Friday, September 30, 2005

Privacy and Fascism

Privacy is only available to the individual. Beyond the privacy of sitting in a locked room, privacy refers to owning ones own life. For the majority of Humans now and throughout history the concept of privacy is unheard of or if known, hated. The atomic individual is outside the control of family, clan, tribe, army, church and state. The atomic individual can stand apart from God Himself. The man in a state of privacy is a permanent exile from group identity. Fascists of all sorts rebel against the very thought of privacy, of individualism, of self-ownership of ones being.The communitarian, Muslim, Leftist or Rightist is against the free individual mind in possession of his being.

One of the battle lines we face is that of privacy versus collectivity. Modern man faces the ummah of Islam. Modern woman faces the enemy of her freedom in the form of the subjugation of women as sanctioned by Islamic and tribal chattel slavery. What is the root cause of Islamic jihad against the rest of the world? One point is individuality. Privacy. He who is free to own his own life is not a slave of Allah. That privacy is atheism.

To the Left dhimmi fascist collectivity is supreme. The same is true for the Rightist fascist who feels that the State is all. And for the Muslim, the ummah is supreme. Within the collective it is the individual who is a menace. He who is private is not working toward the collective goal but toward his own, whatever it might be. And as such, regardless of the collective goal, the individual is not a true believer, is therefore an atheist. He who does not believe in the collective identity's validity is an enemy. That would be us.

Beow we have the first paragraph of a long entry on individualism. We'll come back to this topic again, as we have before, it being central to the thesis that the Left and the Right are fascistic by nature and creed, and that there is little to distinguish those fascisms from Islam.

"Individualism" is a term ranging over a wide variety
of attitudes, doctrines, and theories, and this diversity
of meaning is only increased when one takes account
of historical shifts in the connotations of the very word
"individual" and its synonyms (Mauss, 1937; Ullmann,
1966). The relation of these various meanings to one
another is largely one of family resemblance, though
"individualism" has usually been understood as expres-
sing some cluster of such meanings, which usually are
either not distinguished from one another or else as-
sumed to be logically or conceptually related.

No comments: