Danmark 
Norge 
Sverige
England 
USA 
Israel 
Tidsskr. på eng.
onsdag 11. juni 2008
Seneste udgave af det venstreorienterede engelske tidsskrift The Monthly Review, har sat fokus på ‘islamofobi’ i Danmark, og det er solid underholdning, fra et overdrev der stadig ikke helt har forstået hvad der skete i Berlin den 10. november 1989 sidst på aftenen. Artikel er skrevet af Ellen Brun og Jacques Hersh, der begge har doktorgrader i sociologi – sidstnævnte sågar professor emeritus (AAU).
Forfatterne i slutningen af 1960′erne (begge citater fra Plum, 2000).
“Uden at tage den overlegne samfundsorganisation i betragtning og den politiske inspiration, som var til stede i Stalintiden, kan man vanskeligt forklare den økonomiske fremgang og den sejrrige kamp, som Sovjetunionen førte under 2. Verdenskrig. Intet mål af terror, kamp eller vold kunne have opnået disse resultater.” (Jacques Hersh, 1967)
“I Kina foregår en af historiens største massebevægelser på marxistisk grundlag. Det må da være absolut relevant for en vestlig marxist at undersøge kulturrevolutionens problematik med det formål at uddrage en anvendelig lære deraf.” (Ellen Brun, 1969)
Fra samme, 40 år senere – The Danish Disease.
“In trying to comprehend the virus of Islamophobia now infecting Europe, the small country of Denmark offers powerful insights. Shakespeare’s phrase that “something is rotten in the state of Denmark” seems appropriate to describe the transformation taking place in this former bastion of tolerance and conviviality.
In the course of one generation, beginning in the 1980s, a process has altered the ideal picture that many informed people throughout the world had of Danish society…
In the postwar era, the Social Democratic Party benefited from the general progressive mood of the population. In the context of the defeat of Nazi-Germany and its Danish sympathizers on the one hand, and the existence of strong pro-Socialist sentiments within the working class on the other, Social Democracy aimed at humanizing capitalism through the construction of a “welfare state.” The project of “capitalism with a human face” served a variety of political purposes. It neutralized the anticapitalism of the working class while preserving the interests of the capitalist class. It also offered a counterpoint to the Soviet model of state socialism with regard to the post-colonial world. Especially in Africa, comparatively generous and effective Danish development assistance, implemented by Social Democratic governments, promoted an alternative to strategies of self-reliance or dependency on the socialist bloc. The vision of “capitalism with a human face” was thought accomplished, until the liberalization of capital controls in the 1980s and the onslaught of neoliberalism began to dismantle the “welfare state.”
[...]
The first influx of immigrants… The second wave of immigration… a third wave of political refugees arrived… From a political perspective, it is interesting that most asylum seekers came from regions affected directly or indirectly by the policies of the United States or its allies. This applies especially to the Middle East where the United States and Israel have had a direct responsibility for the region’s political evolution…
The Danish People’s Party, a successor to a populist anti-tax party, taking advantage of the latent xenophobia in the Danish population, put the issue of immigration at the center of the domestic political agenda from its founding in 1995. In recent years, however, the center-right government, supported by this populist party, has internationalized this domestic anti-Muslim antagonism by placing the country at the forefront of military intervention in Muslim countries. Not only was Denmark an original member of the “coalition of the willing” in Iraq and an active participant in the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, but the Danish social landscape has evolved into one of those most hostile to Muslim immigrants.
It was in this context that Denmark made international headlines, when the newspaper Jyllands-Posten published twelve offensive cartoons of the prophet Mohammed on September 30, 2005. Not only were the illustrations reminiscent of anti-Semitic caricatures in Nazi Germany, they were fundamentally insulting to the religious creed of Islam which forbids depictions of the prophet. Muslims in Denmark grieved while the pros and cons of the newspaper’s action were discussed in the media.
Given this background, the intriguing question in this context is why this provocation took place and who benefited from it… The alleged motivation for publishing the cartoons might have been credible had the paper been a traditional bastion of democracy. But the group behind the paper has a dubious ideological and political history. Their editorial line was pro-Nazi during the Second World War and militantly antisocialist and anticommunist, as well as vehemently pro-American, during the Cold War. The Jyllands-Posten remains an ardent supporter of Israel’s policies in Palestine, a warm partisan of Danish military participation in the wars in Muslim countries, and hostile to third world immigrants…
The cartoons were not only meant as a provocation against religious sensitivities. More important, their publication was a clarion call to the media to overcome their restraint and participate actively in the mobilization of opinion against the Muslim population. In other words, this attack was intended to influence the political culture of the Danes in the direction of Islamophobia. Without falling prey to conspiracy theory, it should be mentioned that the responsible editor, Fleming Rose, has a close relationship to Daniel Pipes, the director of the Zionist neoconservative Middle East Forum in the United States. Rose had also been a visiting scholar at the United States Institute of Peace, a U.S. government outfit heavily involved in the administration of occupied Iraq.
