Who Hates America?

By Dennis Prager - Townhall

One of the most widely held beliefs in the contemporary world - so widely held it is not disputed - is that, with few exceptions, the world hates America. One of the Democrats' major accusations against the Bush administration is that it has increased hatred of America to unprecedented levels. And in many polls, the United States is held to be among the greatest obstacles to world peace and harmony.

But it is not true that the world hates America. It is the world's Left that hates America. However, because the Left dominates the world's news media and because most people, understandably, believe what the news media report, many people, including Americans, believe that the world hates America.

That it is the Left - and those influenced by the Left-leaning news and entertainment media - that hates America can be easily shown.

Take Western Europe, which is widely regarded as holding America in contempt, but upon examination only validates our thesis. The French, for example, are regarded as particularly America-hating, but if this were so, how does one explain the election of Nicolas Sarkozy as president of France? Sarkozy loves America and was known to love America when he ran for president. Evidently, it is the Left in France - a Left that, like the Left in America, dominates the media, arts, universities and unions - that hates the U.S., not the French.

The same holds true for Spain, Australia, Britain, Latin America and elsewhere. The Left in these countries hate the United States while non-Leftists, and especially conservatives, in those countries hold America in high regard, if not actually love it.

Take Spain. The Prime Minister Of Spain from 1996 to 2004, Jose Maria Aznar, is a conservative who holds America in the highest regard. He was elected twice, and polls in Spain up to the week before the 2004 election all predicted a third term for Aznar's party (Aznar had promised not to run for a third term). Only the Madrid subway bombings, perpetrated by Muslim terrorists three days before the elections, but which the Aznar government erroneously blamed on Basque separatists, turned the election against the conservative party.

There is another obvious argument against the belief that the world hates America: Many millions of people would rather live in America than in any other country. How does the Left explain this? Why would people want to come to a country they loathe? Why don't people want to live in Sweden or France as much as they wish to live in America? Those are rich and free countries, too.

The answer is that most people know there is no country in the world more accepting of strangers as is America. After three generations, people who have emigrated to Germany or France or Sweden do not feel - and are not regarded as - fully German, French or Swedish. Yet, anyone of any color from any country is regarded as American the moment he or she identifies as one. The country that the Left routinely calls "xenophobic" and "racist" is in fact the least racist and xenophobic country in the world.

Given that it is the Left and the institutions it dominates - universities, media (other than talk radio in America) and unions - that hate America, two questions remain: Why does the Left hate America, and does the American Left, too, hate America?

The answer to the first question is that America and especially the most hated parts of America - conservatives, religious conservatives in particular - are the greatest obstacles to Leftist dominance. American success refutes the socialist ideals of the Left; American use of force to vanquish evil refutes the Left's pacifist tendencies; America is the last great country that believes in putting some murderers to death, something that is anathema to the Left; when America is governed by conservatives, it uses the language of good and evil, language regarded by the Left as "Manichean"; most Americans still believe in the Judeo-Christian value system, another target of the Left because the Left regards all religions as equally valid (or more to the point, equally foolish and dangerous) and regards God-based morality as the moral equivalent of alchemy.

It makes perfect sense that the Left around the world loathes America. The final question, then, is whether this loathing of America is characteristic of the American Left as well. The answer is that the American Left hates the America that believes in American Exceptionalism, is prepared to use force to fight what it deems as dangerous evil, affirms the Judeo-Christian value system, believes in the death penalty, supports male-female marriage, rejects big government, wants lower taxes, prefers free market to governmental solutions, etc. The American Left, like the rest of the world's Left, loathes that America.

So what America does the American Left love? That is for those on the Left to answer. But given their beliefs that America was founded by racists and slaveholders, that it is an imperialist nation, that 35 million Americans go hungry, that it invades countries for corporate profits, and that it is largely racist and xenophobic, it is a fair question.

