Liberal World Order, R.I.P.

[AllahIsAl-Malik]

My thing is... look at how communist China is persecuting Muslims.

As Muslims, aren't we called to enjoin the good and forbid the bad?

If we're around liberals- let us try talking to them about what Islam teaches about topics such as homosexuality and abortion. If you dare to think differently in regards to such issues (as well as other issues), the liberals are liable to become hostile and belligerent. That is what I have a problem with.

I myself am a minority in terms of my ethnicity and I'm all for trying to promote social equality for minorities... however, all too often the left's seeming championing of the poor and of minorities is nothng more than demagoguery.

Many of the leftists are HOSTILE

- - - Updated - - -

(continued- sorry, I accidentally pressed enter prematurely)

towards religion.

Atheism predominantly (though not exclusively) is a thing among Europeans.... most people of Third World origins are religious believers of some sort.... thus for leftists to claim to be for minorities but then try to attack the religious faith of people from such backgrounds.... that is something that I can not accept. It is worse in my opinion than the outright hostility towards minorities that is sometimes exhibited by the right... with the left it seems.... people can have food stamps, health care, etc.... but what the left wants is peoples' souls.... to lead them away from God and to lead them towards championing causes such as abortion and homosexuality which go directly against what Allah has commanded

 

[beleiver]

• what kind of sickness leads people to murder priests???

Following orders from higher priests...That was how the aristocrats gained their lands..The first crusades ordered by the Pope were in the Laungdoc , they were brutal, they killed every man woman and child in many towns and though the word terrorism wasnt invented , it brought terror to the region, genocide and ethnicly cleansed the lands of the preists and their followers..

Then they went on to murder Christians for the crime of translating their book so the pesants could read it for them selves.

- - - Updated - - -

 

[AllahIsAl-Malik]

Following orders from higher priests...That was how the aristocrats gained their lands..The first crusades ordered by the Pope were in the Laungdoc , they were brutal, they killed every man woman and child in many towns and though the word terrorism wasnt invented , it brought terror to the region, genocide and ethnicly cleansed the lands of the preists and their followers..

Then they went on to murder Christians for the crime of translating their book so the pesants could read it for them selves.

- - - Updated - - -

Whatever wrongs the Catholic Church might have done- was it just for the French revolutionaries to murder priests and try to destroy Christianity and replace it with atheism?

I am all for leading Christians to Islam but Christianity is better than atheism.

 

[beleiver]

Same could be asked of the revolutionaries in Syria that have killed priests and even Iman, what would cause even Muslims to kill priests and other Musilms , even children who are innocent?
Then there are those that do similar massacres in Moskes just because they dont like the form of Islam in those Moskes, i dont know what motivates, fear, hate, superiority?

Assad is evil i am sure, and evil beggets evil, but so were those Catholic priests, and to call them christians is an insult to Jesus imho..
The revolutionaries didnt force their atheism either like the Church forced their Catholicism, people were still free to be Christian.

I know i was an Athiest for half my life but found my way to Islam, i dont think it would of been any easier for a Catholic, even a modern one.

 

[AllahIsAl-Malik]

Same could be asked of the revolutionaries in Syria that have killed priests and even Iman, what would cause even Muslims to kill priests and other Musilms , even children who are innocent?
Then there are those that do similar massacres in Moskes just because they dont like the form of Islam in those Moskes, i dont know what motivates, fear, hate, superiority?

Assad is evil i am sure, and evil beggets evil, but so were those Catholic priests, and to call them christians is an insult to Jesus imho..
The revolutionaries didnt force their atheism either like the Church forced their Catholicism, people were still free to be Christian.

I know i was an Athiest for half my life but found my way to Islam, i dont think it would of been any easier for a Catholic, even a modern one.

What could be possessing you to defend the killing of priests and the promotion of atheism?

What you say about Syria is inane and irrelevant.

You sure seem very buddy-buddy with atheistic leftists. Very quick to rush to their defense.

Do you denounce fornication? Do you denounce abortion? Do you denouce homosexuality? Do you denounce intoxicants?

