Friday, June 29, 2007

Some Sanity from Shrinks

The best laid plans of mice and men oft gang agleigh, or whatever,the Muddled East proves again and again. But why do blueish Marxist feminists and academicide victims continue to boost violent reactionaries who would snuff their female [and often Jewish} asses in a heartbeat? Here's Sigmund, Carl & Alfred:

Marx always expected that the middle class--which he described as composed of the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant etc--would own some property, but not sufficient to have all work done by employees or workers. Those in the middle class must also work in order to survive and are thus simultaneously members of Marx's proletariat as well as his bourgeoisie. He expected that the middle class would disappear as capitalism developed, since the only sustainable positions were the ones of his dialectic.

This, however, is not what actually happens in the real world as it turns out.

Whenever the workers are given liberty and allowed to pursue their own happiness (and not the state's), the middle class has continued to expand. In fact, the values of this particular economic group have come to anchor society in the United States. Far from wanting to ignite a worker's revolution as Marx predicted, they enjoy the creature comforts of the capitalist system and feel themselves empowered by it. Worse (from the communist/socialist's perspective anyway), the typical person in the middle class believes that he or she can better themselves by using the many opportunities offered by a liberal, capitalistic democracy.

Even in Communist China, capitalistic pursuits and entrepreneurship have become the true "opiates" of the masses--in the sense that to the degree people are free to pursue their own happiness and work for their own interests--i.e., where they have economic freedom, even if they don't have political freedom-- they are relatively content, and are unlikely to fulfill the ardent communist/socialist's revolutionary fantasies.

Let's switch gears now and look at the scenario that has been playing out in the Middle East for the last half century or more. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict has all the trappings of a perfect Marxist drama: the oppressed and poverty-stricken proletariat who have been dispossessed from the land that should be rightfully theirs; and the evil, oppressive and exploitative Jew.

There is only one way that the Israelis could have achieved a country of plenty in the midst of the arid and empty desert --and that must be by exploitation, oppression and abuse of the Palestinians. I mean, just look at what Israel has been able to accomplish since its founding! Not only have they managed to create a country that exemplifies western values, but their people are prosperous, industrious, educated, and contribute to the advancement of humanity in every way. And, they managed to do all this in only a few decades; while their Arab counterparts (including the Palestinians) have not been able to create much of anything over hundreds of years. In fact, if it wasn't for the discovery of oil in the Middle East, there would not be any wealth at all to sustain most of the countries surrounding Israel.

As this Marxist play continues act after repetitive act, highlighting the dialectic of oppressor versus oppressed, we can begin to understand why the political left have supported the Palestinian and Arab cause against Israel; and why jihad and shar'ia have become the preferred "revolt of the masses".

But despite the ongoing stasis in Gaza and the West Bank, the Arabs appear stuck on stupid. Why can't they adapt in Palestine? And why is the Arab world so backward despite the most massive oil resource base in the world? The knee-jerk loser response that it is the US, Israel, and other outside oppressors is familiar to me, although thoughtful Arab intellectuals will admit the religious component does hold Islamic societies back. After all, Islam means "submission [to the will of God] hardly a dynamic cultural meta-narrative. Blaming lack of Nobel Prizes on conspiracies just is silly when so few western books are translated into Arabic. SC&A continue:
It is in the interest of both Palestinian and Arab leaders to blame the failures and poverty of Palestinian society on Israel. In this, they are simply acting out the middle eastern variation of the Marxist drama by claiming that they have been “oppressed” by the very existence of Israel and cashing in on their victimhood. Thus an empowered middle class with a stake in peace and a desire for prosperity and commerce is the last thing the tyrants and terrorists of the middle east would want to emerge from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A middle class demands accountability. A middle class demands responsible government and a middle class demands opportunity. Thus, the Palestinians are forever doomed to exist in poverty and misery (whether in the primitive “camps” in Gaza; or Lebanon or anywhere in the ME) as an everlasting testament to Israeli and Western “oppression.”

The Palestinian political, cultural and religious leadership in both Hamas and Fatah are united in one area: they are afraid they will rightly be held accountable for the poverty, misery, havoc and destruction they have wrought for the last half century; and for the dark curtain they have drawn around the Arab world. It is the Arab world that has kept generations of Palestinians impoverished and without hope.

The Palestinians have bet on their Arab brothers ever since the UN Decision in 1947 and supported Saddam in '90-91 in his takeover of Kuwait. There are prices to pay from refusing to recognize reality, as the Marxist feminists and academicide victims in the USA are beginning to understand. Back to the Marxist template:
Marx believed that the capitalist system would ignite a worker's revolution, but the reality is that those workers began to enjoy the creature comforts of the capitalist system and felt themselves empowered by it. As stated earlier, the worse aspect of this reality--from the communist/socialist's perspective anyway--is that the typical person in the middle class believes that he or she can better themselves by using the many opportunities offered by a liberal, capitalistic democracy. The middle eastern variant of the Marxist dialectic holds that Palestinians--indeed, all Muslims--are oppressed by the decadence of Western/Christian/Jewish capitalism and democracy and that the only way to get rid of this oppression is through jihad. Thus the elites are invested in encouraging jihad and endless war as they live off the oil profits and bask in their own corruption; while the Arab (especially the Palestinian) proletariat can only look forward to blowing themselves up for Allah as the highest achievement they can aspire to. The pursuit of their own happiness or working for their own interests is simply not an option.

Or, in any way of phrasing it, "success is not an option."


Anonymous said...

damn, you are insightful.

rick said...

Anonymity is a burka worn by the cowardly.

Dave. I am unable to recall the name of that female author. I was hoping it would ring familiar to you. I will continue to search for Holy Land Sojourn. I am particularly interested in what Twain had to say. I believe he is mostly describing the nomadic bedu you refer to.

Mike said...

Western/Christian/Jewish capitalism.
This idea is to be found no where in the Bible. Jesus followers set up a system by which the Church should be run in the book of Acts
Act 4:34 For neither was anyone needy among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
Act 4:35 and they laid them down at the apostles' feet. And distribution was made to every man according as he had need.This is collective ownership in other words socialism. If it was good for the church why not the rest of society.