The centenary of the end of the war to end all wars

Today has been the hundredth anniversary of the moment the Great War – now known merely as World War I – came to an end on November 11, 1918. And what I find depressing is how little regard there is for the lives and sacrifices made that century ago. It was probably ever thus. We fight our own battles in our own time. What our descendants will make of what we do a century from now is unknown, but almost certainly they will give us hardly a moment’s thought.

But that is no reason for us not to try to shape the future. There are many a pathway before us whose fulfilment I would not wish to bestow on anyone. Everywhere that totalitarian ideologies of every sort have taken hold they have left a bitter residue of poverty, misery and tyranny. That Australia remains one of the freest most prosperous and open societies the world has ever seen is the result of the countless men and women of the past who have left us the country in which we live, and the ethic of tolerance, independence and self-reliance upon which our social order depends. They have thrown the torch to us. To preserve what we have is part of the debt we owe to those who have come before.

A Kristallnacht remembrance

A very depressing story: Men shouting about killing Jews end London Kristallnacht vigil.

A vigil held by pro-Israel activists on Speaker’s Corner in London’s Hyde Park is interrupted by men shouting in Arabic on November 9, 2018. (screen capture: Israel Advocacy Movement)

A vigil held by pro-Israel activists on Speaker’s Corner in London’s Hyde Park is interrupted by men shouting in Arabic on November 9, 2018.
.

A vigil held by pro-Israel activists in London for Jews murdered in Arab countries was dispersed violently by men shouting about killing Jews in Arabic.

The event Wednesday by the Israel Advocacy Movement was held on Speaker’s Corner in London’s Hyde Park, which is known for its culture of free speech and passionate street preachers championing various causes.

A few dozen people holding Israeli flags and candles gathered there ahead of Kristallnacht, the name of Nazi pogrom perpetrated in 1938, to highlight the suffering and slaying around the same time of many hundreds of Jews who were killed and wounded in pogroms across the Arab world….

“As if on cue, before we’d even begun an extremist began screaming a death chant of Jews,” Cohen said. “The vigil went from bad to worse, they shouted us down, they would not allow us to remember our dead until we had to call off the vigil,” he added. The occurrence “goes to the heart of the matter we’d gathered to commemorate in the first place,” he also said.

A German woman who witnessed the event said: “A Christian was preaching and the atmosphere was friendly, a Muslim was preaching, and there were shouts but the atmosphere was still friendly but as soon as Jews wanted to honor their dead a whole of crowd appeared out of nowhere, as soon as the flags appeared, the cursing began against people who only wanted to honor their dead.”

Our modern Solzhenitsyn

The different voice that Jordan Peterson provides to the array of criticism of the socialist utopias so many seem to believe an actual possibility, in spite of the universal and disastrous failures every such experiment has created, is that he brings a psychological dimension to the arguments that are an important and in his hands devastating addition to the economic and philosophical arguments that have been more traditional. His has been amongst the most important additions to the criticisms of the left that may have arisen in the present generation. His ability to explain has been recognised in that he has been asked to write The Gulag Archipelago: A New Foreword for the fiftieth anniversary edition commemorating its first publication in 1968. It is a long intro which is worth the time it takes to read it through.

Why, for example, is it still acceptable—and in polite company—to profess the philosophy of a Communist or, if not that, to at least admire the work of Marx? Why is it still acceptable to regard the Marxist doctrine as essentially accurate in its diagnosis of the hypothetical evils of the free-market, democratic West; to still consider that doctrine “progressive,” and fit for the compassionate and proper thinking person? Twenty-five million dead through internal repression in the Soviet Union (according to The Black Book of Communism). Sixty million dead in Mao’s China (and an all-too-likely return to autocratic oppression in that country in the near future). The horrors of Cambodia’s Killing Fields, with their two million corpses. The barely animate body politic of Cuba, where people struggle even now to feed themselves. Venezuela, where it has now been made illegal to attribute a child’s death in hospital to starvation. No political experiment has ever been tried so widely, with so many disparate people, in so many different countries (with such different histories) and failed so absolutely and so catastrophically. Is it mere ignorance (albeit of the most inexcusable kind) that allows today’s Marxists to flaunt their continued allegiance—to present it as compassion and care? Or is it, instead, envy of the successful, in near-infinite proportions? Or something akin to hatred for mankind itself? How much proof do we need? Why do we still avert our eyes from the truth?

