Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam And The American Left Hardcover – Sep 7 2004
No Kindle device required. Download one of the Free Kindle apps to start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, and computer.
To get the free app, enter your e-mail address or mobile phone number.
Is there anyone better able to dissect the contemporary U.S. Left than David Horowitz? After all, it takes one-at least who used to be one-to know one. And like a whole slew of former Leftists over the last 30 years (Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Ronald Radosh, Sidney Hook, and Horowitzs sometimes writing mate, Peter Collier, among others), when these folks critique the Left, they know of what they speak because theyve been there. They know the ideological code words, frames of thought, and rhetoric.
But more than others, Horowitz has made something of a career of his intellectual odyssey from Left to Right, from serving as one of the foremost exponents of New Left radicalism in the 1960s as an editor of Ramparts magazine and in his close association with the revolutionary Black Panther movement, to acting as a Ronald Reagan backer in the 1980s and continuing as conservative ideologue (as publisher of the online magazine FrontPage) and as a crusader against politically correct university speech codes and affirmative action programs. He was once described as the most hated ex-radical of his generation.
This journey has been chronicled in books like Destructive Generation: Second Thoughts About the 60s (with Collier), a critique of the New Left, and Radical Son: A Generational Odyssey, a biographical journey from Red Diaper Baby in a Communist household to modern-day conservative and human rights activist. (Those who dont follow the ideological wars may know him for co-authoring such landmark books as The Rockefellers and The Kennedys.)
Its no wonder Horowitz is a prime Left target. For one thing, the Left never forgives those who abandon it. And could it be otherwise, since in book after book over the past decade (The Politics of Bad Faith, Left Illusions, and The Hate America Left, among others) he has unceasingly attacked the Lefts ideological underpinnings and practices, from its collaboration with totalitarian Communist regimes like North Vietnam, Nicaragua, and Cuba, to its opposition to liberal-democratic governments like those of the United States and other western powers that are seemingly more representative of the Lefts values in upholding human rights and equality.
Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left continues his hammering of the Left. But it is of the post- 9/11 Left, and that makes it particularly significant in a world remade politically after the events of September 11, when the West was awakened to confront the new and ruthless enemy of radical Islam.
In one sense, Unholy Alliances critique is in the vein of the authors earlier works: he makes wide-canvas accusations that the Left has had a lot to answer for-for its official alignments with, and sympathetic support for, unsavoury totalitarian regimes and movements abroad, whether of the former Soviet Union or Pol Pot; on the domestic front he accuses the Left of siding with radical gay activists who lobbied to thwart tough public health measures such as the closing of gay bathhouses in the 1980s that likely would have slowed the spread of AIDS.
In the post-9/11 world the threat may be new (specifically, radical Islam and its desire to impose an imperial caliphate in place of Cold War Communisms worldwide imperial classless ambitions), but for the Left, according to Horowitz, its the same old story. As implied by the books title, the Left today, again contradicting its lip service about equality and human rights, has generally been non-critical-if not directly supportive-of anti-democratic regimes and movements, from Palestinian terror groups to the former government of Saddam Hussein itself, and against liberal democracies like the United States, Great Britain, and Israel.
Indeed, Horowitzs argument in this book is clear and cogent. For example, whatever possessed the Left, within days of the World Trade Center and Pentagon bombings, to rally opposition to any U.S. retaliation against the perpetrators? Between September 11 and 30, before a shot was fired in response, Horowitz says, there were 247 anti-war demonstrations in the United States and overseas, and approximately 150 peace vigils and teach-in protests across the country. If the Left denounced the attacks at all, the criticism was often muted and qualified by rationalisations that America should look at the root causes such as the countrys supposed imperial activities abroad. Perhaps most notorious among all those who took this position was author and intellectual Susan Sontag, who said of the 9/11 hijackers, whatever may be said of the perpetrators of Tuesdays slaughter, they were not cowards.
