas.

I always learn a lot from what David Horowitz writes.

Read the rest.

What is amusing about Ahmadinejad being invited to speak there -is this is all on the heals of the Dean saying he’d invite Hitler (which Columbia University did, in fact do in 1933.)

Since I have a petition online objecting to Joseph Massad teaching courses from the position of homicide bombers and urging President Bollinger to dismiss him, I am no stranger to the farce that Columbia University has become as far academics and the positions the school holds in the classroom on a variety of subjects.

Another illustration of the political divide and complete divorce from reason and reality is Flight 93’s memorial in Pennsylvania. Flight 93 has in essence been re-hijacked by Islamofascists with a horrid memorial that is, in fact a mosque memorial to the terrorists on the graves of the crew and passengers who fought the terrorists on 9/11.

It’s a line of thinking that is completely removed from reason and rational thought.

A few articles that are worth noting on Ahmadinejad’s visit to Columbia University:

SQUALID MISTAKE (New York Post)
ACADEMIA’S UGLY BLINDNESS
By ARTHUR HERMAN
Ahmadinejad: A thug — not a thinker.

COLUMBIA University President Lee Bollinger yesterday made some cutting criticisms while introducing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - but that doesn’t make the school’s decision to offer a platform to the head of a violent terrorist state any less abject, squalid or shameless.

“Abject, squalid, shameless” is how Winston Churchill described the resolution passed by Oxford University’s prestigious Debating Union in 1933 - the year Adolf Hitler came to power - that “this House will under no circumstances fight for King and Country.”

And Columbia’s event, like the 1933 Oxford resolution, sent (to quote Churchill again) a “very disquieting and disgusting message” to friends and enemies alike.

Many American’s won’t see that; their blindness goes to the heart of the “red-blue” divide in our country - much like the one in ’30s Britain that split men like Churchill from the exponents of appeasing Europe’s dictators.

On one side of that chasm, there is outrage and incomprehension that anyone could extend an invitation to a sworn enemy of the United States to speak on an American campus (a campus, moreover, that bans its own military’s ROTC); that the head of the world’s biggest sponsor of terrorism attacks be welcomed anywhere in the city that was 9/11’s principal target; that a Holocaust-denier be welcomed to a university that has so many Jewish students and alumni.

On the other side, again, there is incomprehension that anyone should be offended. And that is the problem.

Yes, what Arthur Herman is talking about is a huge problem. It is what Alec Rawls has categorized as ‘truth denial’ which produces a complete ‘divorce from reality’.

Of Free Speech And Academic “Progressives” (Townhall.com)
By Bill Murchison

An excerpt:

The New York Times records that 2100 professors, students, staffers and alumni have signed an online petition of protest, asserting the Rumsfeld appointment’s incompatibility “with the ethical values of truthfulness, tolerance, disinterested inquiry, respect for national and international laws, and care for the opinions, property, and lives of others to which Stanford is inalienably committed.” Boo! Hiss! Throw da bum out!

It all seems to depend, in liberal academia, on whose free speech rights we’re talking about — those of a morally deranged foreign despot or of a retired American cabinet officer whose policies you don’t like. The jailer-in-chief of a once-sophisticated nation — let’s hear him out. Yea, free speech! And wouldn’t Mr. Madison be proud of our attachment to his First Amendment. As for a warmongering ex-flunky from the Bush administration — no, no, no. Why, his very words would corrupt our delicate ears!

The apparent moral asymmetry here — pay no attention to that. In the academy, we’re all good “progressives.” That’s the central point. Listening to foreign creeps who hate the United States is a moral obligation (and sometimes an unadulterated joy). Lending an ear to patriots who have sought to serve the United States out of love for its life and institutions — that’s another matter entirely, as the Stanford progressives trust Mr. Rumsfeld will understand while pondering the call to withdraw.

Is it too much to hope that just this once, maybe, a patriot can enjoy in academia the same moral footing as a national jailer and Jew-baiter? We’ll see soon enough.

I doubt if we’ll see any turnaround in this behavior any time soon.

Iran’s leader stirs tempest
Ahmadinejad defies criticsincontroversial NYC university visit
By Bay Fang | Chicago Tribune

Ambush flattens Ahmadinejad (The Australian) Notice how Ahmadinejad is portrayed as a victim in this piece.

Sitting alone under a spotlight on the darkened stage, Ahmadinejad looked silly, vulnerable and under arrest as Bollinger coldly and methodically demanded the Iranian leader explain his Holocaust denial, his support for terrorism, his crackdown on academic dissent and his threats against Israel, the country he wants “wiped off the map”.

As much accusation as inquiry, the questions seemed to go on forever, before ending with a putdown that was the verbal equivalent of being beaten with a baseball bat.

“Frankly, and in all candour, Mr President, I doubt that you will have the intellectual courage to answer these questions,” Bollinger said.

“But your avoiding them will itself be meaningful to us. I do expect you to exhibit the fanatical mindset that characterises so much of what you say and do.

“I feel all the weight of the modern civilised world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for. I only wish I could do better.”