Perhaps we simply lack sophistication. Perhaps we just can’t understand. Perhaps our tendency toward compassion is so powerfully necessary in the intimacy of our families and friendships that we cannot contemplate its limitations, its inability to scale, and its propensity to mutate into hatred of the oppressor, rather than allegiance with the oppressed. Perhaps we cannot comprehend the limitations and dangers of the utopian vision given our definite need to contemplate and to strive for a better tomorrow. We certainly don’t seem to imagine, for example, that the hypothesis of some state of future perfection—for example, the truly egalitarian and permanent brotherhood of man—can be used to justify any and all sacrifices whatsoever (the pristine and heavenly end making all conceivable means not only acceptable but morally required). There is simply no price too great to pay in pursuit of the ultimate utopia. (This is particularly true if it is someone else who foots the bill.) And it is clearly the case that we require a future toward which to orient ourselves—to provide meaning in our life, psychologically speaking. It is for that reason we see the same need expressed collectively, on a much larger scale, in the Judeo-Christian vision of the Promised Land, and the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. And it is also clearly the case that sacrifice is necessary to bring that desired end state into being. That’s the discovery of the future itself: the necessity to forego instantaneous gratification in the present, to delay, to bargain with fate so that the future can be better; twinned with the necessity to let go, to burn off, to separate wheat from chaff, and to sacrifice what is presently unworthy, so that tomorrow can be better than today. But limits need to be placed around who or what is deemed dispensable.

And when you’ve read the intro you can then watch this.

You have never seen him so angry.

AND THEN THIS: This is Jordan Peterson’s video intro to the book. He states right at the start that writing this introduction is the greatest honour that has been bestowed upon him.

Pittsburgh shooter was rabidly anti-Trump

My wife lunched with her two oldest friends where the Pittsburgh shooting came up, and both said that the killer had been pro-Trump. Now I do understand how hard it is for some people to take on board that bad things are done by people who are also anti-Trump, but such is life. But what astonished me was that while the information about Robert Bowers’ deep hatred for Trump was available on the day of the shooting, but only if you looked elsewhere beyond the MSM, finding such stories only a few days later has become almost impossible. I have rounded up a few just for the record, but you should try it yourself. And then try it again a month from now.

I will start with this simply because of its unlikely source. This is from Aljazeera which had this right at the end under the sub-head, “No Trump supporter”:

Bowers also posted anti-Trump rhetoric, calling him a “globalist” and not a “nationalist”, which Trump recently claimed to be. Bowers used an anti-Semitic slur to say that as long as there Jewish people in the US, the country would never be great.

This is from The Washington Times: Synagogue shooting suspect registered as unaffiliated voter, ripped Trump on social media. From the story:

Among his recent posts, Bowers posted a photo of a fiery oven like those used in Nazi concentration camps used to cremate Jews, writing the caption “Make Ovens 1488F Again.” But in other posts he also featured memes containing false conspiracy theories suggesting the Holocaust – in which an estimated 6 million Jews perished – was a hoax.

Another post derided Trump for being “a globalist, not a nationalist” and added that “there is no #MAGA” as long as there is a Jewish “infestation,” using a slur for Jews.

This is from Redstate: WATCH: Despite Claims Of ‘Right-Winger,’ The Synagogue Shooter Was Anti-Trump.

As covered earlier by RedState’s T.LaDuke, the shooter in the horrific attack at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue has been identified as 46-year-old Robert Bowers.

On a roll with implications of last week’s attempted mail bombings, surely, if possible, the Left will attempt to connect the suspected murderer of least 11 to some sort of pro-Trump ideology.