Once America did respond with the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. Government, in many Left circles, was immediately denounced for its imperialism and for waging a racist war. Horowitz writes, Within weeks of the most heinous attack on America in its history, radicals had turned their own country into the villain. Criticism of the invasion aside, where, Horowitz asks, was the Left in at least condemning a totalitarian Islamic regime (the Taliban which harboured Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda) that oppressed women, homosexuals and non-Muslims and that consequently should have been repellent to (the Lefts) own values. Horowitz says that, from both angles, this was a defining moment for the U.S. Left, analogous to its response to the signing of the Nazi-Soviet Pact in 1939, when the Left of that era opposed the militarist policies of Britain and the U.S against Nazi Germany.
But it wasnt until the U.S. started contemplating the invasion of Iraq that the wellspring of opposition truly gained force. Horowitz, for his part, takes the same position on Iraq as on Afghanistan-in other words that both invasions were justified-and condemns Left opposition equally. As in Afghanistan, the United States was undertaking a regime change in Iraq that the Left might be expected to support, he argues. After all Saddams Baath Party was modelled after the Nazi Party, Saddam was a mass murderer who had invaded two countries, had used poison gas against his own people (the Kurds and Shiites), had harboured notorious terrorists like Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal, and had actively financed the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Six months before the invasion the demonstrations, numbering in the hundreds of thousands around the world, were larger than in the first six years of protest against the Vietnam War.
Moreover, Horowitz points out, the anti-war protests were notable for their one-sidedness. Only America was denounced as a rogue or terrorist state and for desiring blood for oil with slogans comparing it to Nazi Germany. By contrast, Al Qaeda and radical Islam were not at all targets of the demonstrators ire. Horowitz concludes, The international left had become frontier guards for Saddam and the Islamic jihad.
But Unholy Alliance is more than a simple critique of the anti-war and anti-U.S. Left. It harks back to Horowitzs previous book, The Politics of Bad Faith, which depicts the Left as a Gnostic religious movement whose idealism is rooted in the quest for a world vastly superior to the capitalist liberal democracies extant in the United States. For this reason, the Left sides with victims of capitalism and opposition regimes, no matter how tyrannical, in order to overthrow Western regimes and impose an egalitarian communist order.
Horowitz maintains that the contemporary anti-war Left has largely been propelled by these same Marxist goals. But, he asks, what does it say about these ideological secessionists from traditional American values, who side with an enemy, radical Islam, that has condemned every American-regardless of race, gender, age or creed-to death? It reveals, he answers, a loathing-which is really a self-loathing-for their country and its citizens.
One problem I have with the book is that Horowitz doesnt really distinguish among those people broadly against the war-who might actually number close to half the U.S. population-and many of the organizers of the anti-war demonstrations. Many of the Americans who opposed the war are hardly leftist zealots. They simply werent convinced there was enough evidence to invade Iraq, and are shamed because the military action has sullied what they consider their countrys traditional role as a defender and not aggressor nation. They differ markedly from the protest leaders, including anti-war organizations such as Act Now to Stop War and Racism (ANSWER) and Not In Our Name (NION), whose main components included such groups as the North Korean-aligned Workers World Party and Communist Chinese aligned Revolutionary Communist Party.
I have other quibbles, such as Horowitzs brushing over an issue like the U.S. Governments questionable rights violations of hundreds of people detained without trial in the aftermath of the terror attacks, and the sanctioning under the U.S. Patriot Act, which he otherwise does a good job defending, of allowing secret evidence in court.
Broadly speaking, Horowitz is correct in his condemnation of the post-9/11 anti-war Left-for its overwhelming biases against the West, and for forsaking its own values by not condemning the practices of Islamic regimes. Even if there were legitimate arguments against the Iraq invasion (e.g. no direct links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam, and the enormous death toll that resulted from the invasion), the Left with its conspiratorial hyperbole of no war for oil and charges of Bush simply seeking revenge for an assassination attempt on his father, is in need of a fundamental re-evaluation of where it stands on questions of democracy and human rights and indeed the War on Terror itself. But, as Horowitz has said in this and other books, the Left seems incapable of revaluating its agenda, blinded by its own messianic blinkers.