Bollinger had promised to open Ahmadinejad’s appearance with “a series of sharp challenges” and had been adamant that a critical premise of free speech was that the dishonourable could not be made honourable simply by allowing it to be heard.

But nobody had expected Bollinger to pre-empt Ahmadinejad with such venomous language and in universities across the US, questions are being asked: Did the attack go too far? Was it so personal that it became culturally insensitive? Did it compromise the academic search for greater knowledge and understanding?

Funny, but I think not. This last article is incredibly leftist, you can tell by the ‘culturally insensitive’ comment. The first thing leftists do when you try to call out examples of terrorism is that ‘there is no terrorist threat’ and it’s ‘Islamophobic’.

What was surprising to me was Bollinger’s words berating Ahmadinejad considering what seems to be a pattern in Academia today - not only inviting terrorists and terrorists’ line of thinking into the classroom, berating Israel and agreeing with terrorists that Israel has no right to exist - even as De Paul did here - getting rid of a teacher who had the nerve to mention to a table of demonstrating “Free Palestine” people that there is another school of thought and that Israel does, in fact have a right to exist.

There has been some outrage expressed about Imadinnerjacket requesting a visit to Ground Zero to place a wreath in memorial to the terrorists. Since he was in town, I have no doubt Columbia University would be interested in his visiting with them. Since Hitler was a socialist and Universities and wackademics are off the charts leftist/socialist/communist, it should come as absolutely no surprise that the Columbia University Dean said they would invite Hitler to speak, and I can’t think of any fascist closer to Hitler’s ideology than the holocaust denier, Ahmadinejad.

On the other hand, there goes their Bush=Hitler analogy; completely out the window.

Two peas in a pod
Courtesy STACLU and Gateway Pundit

Historically speaking, this isn’t off the charts weird, Columbia University is just living up to its age-old tradition of catering to socialist wacknuts. They did, in fact invite Hitler to speak there in 1933.

But then…the 1938 Better Homes and Garden Issue published a whole spread showing pictures of “Hitler’s Mountain Home”. A few of those pages are available for viewing here and here.

By David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin - FrontPageMagazine

Nestled in a redwood glade on cliffs above the Pacific Ocean, the University of California at Santa Cruz is one of the most picturesque campuses in America. Its 15,000 students attend classes in 62 majors at 10 colleges, in an environment that would seem an ideal locale for the contemplative life. In the hard sciences, it can be said that Santa Cruz handsomely fulfills its academic expectations.

Its physics program is ranked among the best in the country, while its Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, which houses the Lick Observatory, is a world class scientific institution. But inside the classrooms of its liberal arts division something besides the life of the mind is being nourished. In these environs, UC Santa Cruz is beyond any doubt the most radical university in the United States, its curricula anything but academic.

How to make a revolution is a seminar for credit

BOULDER, Colo. — A Boulder policeman who arrived a few seconds after a freshman’s throat was slashed is relieved the stabbing at the University of Colorado didn’t turn out worse.

Master Officer John Smith said he heard screaming and saw students running away. He ran to help and faced what would be one of the more stressful situations of his three-decade career.

“It evolved very rapidly and I thought it worked out real well,” said Smith.

A Boulder County sheriff’s deputy, Stuart Holt, already had a gun pointed at the suspected attacker, Kenton Astin.

Smith told Holt he was next to him and started to prepare to use his Taser gun.

By his count, it’s been eight or nine years since he was issued the less-lethal weapon and he was about to use it for the first time.

He said the suspect dropped the knife, but kept moving toward him, punching numbers into a cell phone, threatening to detonate something, counting down toward one.

And, he was rambling.

“‘I’m the creator. I’m … something along those lines. It’s the end of the world. Columbine,’” Smith said, describing what Astin was saying.

Smith deployed the Taser but it didn’t stop the suspect in his tracks.

“It distracted him enough that we were able to then close on him and take him to the ground. So it was effective,” said Smith.

Several others helped the two officers get control and handcuff Astin.

Officer Uses Taser For 1st Time In Career

Previously here.

This same subject is mentioned in WAR Crimes by Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson, pp. 45:

Nowhere in our culture is the anti-American and antimilitary movement more unabashedly embraced than in the nation’s education system -universities, colleges, high schools, elementary levels, and yes, even preschools. Just as jihadists have successfully institutionalized their extreme Islamist and anti-Westernism doctrine in madrassas, so too have America’s academics seized the educational system as a platform for fomenting their radical ideologies.¹

Which is one reason why someone who’d watched what happened in Germany took note of the students at Columbia University rushing the Minutemen on stage and compared them to Hitler’s storm troopers.

Hilmar Von Campe: Well, I did see (the Columbia University Minuteman attack video) before. I did see the video about the event before. That was no surprise for me. We had, we called them “storm troopers”. Hitler had storm troopers who would shut up the opposition. And, that is what these people were trying to do, the same thing.

That’s what they think of our ‘free speech’, that’s why they also have the ‘fairness doctrine’.

This isn’t a recent development. Germany’s universities were among the first institutions to support Adolf Hitler’s policies in the 1930’s. In the face of the spreading Nazi aggression, England’s renowned debating society the Oxford Union resolved “not to defend King and country.” The inevitable result of academia’s short-sighted and misguided perspective was world war and the deaths of tens of millions.²

It makes you wonder when we have clear examples of the fallout of their ideology to look back to, why these people don’t connect the dots.