Until the publication of the caricatures, most Danes would in fact have been surprised to learn that freedom of the press or expression was under threat in their country. Anti-immigrant bashing had long been part of the editorial line of populist tabloids. The written media are organized around three press concerns and a few independent dailies while television and radio have both state and private sectors. Under the existing conditions, there is absolutely no serious menace to the bourgeois control of the press and its freedom of expression. This is, however, far from being the case for left-wing opinion. With the defeat of socialism, and “reforms” in the postal system discriminating against small publications, the left-wing press has been decimated. If there were to be a serious complaint about lopsided freedom of expression it should come from leftist intellectuals who are often refused access in the mainstream media under various excuses!
[...]
Finally, as a protest against the official position, a boycott of Danish products started in different Muslim countries causing substantial losses, especially to the dairy industry… During the course of 2007, the situation stabilized. Danish cheeses were sold again in supermarkets in the Middle East and South Asia. The ideologues of “freedom of the press,” who support the government’s violation of international law through Danish participation in wars on Muslim soil, had made their point: Muslims in Denmark had to internalize the hard “lesson” that in a democracy where religious freedom is respected, insulting a specific religion is considered a democratic right! In other words, this was secularism on steroids, directed against Muslims. The irony is that in Denmark there is no separation of church and state…
[...]
It was in this general post-crisis climate that a new bombshell was dropped on the political class. A Danish-made documentary, shown on the public state television station DR 1 on February 6, 2008, confirmed the persistent rumors that the CIA had used both Copenhagen Airport and the airport of Narsarsuaq in Greenland for undercover transports…
The commotion brought about by the documentary had barely subsided, with the government just managing its credibility gap, when a new affair was to shake the Danish political scene… But less than one week after the showing of the aforementioned damaging documentary, an event took place which refocused public attention. In the early hours of February 12, 2008, the secret police arrested three Muslim men under the accusation of plotting to assassinate one of the Mohammed cartoonists. The suspects, a Moroccan with Danish citizenship and two Tunisian nationals, had been under police surveillance for months. By “coincidence,” the secret police was again seen as displaying its expected professionalism by saving the life of one of the heroes behind the original campaign for press freedom and liberty of expression. Not only was public opinion gratified to learn that the secret service was doing its work in a competent manner, but the debate could return to the question of freedom of the press and Islam-bashing.
[...]
Regardless of the lingering uncertainty concerning the guilt and fate of the suspects, the Danish press instinctively applied collective punishment against the Muslim community by showing its dedication to “freedom of the press.” The spokesman for the “Islamic Faith Community,” Kasem Ahmad, criticized the press for nurturing a radicalization of young Muslims by republishing the cartoons… He was also quoted in the daily Politiken for pointing out that “We support all measures in the fight against all types of extremism. We are willing to cooperate with the authorities in the struggle against a radicalization of Danish society.”
[...]
Parallel to the arrest of the alleged assassins and the reproduction of the Mohammed cartoon by the print media, Danish society was wreaked by disorders in different cities and towns for about one week… Contrary to the opinion of the prime minister, who refuses to see any implicit responsibility of society in the disturbances, the consensus among qualified observers is that Danish society has in its midst a significant number of young people who are maladjusted and feel maltreated because of the social conditions they live in as well as the constant harassment they feel subjected to…
[...]
An omen of what may lie ahead is that segments of the left have not been immune to the virus of Islamophobia. Besides having had to face the challenge of xenophobia in Danish society, for which it was unprepared, the “left of the left” has since the 1990s had to absorb the ideological onslaught of postmodernism and crude antisocialism. All the shortcomings of “really existing socialism” are used against the leftists who have refused to recant or abandon the struggle against capitalism and imperialism. What could be a positive debate on these issues often takes place on premises established by the liberal press and under its control. The paradoxical result is that freedom of expression for the left is limited by the really existing “freedom” of the mainstream press: to freely choose to promote or suppress opinion!
[...]
