Saturday, May 02, 2009

Examining the Left's toxic affection for Tyranny and Terror

A review of Jamie Glazov's new book: United In Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror.

Like a pocket full of razor blades

Noteworthy:

"His book's protagonist defined, it's then off on an 90-year journey from the formation of the Soviet Union in 1917 to the War on Terror in the present day. And Glazov's pattern chapter after chapter stings: here's the Marxist dictatorship, here's some of its atrocities, and here's the adoring words of leftist intellectuals. Same Believer protagonist just with different faces as new Marxist experiments emerge.

First it's George Bernard Shaw and Walter Duranty's praises of the Soviet Union juxtaposed with the horrors of Stalinism. Second is Susan Sontag and Todd Gitlin's affection for Fidel Castro's Cuba. Then Mary McCarthy with North Vietnam, then Shirley MacLaine with Red China, and finally Gunter Grass with Nicaragua. This pattern established Glazov brings his narrative to the present as Marxist tyrannies are replaced with Islamist terrors and the Believer discovers a new love.

Now the Believer cheers for Al-Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Glazov describes the Islamist worldview in Part III, laying out in disturbing detail the misogyny, anti-Semitism, and puritan elements of Orthodox Islamic societies. And then the Believer's pattern continues, this time with Jimmy Carter, Naomi Klein, Michael Moore, and Noam Chomsky playing the role.

Stylistically Glazov maintains a disturbing, uncomfortable tone throughout the text. The metaphor he chooses to employ is that of romance -- the Left has fallen in love with nihilism and brutality. This motif appears throughout the book, especially in chapter titles like 'Flirting with Mao's Executioners,' 'Yearnings for Death and Suicide,' and 'The Bonds of Jew Hate.' This frightening metaphorical creation only adds to the book's sharp edge as romance - a concept intimately associated with life - is instead employed to describe an attraction to death."

Unquestionably true, given the over-abundance of evidence to that effect.

The implications of Woolsey's introduction to the book are also accurate. The classic 20th century "liberal" is almost extinct today. Most of those we mistakenly label as liberals today are actually leftists (or worse). Calling themselves "progressives" doesn't change that fact at all.

#

No comments:

Post a Comment