- - - Updated - - -

First of i want to thank you all for your responses, given me much to ponder, and will adress the Jedi bit first I put Jedi on the forum form more of a joke than anything..I am from the star wars generation and love the film, I often wonder if a film came out now where the hero in a lawless land was radicalized by a relegious extremist in a cave and then went on to blow up government buildings how it would go down But jokes aside , the force that is present in all living things that binds the universe together to me is similar to the 'light of the heavens and the earth and all that is within' that and the Truth is what I beleive, I trust and i willingly submit to, it is that Truth that guides me inshalla and i seek forgiveness and mercy from, It is Truth that protects me from satan and his lies..That is all included in my daily prayers..And I start those prayers with 'in the name of God the mercifull the extra mercifull' but in Arabic as to me it has a deep deep meaning that simply doesnt translate..So after reading this forum for around a year now and learning a simple, basic concept of prayer, I dont think i am much of a Jedi, I dont like their strict Monastic ways and i doubt i could fight my way out of a paper bag, besides the Evil empire of Disney has the whole thing totally corrpted, Jedi is most likley gone to the dark side too..What you think i am is not really important , what God thinks of me is..Inshalla i will get back on topic next reply..

the force that is present in all living things that binds the universe together to me is similar to the 'light of the heavens and the earth and all that is within' that and the Truth is what I beleive, I trust and i willingly submit to, it is that Truth that guides me inshalla and i seek forgiveness and mercy from

I have no idea what that is but that does not sound like Islam.

- - - Updated - - -

I thought that I remembered something in the Bible about a blasphemy involving "God of forces"

[FONT=&quot]

The Antichrist's God of Forces[/FONT]​

​

[FONT=&quot]

Daniel 11:38, “But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.”[/FONT]​

​

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]​

​

The Bible teaches that the estate of the Antichrist, i.e., the New World Order, will honor the GOD OF FORCES. This is the core teaching of New Age doctrine, i.e., that god is a force of nature, the energy of all life, the substance of the universe. New Age doesn't recognize a personal, reachable, individual, God. Deuteronomy 6:4 tells us that there is ONE God. 1st John 5:7, Matthew 28:19-20, Colossians 2:9 and many other Scriptures teach a Godhead, Who has revealed Himself to mankind in the Persons of: God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
In Luke 3:22 we see all 3 members of the Godhead present... “And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon Him, and a voice came from Heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.” The teaching of the Godhead cannot be denied. Please note that the King James Bible is the only reliable English Bible I would recommend. The word “Godhead” is found in Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9 of the King James Bible; yet, all modern perversions of the Scripture completely removes the word Godhead. This is a woeful evil, intended to lead people away from the truth of God's Word. Every modern Bible diminishes the deity of Jesus Christ and the Godhead.
New Age teaches a one-size-fits-all god. New Age speaks of spirituality, heaven and Jesus; but leaves off the Scriptures. Anytime you hear someone talking about spiritual matters and they don't quote the Word of God, either run or tell them how to get saved!!!

Religions: Ecumenical Bridge to the New World Order
Jesus never started a religion. Jesus said that the kingdom of God is within the believer (Luke 17:21). In the 1950's, the U.S. government came to America's churches are offered them tax-exemption if they converted over to charities. This one move turned all of America's churches into businesses. And so it is today.

It is tragic that 1,000,000,000 Catholics have been taught to bow and worship statues, paintings and icons. Look at the picture to the left. The man is bowing in worship to a painting of the Virgin Mary. The people in the picture are also bowing and worshipping to the Virgin Mary.
Exodus 20:4-5 teaches NOT to bow nor worship any graven image. This is the 2nd of the Ten Commandments. It is appalling that most Catholics deny worshipping Mary, in the face of blatant evidence of Mary worship.
Oh, that people would wake up and come out of the prisonhouse of Catholicism.

