Comparing Totalitarian Systems


A hearty thank you to Fobo 7 for the image below. It's something everyone should see. (Click on the picture to see it larger.)


Anonymous 2:57 AM  

Excellent graphic!

Perhaps even PCs and The Left might take heed.

PCs are mostly in denial whereas The Left thinks Islam can be an ally against "imperialism" - despite the destruction of The Left in Iran ... and also in Afghanistan (when the "holy warriors" forced the Soviets out).

Damien 9:34 AM  

Citizen Warrior,

Very interesting. Overall Islam is much more extreme than even Communism or Nazism. However, I wouldn't say the Nazi believed in equality for women. From what I've read about them, they were pretty sexist as well as racist, although Nazism certainly had a higher view of women then Islam.

Anonymous 12:51 PM  

Few people realise how complete and absolutist a form of totalitarianism Islam is. This chart illustrates this fact superbly.

Amit 12:56 AM  

but then a women suuccessful or simple muslim women would say..we are treaed higher! we are happy in islam

such stories come in again and dirpove chart

how to deal?

Anonymous 8:52 AM  

While both communism and Nazism have been ostracised and rejected, Islam seems relentless in its upward momentum. It's time to rise against the noisy leftists and human rightists who are propelling Islam's growth.

Anonymous 8:17 PM  

"...but then a women suuccessful or simple muslim women would say.we are treaed higher! we are happy in islam"

How to deal? Here are 3 examplesL

1.The issue is, are they equal and or free (objective). not are they happy(subejctive.) If they HAVE (not just say they have) the same amount of freedom as men, then you mark this box "yes." If not, mark it "no." . Freedom and equality, as opposed to second-class citizenship, can be tested and measured with consistent resuts.

2. I'm sure we could find slave narratives from the 18th century where SOME slaves (or indentured servents, who ived comparable lives) would say they were treated "higher" or "better" than "that white trash," subsitence farmers who lived nearby.

But as above, that is not enough when measuring scientificaly according to a constant set of standards.

3. If what women are "allowed" to do (and if they help decide what is "allowed," don't just follow men's rules)are equal to men's, that can be proven. If they are not, then they are not treated "higher," even if they DO belive they are "happy in islam."
They have no other existence to compare it to (and they have been told from birth that their restrictions are to glorify and protect them.)

Sorry so lengthy. Basically. it comes down to using consistence standards of measurement for men and women and then comparing them, not just going by what each group says. Because if you've heard of the Stockhold Syndrome, you know that subervient people start to believe their "masters" are doing what is best for them, and they become thankful for their lives (seeing them in a completely twisted way.)

GREAT CHART! Will come in useful often in days ahead/

Anonymous 11:56 PM  

There is some light at the end of the tunnel despite the "noisy leftists and human rightists".

Raymond Ibrahim has this to say in his article "Is Simple Attention the Islamists' Greatest Enemy?":

"Americans, wondering why Islam is always in the spotlight, begin inquiring; some become acquainted with reality, and go on to discuss it with friends and family."

Recently Islamic organisations tried to stop Ibrahim from speaking at a college - and failed!

Anonymous 9:39 PM  

@ anonymous

objective and consistent standards is key... i got..
but how can one know that chart has taken this in account?

im not against chart as i fully know that what muslim women go through.. but just a discussion can help more enlightenment of the issue and give more clarity

Anonymous 12:03 PM  

FeministX, today (13th July) Islamic terrorists bombed Mumbai.

Whilst 'moderate' muslims mostly sit back and do nothing or very little about their 'extremist' co-religionists the world is moving ever closer to a world war on the scale of which nothing that has ever come before will compare.

There is no alternative but for The West, Russia, China, and India to come together and face the reality that as long as Islamists are allowed safe haven amongst their co-religionists world peace is at stake.

The remaining non-muslim countries will need to make a choice too.

Latin America and its leftist leaning delusional alliance with Islam to counter "yankee imperialism" will need to realise that when the Students Islamic Movement of India seeks officially to impose its will upon almost a billion non Muslim Indians and subjugate them to Islam there is a very real problem that ALL non-muslims face, be they "yankee imperialists" or Latin Americans or the Politically Correct or Leftists or celebratory "journalists" like Robert Fisk and Vaughan Smith and Juilian Assange.

We are dealing with an extreme merciless form of evil far worse than that of the Nazis.

If you have any doubts let's see what the Emir of Qatar or Wael Ghonim will say or do about this latest Islamist outrage.

Mostly nothing or very little ... present day Islam is no less than that which you say resulted in the deaths of eighty million Indians.

Anonymous 1:54 AM  

With the latest Mumbai bombings, with the images of anguished relatives in the media, one must ask how the minds of two specific types work:

a) those of the Politically Correct?
b) those of the Left?

This is my view as a non-Jewish, atheist libertarian …

The Politically Correct only consider issues that are ‘sexy’ or ‘in vogue’.