However, film director Robby Starbuck reportedly screencaptured Twitter and Gab posts from Bowers’s social media accounts before they were deleted, and they reveal quite the opposite.

Not only is Bowers rabidly anti-Jewish; he’s anti-Trump.

See below yourself.

And this is what was below.

This is from the UK’s Sun: ‘I DIDN’T VOTE TRUMP’ Pittsburgh synagogue massacre suspect slammed Donald Trump and posted a series of anti-Semitic rants.

THE suspect who has been charged with murdering 11 people at a synagogue in Pittsburgh slammed Donald Trump in a series of social media rants.

Robert Bowers, 46, said he would “never touch a MAGA hat” and never voted for the US President.

He added on Gab, an alternative for Twitter that is popular with white supremacists: “For the record, I did not vote for him nor have I owned, wore or even touch a maga [Make America Great Again] hat.”

This is from The Daily Mail: REVEALED: Synagogue shooter is a gun-obsessed anti-Semite who believes Trump is a puppet for Jewish interests.

  • Robert Bowers allegedly opened fire at the Tree of Life Congregation Synagogue
  • Information about suspect and his social media posts emerged after shooting
  • Bower shared anti-Semitic and anti-Trump posts and revealed his love of guns
  • 11 people were killed and six people, including four police officers, were injured

And this you may know with certainty. Had the killer been pro-Trump, it would never have disappeared from the media which would have been blaring it non-stop since the moment the shooting had ceased. And I should also add that it would make no difference one way or the other who he happened to support at the national level in the United States. He represents the essence of evil. Politicising such murderous insanity is unfortunately itself part of the political insanity of our times.

The most genuine person I have ever seen reach high office in my life

It’s not so much that they have been wrong in the past but that their ignorant ill-will is never ending. They will get him if they can. In the meantime, there are the mid-term elections next Tuesday in the US – which will be our Wednesday morning. He will be president no matter what happens the day after, but even the House going Democrat will make things much more difficult even if the Senate shifts towards the Republicans which is likely. Alas, in the House, the polls show a strong likelihood that the Dems will win, but it is still a toss up. 435 separate constituencies with everything under the sun a potential issue. On another note, this was PDT in Pittsburgh visiting a hospital after the mass murder of Jews in a synagogue.

I am not sure he ever plays politics although he is very good at what he does. He is the most genuine person I have ever seen reach high office in my life.

AND LET ME ADD THIS: From MH in the comments:

And while I am at a 50-50 in thinking about what will happen in the election for the House, I am definitely not tired of winning. If the Republicans take the House again, I can live with that!

NOT TO FORGET:

PDT condemning anti-semitism

Condemning anti-semitism should be bi-partisan and non-political. Yet this. From Instapundit

A VERY STRONG STATEMENT ON ANTISEMITISM: Donald Trump on Sunday: “This evil, anti-Semitic attack is an assault on all of us. It is an assault on humanity. It must be confronted and condemned everywhere it rears its ugly head. We must stand with our Jewish brothers and sisters to defeat anti-Semitism and vanquish the forces of hate. Those seeking their destruction, we will seek their destruction.”

This has to be among the strongest statements any president has made on behalf of Jewish Americans. Yet I could find no mention of it in the New York Times, Washington Post, and so on.

Compare and contrast Obama’s reference to Jewish victims of anti-Semitic terrorism in Paris as victims of zealots who “randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris,” with the White House afterwards defending the proposition that the Jews shopping in a kosher market, somewhere that only Jews go, were not targeted because they were Jews, which was obviously untrue from the getgo.

UPDATE: A Facebook friend points out that you can find bits and pieces of the quotation, but not the full quotation, in the Times. But the way the Times isolates and portrays the final sentence, which I see as the strongest and most dramatic part of the statement, is bizarre and dishonest.

At his rally, the president ended comments about the synagogue shooting by reiterating his belief that shooting suspects who target Jewish people should be put to death.

“Those seeking their destruction,” Mr. Trump said, “we will seek their destruction.”