Moreover, in relation to the thriving Islamophobia in large segments of the population, the leadership of the SF appears to have joined in the glory of Islam-bashing from a “leftist” position. The launching of SF’s new line towards Muslim immigrants is a recent development. A golden opportunity presented itself when the spokesman for the Islamic Faith Community and other moderate imams took part in a demonstration arranged by the fundamentalist organization Hizb ut-Tahrir to protest the reproduction of the Mohammed cartoon. The argument can be made that this participation was not a very wise decision given the present political climate in Denmark…
In his personal blog, Villy Sovndal, the leader of the SF, attacked both members of the moderate Islamic Faith Community and the extremist Hizb ut-Tahir in a tone and vocabulary reminiscent of that utilized by the xenophobic Danish People’s Party. More worrisome is the fact that he now regrets his criticism of the original publication of the cartoons by the Jyllands-Posten and approves of the paper’s crusade in the name of the “free press.” In following such a course, the SF comes close to legitimizing the politics of the demonization of Islam; a strategy that has become the benchmark of right-wing politics both on the national and international levels. More troubling is the fact that this position blurs the fundamental question of a critical understanding of bourgeois democracy.…
An offensive posture by socialists in defense of bourgeois rights in capitalist society confuses many issues. Although some extreme Islamic organizations in Europe have a discourse of promoting another type of society that would be in counterpoint to the Western ideal types, including socialism, it doesn’t make them automatically subversive. Progressives need to remember that communists and anarchist parties in the past promoted a discourse of anticapitalism and worked for the overthrow of capitalist democracies!
[...]
What seems to be lacking in the critical frame of reference of Danish center-left politics is that a substantial segment of the population is responsive to xenophobic demagogy and that the most serious menace is to be found in the apparent change taking place in the political culture of society… In the present context, catering to a xenophobic discourse and nurturing Islamophobia serves the extreme right. It should be recalled that fascism is not only a structural phenomenon but requires an ideologically motivated mass movement. Seen in this light we can sense danger signals in most of Europe and not least in Denmark.”
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.uriasposten.net/wp-trackback.php?p=5910
21 kommentarer »
RSS af kommentarer til dette indlæg.
Skriv en kommentar
Linjer og afsnit brydes automatisk, e-mail-adresse vises aldrig. Tilladt HTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
SÅ for søren, den får ikke får lidt fra de to kommunister der aktivt taler for islamisk imperialisme og neo-kolonisering af europa, mens de lystiggt afskriver sig det liberale demokrati og dets kerneværdier som f.eks. ytringsfrihed.
Jacques har iøvrigt skrevet noget nær det samme i KritiskDebat.
Jeg får helt ondt i maven når jeg læser den slags racistisk hatespeech mod den vestlige kulturkreds.
Kommentar af jesper F. — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 15:44
Ja, det er sandt, danskerne er ved at være dødtrætte af den spirende islamofascisme.
Men det var måske ikke det de mente?
Kommentar af RettenTilSelvforsvar — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 16:35
Da jeg læste deres skriveri 1. gang blev jeg overrasket over hvor let det er for dem at sværte deres eget land og deres landsmænd til.
Med det billede disse 2 tegner af Danskerne må folk ude omkring få den opfattelse ,at vi er islamo-/xenofobe sataner alle til hobe.
Heldigvis har andre befolkninger erfaret de samme berigelser fra Islam som Danskerne plus at deres reaktioner på denne berigelse ikke adskiller sig så meget fra vores.
For vi ville unægtelig have mentale problemer af en art, om det kun var os der reagerede mod Islamiseringen !
Det de 2 får manet frem er et billede af et par frusterede og fortabte mennesker som har satse hele deres livs virke på en ide, der gik i opløsning med Murens fald og Sovjets forsvinden.
Nu må de så anvende deres livsaftens mindre kræfter på at satse på den nye ide der kan puste lidt gløder i dem igen – nemlig Islam.
Hvad Sovjets og Mao´s kommunisme ikke fik udvirket her i det kapitalistiske Vesten, nemlig dennes endeligt, håber disse 2 nu fromt på Islam kan udvirke .
Men det går med dem og deres ønsker, håber jeg, nemlig samme vej som hønsene skaber !