America's Ruined Alliances

By Charles Krauthammer - Jewish World Review

When the Democratic presidential candidates pause from beating Hillary with a stick, they join in unison to pronounce the Democratic pieties, chief among which is that George Bush has left our alliances in ruins. As Clinton puts it, we have "alienated our friends," must "rebuild our alliances" and "restore our standing in the world." That's mild. The others describe Bush as having a scorched-earth foreign policy that has left us reviled and isolated in the world.

Like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who insist that nothing of significance has changed in Iraq, the Democrats are living in what Bob Woodward would call a state of denial. Do they not notice anything?

France has a new president who is breaking not just with the anti-Americanism of the Chirac era but also with 50 years of Fifth Republic orthodoxy that defined French greatness as operating in counterpoise to America. Nicolas Sarkozy's trip last week to the United States was marked by a highly successful White House visit and a rousing speech to Congress in which he not only called America "the greatest nation in the world" (how many leaders of any country say that about another?) but also pledged solidarity with the United States on Afghanistan, Iran, Lebanon, the Middle East and nuclear nonproliferation. This just a few months after he sent his foreign minister to Iraq to signal an openness to cooperation and an end to Chirac's reflexive obstructionism.

That's France. In Germany, Gerhard Schroeder is long gone, voted out of office and into a cozy retirement as Putin's concubine at Gazprom. His successor is the decidedly pro-American Angela Merkel, who concluded an unusually warm visit with Bush this week.

All this, beyond the ken of Democrats, is duly noted by new British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who in an interview with Sky News on Sunday remarked on "the great change that is taking place," namely "that France and Germany and the European Union are also moving more closely with America."

As for our other traditional alliances, relations with Australia are very close, and Canada has shown remarkable steadfastness in taking disproportionate casualties in supporting the NATO mission in Afghanistan. Eastern European nations, traditionally friendly, are taking considerable risks on behalf of their U.S. alliance - for example, cooperating with us on missile defense in the face of enormous Russian pressure. And ties with Japan have never been stronger, with Tokyo increasingly undertaking military and quasi-military obligations that it had forsworn for the past half-century.

So much for the disarray of our alliances. Read More...

Fjordman on Racism in the U.S.

By Fjordman

As most readers know by now, I have been involved in what has unfortunately become a very public brawl - some would probably say witch-hunt - with Charles Johnson of major American blog Little Green Footballs about the supposed “racism” of the Sweden Democrats and the Vlaams Belang. Many of these claims have already been countered, though LGF refuses to link to this. I have announced my intention to take a break from commenting at LGF, where I have been active for several years, since it has become abundantly clear that neither Charles nor many of his readers have any interest whatsoever in having an actual debate, and certainly not about the real threats to freedom in Europe.

However, I’d like to continue the debate about “racism,” which now frequently means something along the lines of “I’m a Multiculturalist. I’ve just lost the debate because I have poor arguments in favor of my case. I want to shut you up, therefore you are a racist.”

An American friend of mine once suggested the creation of an European Indigenous People’s Party. When seeing the speed of the demographic shift that is taking place and the censorship imposed on any debate of the issue, maybe this will actually happen. There is no other continent where the indigenous peoples are being systematically stripped of their heritage, displaced in their own cities and are subject to violence and abuse with the active participation of their own authorities, yet where this is celebrated as a victory for tolerance and where the natives are banned from even verbally opposing any of this. Yes, I think this reveals an anti-European bias.

I asked Charles Johnson about this: “OK Charles, since you make this to be about racism, I’d like to hear your definition of racism. The indigenous population of all European countries is white. If European countries would like to maintain the indigenous population as the majority, this by extension means a white majority. Do you think the people in, say, Norway, have the right to desire an immigration policy which ensures a traditional demographic majority, or is this racism? If so, how come non-European countries are allowed to desire the same thing without being attacked? Since you’re so preoccupied with racism, will you also launch an equally passionate campaign against the Whiteness Studies now taught in increasing numbers of American educational institutions, sometimes with the support of public money?” He first claimed that the question was “meaningless,” but after I pushed him, he reluctantly replied that yes, Europeans have the right to resist being turned into a minority in their own countries. Good. He didn’t answer me regarding the issue of Whiteness Studies, though. I kept pushing him, and he finally replied: “Since you’ve repeated this several times, I’ll answer it. The fact that I do or do not post about one thing has absolutely nothing to do with what I post about something else. That is a complete red herring, and you know it.”

