|
08 Apr 03 - 12:20 PM (#928736) Subject: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Sean Waltman A very interesting article by David Horowitz, a sixties radical and founder of Ramparts Magazine. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=7113 Link fixed and thread moved to BS/Nonmusic. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 12:23 PM (#928739) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: greg stephens I have a sort of vague feeling that given the classification system on Mudcat(which I personally disagree with), this should be BS. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 12:24 PM (#928740) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Sean Waltman Sorry, I can't seem to make the make a link function work properly. Maybe Joe can fix the link for me. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=7113 |
|
08 Apr 03 - 12:25 PM (#928741) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Sean Waltman Sorry Greg, I meant to put it as BS. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 12:28 PM (#928743) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Amos Here's a clicky to it. The article discusses extremism and its proponents amongst Islamic front groups, particularly as they are represented on American campuses. A |
|
08 Apr 03 - 01:09 PM (#928765) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Joe Offer I've heard before that Horowitz had switched from left-wing ideology to right-wing ideology. I wonder if he stopped in between to think any of his own thoughts. I think this happens quite often. Some people have to be on the bandwagon, and it really doesn't matter which bandwagon they ride on. They want an ideology, an entire package that provides all the easy answers. Seems to me that Rush Limbaugh and Ronald Reagan are two others who made this sort of switch. All three read scripts very well and are able to draw others to join their bandwagon - but it's doubtful that they ever did any serious thinking for themselves. -Joe Offer- |
|
08 Apr 03 - 01:16 PM (#928767) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: DougR Aw Joe! There you go, picking on poor old Rush and Ronnie! I'm sure you are correct about Ronald, today, but Rush, I'm not so sure. :>) DougR |
|
08 Apr 03 - 01:20 PM (#928770) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Troll Come on Joe. Just because they didn't draw the same conclusions that you did doesn't mean they never thought about it. You are certainly old enough to recall a TV show called "Eye Of The Beholder" in which each person who saw a scene interpreted it according to their own bias's. No two people will interpret data in the same way, especially something as subjective as political theory. troll |
|
08 Apr 03 - 01:25 PM (#928773) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Sean Waltman Joe, It's not unusual for people to change aspects of their thinking when they come to see their mistakes. Once upon a time, Pete Seeger and Paul Robeson were staunch Stalinists. Of course, that was before they knew that Stalin was one of the worst mass murderers in human history, directly responsible for 20,000,000 deaths. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 01:34 PM (#928782) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Joe Offer I wasn't aware of Reagan and Limbaugh during their "liberal" days, but I was aware of Horowitz and his flashy Ramparts magazine. He was rash back then, and he's rash now. "Mindless ideologue" is the term that comes to mind... I saw the same kind of people on the rostrum at the peace rally I attended in Sacramento on February 15. They spouted (shouted?) extreme left-wing ideology, full of finger-pointing and easy answers. The right-wingers do the same thing - and neither side makes much sense. The United States is a nation of ideologues, led by a president who is very dangerously ideological. The answers are neither on the left, or on the right. I wonder if America will ever come to understand that. -Joe Offer- |
|
08 Apr 03 - 01:50 PM (#928799) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: CarolC The interesting part is that the Black Panthers came to the forefront of the Civil Rights movement after Martin Luther King was assasinated. Dr. King was adamant about using Gandhiesque (sp?) tactics. One of his greatest strengths was his ability to inspire people to risk their lives while using entirely peaceful means of protest. It's not the least bit surprising that the Civil Rights movement became radicalized after Dr. King was assasinated. I think people in power today could learn a lot from the lessons of those times. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 02:24 PM (#928823) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Greg F. He going to follow up with articles on Militant Judaism and Militant Christianity- both of which are a greater real threat than Islam? |
|
08 Apr 03 - 03:00 PM (#928853) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Joe Offer Well, Greg, maybe the real thread is militancy, not Islam, Christianity, or Judaism. -Joe Offer- |
|
08 Apr 03 - 03:22 PM (#928870) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Beccy Joe- I have to agree with you that militancy is the threat. Anyone who adheres faithfully (and I stress FAITHFULLY) to a religion tends to be better for it. Anyone who adheres militantly (again- add emphasis) tends not only to be worse off for it, but tends to make others worse off in the bargain. Generalization? To be sure- but I have seen militancy work bad deeds on people I have loved- so it's also anecdotal. Beccy |
|
08 Apr 03 - 03:23 PM (#928872) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Beccy One more thing... Just WHEN were Limbaugh's "liberal days"??? I am unaware of them. Everyone knows Reagan converted from the Democrat side of the aisle- (and graduated from SAG.) |
|