The photo to the right is called THE IMAGE OF DIVINE MERCY. This image has been displayed in ALL Catholic churches since the year 2,000, when Pope John Paul II canonized Sister Faustina and made it an official requirement for Catholics to worship this image. Carefully notice the New World Order pyramid. This is the same pyramid seen on the back of every U.S. one dollar bill. This is the same pyramid which is found in the Scientology logo. The founder of the Jehovah's Witness religion, Charles Russell, has a 10-foot pyramid parked on top of his grave.
The truth is that all these religions are controlled by the occult. They have all sworn allegiance to the forming New World Order, and will give their loyalty to the Antichrist when he appears. Revelation 13:4, “And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?”
Catholics are unknowingly worshipping the Dragon, by adhering to doctrines of devils (1st Timothy 4:1). As they sit singing their songs and worshipping God in vain (Mark 7:9), there is THE IMAGE OF DIVINE MERCY staring right down at them from the front or side of the auditorium. That pyramid says it all.
Freemasonry is the common denominator of most religions today. Ron Hubbard of Scientology, Charles Russell of the Jehovah's Witness, and Joseph Smith of the Mormons, were all 33rd degree Freemasons. Tragically, one-third of the men in the Southern Baptist Convention are Freemasons, which explains why the convention is so apostate today and going downhill ever so fast doctrinally and morally. The churches which are growing the fastest are the ones pastored by the biggest apostates. These ministers see no reason to argue over which Bible is God's preserved and inspired Word. The King James Bible is that faithfully preserved and inspired Word!
As the world nears the coming of the Antichrist, more and more churches are embracing false Bibles, false doctrines, false religions, false Gospels, false Christs, false spirits and the New World Order. The primary teaching of the New World Order's religion is that God is merely an energy force, present in all life, including humans who have the potential to become gods themselves. The Biblical proclamation of a personal God is denied. New Age teaches an ambiguous, non-defined, all-purpose God. Freemasons call this false god, THE GREAT ARCHITECT.
Beware of the Antichrist's GOD OF FORCES.
​

---

John 8:32,36, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free ... If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.”​

[FONT=&quot]

Jesus Came to Save Sinners[/FONT]​

​

[FONT=&quot] http://www.lovethetruth.com/false_religion/new_age/god_of_forces.htm

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Obviously I don't believe in the "worship Jesus" stuff but I definitely believe the weird Star Wars stuff is blasphemous New Agey stuff

I remember having thought there was something sinister about Star Wars.... Masha'Allah I never really cared about those movies[/FONT]

- - - Updated - - -

but of course... you don't identify as a leftist.... I get it... "I don't like labels, man..."... all this does is confirm the earlier observation (I think from Junon) that leftists are constantly trying to practice subversion..... and I don't have anything personal against you.... but I do take that very seriously!

 

[beleiver]

Those words where i compared the 'force' can all be found in the Quran and the night prayer..

I dont defend killing but when people have nothing left to loose many people loose it, its natural.
The Catholic priests for years had nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus, they forced their will on the people, atheists do not all do that, people were probarbly more free to practice Christianity in France after the revolution than before it..
I think thats about all i said other than point out the worst genocides in Europe we commited at the order of preists.

What ever preconceived ideas you have about me are in your head, i will leave the disscussion here as its pointelss to go on..If you think i lie so be it, i am what i am.

But my original point still stands..Liberal world died a long time ago, we are in a corporate world order moving to overt fascism if we dont turn of our TV and wake up thats where we are going.

 

[Futuwwa]

Dont forget Japan and south Korea.

Japan might be a case of that, but South Korea, no. For pretty much the entire Cold War, it was a right-wing dictatorship.

 

[سيف الله]

Salaam

but of course... you don't identify as a leftist.... I get it... "I don't like labels, man..."... all this does is confirm the earlier observation (I think from Junon) that leftists are constantly trying to practice subversion..... and I don't have anything personal against you.... but I do take that very seriously!

The French revolution was a disaster for Christianity in France, its never recovered and paved the way for Marxism, communism etc. Important to learn the lessons from this period of history.

I do like aspects of the left, but it has a dark side particularly its relentless attempt to subvert and remake societies.

I know were getting a bit offtopic but these books might be of interest.

The Dark Side of Church/State Separation: The French Revolution, Nazi Germany, and International Communism

Blurb

The Dark Side of Church/State Separation analyzes the Enlightenment's attack upon the Judeo-Christian tradition and its impact upon the development of secular regimes in France, Germany, and Russia. Such regimes followed the anti-Semitic/anti-Christian agenda of the French Enlightenment in blaming the Judeo-Christian tradition for all the ills of European society and believing that human beings can develop their own set of values and purposes through rational means, apart from any revelation from God or Scripture. Stephen Strehle's analysis extends our understanding of church/state relations and its history. He confirms the spiritual roots of modern anti-Semitism within the ideology of the Enlightenment and recognizes the intimate relationship between anti-Semitism and anti-Christianity. Strehle questions the absolute doctrine of church/state separation, given its background in the bigotries of the philosophes. He notes the nefarious motives of subsequent regimes, which used the French doctrine to replace the religious community with the state and its secular ideology. This detailed historical analysis of original sources and secondary literature is woven together with special appreciation for the philosophical and theological ideas that contributed to the emergence of political institutions. Readers will gain an understanding of the most influential ideas shaping the modern world and present-day culture.