In this country, the campus unrest of the 60’s spurred the opposition to the Vietnam war and led to American withdrawal from Vietnam - the result of which was the deaths of 2.5 million people. Today, blind to the repeated lessons of history, educational institutions propound the message that America is imperialist, its leaders warmongers, and the U.S. military is evil.³

Not that they’d ever want to even learn from history; they’re too busy rewriting it.

A few more posts are here on the Nazi storm troopers theme. First here, then here, then here.

Here are a few interesting photographs (John Ray here and here) from some of the posters that were put up in nazi germany during the 30’s to promulgate Hitler’s political views. Notice the similarity to the leftists of today:

Translated, the poster reads: “The Marshall and the corporal fight alongside us for peace and equal rights”

Can you get a more Leftist slogan than that? “Peace and equal rights”? Modern-day Leftists sometimes try to dismiss Hitler’s socialism as something from his early days that he later outgrew. But when this poster was promulgated he was already Reichskanzler (Prime Minister) so it was far from early days. Once again we see what a barefaced lie it is when Leftists misrepresent Hitler as a Rightist. We can all have our own views about what Hitler actually believed but he campaigned and gained power as a democratic Leftist. The March 5, 1933 election was the last really democratic election prewar Germany had and, in it, Hitler’s appeal was Leftist.

It reads: “Mit Adolf Hitler “Ja” fuer Gleichberechtigung und Frieden” — which translates as “With Adolf Hitler “Yes” for equal rights and peace” — the same old standby slogans that the Left trot out to this day, of course.

The slogan in this photograph says something that you won’t believe unless you are aware of how readily all Leftists preach one thing and to one another. Because many people don’t even know that for much of the 30s Hitler was actually something of a peacenik. It reads “Mit Hitler gegen den Ruestungswahnsinn der Welt”. And what does that mean? It means “With Hitler against the armaments madness of the world”. “Ruestung” could more precisely be translated as “military preparations” but “armaments” is a bit more idiomatic in English.

And who is it exactly that wants us to disarm?

The Dutch Nazis were very much in cahoots with the German occupation authorities. In translation, it reads: “With Germany AGAINST capitalism”. So Nazism was Rightist? Only in the fevered imaginations of modern Leftists. There is more on the background of the Dutch poster here

Thanks to John Ray, once again.

Engels sees democrats as partners towards achieving Communism

ENGELS ADVOCATED NATIONALIZATION OF INDUSTRY AND EDUCATION AS STEPS TO COMMUNISM

Far from starting futile quarrels with the democrats, in the present circumstances, the Communists for the time being rather take the field as democrats themselves in all practical party matters. In all civilised countries, democracy has as its necessary consequence the political rule of the proletariat, and the political rule of the proletariat is the first condition for all communist measures. As long as democracy has not been achieved, thus long do Communists and democrats fight side by side, thus long are the interests of the democrats at the same time those of the Communists. Until that time, the differences between the two parties are of a purely theoretical nature and can perfectly well be debated on a theoretical level without common action being thereby in any way prejudiced. Indeed, understandings will be possible concerning many measures which are to be carried out in the interests of the previously oppressed classes immediately after democracy has been achieved, e.g. the running of large-scale industry and the railways by the state, the education of all children at state expense, etc.

Source

The first part in German:

Friedrich Engels, „Die Kommunisten und Karl Heinzen“, 1847

„Die Kommunisten, weit entfernt, unter den gegenwärtigen Verhältnissen mit den Demokraten nutzlose Streitfragen anzufangen, treten vielmehr für den Augenblick in allen praktischen Parteifragen selbst als Demokraten auf. (…) Solange die Demokratie noch nicht erkämpft ist, solange kämpfen Kommunisten und Demokraten also gemeinsam (…)“

MEW a.a.O. 4, 317.

And now John Ray concludes:

This passage is of course a classical formulation of the “fellow-traveller” doctrine. As we see repeatedly in his writing, Engels despised democracy but above he sees Communism as the ultimate endpoint of democracy so says that Communists and democrats should work together to achieve State control of industry and education as the final steps before Communism is achieved.

The State control of industry has fallen by the wayside in modern times but education still seems to be well on track.

Photo from Zombietime’s coverage of a Cindy Sheehan protest -entitled-The World Can’t Wait- courtesy of the Revolutionary Communist Party- from November, 2005.

1. Patterson, R. (Lt. Col., USAF, Ret.) (2007). WAR CRIMES: The Left’s Campaign to destroy our military and lose the war on terror. Crown Publishing, New York. pp. 45.[back]
2. Patterson, R. (Lt. Col., USAF, Ret.) (2007). WAR CRIMES: The Left’s Campaign to destroy our military and lose the war on terror. Crown Publishing, New York. pp. 45.[back]
3. Patterson, R. (Lt. Col., USAF, Ret.) (2007). WAR CRIMES: The Left’s Campaign to destroy our military and lose the war on terror. Crown Publishing, New York. pp. 45.[back]