Freedomvrights.com
Writings and Publications by Joseph B. H. McMillan
Who are the Liberal Fundamentalists?
by
Joseph B.H. McMillan:
The Threat; Who are They? The Fight; Islam and Liberal Fundamentalism; Origins of Liberal Fundamentalism; Route to Power; The Doctrine; Authoritarianism; Israel; Some Manifestations
Liberal Fundamentalism is the most dangerous, the most destructive, and the most sinister pseudo-religious doctrine ever to gain credence amongst supposedly rational human beings.
Liberal Fundamentalist doctrine created the environment and conditions which rendered the most powerful nation on earth defenseless against the horrific attacks on the 11th September, 2001.
I shall demonstrate, in later articles, that Liberal Fundamentalism is more dangerous to individual freedom and international peace than communism; more destructive of moral values and family and social cohesion than Nero's Rome; and more sinister than Nazism in its contempt for democratic institutions, indoctrination of its populace and resort to “the law” to give legitimacy and authority to its creed.
Thus does Liberal Fundamentalism reveal itself as the authoritarian doctrine it is. A doctrine well advanced in its principal aim: the dismantling and destruction of Western Judeo-Christian civilization.
But, unlike the peoples and nations subjugated by Communist and Nazi doctrine, those peoples and nations in the grip of Liberal Fundamentalist doctrine do not have the beacon of light, the counterbalance of hope, which the `free world', particularly the United States, held out to those seeking to rid themselves of the yokes of Communism and Nazism. Liberal Fundamentalism has the so-called `free world' itself in a stranglehold. And like the settlers opening up the American Frontier, we only have ourselves to rely on to fight against, and rid ourselves, of this Orwellian authoritarianism. Although we should be under no illusion as to the difficulty of the task.
The `high priest' of Liberal Fundamentalism is Bill Clinton, former President of the United States. He is `worshipped' and emulated by Liberal Fundamentalists everywhere, but nowhere more so than in the radical student activist New Labour government of Britain, led by Tony Blair. When the Fundamentalists lost power in the United States after the 2000 Presidential elections, the Fundamentalist banner was taken up by Blair and his clique of student activists. The doctrine practiced by these Fundamentalists masquerades as `The Third Way'. It has disciples in every European Union country, some wielding power, others waiting in the wings. The institutions of the European Union are infested with adherents to the doctrine. Indeed, no Western developed country is free of Liberal Fundamentalism. And there lies one of the greatest difficulties in fighting this brand of Fundamentalism. Europe, or more accurately, the European Union, is a lost cause, so complete has been the imposition of Fundamentalist doctrine, even in those countries which do not currently have `Third Way' governments. There are a very few exceptions, notably Spain, where the doctrine is still in its early stages. Regrettably, its membership of the European Union renders it virtually powerless to resist the Fundamentalist onslaught.
So yet again, the only beacon of light shines in the United States, albeit dimly. Although more often than not Fundamentalist trends have initially taken hold in the US, its size, constitution and heritage have ensured a diversity which contains a counterbalance within itself. But this time, the US is not standing united against a foreign threat. Liberal Fundamentalism is firmly entrenched. But there is still just about sufficient counterbalance which, if brought together in a common recognition of the threat, is capable of defending and re-establishing the Judeo-Christian values and heritage which have made the United States and its people the bastion and defender of freedom and decency in the modern age.
Recognition of the urgency and need for action is crucial however, because the catastrophic consequences of Liberal Fundamentalist doctrine are already manifesting themselves in devastating and terrifying ways, not least the proliferation of international terror and the continuing and escalating onslaught on Israel, or more accurately, on the Jews. Simultaneously, and with the additional catalyst of terror, individual freedom is being jettisoned at unparalleled speed. Conversely, Liberal Fundamentalists have never been so active and vocal in enhancing and entrenching the freedoms of those who despise and seek to harm us; not only the individuals, but their doctrines, creeds and religions. This should not surprise us; there is a coincidence of contempt and hatred for Judeo-Christian values in both camps. There is a convergence of intention to destroy those values even though the alternatives each seek to impose in its place may differ.
