Thursday, October 04, 2018

Alliances and Its Consequences (I)

Do you make a distinction between these two banners?





If you see them on par and detest both equally, you are not the “norm”. The leftist Marxist banner on the left gets a pass and has a level of acceptance that the Nazi banner on the right does not. If you have any doubt, look at the pictures of these two demonstrations.




The one on the right is a white supremacist demonstration. The extreme right rallies commonly are confronted with a larger counter demonstration and most of the media in the West condemns the rightist demonstration. At the same time, it is not hard to notice that there is an aura of normalcy about the communist demonstration on the left. Counter demonstrations to the communist rallies are rare and much smaller if it happens. There is no pressure on the media to condemn the leftist communist agenda. It is more accepted. They are part of the legitimate social protest movement. Why is that?

The state policies espousing each of those two banners killed millions of people. Millions more suffered imprisonment in concentration camps, faced humiliation and starvation. The numbers are so large that it is hard to say which one carried out more indignities and cruelties. Both banners were raised as perpetrators carried out their social experiments in the Soviet Union, Germany, China, North Korea, Vietnam and Cuba and the East European countries. The first of these large-scale experiments was initiated by the proponents of the communist banner, 1917 in Russia. These Experiments promised a bright future but only ended up tearing their societies apart with terrible negative results. Why is there such an asymmetry in the people’s general attitude, in the U.S. and the democratic world, toward these two movements on the extreme right and the extreme left?

The influences that have created this asymmetry is not limited to the public, people with less time to develop depth of perception about issues. This goes all the way up to the highest levels of our government. Look at this statement by the former President Barack Obama in his recent speech in Illinois (9/7/2018) criticizing President Trump. Referring to the rightist demonstration that Trump took a neutral position on it, he said: “We're supposed to stand up to discrimination. And we're sure as heck supposed to stand up, clearly and unequivocally, to Nazi sympathizers. How hard can that be? Saying that Nazis are bad.”

And Obama is right it is not that “hard” for a politician to condemn a rightist, white supremacist, rally. The public opinion is already tilted and that makes his condemnation very easy. Condemning the witches in Salem at the end of 17th century was easy. That was the mood of the public. But you will never find Obama to condemn a pro communist rally or rallies with communist red banners flying high. He would not “clearly and unequivocally” stand up to Communist sympathizers!

Don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to defend Trump. I will vote for Obama and against Trump any time of the day and that is only a vote for a politician against the other and no more. This vote is for principled reasons related to the foundation of this country. A foundation that I referred to it as the “American Myth” and I will return to it again, later, in other posts. My vote is only based on which politician is a more immediate threat to that foundation and as I said, it is no more. By referring to Obama’s statement, I am trying to point out the reality of this asymmetry, the depth of it and ask why!

This brings me to the title of this post “Alliances and Its Consequences”. I think the root of this problem, this asymmetry of perception between the leftist and the rightist politics, is in the alliances that shaped and influenced the outcome of the Second World War (WWII).

Let’s look at it from another angle, an imaginary one. Let your imagination go wild, go back to pre-WWII period. Prior to 1933, the U.S. had one serious contender, an ideological one, the “revolutionary” Soviet Union. It seemed to be isolated and could be left for the moment to be dealt with in due course. How, it was not clear. The wake of the WWI had left many more immediate challenges. Communist ideology and its ascendancy was a growing challenge. It was sweeping through the intelligentsia of the Western countries, garnering support. This support was even more intense among the emerging intelligentsia of the underdeveloped regions and countries.

With the ascendancy of Hitler and his Nazi party, in 1933, it seemed that the challenge of Communism had met its solution. German communists were crushed. The advancement of Nazis on the Eastern Europe seemed to confirm this. Why Britain and the U.S. did not take this opportunity to align themselves with Hitler, crush the Soviet communism and later deal with their differences with Hitler and the challenges it posed.

I suspect if that imaginary course of events had unfolded then today our asymmetry of perception would have been reversed. It would have been a lot easier to condemn the communist demonstrations in the U.S. and a lot harder to criticize the rightists. The actual course of events could prompt us to conclude that apparently German “capitalism” and the U.S. “capitalism” were not perceptive enough to recognize their common enemy! This by itself is a rebuttal of the leftist ideological illusion about “capitalism”. At a different level I have dealt with this illusion in a previous post, “Ephemeral Capitalism”.

The crushing of the German Nazism through our alliance with the Soviet communism, dried up that type of challenge to the U.S. but left Communism to fester and even expand in the wake of the WWII. It was able to root into all sorts of social developments politically and create the atmosphere of this present asymmetry. As such, overall, the leftists are a bigger and more complicated challenge to the health of “American Myth” than the rightists. Alliance with the Soviet Union had its consequences as all alliances go. More on this topic in the next posts.

No comments: