Foehammer's Anvil, in "Bush dismembers Serbia" is on to the consequences of the impending Kosovo precedent.
In instalment number 5 on the transnational state in the series "Neo-Totalitarianism" we have already seen that " ... it is certain that diplomatically and politically something is afoot. The U.N. does not have the legal power to declare countries independent; nevertheless, if Security Council member and Serb ally Russia doesn't veto ... the U.N. will have done exactly that. It will provide for any other area in the world with separatist aspirations or with an axe to grind, to go the same route".But, if the whole exercise isn't an adexterous attempt at appeasing Radical Islamism, betting heavily on Russia indeed voting the hazardous plan to Neverland, "perhaps this is the very thing the Transnational Progressive community have in mind ... the gradual end to the mono-cultural remnants of the era of "sectarian war after war, and wave after wave of ethic cleansing", as the latest postmodern propaganda slogan goes."
Foehammer is quoting from a 'Accuracy in Media' (AIM) article by Cliff Kincaid dated June 8, 2007 as follows: "What Bush is doing is laying the groundwork for more conflict and upheaval in the world ... Never before in history has the U.N. presided over the deliberate destruction of a sovereign state. Kosovo represents the religious heritage of Serbia's Christians and many Christian churches have already been destroyed by Muslim extremists there. Taking Kosovo from Serbia is comparable to taking Jerusalem from Israel." Amen!There is that last aspect too, yes. But in today's 'post-Christian' world who cares for a few antiquated churches and monasteries: old bricks and mortar, and a reminder of the terrible world we inhabited before the advent of postmodernity! We are all interdependent now ...!
Yet the relentless diplomatic push towards an independent Muslim state in Kosovo is indeed "ominous ... If ethnic Albanians can take Kosovo from Serbia, then Mexico can take the Southwest from the U.S., making it part of Mexico or making it into a state or region of its own, separate from the U.S. Indeed, there is a plan to do just that. Bush apparently doesn't fear this possibility because he sees Mexico joining Canada and the U.S. in some kind of ultimate trilateral entity. In this kind of world, there would be a common identity card and people would be free to travel anywhere." Hey, let's rock with this transnational progressivism! Burn your passport, delete the border!
That multicultural and multi-ethnic world of empires people lived in before the doctrine of self-determination, autonomy and the national identity was fully developed, and which since has gone out of diplomatic fashion, is described in the book "Not even my name" by Thea Halo whose mother was a Pontian Greek, father an Assyrian, Christian minorities in the Ottoman Empire that - along with Armenians - felt the brunt of the Young Turk and Ataturk's policies of 'Turkey for the Turks'. Armenian Aztag Daily had an interview with the American author; it can be read in "Companians in Suffering".Which begs the question: can Turkey ever become a worthy E.U. member while in denial over its own history of conquest, submission (dhimmitude) and suppression? Germany and South Africa were brave enough, having completed their psychological processes to come to terms with the past and are the better for it; due to their cultures of shame Japan and Turkey are still struggling with the events, the latter being in a state of denial altogether.
The tone for example in which Turkish Daily News recently reported on the matter of a Greek history text book didn't exactly betray awareness of any sensitivities on the Greek side towards past events that happened on their imperial watch, to say the least.
And neither did Turkish P.M. Erdogan betray any empathy when he told Greek P.M. Karamanlis during a meeting in Vienna last Friday, that "there is a lot of sensitivity (on the part of Turkey) to this sort of issue"; this sort of issue being the unveiling of a monument in Thessaloniki, commemorating the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Pontic Greeks during World War I and in the Asia Minor catastrophe of 1922 at the hands of Turkish forces: it "cast a shadow over friendly relations between the two countries", rang the ultimate chutzpah.
The American author has a good point where she stresses that "... by recognizing the genocides they (Turkey) would resolve some of the other important issues as well. For instance ... you don't have to keep jailing your teachers, publishers, and journalists on this issue ... It's a shame that they can't speak freely and learn what happened in their own country without fear.""The sad thing is that they lost so much, because the Greeks, Armenians, and Assyrians had so much culture there ... vibrancy ... wonderful artisans, intellectuals, teachers, musicians. At the time, there were Europeans who were saying "What in the world will Turkey do without the Christians?" After all, it was the Christians who were the intellectuals and business people, who had the education to help Turkey progress into the 20th century."
"When Turkey got rid of the Christian populations, they set themselves back, way-way back. The general Turkish population was not well educated at that time, because the Turkish government didn't bother to educate them the way the Christian missionaries educated the Christian populations. For the most part, the government wouldn't allow Muslims to attend the Christian schools, for fear of conversion, so most Turks of the time remained peasants and farmers" ... whose grandchildren are currently finding their way to permissive, postmodern, liberal societies and don't seem to be able to get over the culture shock.
As history lessons are gradually erased from school curricula, it is not unusual to find Westerners going through their lives with the false idea that Greek temples, Armenian monasteries and Assyrian churches were built by Turks, unaware as they are of the fact that pre-Islamic Turkish tribes only came on the Indo-European scene out of the Mongolian planes, from the thirteenth century onwards, conquering the indigenous Christianized peoples in the process. It is an illusion the Turks do nothing to dispel, claiming the cultural loot as their own.
A similar development occurred from the eighth century onwards with the Islamic conquests of countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa: it may come as a shock to some victims of the postmodern interpretation of history education, but (Islamic) Turks and Arabs don't build churches, or Greek ruins, or Roman aquaducts - never have, never will! Nor are they indigenous to Turkey (Asia Minor, or the Near East) or the Middle East, the Arabs hailing from the Arabian peninsula, roughly present day Saudi Arabia.The postmodern elite is so much in a hurry towards the progression of the transnational, borderless, multicultural and multi-ethnic empire building, that they rather opt for silence and suppression of unwelcome historical events rather than deal with them, non-offensive policies being the number one on the politically correct order of the day.
U-turning politicians are never a pleasant sight, but nothing is more repulsive and nauseating than the European party big wigs slithering hither and thither in their exculpation of the Turkish atrocities in the face of that country's impending E.U. membership (Belgium's Messrs Johan Vande Lanotte and Yves Leterme and, on behalf of The Netherlands, Wouter Bos).
The most perplexing of the transnational progressive wisdom is, that - apart from the fact that the old empires were neither easy manageable entities from a governmental point of view, nor democratic champions of civil rights - the idea also counters, what not a century ago, was seen as the solution to "sectarian war after war, and wave after wave of ethic cleansing", namely borders, passports, sovereignty, the nation-state.
No comments:
Post a Comment