Islam and Liberal Fundamentalism
The leading beneficiary of Liberal Fundamentalism is undoubtedly Islam: and Muslims have not missed any opportunity to exploit the weaknesses created by the doctrine. Accorded the status “Beyond Criticism or Debate”, Islam has aggressively entrenched and expanded its privileged position.
Although I deal with Islam more fully later in this discourse, I should lay out some general observations at the outset. The most startling is ignorance. Ignorance of those who pontificate about the nature and merits of Islam while knowing little, or more accurately, nothing about it. Chief among these are our political leaders and the western media. A short illustration should demonstrate the point. After the horrific terror attacks on the US in September 2001, Blair's aides proudly announced that he had taken a copy of the Koran with him on his summer holiday so that he could read up on the subject. Soon after this dramatic announcement, the British people were treated to a lecture by Blair on the peaceful and tolerant nature of Islam. While many scholars who have objectively studied the Koran conclude the opposite, Blair, like all Liberal Fundamentalists, appears to benefit from instant revelation.
So while a great scholar and philanthropist such as Albert Schweitzer concludes that Islam is on “all points unoriginal and decadent” [Civilization and Ethics, 3rd Ed, page28], Blair, after a few weeks holiday reading, dictates that Islam is peaceful and tolerant.
All things being equal, one could be inclined to give the Liberal Fundamentalists the benefit of the doubt and accept such proclamations. The problem is that it flies in the face of reality and common sense. A brief visit to any Islamic country practicing Sha'ria law will give the lie to what we are told we must believe. And while Blair is trumpeting Islam's tolerance on the one hand, on the other he is spending a fortune of taxpayers money protecting a writer [Salman Rushdie, for whom, I should add, I have little admiration] from an Islamic decree (fatwa) that he should be executed for criticizing Islam.
Blair's proclamations about Islam also demonstrate the total contempt Liberal Fundamentalists have for the intelligence of their own people. Given that they have turned institutions of learning into centers of indoctrination, this should not be surprising. Anyone, including the likes of Blair, will find, by even a cursory examination of the Contents of the Koran, cutting criticism of both Judaism and Christianity. “The Children of Israel: Their privileges and backsliding” [Chapter 2, verses 40 - 86] and “People of the Book: Their jealousy and narrow-mindedness” [Chapter 2 verses 87 - 121]. If Blair had then taken the trouble to turn to the commentary introducing the former (C 46) he would have read, after a little tirade against the “Children of Israel”, this: “they [the Children of Israel] falsified Scripture and turned their backs on righteousness”. At a stroke the Koran declares that the Jews adhere to scriptures which are false. No wonder then that the Koran states that the peoples having the strongest enmity to Muslims are the “Jews and Pagans” [Chapter 5 verse 85].
Turning over the Contents page we come to this: “Where the People of the Book went wrong...” [Chapter 4 verses 153 -176]. If Blair, or anyone else, then bothered to read the Commentary [C68], they would find this about Christianity: “And the Christians [went wrong] in raising Jesus the Apostle to equality with God”. I would expect that anyone reading such a statement may be interested in reading on a little. If they did they would discover that the Koran denies the Crucifixion [4:157], declares that Christ is not God and it is blasphemy to claim such [5:19], and likewise it is blasphemous to proclaim the Holy Trinity [5:76]. For good measure the Koran calls “God's curse” on those who “Call Christ the Son of God” [9:30]. So there we are; the entire Christian faith is founded on fallacy.