Critics of the Enlightenment (Crosscurrents)

Blurb

For the Anglo-American world, Edmund Burke is the touchstone of counter-revolutionary thought, but in this volume, Christopher Olaf Blum shows that in attempting to vindicate the principles that had, at its best, animated the Old Regime, and in critiquing the institutions and beliefs associated with the New Regime, the French counter-revolutionary tradition is unparalleled. To understand adequately what Georges Bernanos called the spiritual drama of Europe, it is a tradition that must be grappled with. Critics of the Enlightenment makes available new translations of representative selections from some of the leading French conservative thinkers of the nineteenth century: Franois de Chateaubriand, Louis de Bonald, Joseph de Maistre, Frederic Le Play, Emile Keller, and Rene de La Tour du Pin. The selections span much of the nineteenth century, from Chateaubriand's 1814 pamphlet against Bonaparte to La Tour du Pin's 1883 essay on the theory of the corporate state. The volume, therefore, not only includes responses of the French conservatives to the French Revolutions of 1789 through 1815, but also testifies to the continuing elaboration of this critique against the background of the troubled nineteenth century. Blum's introduction sets these selections within the contexts of the events giving rise to them and the lives of their authors. The French political philosopher Philippe Beneton supplies the book's foreword. Blum's elegant translations of texts heretofore difficult or impossible to find in English allow Anglophone readers to profit from the counter-revolutionaries' insights about social and cultural matters of perennial importance, such as the necessary roles of religion, family, and local communities within any larger political society--matters of pressing concern to the counter-revolutionaries of our own time

Sorry last book, this book is very readable one of the first books I read on the subject we are discussing.

Worshipping the State: How Liberalism Became Our State Religion

Blurb

Many Christians feel that they are being opposed at every turn by what seems to be a well-orchestrated political and cultural campaign to de-Christianize every aspect of Western culture. They are right, and it goes even further back than the Obama Administration.

In Worshipping the State: How Government is Replacing Religion, Benjamin Wiker argues that it is liberals who seek to establish an official state religion: one of unbelief. Wiker reveals that it was never the intention of the Founders to drive religion out of the public square with the First Amendment, but centuries of secularists and liberals have deliberately misinterpreted the establishment clause to serve their own ends: the de-Christianization of Western civilization.

The result, they hope, is government as the new oracle. Personal faith in a deity is replaced with collective dependence on government, and the diversity of religious practices and dogmas is reduced to a uniform ideological agenda. The strategy is two-pronged: drive religion out of the public square through law and by encouraging popular derision of the faithful; then, in religion’s place, erect the Church of the State to fill the human need for a higher power to look up to.

But what was done can be undone. Outlining a simple, step-by-step strategy for disestablishing the state church of secularism, Worshiping the State shows the full historical sweep of the war to those on the Christian side of the cultural battle—and as a consequence of this far more complete vantage, how to win it.

 

[beleiver]

Wouldnt Islam be a classic revolutionary movement that seeks to remake societies?..
Truth subverts evil.

And its quite sad how the leftist ideals in Islam are ignored..

Islam was the first socialised state no?
Prohibits Usury, now there is some more lefty revolutionary talk right there..

 

[Zafran]

Wouldnt Islam be a classic revolutionary movement that seeks to remake societies?..
Truth subverts evil.

And its quite sad how the leftist ideals in Islam are ignored..

Islam was the first socialised state no?
Prohibits Usury, now there is some more lefty revolutionary talk right there..

left wing and right wing are terms used within the liberal paradigm - Islamic political and social phenomena was within the Islamic paradigm - Even the term right wing and left wing were first invented during the french revolution.

where ever Islam went be it Persia, the Turks, north Africa, Indonesia, Malaysia or sub Continent it reformed peoples beliefs, action, character and manners but didn't change there historical, cultural and ethnic identity.

