***WHY SOME OF US FEAR CLINTON ? ***
Published: July 24 Author: J.R. Nyquist
Nazi was shorthand for National "Socialists" Workers Party --a left-wing totalitarian government.
Let's all get that straight.
The thing to fear is totalitarianism.
Nothing else matters but that.
========================================================
WHY SOME OF US FEAR CLINTON?
The Bible teaches us to love our enemies and to hate no one.
This is a very noble way to live, though few of us attain such grace.
Perhaps the reason so few of us can love our enemies has to do with the link between hate and fear.
If someone makes us afraid, we eventually come to hate that person. And however brave some of us are, fear sometimes gets the better of us.
It has often been remarked that the so-called "far right" is irrational in its hatred for Bill CLinton.
Many liberal media types think the impeachment trial was mean-spirited, a hate-inspired attack on a poor sick guy who suffers from a sexual addiction. Some leftists are baffled because they don't see anything special about Clinton that is particularly threatening or dangerous.
Well, it's time someone explained the right's fear of Bill Clinton.
We experience his term in office as a dangerous time, as a time in when American institutions are exposed to corruption and degradation. It's a time when freedom is imperiled at home and national security is weakened abroad.
Right Wing paranoia?
What if we elected a president who, as a College student had worked for a Nazi front organization, then made a trip to Hitler's Berlin (a time about which he is less than forthcoming).
Imagine also that he married someone with ties to numerous anti-semitic organizations. Someone who idolizes Mussolini and Franco. How would you feel?
I first heard of Bill Clinton 16 years ago.
I was getting a teaching credential, and one of my classes was on Adolescent Psychology. The professor of this course, who was a very admirable teacher--one day, after class, invited me to a 7 p.m. meeting at the Science Lecture Hall.
At the time I didn't know she was a Marxist, and I didn't know the meeting was political. She said that if I were interested in education in California, I should attend.
I was curious, so I went.
Well, I couldn't have been more surprised if it had been a coven of witches. I found communist literature, books and pamphlets--stacked on tables in the lobby.
A visiting professor gave a rousing talk about overthrowing the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie" in America.
How would this be accomplished? By taking over the Democratic Party through its left wing.
The speaker said it was possible to elect a stealth socialist president who, would effect a peaceful transition of socialism during the next great economic down-turn.
Capitalism would be unmasked as a bankrupt system. The people would then support a new socialist system.
All businesses would be nationalized by the government and run like the Post Office.
This socialist president, said the speaker, could be elected either in 1988 or 1992.
The only problem was that of timing. When would the next major economic down-turn hit?
Some days later, I went to visit my professor at her office. We talked about the speaker and the book he had written. We talked about Marxism and the idea of changing the system.
Then suddenly, my professor said, "We have such high hopes for this young Arkansas governor, Bill Clinton."
That was the first time I heard Bill Clinton's name.
But it wasn't the first time I'd heard this idea of taking over the left wing of the Democratic Party and electing a stealth socialist president.
I'd heard that idea in 1981, when I was a senior at University of California.
The left wing activist, Derek Shearer, come to speak on "economic democracy."
Two radical friends dragged me to hear him. To listen to Shearer talk, concentrating on his theory of "economic democracy," thinking to myself "this is just Marxism."
After his speech, I went up to him and asked point blank: "Mr. Shearer, what is the difference between Marxism and "economic democracy"? He looked at me suspiciously and then said "I probably shouldn't say this --but there is no difference."
I had a long discussion with Shearer about why he wasn't forthright --and he said, "Marxism is unpopular with the American people, who have a knee-jerk reaction to words like "socialism" and "communism" even though--according to Shearer, "these are perfectly good words. Therefore, in order to win Americans over to socialist ways of thinking, you need to create a new euphemistic language - -a kind of linguistic deception."
Shearer also talked about taking over the Democratic Party through its left wing and electing a stealth socialist president.
As it happens, Derek Shearer is a friend of Bill Clinton.
What if you were Jewish and you had an American President and first lady who flirted with Nazism and had friends who were anti-semitics?
But the Nazis were mass murderers. It is wrong to compare them to Marxists.
Our leftist friends forget that tens of millions of conservatives, traditionalists, Christian and others have been persecuted, murdered, and driven into concentration camps by Marxists.
Nearly one-third of the nation of Cambodia was killed by Marxists.
The killing continues today. In Angola, Mozambique, Colombia and the Congo.
Let's be honest.
The historic record is indisputable. Marxism means persecution of Christians, the execution of right wing dissidents, massive slave labor camps and grinding poverty for countless millions of terrified, muzzled human beings.
So when it happens that we compare Marxism to Nazism we are not being unfair in our comparison.
We are being historically accurate.
We are describing what happened to conservatives and Christians in country after country.
What the left has to finally acknowledge is that the ideas of Marx, Lenin, Trotsky and Mao, are as threatening as the anti-semitic ideas of Hitler.
After Mao, the next greatest mass murderer happens to be Stalin.
Marxist ideologues have killed 100 million people. Nazis killed only a fraction of this.
Nobody in this country is going to defend Nazi associations. If a Republican candidate for president was involved with anti-semitic, racists or worked for a Nazi front organization, he would be denounced---
Why is it then that the Democratic Party is soft on Marxism. Why does it tolerate so many fellow-travelers and disciples for the hard left?
Come now, let us compare this double standard in American politics.
Bill Clinton was not only a draft evader but he was for the Viet-Cong terrorists.
Posted for discussion and educational purposes only. Not for commercial use.
worldnetdaily.com |