No, Trump didn’t say that “shooting suspects” who target Jews should “be put to death,” he said that he will seek the destruction of those seeking destruction of our “Jewish brothers and sisters.” That’s not at all the same thing.

AND PICKED UP FROM THE COMMENTS:

Conquest’s Second Law of Politics and the Heterodox Academy

That’s not necessarily true, Lindsay? And what’s not necessarily true? “That all perspectives in a university are valid.”

But let me work back from where I was to how I found this video. It was in an article on Jordan Peterson fires new salvo against Wilfrid Laurier in already fiery academic freedom battle. The core of the story was:

The fervent debate over academic freedom involving Jordan Peterson is rekindled for a new school year with Peterson saying in court documents that Wilfrid Laurier University’s contention he benefited from the controversy is like saying “those who survived the Holocaust should be grateful to their oppressors for teaching them survival skills.”

Peterson filed fresh legal documents Tuesday, including another lawsuit against the Ontario university — his second in three months — claiming Laurier further defamed him in its public defence against his June claim.

Not hard to believe he was defamed, but let me note where I found this article. It was from The New York Times: Attack of the Right-Wing Snowflakes subtitled, “Angry men go to court to silence their critics”.

The Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, sometimes seen as a free speech warrior, has twice sued Ontario’s Wilfrid Laurier University for defamation, part of a controversy that arose after a teaching assistant there was chastised for showing a video of Peterson in class. He has also threatened to sue Kate Manne, a writer and assistant professor at Cornell, for calling his work misogynist. The failed Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore sued four women who accused him of sexual abuse.

Defamation is an illegal form of speech. You cannot say anything you like about anyone else. And it is wondrous that Roy Moore ends up, not just in the same story but in the same para, as if these accusations were not highly defamatory if they were untrue. But where did I find this NYT article? It came from The Heterodox Weekly Bulletin where that same quote is found as the lead-in. Heterodox Academy was, I thought, to defend free thought and free speech against those who would shut it down if they could, such as organisations like the NYT. It is Jordan Peterson whose views need protecting, not the NYT nor Wilfred Laurier University. All of which reminded me of Conquest’s Second Law of Politics:

Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.

Quoting a New York Times article contra Jordan Peterson makes me think the Heterodox Academy is well on its way.

Whatever you do, do not become a Trojan horse

Janet Albrechtsen describes a meeting at the University of Sydney about a series of academics ganging up on Western Civilisation. Of course, depressing, but this did make me smile. It is a quote from someone opposed to the introduction of this course in Western Civ:

“We have a moral obligation not to allow ourselves to become Trojan horses for political agendas of any kind, least of all supremacist ones,” she said. The Ramsay proposal is “part of the worldwide rise of aggressive racial and cultural supremacism”.

Just what kind of horse is a Trojan horse, and what exactly are we being warned not to become? If you don’t do Western Civ, you will never know! Laughably ironic in their ignorance, but a tragedy to find into whose hands the university system has fallen.

Playing politics with tragedy

From David Harsanyi: The Left’s Response To The Mass Shooting Of Jews Is An Act Of Bad Faith. His sub-title is, “How are Americans ever going to ‘come together’ if the first thing a political party sees when it sees dead Americans is a partisan cudgel?” It is for this very reason that I did not blog on this myself. There ought to be no politics in this, not for Trump or against him, nor in relation to any other political aspect. Anti-semitism is an old and deadly story for Jews and no family is without a story to tell, though thankfully in my own lifetime there has been virtually none in the places I have lived. Even the story of the Holocaust has been universalised, about the all forms of prejudice even though it was specifically directed against Jews, with anti-semitism still very much alive and in evidence everywhere. And there is no doubt that Trump’s philo-semitism, while welcomed by me is not welcomed by all. An interesting article, reprinted in full.

It was ironic to see many of the same liberals, who recently fought to prop up the world’s most powerful Jew-hating terror state, lecturing us on the importance of combating anti-Semitism. But there they were yesterday.