Islam didn't come as a revolution on the contrary calling people to Tawheed, revelation, Prophet hood and the last day is more of reminder and a reformation of earlier revelations which were corrupted. In Arabia it was a recalling of monotheism that Ishmael and Abraham pbut (the forefathers of the arabs) were on.

Prophet Muhammad pbuh of course is known as the last prophet.

 

[AllahIsAl-Malik]

Wouldnt Islam be a classic revolutionary movement that seeks to remake societies?..
Truth subverts evil.

And its quite sad how the leftist ideals in Islam are ignored..

Islam was the first socialised state no?
Prohibits Usury, now there is some more lefty revolutionary talk right there..

Stop trying to subvert Islam.

 

[beleiver]

left wing and right wing are terms used within the liberal paradigm - Islamic political and social phenomena was within the Islamic paradigm - Even the term right wing and left wing were first invented during the french revolution.

where ever Islam went be it Persia, the Turks, north Africa, Indonesia, Malaysia or sub Continent it reformed peoples beliefs, action, character and manners but didn't change there historical, cultural and ethnic identity.

Islam didn't come as a revolution on the contrary calling people to Tawheed, revelation, Prophet hood and the last day is more of reminder and a reformation of earlier revelations which were corrupted. In Arabia it was a recalling of monotheism that Ishmael and Abraham pbut (the forefathers of the arabs) were on.

Prophet Muhammad pbuh of course is known as the last prophet.

Yep I agree, i genuinley dont like left right paradigmes, its all part of the divide and rule stratergy used by the evil one.

But the notion that usery should be forbidden for example in this day and age is revolutionary and i do think welfare state 1400years ago in Arabia was also revolutionary?

But i also get your point.

- - - Updated - - -

Stop trying to subvert Islam.

Is prohibiting Riba subversion of Islam?

 

[Futuwwa]

Wouldnt Islam be a classic revolutionary movement that seeks to remake societies?..
Truth subverts evil.

And its quite sad how the leftist ideals in Islam are ignored..

Islam was the first socialised state no?
Prohibits Usury, now there is some more lefty revolutionary talk right there..

Also, Caliph Abu Bakr launched the Ridda Wars to bring to heel tribes that refused to pay zakat. That's some truly radical giant missile parade grade Communism there ;D

 

[سيف الله]

Salaam

On the subject of Interest, I think Arisotle was one of the first to speak against interest.

Aristotle understood that money is sterile; it doesn’t beget more money the way cows beget
more cows. He knew that

"Money exists not by nature but by law":

"The most hated sort (of wealth getting) and with the greatest reason, is usury, which
makes a gain out of money itself and not from the natural object of it. For money was
intended to be used in exchange but not to increase at interest. And this term interest [the
word tokos, which in Greek also means 'breed' or 'offspring']*, which means the birth of
money from money is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles
the parent. Wherefore of all modes of getting wealth, this is the most unnatural." (1258b,
POLITICS)

And he really disliked usurers:

"...those who ply sordid trades, pimps and all such people, and those who lend
small sums at high rates. For all these take more than they ought, and from the wrong
sources. What is common to them is evidently a sordid love of gain..." (1122a, ETHICS)

But your right that Islam had the most success in prohibiting interest.

Bro beleiver I think we want the same things and like I said I do admire aspects of the left (their stances against war, racism etc)

I think we differ on how to get to the destination.

 

[anatolian]

The Islamic socio-economic system is neither capitalist, nor communist but in between. Islam permits the individual investment but discourages the accumulation of wealth. Tries to establish the equal distribution of wealth.

 

[AllahIsAl-Malik]

Yep I agree, i genuinley dont like left right paradigmes, its all part of the divide and rule stratergy used by the evil one.

But the notion that usery should be forbidden for example in this day and age is revolutionary and i do think welfare state 1400years ago in Arabia was also revolutionary?

But i also get your point.

- - - Updated - - -



Is prohibiting Riba subversion of Islam?

Do you denounce fornication? Do you denounce abortion? Do you denouce homosexuality? Do you denounce intoxicants?

