Professional Soldiers ® - View Single Post - There Are No "Good" or "Moderate" Supremacists

Warrior-Mentor · 03-03-2009, 10:55

1. The Evil of Supremacism is Never "Good" or "Moderate"

Could you imagine being led in World War II by those who wanted us to believe that there were "Good Nazis" versus "Bad Nazis"? Or to try to distinguish between "Extremist Nazis" versus "Moderate Nazis"? Or seeking the evolution of Aryan Supremacist Nazism into becoming a "mainstream" political ideology for "reconciliation" of "moderate Nazis"?

Similarly, where would we be in America's civil rights today, if our national confrontation against white supremacists was led by those whose idea of defending equality and liberty was to try to distinguish between the "Good KKK" versus the "Bad KKK"? Or to try to suggest that our national strategy should be based on recognizing the difference between "extremist white supremacists" versus "moderate white supremacists"? Or seeking the continued tolerance of white supremacism as a "mainstream" political ideology for the vague goals of national "reconciliation"?

Imagine further if appeasers rationalized that such "reconciliation" with supremacists could be achieved by addressing "historical grievances" by such groups. Such as, perhaps entertaining the Nazi "grievances" regarding Czechoslovakia and Europe, or their "grievances" with Jews? Or entertaining white supremacist "grievances" calling for "separate but equal" segregation, concerns about federal government "meddling" in local white supremacist-based laws, or their "grievances" with blacks? What if our answer to Nazis and white supremacists had simply been to provide them with more "economic development opportunities" in the absurd belief that this would make them abandon their supremacist ideologies?

Such ideas are obviously absurd. The very term "moderate supremacist" is an oxymoron. A "mainstream" political ideology of Aryan supremacist Nazism or white supremacism would still be inimical to the inalienable human rights of equality and liberty. History showed the determination of the allied nations to crush Aryan supremacist Nazism throughout Germany after the war. History shows the determination of Americans to crush white supremacism in this nation in the 1960s, a war of ideas that continues against the fringe remnants even today. In both examples of confronting and defeating a supremacist ideology, we did not cave in to those who would call for "reconciliation" with "moderate" supremacists to return them to power and influence. All the "economic stimulus" in the world for Nazis or white supremacists would have never brought them to embrace equality and liberty.

But such nonsensical suggestions are exactly the direction that many seek to take us regarding Islamic supremacism -- as shown by the arguments that there is a "good" (or "reconcilable" Taliban). Such supremacist appeasers seek to deliberately ignore the lessons of history and the logic that any adult living in a 21st century democracy should readily know.

Yet this completely illogical, historically disproven approach is precisely the direction where many in the foreign policy community seek to take us regarding Islamic supremacism -- a direction that we are continuing to see regarding many of most dangerous nations that harbor Islamic supremacism in the world

03-03-2009, 10:55	#2
Warrior-Mentor Quiet Professional Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: America, the Beautiful Posts: 3,193	1. The Evil of Supremacism is Never "Good" or "Moderate" 1. The Evil of Supremacism is Never "Good" or "Moderate" Could you imagine being led in World War II by those who wanted us to believe that there were "Good Nazis" versus "Bad Nazis"? Or to try to distinguish between "Extremist Nazis" versus "Moderate Nazis"? Or seeking the evolution of Aryan Supremacist Nazism into becoming a "mainstream" political ideology for "reconciliation" of "moderate Nazis"? Similarly, where would we be in America's civil rights today, if our national confrontation against white supremacists was led by those whose idea of defending equality and liberty was to try to distinguish between the "Good KKK" versus the "Bad KKK"? Or to try to suggest that our national strategy should be based on recognizing the difference between "extremist white supremacists" versus "moderate white supremacists"? Or seeking the continued tolerance of white supremacism as a "mainstream" political ideology for the vague goals of national "reconciliation"? Imagine further if appeasers rationalized that such "reconciliation" with supremacists could be achieved by addressing "historical grievances" by such groups. Such as, perhaps entertaining the Nazi "grievances" regarding Czechoslovakia and Europe, or their "grievances" with Jews? Or entertaining white supremacist "grievances" calling for "separate but equal" segregation, concerns about federal government "meddling" in local white supremacist-based laws, or their "grievances" with blacks? What if our answer to Nazis and white supremacists had simply been to provide them with more "economic development opportunities" in the absurd belief that this would make them abandon their supremacist ideologies? Such ideas are obviously absurd. The very term "moderate supremacist" is an oxymoron. A "mainstream" political ideology of Aryan supremacist Nazism or white supremacism would still be inimical to the inalienable human rights of equality and liberty. History showed the determination of the allied nations to crush Aryan supremacist Nazism throughout Germany after the war. History shows the determination of Americans to crush white supremacism in this nation in the 1960s, a war of ideas that continues against the fringe remnants even today. In both examples of confronting and defeating a supremacist ideology, we did not cave in to those who would call for "reconciliation" with "moderate" supremacists to return them to power and influence. All the "economic stimulus" in the world for Nazis or white supremacists would have never brought them to embrace equality and liberty. But such nonsensical suggestions are exactly the direction that many seek to take us regarding Islamic supremacism -- as shown by the arguments that there is a "good" (or "reconcilable" Taliban). Such supremacist appeasers seek to deliberately ignore the lessons of history and the logic that any adult living in a 21st century democracy should readily know. Yet this completely illogical, historically disproven approach is precisely the direction where many in the foreign policy community seek to take us regarding Islamic supremacism -- a direction that we are continuing to see regarding many of most dangerous nations that harbor Islamic supremacism in the world Last edited by Warrior-Mentor; 03-03-2009 at 12:03.
Warrior-Mentor is offline