Ron Stang (Books in Canada)
-- Books in Canada
Inside This Book(Learn More)
Browse and search another edition of this book.
Top Customer Reviews
Their agenda emanates from the extreme left but their influence extends far beyond, also encompassing liberal discourse and the mass media. It seems that this radical agenda has now succeeded in capturing the heart and soul of the Democratic Party.
Unholy Alliance exposes and dissects the Left in fine detail, seeking for answers to why it has made an alliance with a reactionary and oppressive religious ideology. Also why it tried to undermine the War on Terror by opposing the liberation of Afghanitan and Iraq. The fracture of the consensus in American politics is another topic discussed here.
Part One, A Defining Moment, takes the investigation from 9/11, the response of the Administration, and the Left's response to that. It shows how the Left declared war on the War on Terror and started organising demonstrations long before any action was taken, becoming the vanguard for Saddam and the Jihad terrorists.
Part Two explores the Mind of the Left in a series that includes communist forerunners, the transition after the collapse of communism, the New Left, the Utopian Idea, the Nihilist Left and the Anti-American Cult. Throughout the book, prominent personalities are highlighted. Among them is Noam Chomsky, discussed with reference to a New Yorker profile where this nasty professor's malice and distortion of historical facts are pointed out. Chomsky's less strident but equally deceptive intellectual twin Howard Zinn also features.Read more ›
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
It begins with the leftist movements at the beginning of the 20th Century, and works its way up to the present day, exploring the anti-American attitude of these movements in detail. Horowitz shows that the enemies of the US back then are largely the same group today, operating under the same misperceptions, making the same mistakes, and pursuing the same impossible utopia.
Individual chapters are included on the Patriot Act (I was persuaded that it is a GOOD thing); the democratic flip-flop on Iraq once G.W. Bush implemented what they agreed with Clinton needed to be done; the driving components of the current anti-war movement; as well as chapters on individual personalities who are major spokespeople of the Left. Horowitz covers a lot of ground, and he covers it concisely and clearly. Unholy Alliance is richly informative without ever being boring or plodding.
This book is so illuminating that I simply cannot do justice to it here. I love people who reason so clearly that they help me get my own reasoning clear. Horowitz is just that type of person! In the terrain of mindless clichés (no-blood-for-oil, etc.), he is a breath of real fresh air.
Ladies and gentlemen, there is no free lunch. Mr. Horowitz elucidates the price to be paid if we accept the force-feeding of an illusory, earthly paradise that the radical socialist and jihadist are attempting to push down our throats. Swallow at your own peril. What David Horowitz has on the menu is well worth the price and infinitely more digestible.
Hey, my mom was a Trotskyite in college. What Horowitz says is totally right on. I don't know that it means that making war on Iraq was the best chess move in this very serious war, but I found only one item that I thought was an error.
Horowitz states that the war on Iraq and the war on Afghanistan took a few weeks and didn't become a quagmire. However, applying the same logical razor as he used in his book: First, you can't tell if something has become a quagmire until years afterward. Second, there are definite signs of quagmire developing, and it worth noting that the US occupation of Afghanistan never has reached the level of dominance and security at any time that the Soviet Union had there for the early years of their acquisition.
But, aside from that, he really nails the center of the uneasiness, the political fulcrum which has become a core of the Bush administration. Fact is, the left and its leaders have supported far more terrorism and sold far more lies than anyone else, and that most definitely includes Chomsky, his endless revisionist history and blinkered apologist tracts.
Horowitz knows his subject like only an apostate can. Seriously, if you want to read a book that will help you understand this political mess we have in America today, read this.
An important book to read for any American. While not everyone will be as alarmed as Horowitz, it is difficult to not at least be troubled by the political sympathy of an entire "intellectual" movement in the U.S.
An important piece of work.
Look for similar items by category
- Books > History > Historical Study > Revolutionary
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Current Events > Terrorism
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Politics > Ideologies
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Politics > International > Relations
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Politics > Terrorism
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Social Sciences > Political Science > Government
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Social Sciences > Political Science > Political Doctrines