And what does the Koran have to say about these “deluded” [9:30] “People of the Book”? It says this: Fight those who do not “acknowledge the Religion Of Truth [ie Islam], (even if they are) of the People of the Book, Until they pay the Jizha [a kind of compensation] With willing submission, And feel themselves subdued.” [9:29]
Verses 20 and 38 of Chapter 9 exhort “those who believe” to fight with their goods “and their persons” in Gods [ie Islam's] cause. Verse 38 admonishes those who hesitate to sacrifice their lives when “asked [by their spiritual leader] to go forth in the cause of God” because “little is the comfort of this life, as compared With the Hereafter.”
So, while everyone else must desist from debate or criticism of Islam, Muslims in Mosques around the world can daily proclaim that Jews read falsified scriptures and Christians are committing blasphemy. Islam can also exhort its “believers” to fight Christians and Jews until they are “subdued.”
I think I can be forgiven for wondering how the likes of Blair make determinations of such absolute certainty when any cursory enquiry into the Koran, as well as reality and common sense, contradict him and other Liberal Fundamentalists like him. The answer perhaps can be gleamed from the ostentatious parade of Muslims in and out of Downing Street.
But this `conspiracy' to silence debate and criticism of Islam is not limited to deluded leaders. The media, that bastion of free speech, ensures that the Liberal Fundamentalist creed is not violated. In Europe the silence is overwhelming. In The US there is at least some `toe-dipping'. But even then I have often watched television in disbelief as `moderate' Muslim after `moderate' Muslim appears to ridicule any perceived or anticipated criticism totally unchallenged. Inevitably I pick up my copy of the Koran and instantly find the verses they deny exist. The problem with the media of course is the same as with the politicians: ignorance at best; adherence to the Liberal Fundamentalist creed at worst.
And so it has been decreed that debate will not be tolerated, less yet criticism. Even worse, Liberal Fundamentalism has so complete a stranglehold on the legislatures and judicial systems in the West that any criticism or debate of Islam could well result in prosecution for inciting racial or religious hatred. If, that is, anyone can overcome the media censorship.
By dismantling Judeo-Christian values and sacrificing our freedoms on the Liberal Fundamentalist altar, the Fundamentalists are leading the world into a cataclysmic conflict which will reduce most of our achievements to rubble. The September 2001 horror was only a mild foretaste of what is to come if we allow the Liberal Fundamentalist doctrine to continue its infestation and destruction of our values and heritage unchecked.
At this point I should just put down a marker: this discourse is not focused on Islam. Its focus is the totality of the threat posed by Liberal Fundamentalism. The `conspiracy' of silence on Islam is only one facet of the overall threat and is outlined at the outset as an illustration because of the immediacy of its import.
Origins of Liberal Fundamentalism
So where did these Liberal Fundamentalists come from and how have they succeeded in gaining such power and influence in supposedly democratic countries? And the more troubling question: how did supposedly rational people let it happen?
I shall deal briefly with these questions then conclude this Introduction with a short precis of the Liberal Fundamentalist doctrine. After that I'll get to the raw meat.
The `elite' of the Fundamentalists are the die-hard activists of the 1960's and 70's. The free-love, pop-star worshippers who enjoyed previously unimaginable freedom, both physically and financially. Their freedom was bought by the sacrifices of their fore-bearers and their Judeo-Christian heritage. Their good fortune was bought with the blood and sweat of their ancestors whose ethical heritage raised them to the nobility of sacrifice for the benefit of future generations.
These budding Fundamentalists, having inherited the legacy of that sacrifice, grew to despise and ridicule the institutions and heritage which had bestowed the legacy.
Primitive self-indulgence was the routine. Carnal indulgence; substance indulgence; leisure indulgence; ungrateful and arrogant indulgence. Responsibility, self-restraint and self-sacrifice were anathema to them. Right and wrong, good and evil; such concepts had no objective meaning. Right and good was their indulgence; wrong and evil was their inheritance. They had no rationality for this `philosophy' other than it felt good; “hey man, its cool.”