It is a form of denial, as if the victims of those who suffer human right abuses and crimes against humanity at the hands of the ‘in vogue’ side do not really matter, that they do not really hurt, or if they do somehow it is a result of ‘bad things’ that “we” (The West) have done to the ‘in vogue’ side.

Robert Fisk begging for his life when he was attacked in Afghanistan and then excusing his attackers because us Westerners (himself included) have done ‘bad things’ to them is the pathetic drivel that often emanates from the PC.

The Left is different.

They, at some conscious or sub conscious level, believe violence is justifiable to act against “imperialism”.

So (for example) Che Guevara is a revolutionary hero despite the atrocities he committed.

Similarly Stalin and Mao were adored and admired by the Western Left, despite the tens of millions of corpses that they piled up on a colossal pyramid of human sacrifices.

In a nutshell:

a) PCs are in denial about the human rights abuses of the Side That Is In Vogue.

b) Leftists believe violence is moral as long as it is directed against Jews and ‘imperialists’. If many of the ‘proletariat’ need to be sacrificed so be it as they are then ‘martyrs’ for the cause of international socialism.

philip.zhao 11:37 PM  

I would venture to make a slight revision on the column of "communism" by giving the first entry a 50% Yellow and same rating to the last entry.
One can enjoy a large measure of freedom of speech as long as one does not criticize the government systems. As for other religions, communism adopts peaceful measures in time of peace and highhanded in case of insurrections. I am speaking about China.

Anonymous 6:26 PM  

You're wrong, Empress Trudy.
Several Bolshevik leaders were Jewish, like Zinoviev and Kamenev for example.
Jews often had (and have) important chairs in universities, and they would (and do) preferably hire their own in their institution.
Many used the excuse of their Jewish roots in order to leave the Soviet Union for Israel (where they usually didn't stay very long)!
All in all, in all objectivity and fairness, they were definitely not treated worse than the average Soviet citizen.
Just to be precise, I have nothing against Jews except I get a bit irritated by their attitude of superiority; while there is nothing wrong with being Jewish, I think there is nothing wrong with NOT being Jewish either!

Truthiocity 3:02 PM  

I have to disagree with the pathology in question. It is accurately analogous yet not quite accurate. Perhaps people are more aware of sociopathy but there is a more accurate abnormal pathology that has perrhaps been bred into the islamic societies.

That is the Sadistic Personality Disorder. It's not the same as sexual sadism. It was in the DSMIII But Not the DSMIV but I believe it should be.

Stephen J. Hucker, MB, BS, FRCP(C), FRCPsych (basically he's a very well educated forensic psychologist) says:

"The SPD takes pleasure in the humiliation, control and domination of others. It is manifested as cruel, manipulative, demeaning and possibly aggressive behavior towards others."

Seriously, how perfect is that? How better to describe EVERYTHING we read in the papers?

Laura Logan said in an interview that the crowd attacking her was egged and further exited by her visible suffering.

Anthropologists have found that some societies that value specific traits develop a population who exhibit extreme examples of that trait. Those with the valued trait will get more mates and produce more offspring. The result is that some cultures have a preponderance of some sorts of abnormal psychology rather than others. That is to say that one society will produce more depressives and another will produce more psychotics.

The marriage and mating strategies of arabic/islamic sociteies, where a minority of men accumulate several wives and most end up with none, will accelerate and intensify this process. In this case it is the more aggressive, domineering men who accumulate the most wives.

I believe the result of at least a thousand years of this mating behavior causes a prepoderance of aggression and drive to dominate in the population.

This could be why the most aggressive islamic societies are those who adopted islam earliest while the most mild societies are the ones who adopted it more recently. "Natural" selection hasn't had as much time to work in those more newly islamic societies.

Of course there are cultural factors as well.

But this could explain the prepoderance of aggressive behavior on every level, from the personal to the interactions between states exhibited by and in arabic/islamic countries.

It cannot be denied that Muhammad derived great pleasure from dominating others, and especially women. The choice of a child bride, as someone small and unable to defend herself from him, would fit into this pathology as well as the pathology of pedophilia.

Here is a link to a page about SPD:

Anonymous 11:07 AM  

Personally I think your diagram is very bias. If you were really to go in depth to the true meaning of Islam and not post based on stereotypical ideas you have heard, you would know that Islam is not at all what you have considered it to be. Please do your all your research before coming to such conclusion
And frankly speaking no one gives you the right to treat anyone's religion like this, doesn't matter if it's Islam or not!.

Its shameful that in today's society people make such comments.

I am very disappointed.

Citizen Warrior 3:43 PM  

What if it is true? Would you still be against treating a "religion" that way?

Would you rather people told fibs to each other?

Article Spotlight

One of the most unusual articles on is Pleasantville and Islamic Supremacism.

It illustrates the Islamic Supremacist vision by showing the similarity between what happened in the movie, Pleasantville, and what devout fundamentalist Muslims are trying to create in Islamic states like Syria, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia (and ultimately everywhere in the world).

Click here to read the article.


All writing on is copyright © 2001-2099, all rights reserved.

  © Free Blogger Templates Columnus by 2008

Back to TOP