Kommentar af Vivi Andersen — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 17:06
De to forfattere lever vist sammen på et klubværelse i det indre København, så vidt jeg har hørt. De skulle være et meget særpræget par, der er afskyet på de meste af venstrefløjen, der ellers ikke er så sart, fordi de stadig holder fast ved, at Nordkorea er det store ideal, hvis form for socialisme er den ypperste. At kalde dem stalinister er en underdrivelse…
Kommentar af Anne Larsen — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 17:26
Det er da rart at vi i det kan registrere skiderikkerne. Problemet er “desværre” nok, at de fleste trods alt har for meget at miste i forhold til at skyde knoppen af dem.
Men hvor langt vil vi gå for at bekæmpe vore fjender.
(Jeg sondrer mellem politiske modstandere og fjender. Fjender er dem der har holdninger der vil skade mit liv).
Kommentar af Tolder — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 17:35
Ellen Brun og Jacques Hersh har, med deres artikel, sikret sig timevis af interviews i DR.
Kommentar af Mallebrok — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 17:44
Academic Politics Are So Vicious Is Because the Stakes Are So Small – Henry Kissinger
Sageman
The true menace comes from loose-knit cells of Western-born Muslims or Muslim immigrants studying and working in the West. These disaffected “bunches of guys” are often friends, roommates, or classmates who undergo the process of radicalization together.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080501fareviewessay87310/bruce-hoffman/the-myth-of-grass-roots-terrorism.html
Pakistan’s ISI, principal source of international Islamic terrorism, says KPS Gill
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20080611&fname=kps&sid=1
Kommentar af Terrorisme dans le monde — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 17:58
#5 deler dit syn på politiske modstandere og direkte fjender (selvom de tit ender i samme boks)og efter min mening bør patrioterne gå hele vejen, og jeg mener hele vejen.
Vi er i krig, også selvom venstrefløjen og de borgerlige hattedamer ikke har fattet en skid af det hele, det Danske folk bliver dagligt udsat for krigserklæringer fra islam så selvfølig skal islam og dets støtter bekæmpes med alle midler.
Og siden kommunisterne nu viser sig at være endnu større støttere af islam end nazisterne skal de nu snart for en gangs skyld i historien udstilles som det de reelt er, udskud ,affald, beskidte facister, (indsæt selv flere skældsord)kort sagt menneskeligt affald fuldt på linje med både nazister og islamister.
Kæmp for alt hvad du har kært, dø om så det gælder……!
Kommentar af whodares(islam skaber tabersamfund) — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 19:26
Til indlæg 5 o 8: I går kun venstrefløjen og islamisternes ærinde, hvis I anvender vold (bortset fra til selvforsvar). Don’t do it!
Lær af Kim. Argumenter og dokumentation er stærkere end kugler.
Kommentar af Anne Larsen — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 19:44
Det første man må forlange af universitetsuddannede, hvis man ønsker at blive taget alvorligt, er, at man ikke ukritisk løber til torvs med dhimmiernes vandrehistorier, hentet med stor underdanighed fra det muslimske offermiljø.
Kommentar af Menig 442 — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 19:46
#9 så tag du ind på Nørrebronx og argumenter dig ud af en massevoldtægt min naive tøs !
Ikke mere snak nu, vågn op mandfolk af begge køn !
Kommentar af whodares(islam skaber tabersamfund) — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 20:21
Reelt er vi solgt og blevet pænt pakket ind til de nye ejere i EU og Islam ergo virker al denne pladdersnak ikke en skid, intet bliver rykket intet bliver ændret.
Der er sgu brug for modige mænd og kvinder ikke veluddannet høns af begge køn der ævler stolpe op og stolpe ned om lige præcis ingenting, men folk der tør og er rede til at handle.
Danmark har brug for en aktiv modstandsbevægelse igen, og da især efter vores feje politikkere (DF undtaget)IGEN har foræret landet væk til totalitære kræfter, i denne omgang hele to nemlig EU og Islam.
Slås for fanden for Danmark og jeres børns fremtid !
Kommentar af whodares(islam skaber tabersamfund) — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 20:27
Iøvrigt Anne så vi hvordan horderne indenfor islam tager hensyn til vestens “stærke” argumenter, deres svar har vist ikke ret meget med sprogligt argumentation at gøre…..Vil du mene det ?
Kommentar af whodares(islam skaber tabersamfund) — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 20:29
De venstresnoede fjolser og de radigale ævler om integration af de såkaldte flygtninge. I visse andre lande får “flygtningene” midlertidig opholdstilladelse et år ad gangen. Når forholdene i hjemlandet er blevet bedre inddrages den midlertige opholdstilladelse, hvorefter de hjemsendes.
Kommentar af jørgen — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 22:16
Det er undre mig er at folk der skulle have indsigt i videnskabelig metode kan skrive sådan som de gør dér.