Rational reflection of their actions was beyond them. Reflection focused on yesterday's orgy, or yesterday's high, or yesterday's pop concert. Regrettably all too often their parents tacitly endorsed their off-spring's indulgence; the kids were just enjoying the freedoms their ancestors had sacrificed so much to give them. Once they had let off a bit of steam, they would get back to the real world and ensure they protected the inheritance for future generations.
Tragically, that was a gross miscalculation. Some did come to see their folly. The die-hards did not. Their parents' tacit sanction of their indulgence served to spur them on, rather like toddlers testing the limits. They had to find a `cause' that would strike a nerve at the very heart of the beliefs and values which sustained their parents' sense of security. To the delight of these spoilt kids, there were an abundance of `causes' on offer and they embraced them with an almost demonic fanaticism. The only `merit' that a `cause' required to qualify for support was the undermining of western Judeo-Christian values or policy which sought to protect western democratic security. So were spawned the myriad of `movements' which have metamorphosed into today's Liberal Fundamentalism. A particular trait of these `movements' which has been preserved and become a hallmark of Liberal Fundamentalism is prohibition of debate.
I shall examine a little later the destructive effect of some of these `movements', particularly those that have given succor to terror and those which have torn apart our Judeo-Christian values.
So how did this rag-tag of indulgent kids come to wield such destructive and corruptive influence, and then power, over supposedly rational people in supposedly democratic countries? The answer is in fact simple: the dismantling of the education system to replace education with indoctrination; the hi-jacking of the media; the corruption of the legal system; and finally, with the infrastructure in place, the infiltration of the political process from top to bottom. And how was it allowed to happen? Misplaced comfort in democracy which bred complacency and delusion about the protection against authoritarianism which democracy could in reality offer. We assumed that all who participate had the good intentions of `playing by the rules'. Like Germany in the 1930's, we let down our guard; democracy is not a vaccine against evil. The institutions necessary for the maintenance of free democratic nations are those same institutions relied on by authoritarian regimes and dictators to implement and enforce their doctrines. The difference lies in the intention. Authoritarianism uses those institutions, the law, the media, education, to impose its will and its doctrine; in free democratic nations such institutions are the servants of the people, the more minimal the more benign. Proliferation of “law” and administrators of “law” is indicative of the imposition of `will'. In this model, individuals are deemed incapable of “knowing what's best for them”. So, along with an expansion of edicts disguised as “law”, so too are the “courts” and administrators necessary to enforce the edicts. Champions of this model are the European Fundamentalists creating and sponsoring the creation of innumerable new “courts”. Each new “court” erodes more freedom and sovereignty not only of individuals but, as in the case of the “International Criminal Court”, State freedom to protect its citizens and State sovereignty to protect its security. Liberal Fundamentalists have an elitist intellectual arrogance which decrees that true and free democratic process gives reign to ignorant popular prejudices. Only they, the intellectual elite, are capable of creating, implementing and dispensing “true justice” through their myriad of un-elected institutions, quasi-judicial `bodies' and `specialist courts'. To the Fundamentalists, the election of George W Bush in the 2000 Presidential elections is proof positive that allowing the populace free expression of their prejudices, without the benefit of appropriate political `education', results in a conservative “moronic cowboy” clutching the levers of power in the most powerful nation on earth. `True justice', believe the Fundamentalists, can only be served by them to the exclusion of the popular prejudice facilitated by a truly free democratic process. President Bush has been mocked, pilloried and insulted across European political, media and `intellectual' circles, again, with the partial exception of Spain.
So the model is this: the Liberal Fundamentalist elite, the `most equal', have created, and continue to create, extra-democratic institutions through which they can dispense the hierarchical “equality” which they decree is `pure justice', too important to be corrupted by the popular prejudice of the `less equal'. Yes, it does sound like a prophetic fulfillment of Animal Farm and 1984.
The final matter then is the content of the doctrine of Liberal Fundamentalism. I shall focus in detail on various aspects of the doctrine in future discourse. For now I give an overview.
