Demagogue : Criminalizing Political Extremism For The Good Of Civil Society

I found out very early on you cannot criminalize the expression of ideas in America no matter how extreme. In 1956 a friend of mine left Boston for Paris and I took over his apartment and agreed to collect his mail for him. One day I found an envelop full of Nazi propaganda with such lies in it as calling Franklin Roosevelt a Jew Rosenfeld and all sorts of other hateful lies and ideas expressing Nazi beliefs do I called the FBI and they told me they knew about such things but could do nothing because of freedom of speech. A case of what happens when people get hysterical over political extremism is the Sacco Vanzetti case in which two Italian Anarchists were executed accused of killing a guard in a robbery but I read a now out of print book by Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter on the case and not only did he think the trial was prejudiced against the defendants throughout a total sham but he thought they were innocent. If political extremism is a virus then Political Correctness is a much more dangerous virus because it kills in the name of justice and goodness. I saw the rise of PC in my final years as a professor at Western IL University where I was chosen by a publishing company to review a textbook on art and I was told by that author that I should not teach that there are geniuses in art as most of them are white males and this is unfair to women and minorities so that female artists and other ethnic groups should be viewed on an equal footing to these white male geniuses. Aesthetics cannot be taught that way because you must decide no matter how difficult and how painful what is good what is great what is mediocre and what is bad in terms of artistic qualities. At least in art some men are more equal than others. What all men are created equal means is in due process of law all men (people) are viewed as equal under the eyes of the law not that they equally as intelligent or equally as strong. And this is one of the reasons why Sharia Law runs counter to due process of law as described in the Constitution of the United States of America. In Sharia Law a woman’s testimony in court is worth half that of a righteous Muslim man. An other reason is that cutting off the right had of a thief is cruel and unusual punishment. So just as Nazism is a dangerous form of political extremism which threatens the lives and safety of the peaceful citizen so are some of the practices in Islam. Nidal Hasan proclaimed before his colleagues int eh army that he held the Koran above the constitution of the United States. He was then promoted despite this statement and went on to kill a dozen innocent people at Fort Hood. On what grounds did he not undergo a court martial instead of being promoted? Was it the first amendment protecting his religious freedom? He took an oath of office which demands that he “ protect and defend the Constitution of the United Stares against all enemies foreign and domestic.” Sharia Law contradicts the constitution and threatens to destroy it if it ever became the law of the land and it is embedded din the Koran so the First Amendment does not protect him from breaking his oath of office only if he resigned his commission in the Army would it so his commanding officer and it goes higher the policies of the US Army cost those lives and if it goes higher the policies of Barack Obama cost those lives. Nazis kill but so does the practice of political correctness. Now i have a right to hate Nazism more than the average person as I am a Jew and have suffered not only from Nazis but the hatred of my self proclaimed “Christian” neighbors when I was a child growing up int eh 40’s in Washington DC and when my father went to the police to complain that they were expressing hatred to my brother and I because we were Jews the Police said they could do nothing about it because that was their right. I have also learned that whatever family I had in the old country Odessa now part of the Ukraine are all dead.

But in the case of Islam the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful so why is a minority among a group of over a billion causing so much trouble and violence in the the world. A big part of it is political correctness. The media and politicians because of PC hide the fact that there are quite a few verses in the Koran that call for the killing of the non-believer. They use phrases like they have hijacked a peaceful religion or they are using an extreme form of Sharia Law. The simple solution is to tell the public that there are verses that call for killing and beheading and to have a debate in the public forum about how to deal with them. There is a simple solution given to me and others by Muslims whom we have debated on the matter. These Muslims claim that these verses only refer to the time of Mohamed when he was fighting his enemies and are not meant to be used for all times. Let the peaceful Muslims say that to the Violent Jihadists as a reason to not commit violent Jihad instead of denying or hiding the suras that call for killing the non-believer. If this were done the cat would be out of the bag and the debate would become public and worldwide. Any Islamic states or groups that joined in the debate could not hide behind the current methods of Islam is peace and they are hijacking our religion. If it was widely proclaimed by Muslims around the world that killing the Infidel only referred to the time of Mohamed when he was fighting his enemies it would become much harder to radicalize young Muslims worldwide.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.