08 Apr 03 - 03:32 PM (#928879) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Sean Waltman The interesting part is that the Black Panthers came to the forefront of the Civil Rights movement after Martin Luther King was assasinated. Dr. King was adamant about using Gandhiesque (sp?) tactics. One of his greatest strengths was his ability to inspire people to risk their lives while using entirely peaceful means of protest. It's not the least bit surprising that the Civil Rights movement became radicalized after Dr. King was assasinated. CarolC, You're wrong. The Black Panthers were a significant force by 1966, two years before Dr. King was assassinated. And long before the assassination, there were many who rejected Dr. King's Ghandian philosophy. I recall the huge, very violent riots in Watts in 1965, in Detroit in 1967, etc. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 04:09 PM (#928905) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Beccy I see he footnotes the story of his friend (I believe her name was Betty Van Patter) in the article. I read "Radical Son" an found it to be a riveting political auto-biography. Horowitz, like many uber-passionate people, admits that he was more than difficult to live with. All the same, to paraphrase, that candle that burns the hottest extinquishes the fastest- and like him or not, Horowitz is a genius. I heartily recommend "Radical Son" to anyone who wants to see the metamorphosis from radical "red diaper baby" (his words) to outspoken conservative. One of the most interesting parts of the book was the treatment he received from former "friends" and compatriots when he realized that he was changing his opinions in several areas. Beccy P.S. Sorry for the thread creep- but it's really worth the read! |
|
08 Apr 03 - 06:09 PM (#928992) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: CarolC Sean, while the Black Panthers may have been a significant force by 1966, Dr. King and those Civil Rights organizations that promoted non-violent methods were still in the forefront (drawing the largest number of supporters) of the movement until Dr. King was killed. Dr. King's assassination gave those organizations who advocated a more radical approach an opportunity to say "see, we told you so" to those who might still want to use non-violent approaches. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 06:15 PM (#928995) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: GUEST,heric "Gandhiesque (sp?)" Perfect, Carol. Meticulous. . . perfect. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 06:20 PM (#928997) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Joe Offer Hi, Beccy - When he had a local talk show here in Sacramento, Rush Limbaugh would often say he was a knee-jerk liberal before he "saw the light" (which I think means when he found out the conservatives paid better). He certainly wasn't a liberal when he was on the air here, but it WAS fun to listen to him every once in a while. -Joe Offer- |
|
08 Apr 03 - 06:30 PM (#929010) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: McGrath of Harlow It's not unusual, as Joe says, to get people with an authoritarian mindset turning up in a different part of the political spectrum. Mussolini was another. It's a pity people still seem so preoccupied with a one dimenional model of politics, as if when you have placed people on a left-right spectrum you have defined what is important. To even approximate to really you have to add in an authoritarian-libertarian dimension as well, at right angles. And probably a third dimension which woudl be about attitudes to the use of violence and so forth. My inpression is that, while it is quite common for people to move from one end of the left-right dimension, they are more likely to stay consistent along the authoritarian-libertarian dimension, and probably the violence/non-violence one. |
|
08 Apr 03 - 07:18 PM (#929058) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Beccy Thanks, Joe... I never had the opportunity to hear him in Sacramento for a couple reasons. A.) I was too young to care. B.) I didn't have a shortwave radio, and Sacramento's a heckuva stretch to reach Michigan or New York. :-)Beccy |
|
09 Apr 03 - 03:45 AM (#929285) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Joe Offer Beccy, are you implying that I'm an old guy? Hmmm. Maybe I am. -Joe Offer, 54- |
|
09 Apr 03 - 12:32 PM (#929625) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Beccy Nah, Joe... I'm not saying you're OLD, I'm just sayin' you're older than me. And you lived much more in range of that particular radio tower than did I. (Phew.... nice save, eh? :-) Beccy |
|
09 Apr 03 - 01:20 PM (#929672) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Wolfgang It's not unusual, as Joe says, to get people with an authoritarian mindset turning up in a different part of the political spectrum. Mussolini was another. True. Many others come to my mind easily, but all of them share one detail: They went from far left to far right. Is it only me or is here a pattern? Help me and give me a counter example or tell me why there should be this particular pattern. Wolfgang |
|
09 Apr 03 - 01:37 PM (#929683) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: McGrath of Harlow I'd suspect that in a place where the authoritarian left took over from the authoritarian right some of the same characters might crop up. For example in Eastern Europe in the postwar years. I'm sure for some people needing to be close to the people in power is the dominant thing. I imagine there are also other people who find they are always going to be in opposition, whoever is in power. I'd be very surprised if there aren't many people in Russia and Eastern Europe, who were dissidents under the Soviet system, who are still dissidents today. |
|
09 Apr 03 - 01:55 PM (#929707) Subject: RE: David Horowitz on militant Islam From: Wolfgang For example in Eastern Europe in the postwar years. I'm sure you're right here, though I couldn't think of a single known example. Some of Hitler's officers have been in the GDR's army, for instance. Could anyone provide me with a counterexample without a government change? Someone in France, Britain, USA or some other democracy taking the path from far right to far left and not vice versa. Wolfgang |