The Liberal Fundamentalist mantra is “equality”. I have already given a taste of Fundamentalism's concept of “equality”. The flip side of the Fundamentalist “equality” coin is `tolerance'. And here lies the deceit behind the doctrine: Fundamentalists proclaim that they are “only intolerant of intolerance”. The trick is in their definition and interpretation of “intolerance”. Essentially it is any view, belief or action with which they disagree. Judeo-Christian values are of course top of the list. This fanatical hatred of Judeo-Christian values was revealed in all its twisted logic by Britain's Tony Blair in his Hit'lerist “forces of conservatism” speech on the 28th September 1999. The “forces of conservatism” vilified by Blair are those same Judeo-Christian values which left the student radical activists like him the legacy of freedom in which they indulge their ignorance. These values, or in Blair's words, “forces of conservatism”, are responsible, according to Blair, for the death of Martin Luther King and the imprisonment of Nelson Mandela, as well as every other “evil” that has ever haunted the planet. The poor deluded soul; his grasp of history appears more suspect than his grasp of Islam. But that is a hallmark of Liberal Fundamentalist doctrine.
Apart from confirming the determination of Liberal Fundamentalist's to control every aspect of the lives of the people unfortunate enough to be under their rule, Blair's speech specifically attacks his “grandfather's generation”: they were “strong on values. Respect for people. Good manners. Horror of crime. But it was a generation also of deference and of prejudices: racial, sexual, social.”
He then goes on to confirm, in true authoritarian tradition, the Fundamentalist love of law to enforce its doctrine. This is what he said: “This generation wants a society free from prejudice, but not from rules, from order.”
Fundamentalists such as Blair appear incapable of deducing the obvious: “respect for people” precludes “prejudice”. It certainly did with the grandfather and his generation I knew.
So the Liberal Fundamentalist doctrine can be summed up not by reference to positive reasoned policy but a fanatical activist opposition to anything and everything associated with Judeo-Christian values; and anything the Fundamentalists disagree with. The closest they come to reasoned support for their “cause” is the invocation of “justice”. They support justice; the “forces of conservatism”, according to Blair, “keep opposing ...justice”. As a great philosopher once said, “invoking justice in support of your argument is like banging the table”. But then, could we really expect the Fundamentalists to have a grasp of philosophy?
What makes these Liberal Fundamentalists especially dangerous is their inability to distinguish between right and wrong, between good and evil. They do not recognize the qualities which distinguish great leaders from the mediocre and downright incompetent. Great leaders clearly identify threats to their nation's security and freedom and take the difficult decisions to counteract those threats. They have the ability to distinguish between good and evil. They can assess individual character; see through deceit. They know freedom requires less “rules”, not more. We can be grateful that in our moments of crisis such leaders have surfaced. Had they not, these Fundamentalists would not have seen the light of day. They would be living under Islamic, Nazi or Communist regimes. And it was the values of all our “grandfather's generation” which produced such leaders; not an ever expanding elixir of rules to counter some non-existent “prejudice” permeating the entire Judeo-Christian world. But that is the Liberal Fundamentalist “agenda”: sexism, racism, homophobia, and all manner of other “prejudices” lurking “within us”, or as they also like to say, “institutionalized”. So they will create ever more “rules” and “order” to force us to like and respect everyone, everything and even every deviant lifestyle or behavior; to wholly abandon our Judeo-Christian values; dissent will be criminalized. So they will force their twisted little creed down our throats, and down the throats of our children; no authoritarian doctrine would be safe without the thorough indoctrination of the future generations. The Liberal Fundamentalist objective requires nothing less than the ciminalization of our heritage, our Judeo-Christian values, under the guise of eliminating “prejudice”. It is nothing more than an excuse to establish authoritarian rule. For, as was the case with communism, Judeo-Christian beliefs and values are diametrically opposed to their creed; they must thus be outlawed with that most trusted weapon in the authoritarian armory: the law.