Hvad er det baseret på? hvilken metode er anvendt? Hvordan er den viden de formidler kommet i stand? Hvor valid er den?
Endelig savner jeg en perspektivering. Den kunne f.eks. handle om, hvorvidt de danskere der ikke ønsker mere indvandring og diversitet per se er mennesker der tænker forkerte ting.
Altså; kan man forestille sig et standpunkt, hvor det faktisk er ok ikke at ønske indvandring – eller er det givet på forhånd i naturen (altså ikke ideologien) at diversitet er godt og at folk der er imod massekultur derfor er folk er ikke forstår noget.
Kommentar af Anonym Københavner — onsdag 11. juni 2008 @ 22:26
den er skøn :
“Uden at tage den overlegne samfundsorganisation i betragtning og den politiske inspiration, som var til stede i Stalintiden, kan man vanskeligt forklare den økonomiske fremgang og den sejrrige kamp, som Sovjetunionen førte under 2. Verdenskrig.
uden massive tilførsler af bla våben via konvojer var Sovjet faldet til Hitler.
Kommentar af steen — torsdag 12. juni 2008 @ 04:43
Åh herregud! de intellektuelle idioter lever nu som før af at opretholde unuancerede forestillinger omkring sekularisering, demokrati og ytringsfrihed. Deres følelser producerer af uerkendte årsager en forenkling af verden, så den passer ind i deres ideologi. Derved får de troens sikkerhed og er uden for pædagogisk rækkevidde.
I virkeligheden er det mennesker, som dyrker en form for primitiv tænkning, og som derfor blokerer for evnen til at leve sig ind i andre menneskers forestillingsverden. Der er kun en sandhed, deres egen.
Deres marxistiske fortid og deres analyser af datidens verdensbillede er et godt bevis på ovenstående motivanalyse. Enhver intellektuel kan grave “sandheden” frem, bare begavelsen og evnerne er der. Der er litteratur nok.
I realiteten bør man have medlidenhed med dem, for de mangler i realiteten en følelseskvalitet, der er afgørende for for vor menneskelighed. Vi bør derfor have medlidenhed med dem, for de mangler noget.
Tænk på alle de intellektuelle idioter, der i fortiden var skyld i millioner af menenskers død. Vi må prise os lykkelig for, at den slags mennesker ikke får magten i hænderne, for så går det først rigtigt galt.
Kommentar af kurt rosenstrøm — torsdag 12. juni 2008 @ 13:46
Problemet er jo netop at netop de mennesker HAR magten, styrer du undervisningsanstalterne og medierne har du magten, og skidderikkerne lægger ikke engang skjul på det !
Nå ja og Anders FUP og co lader vist heller ingen noget at høre hvad angår tåbelige og højtflyvende utopier, så man kan sige at vi er blevet taget i begge ender i bogstavligste forstand.
Kommentar af whodares(islam skaber tabersamfund) — torsdag 12. juni 2008 @ 21:24
“If there were to be a serious complaint about lopsided freedom of expression it should come from leftist intellectuals who are often refused access in the mainstream media under various excuses!”
OMFG det er jo heeeeeeelt vildt det her
Kommentar af DaLi — torsdag 12. juni 2008 @ 22:32
@9
Det kan du måske godt sige, men da “pennen” langt overvejende i dag kontrolleres af venstrefløjen så er der jo kun den anden mulighed tilbage.
Jeg husker heller ikke lige, at De Allierede slog nazisterne med en pen, det skulle da lige være den pen der underskrev planen for D-Dag.
Kommentar af Tolder — mandag 16. juni 2008 @ 19:08
Ellen Brun og Jaques Hersh har fuppet sig til titlen dr.scient.soc. De fik den uden videre bevilliget af studienævnet på sociologi (daværende formand nuværende professor på RUC, Kurt Aagård) i 1972, hvor marxisterne ville forhindre at lektor Erik Høgh fik den første i DK på baggrund af en gedigen empririsk analyse af vælgeradfærd. Høgh, der blev systematisk forfulgt af marxisterne på sociologi, blev reddet på målstregen af internationale støtter og fik doktorgraden trods massiv marxistisk hetz (bla.i Information). Det var en del af marxisternes march mod magten at give titlen dr.scient.soc. til Ellen Brun og Jaques Hersh på baggrund af en samling af deres marxistiske skriverier.
Kommentar af anti-marx anno dazumahl — torsdag 5. marts 2009 @ 11:19