I’m not so sure it is. The blogger Vanishing American notes that some university courses now present whites as more or less genetically evil: It’s everywhere.

"How can purges against ‘racists’ on these blogs and forums be instituted, if everybody of European descent is racist? If racism disqualifies you from the right to free speech, and if all Europeans are racists, then no European-descended person has a right to freedom of expression. Ban us all. We’d even have to ban ourselves. Just give up and turn ourselves in for re-education."

A mandatory University of Delaware program requires residence hall students to acknowledge that “all whites are racist” and offers them “treatment” for any incorrect attitudes regarding class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality they might hold upon entering the school, according to a civil rights group. The organization cited excerpts from the university’s Office of Residence Life Diversity Education Training documents, including the statement:

"A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. ‘The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination�.’” The education program also notes that “reverse racism” is “a term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege.” And “a non-racist” is called “a non-term,” because, the program explains, “The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift the responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called ‘blaming the victim’)."

I have written about the subject of anti-white racism before: Caucasophobia - the Accepted Racism.

Barbara Kay of Canada’s National Post writes about a new fad called Whiteness Studies: “The goal of WS is to entrench permanent race consciousness in everyone - eternal victimhood for nonwhites, eternal guilt for whites - and was most famously framed by WS chief guru, Noel Ignatiev, former professor at Harvard University, now teaching at the Massachusetts College of Art: “The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race.”

Some of the inventors of Whiteness Studies have stated their goals quite openly: “Abolitionism is also a strategy: its aim is not racial harmony but class war. By attacking whiteness, the abolitionists seek to undermine the main pillar of capitalist rule in this country.” And: “The task is to gather together a minority determined to make it impossible for anyone to be white.”

Conservative social critic David Horowitz comments that: “Black studies celebrates blackness, Chicano studies celebrates Chicanos, women’s studies celebrates women, and white studies attacks white people as evil.” However, despite widespread criticism, at least 30 institutions - from Princeton University to the University of California at Los Angeles - teach courses in whiteness studies.

College professor Mike S. Adams writes about conspiracy theories he’s heard among students attempting to blame various social ills on white people: “The Mona Lisa was painted by an African artist and stolen from a museum in Ethiopia. Most of the great works of art are African in origin and stolen by white people. This is done to promote the myth of white cultural superiority.” Another one: “It is a proven fact that U.S. Coast Guard ships - on orders from President Bush - were seen crashing into the New Orleans levees during Hurricane Katrina. Bush did it to kill black people living in government housing projects.”

Adams presents this as funny, but I don’t think it is.

It is a disturbing testimony to the fact that hating whites, still the majority in the USA, is OK, indeed encouraged, in American colleges. In the book Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn’t , Robert Spencer quotes “Rachel,” a white American student, who spoke these words to American Indian professor Dr. David Yeagley in 2001: “Look, Dr. Yeagley, I don’t see anything about my culture to be proud of. It’s all nothing. My race is just nothing.... Look at your culture. Look at American Indian tradition. Now I think that’s really great. You have something to be proud of. My culture is nothing.”

As Yeagley observed, “The Cheyenne people have a saying: A nation is never conquered until the hearts of its women are on the ground… When Rachel denounced her people, she did it with the serene self-confidence of a High Priestess reciting a liturgy. She said it without fear of criticism or censure. And she received none. The other students listened in silence, their eyes moving timidly back and forth between me and Rachel, as if unsure which of us constituted a higher authority… Who had conquered Rachel’s people? What had led her to disrespect them? Why did she behave like a woman of a defeated tribe?”