It is this kind of twisted `reasoning' which enables Liberal Fundamentalists to see moral equivalence between the murder of innocent Israeli civilians by Palestinian “freedom fighters” and the accidental deaths of Palestinian civilians resulting from the Israeli armed forces defending the people of Israel. Even more troubling, most Fundamentalists actually denounce Israel's defense as “state sponsored terrorism” against defenseless and innocent people justifying retaliation against innocent civilians.
Common sense dictates to any rational, decent and civilized human being the repugnance of such beliefs. Common sense also dictates to rational, decent and civilized human beings that pre-Liberal Fundamentalist Western Judeo-Christian nations were beacons of liberty, tolerance and hope around the world, particularly in the darkest moments of recent history. But alas, common sense is not that common amongst Liberal Fundamentalists.
But no more are the Western powers beacons of hope, with the partial exception of the United States. Unfortunately the US is itself still in partial Liberal Fundamentalist paralysis although, thankfully, it has not so completely succumbed as has Europe.
Instead, today we have the spectacle of the western powers bombing Yugoslavia, deliberately targeting civilians to “silence” TV propaganda. The justification? “Because its' right.” To `prove' it is “right”, the German Intelligence Services are commissioned, according to a German General, to manufacture a document purporting to be evidence of Yugoslavia's plan for a genocidal “final solution” of the Kosovans.
We have the spectacle of the European Union censuring the Austrian people for electing a party and leader which the Liberal Fundamentalist Europeans disapprove of. Those same European Fundamentalists also disapproved of the election of George Bush in the US of course; only they knew the Americans would not stand for petty bullying.
But most hideous of all is the spectacle of Fundamentalist contortions with regard to Zimbabwe. Robert Mugabe, the hero of radical student activists, committed a cardinal sin against the Liberal Fundamentalist creed: he expressed views which the Fundamentalists deemed homophobic. So, like Yugoslavia, they garnered support and “evidence” to bring sanctions against Mugabe and his government. The Fundamentalists also abandoned any role, and indeed Treaty obligations, in resolving the land issue in Zimbabwe. Given the festering animosities still lurking after decades of war, common sense would dictate to anyone that such actions would bring those animosities to the surface in an ugly way; they would be manifest in a greater and more vicious persecution of the remaining white population. The whites are being driven off their property and out of the country on pain of execution: by any measure it is racially motivated, genocidal ethnic cleansing, to use Fundamentalist parlance. But where is the outrage? Where are the precision bombs? Where are the coalitions; the massing of troops? There is deafening silence. And why? Mugabe must be punished for his homophobia and if the price is the murderous persecution of whites that's fine by the Fundamentalists. They are institutionalized racists anyway; not within the equality hierarchy of the Fundamentalist creed; not entitled to protection from persecution; not worthy of the benefit of humanitarian law. Crimes against Humanity, genocide and ethnic cleansing are incapable of being committed against whites, especially if they are southern African. But their persecution does not end when they escape Zimbabwe. Those British citizens who seek sanctuary in their homeland, Blair's Britain, are denied those basic entitlements doled out lavishly to all other comers, citizens or not. So despicable was the spectacle that even the Monarchy in Britain, by the way of Prince Charles, had to intervene to implore Blair and his Fundamentalist clique to put an end to it.
All this is but a foretaste of the grubby authoritarianism that will soon be irreversibly encamped in what were the free nations of the world. And the horrors of September 11th, 2001, were only a foretaste of the apocalyptic conflicts and destruction which will be visited upon us as a result of our embrace of Liberal Fundamentalist doctrine.
Unless, that is, rational, freedom loving people come together to rid this menace from the face of the earth once and for all; for the sake of future generations. If we fail, may God help us all.
Copyright © Joseph B.H. McMillan 2002 All Rights Reserved
Click here to purchase Freedom v. A Tyranny of Rights from Amazon.com.
Home | Articles | Books | Biography | Contact
Copyright©Escaping Books, S.L. and Joseph B.H. McMillan,2007