Reds

It is impossible to understand our current world situation without pondering this assertion by Nelson Ascher of Europundits ("Columns by notable Eurobloggers on politics, culture, and society"):

Maybe we, or at least many of us, were too busy commemorating the fall of the Berlin wall in late 1989. Thus, we overlooked all those people who weren’t exactly happy with the outcome of the Cold War.
...
And so, spontaneously up to a point, anti-Americanism became the alternative ideology that came to fill in the vacuum left by the failure of traditional, USSR-based communism and its Maoist or Trotskyite satellites.
...
Now, whatever they wanted to defend or protect doesn’t exist anymore. They have only things to destroy, and all those things are personified in the US, in its very existence. They may, outwardly, fight for some positive cause: save the whales, rescue the world from global heating and so on. But let’s not be deceived by this: they choose as their so-called positive causes only the ones that have both the potential of conferring some kind of innocent legitimacy on themselves and, much more important, that of doing most harm to their enemy, whether physically or to its image.

We, well, at least I was wrong to dismiss the pre-1989 leftists as dinosaurs condemned to extinction by evolution. While I was looking the other way, they were regrouping, inventing new slogans, creating new tactics and, above all, keeping the flames of their hatred burning. The history is still to be written about the moment when the left made its collective mind up and decided to strike an alliance with radical Islam....All that can be said is that, right now, we have a “fait accompli”.

This newly ever-growing Western left, not only in Europe, but in Latin America and even in the US itself, has a clear goal: the destruction of the country and society that vanquished its dreams fifteen years ago. But it does not have, as in the old days of the Soviet Union, the hard power to accomplish this by itself. Thanks to this, all our leftist friends’ bets are now on radical Islam. What can they do to help it? Answer: tie down America’s superior strength with a million Liliputian ropes: legal ones, political ones, with propaganda and disinformation etc. Anything and everything will do.

In the same way as the murderers of 911 used the West’s technology against itself, the contemporary left will do its best to turn democracy into a suicidal pact. This is already being done, obviously. The fight for Guantanamo Bay is, in many ways, as important as that for Baghdad. And, whenever a British born terrorist is released and sent back to the UK, to be joyfully acclaimed by the pages of “The Guardian”, “The Independent” or through the waves of the BBC, that fight is being lost. Radical Islam is being given one more tactical victory and the left’s strategy is being vindicated.

There has been some talk recently about the probable inevitability of a nuclear attack on the mainland US in, say, the next ten or fifteen years. The Berlin Wall’s orphans are already busy creating the slogans, formulating the dogmas, writing down the articles and books that will allow them, when the worst happens, to lay all the blame on the victims, making retaliation as difficult as it can be. They’re carefully preparing their case and the court is already in session.

This should have been obvious, but wasn't. But clearly, those armies of KGB-funded "peace movement" and "anti-nuclear" people devoted to world communism didn't just vanish in 1989.

It's indidious how they always try to push the meme that it's the nasty Bush administration (or "The Man", generally), that always has to "invent" some new enemy to keep the people scared -- witness human pusbag Michael Moore claiming "there is no terrorist threat!".

When in fact, the very people whispering in our ears that there is no threat are themselves the enemy!

And always were.

Don't forget, the Rosenbergs really were guilty, according to former Soviet sources.

And McCarthy's claims that there were communist agents in high levels of government were, we now know, factually true. FDR's administration was riddled with them:

The VENONA project was a long-running and highly secret collaboration between the United States intelligence agencies and the United Kingdom's MI5 that involved the cryptanalysis of Soviet messages.
...
The VENONA documents, and the extent of their significance, were not made public until 1995. They show that the US and others were targeted in major espionage campaigns by the Soviet Union as early as 1942.

The decrypts include code names for 349 individuals who were maintaining a covert relationship with the Soviet Union. It can be safely assumed that more than 349 agents were active, as that number is from a small sample of the total intercepted message traffic. Among those thought to be identified are Alger Hiss, believed to have been the agent "ALES"; Harry Dexter White, the second-highest official in the Treasury Department; Lauchlin Currie, a personal aide to Franklin Roosevelt; and Maurice Halperin, a section head in the Office of Strategic Services. Almost every military and diplomatic agency of any importance was compromised to some extent, including, of course, the Manhattan Project. Even today, the identities of fewer than half of the 349 agents are known with any certainty. Agents who were never identified include "Mole", a senior Washington official who passed information on American diplomatic policy, and "Quantum", a scientist on the Manhattan Project.
...
While critics debate the identity of individual agents, the overall picture of infiltration is more difficult to refute. The release of the VENONA information has forced reevaluation of the Red Scare in the US.

These legions of what Stalin called "useful idiots" didn't go away.

Their alliance with Islamic fascists should be no surprise, as I've explained here, because both Communists and Islamists are both politically Authoritarian Leftist Utopians -- the only difference is the former is socially progressive, the latter socially traditional. But they are fellow travels in terms of methods and the destruction of the individual for the good of the collective.

These are the same people who perpetuate the myth that Nazis (the only "authorized" "universal bad guys") are Right wing, and somehow thus akin to Republicans. As explained here and here, the Nazis (the name means National Socialists, after all!) are indeed leftists.

We should insist it's quite possible to be reasonably socially progressive, and still right-wing (meaning, embracing smaller rather than larger government, and according more rights to the individual rather than to a nebulous "society").

In fact, such a combination used to be known as the "classic liberal"!

But, as Orwell predicted, Leftists destroy language to control meaning, so they can pretend to be the true liberals.

Imposters!

Fight them at every turn!