 

[beleiver]

Do you denounce fornication? Do you denounce abortion? Do you denouce homosexuality? Do you denounce intoxicants?

Going massivley off topic now..I really dont see the relevance? but while i am here.
Most that stuff is between the sinner and the creator, there is no other victim, and every situation is different, Allah knows best and i have faith there is no escape from His punishment.
But 'intoxicant' the word doesnt translate in arabic or at best its a bad translation..
I totally agree 100% with the Quran where it says to stay away from anything that covers ones mind if they want to succede, I really dont think out right prohibition is subscribed, justified nor has there ever been a single case where it works or hasnt caused more problems than some idiot getting wasted might..'Stay away from' means just that, i dont support tyranny at any level either.

There is nothing in the Quran that says stay away from things that open the mind, but plenty of quotes that say the Quran is work for those that think.

 

[AllahIsAl-Malik]

Going massivley off topic now..I really dont see the relevance? but while i am here.
Most that stuff is between the sinner and the creator, there is no other victim, and every situation is different, Allah knows best and i have faith there is no escape from His punishment.
But 'intoxicant' the word doesnt translate in arabic or at best its a bad translation..
I totally agree 100% with the Quran where it says to stay away from anything that covers ones mind if they want to succede, I really dont think out right prohibition is subscribed, justified nor has there ever been a single case where it works or hasnt caused more problems than some idiot getting wasted might..'Stay away from' means just that, i dont support tyranny at any level either.

There is nothing in the Quran that says stay away from things that open the mind, but plenty of quotes that say the Quran is work for those that think.

That is not off-topic.

I asked you that same question twice and you ignored the first time. Only the second time did you answer.

In any case, Islam already has a certain amount of socialism built in via Zakat.

The leftists support abortion, homosexuality, "gender theory" (saying things like "gender and sex are not the same" and trying to force that deranged ideology on people) and all sorts of degeneracy.

The liberals are promoting degeneracy. You try to make it about economics and talk about economics. But the liberals are not just talking about economic things.

The liberals are promoting degeneracy. What the social justice warriors are promoting is totally against Islam. I live around a bunch of leftists. I see for myself what they're about.

- - - Updated - - -

This is leftism today. It deserves to die.

 

[beleiver]

I will look at that later..My initial reaction is to say, just because there are some insane leftists doesnt make all leftists of their ideas insane..Same can be said for conservatives.

Abortion for example , it can be insane to force a pregnancy againt ones will that might endanger a woman a mother a daughter and wife for the sake of an unborn that is dependant on that woman and that woman alone in the first place, or to force a rape victim to give birth, in such cases its between that woman and God alone surley?
This is not a left right debate but a debate centred around Truth and Justice.
There is a referendum on Abortion here in Ireland so its a hot topic, and i can find no consensus in Islam, some Sheiks are in favour of repeal.

Labels are bad and i stand by the theory that the left right paradigm is from the evil one, he seeks to divide and rule us.

 

[سيف الله]

Salaam

Some more books Id like to recommend.

Liberalism: A Counter-History

Blurb

In this definitive historical investigation, Italian author and philosopher Domenico Losurdo argues that from the outset liberalism, as a philosophical position and ideology, has been bound up with the most illiberal of policies: slavery, colonialism, genocide, racism and snobbery.

A review

Germinal

5.0 out of 5 stars The murky side of liberalism exposed.

This book is a forensic excavation that aims, and succeeds, in challenging the dominant narrative of the history of liberalism. This dominant narrative, self-regarding, self-congratulatory, claiming for itself a constant, peaceful path of progress, is described by Losurdo as a 'hagiography'. It is one that Losurdo quite ruthlessly undermines.

Losurdo argues that from the outset liberalism, as a philosophical position and ideology, has been bound up with the most illiberal of policies: slavery, colonialism, genocide, racism, support for fascism and systems of ruthless and violent class domination both in the heartlands of the liberal world, Britain and the USA, and in the colonies.