The same Voxers who had long rationalized, romanticized, and excused the Jew-killing terror organization of the Middle East were now blaming the existence of the evil, anti-Semitic Pittsburgh shooter on Republicans. The same Pod bros whose echo chamber deployed anti-Semitic dual-loyalty tropes to smear critics of the Iran deal were now incredibly concerned about the Jewish community.

There were many others, and that was bad enough. But others decided to dip into a little victim blaming, as well. Hadn’t American Jews been little too Jew-centric and pro-Israelfor their own good?

Franklin Foer of The Atlantic demanded that Jews finally dispense with their faith, adopt his, and start expelling co-religionists for their political opinions. (If you want to read about the left’s co-opting of American Judaism, I recommend Jonathan Neumann’s excellent book, “To Heal The World?”) Wire creator David Simon went bold, embracing a transparent anti-Jewish conspiracy theory, accusing the Israeli government of intervening in the American democracy.

For those who confuse progressivism with Judaism — which is to say many — it might be difficult to understand that undermining the Democratic Party isn’t an act of anti-Semitism. The Trump administration, in fact, has been the most pro-Jewish in memory.

Every Jew who’s ever prayed understands the importance of Jerusalem in our faith, culture, and history. It was President Trump, not any of the other presidents who promised the same, who recognized Jerusalem as the undisputed Jewish capital, putting an end to the fiction that it’s a shared city.

It was Trump who withdrew from the Iran deal and once again isolated the single most dangerous threat to Jewish lives in the world, the Holocaust-denying theocrats of the Islamic Republic.

It was Trump who cut more than $200 million in aid to a Palestinian government that was not only inciting terrorists (including the murder of a Jewish-American citizen named Ari Fuld; but since he never wrote for The Washington Post, you might not have heard of him) but also rewarded the killers’ families.

It was his administration that kicked the Palestine Liberation Organization, the most successful Jewish-civilian murdering organization of the past 60 years, out of DC. It was the Trump administration that cut funding to the anti-Semitic U.N. Relief and Works Agency. It was also the Trump administration that turned around the unique Obama-era legacy of standing against Israel at the United Nations. And it is his administration that cracked down on anti-Semitism on college campuses and that deported one of the last real-life Nazis.

At the same time, the liberal activist resistance wing is being led by a couple of Louis Farrakhan fangirls, and most Jewish Democrats are scared to death to say a single word in protest. But that’s another story.

Anti-Semitic shootings aren’t new, and anti-Jewish hate crimes have long dominated religious bias in this country. This ancient hatred comes from both fringes and runs through presidents of both parties and occurs in nations across the world. Yet what was the most vital lesson partisans could derive from the massacre of elderly Jews attending a bris in Pittsburgh? Stop saying mean things about billionaire progressive sugar daddy George Soros.

As a Hungarian Jew who is a descendant of Holocaust survivors and victims, I am wholly comfortable attacking Soros, who is both a hard-left activist and a funder of the anti-Semitic boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement. Now, there are surely anti-Semites out there peddling conspiracy theories about Soros, just as there are people peddling anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about Sheldon Adelson and other wealthy Jews who involve themselves in politics. It’s often overdone, and often by Republicans.

But if you’re not upset about the vile accusations that are incessantly thrown at someone like Benjamin Netanyahu, while you think calling out Soros is de facto anti-Semitism, your main concern is liberalism, not the Jewish people.

If you think Trump should bring down the temperature, you have a point. If you think Trump should turn down the temperature but you fail to mention that a progressive yelling about “health care” tried to assassinate the entire GOP leadership on a baseball field, you don’t really care about the temperature.

If you fail to mention that Democrats have been accusing Republicans of wanting to the kill the poor and young, of trying to destroy the planet, of being “terrorists” after every school shooting, you don’t care about the temperature.  If you rationalize mob behavior every time you don’t get your way in the electoral process, you don’t care about the temperature. And if your first instinct is to play politics with tragedy for partisan gain, you are part of the problem.