Well, my answer to that would be: Americans have been bombarded with accusations of racism, almost exclusively against the European-derived majority, for decades. If I may be so bold as to say so, that’s what I really see when I look at the hysterical overreaction on part of Little Green Footballs regarding “white racism” in Europe, despite the fact that people of European descent are probably among the least racist people on the planet right now.

LGFers base their world-view on the existence of a moderate Islam, which doesn’t exist, and on the existence of a large and rabid network of neo-Nazis in Europe, which also doesn’t exist. Neo-Nazi groups are generally quite marginal, for the very simple reason that people don’t like them. I agree that they should be watched, but they are far down the list of enemies of freedom right now, behind Muslims, Leftists and the European Union. The only theoretical reason why even a fraction of Europeans would embrace real extremist groups would be if they have their backs against the wall and everybody else has abandoned them, which is exactly what we’re trying to avoid.

Moreover, why do American politicians across the board, including Republicans and senior members of the Bush administration, cooperate with La Raza, meaning “the race,” a Mexican group Charles Johnson himself calls a Hispanic supremacist group? Why is this considered OK, while native Europeans who simply don’t want to become a minority in their own countries are demons? Meanwhile, Mexican and Hispanic gangs are deliberately cleansing black, white and Asian Americans from their neighborhoods in Los Angeles and elsewhere. I called this “ethnic cleansing” once at LGF and was denounced as “hysterical.” Johnson doesn’t write too much about that, but some of his readers apparently believe there is a Nazi hiding behind every stone in Europe and reveal this if there is even a hint of resistance to the ongoing Muslim colonization of the continent, aided and abetted by the European Union.

I believe this tells us more about the anti-white intellectual climate in the United States than it does about Europe. This brings us to a question I have asked before. Many Americans say they are tired and will never become involved in Europe again. Fine, I can understand why. But another question is, if native Europeans actually start fighting back against Islamization for real, whose side will Americans be on? Will they be on ours, or will they back the poor, Muslims victims of European racism and xenophobia, just like they did in Yugoslavia?

Judging from the aggressive hostility towards anything European they are indoctrinated with, I fear the latter.

That Racist Swedish Flag

A school principal in southern Sweden has banned pupils from posing for class photos wearing national team shirts containing Swedish flags. Since national flags may be perceived by some as xenophobic, eighth grade pupils in Karlshamn have been ordered to wear less inflammatory garb for a photo to be published in the school yearbook.

read more digg story

Time to Recognize the Armenian Genocide

The Muslim world is in denial about the 20th century slaughter of over a million Christians. The rest of us don't have to be.

read more digg story

Neighbourhood Bully (The truth about Israel)

"An amazing compendium of some of the many instances in which Israel has provided aid to countries around the world. Including many whom are enemies. For those who still think there is anything to the nonsense that Israel is a 'racist' country, you will note that many (maybe even most) of the aid beneficiaries in the video are people of color.

read more digg story

Jimmy Carter's Disaster in Iran

In the mid twentieth century, US-Iran relations prospered. Many Americans celebrated Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi as a model king. President Lyndon B. Johnson pronounced in 1964: "What is going on in Iran is about the best thing going on anywhere in the world".

read more digg story

Morality News from Iran

Ya gotta hand it to the mullahs - they really understand the importance of being immoral in the pursuit of "morality." Read More...

Restoring A Nation

By definition, a democracy can only function if its basis is a demos, a group of ordinary people who share the same language and general values. Read More...

Democrats and Genocide

"Since the first of the year, I've been working on a project dealing with the connections between liberal policies and mass mortality - the easily demonstrated (though somehow never mentioned) fact that, since at least the 1950s, liberal policies taken to their logical conclusion tend to create large piles of bodies." Read More...

Jihad TV in Canada

"Now, this is Canada, after all, the land of gun control and hate speech laws, where speaking out against homosexuality in public can get you arrested. Canada is the Sweden of the New World. How could this happen in Canada?" Read More...