Losurdo narrates an intellectual history running from the seventeenth through to the twentieth centuries. He examines the thought of preeminent liberal writers and politicians such as Locke, Burke, de Tocqueville, Constant, Bentham, Mill, Jefferson, Disraeli and Sieyes among many others, revealing the inner contradictions of an intellectual position that has exercised a formative influence on today's politics. The contradictions that Losurdo highlights are what he terms 'the exclusion clauses' that enable the liberal, in the classic age of liberalism, to deny to others, blacks, slaves, the colonised, Irish, peasants and working class, the liberties which the liberals claim for themselves and the specious reasonings employed to justify oppression in the name of liberty. In fact, Losurdo locates much of the progress made in liberal societies, the extension of liberty to those previously excluded from it, to the struggles of the oppressed themselves, what Losurdo calls 'struggles for recognition' and how these have challenged the exclusion clauses of liberalism and forced some liberals to amend their philosophy and practice. Uncomfortable reading for liberals.

Despite some quite complex lines of argumentation, the book is easy to read. It's divided into short thematic chunks to make it easily digestible and really was great to read. In fact, I was sorry that it finished and felt that the twentieth century and the present day of liberalism could have received greater attention.



The Myth of Liberalism

Blurb

Individual freedom looms large in political and ethical thought. Nevertheless, the theoretical foundations underlying modern liberalism continue to be contested by proponents and opponents alike. The Myth of Liberalism offers a unique contribution to this debate by following through on the often-underdeveloped suggestion that liberal principles are untenable because they are self-contradictory. By analyzing and ultimately refuting each of the proposed underpinnings of liberalism—liberty, equality, rights, privacy, autonomy, or dignity—Safranek concludes that contemporary liberalism is a myth: it is not a coherent political philosophy as much as a collection of causes masked by emotively potent political rhetoric.

Safranek marshals thorough evidence to make the case that each of the allegedly fundamental liberal principles amount to the right to do as one desires. As a result, liberalism’s proponents must offer some method or principle to mediate the inevitable conflict of desires. In fact, all liberal scholars invoke some form of John Stuart Mill’s harm principle to proscribe unacceptable desires. But this leads to self-contradiction: because all acknowledge that harm can be psychological as well as physical, anyone suffers harm when his act is legally prohibited, as this denies him the object of his desires (liberty) for the sake of another’s desires. Therefore any right advanced in the name of liberty contradicts that very principle.

While finding inherent flaws in liberal justifications for personal liberty, including rights to same-sex marriage, abortion, and assisted suicide, Safranek reveals the consequences of the contemporary liberaldisdain for morality as a basis for law and constitutional rights. To correct for these shortcomings of the modern liberal notions of freedom, which are grounded in the passions, The Myth of Liberalism proposes an alternative way of safeguarding the human desire for liberty: a cogent retrieval of a pre-modern intellectual tradition that esteems reason and virtue.

A Conservative history of the American left

Blurb

A conservative and author of Intellectual Morons takes a look at the origins and history of today's leftist and liberal ideas, from the nineteenth century to the present day, with profiles of colorful characters ranging from a free love, anti-marriage activist, to a famed abolitionist who advocated violence, to a woman who ran for president on a platform of "scientific religion.

A review

Peter Uys

Superbly written & researched history of ideas & individuals

Laird M. Wilcox

5.0 out of 5 starsWell-written and authentic account of the dark side of the American Left from a conservative perspective.

Nearly all of the books on the American Left tend to favor it They are written by leftists for leftists and many are embarrassingly partisan and heavily biased. Acts of violence, though regrettable, are justified by the circumstances. Lies, deceit, fanaticism and psychopathy are ignored or explained away as unavoidable artifacts of necessary socialist causes and crusades. Books on the American Right, on the other hand, are uniformly critical, name-calling, sterotypical attempts to marginalize and stigmatize it. All right-wingers are Nazis, near-Nazis, crypto-Nazis or unaware that their values, opinions and beliefs are leading in that direction.

This book is an attempt to illustrate the shady and even dangerous side of the American Left. Deals with the dark side of the sometimes psychopathic far left that most books minimize or explain as regrettable exceptions to a rather nice bunch of people only wanting to do the right thing. Explains the role that the Communist Party had in promoting Soviet espionage in the 50's along with other examples of leftist worship of totalitarian dictatorships. It's well-written, insightful and a good balance to other fawning accounts written by fans and enthusiasts. It predates the racial fanaticism and identity politics of the early 21st Century but is very helpful in understand the historical basis it.