Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

When will the “mainstream” media point out that the dicator of Libya, Muammar Muhammed al-Qaddafi, is a life long socialist.

That is it, I am not asking the msm to explain that “Islamic Socialism” was very popular in (amongst other places) the Hyde Park area of Chicago. With leading Islamists (of this faction – i.e. Islamic Socialists) and Marxists giving each other money and jobs (often from organizations created by rich, and now dead, Republicans) on the grounds that both groups were socialist and their common enemy was the “capitalist” United States. A “Red/Green alliance” against “Imperialist” America and the “Imperialist” West in general.

I do not expect the media to engage in what they would call “unfair Obama bashing” – I do not expect them to mention Barack Obama at all.

All I want them to do is to mention that the tyrant of Libya, whose bloodstained hands organised terror at home and international terrorism in the rest of the world, was a lifelong and dedicated socialist.

Surely this is not too much to ask?


  1. GW says:

    I love a good humorous post.

  2. JuliaM says:

    *holds up hand*

    Sir, sir! I know this one! It’s ‘never’, isn’t it?

  3. Johnathan Pearce says:


    For much of the media and commentariat, it is simply not discussable, not thinkable, that a dictator can be “left”, let alone “socialist”.

    In any event, the whole business throws Tony Blair’s recent foreign policy stance towards the man into a new light.

  4. Lynne says:

    This is the same media who think that the BNP is right wing? And who think that Cameron is a conservative?


  5. Paul Marks says:

    Brother Glenn gave a good example of media speak yesterday.

    Brian Williams (the presentor of NBC evening news) went straight from talking about Egypt (which, of course, he presented as fluffy) to talking about Wisconsin.

    “Now the people are also rising up in the United States – the people have taken over the State capital building in Wisconsin……”

    “The people” actually elected the Republican Governor and State Legislature (way back….. in November) – but the voters are not “people” as far as Mr Williams is concerned.

    Only the left are “people”.

    Nice hair, suit and tie – that is how the media left present themselves.

    But they are the same as the people in Wisconsin (and in Egypt) waving the Communist banners.

    Openly waving them.

    Just as in Egypt the Communist banners and the Islamists banners were SIDE BY SIDE (sure they will fall out later – but they were working together).

    Yet if anyone mentions the Red/Green alliance the msm (such as Joe Klein of “Time” magazine) will say they are “delusional”.

    “Do not look at these signs people, and do not listen to the words these people are saying, it is just democracy in action – just listed to us (the “mainstream” media) nothing else to see here – move along…..”

  6. The faster the blogosphere takes over from the MSM, the better.

  7. Muammar says:

    Calling Qaddafi a socialist is like calling a (www-) libertarian racist. Oh, oops… sorry.

  8. NickM says:

    I don’t actually think I blame the MSM here. I don’t think calling him a socialist is particularly meaningful. I think the same about the Kims of North Korea. Quite simply those countries are thoroughly unique. Libya under Gadaffi is/was the world’s only Jamahiriya and the DPRK is the only Juche state in the world. Indeed a basic principle of Juche is that it is not exportable beyond Korea.

    That the Libyan economy is a command one is not synonymous with socialism. Saudi Arabia is much the same. The key is having oil which means no other large-scale industry is really needed. Indeed discouraged because if people start getting wealthy off their own bat… And to give the BBC it’s credit enough of their commentators on this ruckus have made it abundantly clear that Libya has no independent media or civil society at all. Furthermore Gadaffi is a veritable Houdini of dictators (up until now anyway). He has been for quite some time strategically placing Libya as an African rather than Arab power. Post 9/11 he came out strongly against terrorism and has been perfectly happy for quite some time with Western investment in the oil industry (the later hardly very socialist – did he allow that after the Soviets bust their flush?). The Mad Dog has proven to have a sensitive nose for which way the wind is blowing – he is an arch pragmatist. That is why he’s lasted so long. Moreover – and I have argued this about Iran too – the raving nutter schtick is extremely helpful in international relations because it disconcerts people. unpredictability is a strength few “classic” diplomats grasp.

    One final point. “Islamic Socialism” rather than “Arab Socialism”. Well, it helps as Paul says to spread the word (whatever that might be) into the non-Mahgreb Muslim states of Africa – a natural sphere of influence for Libya* but… there is another reason. After the spectacular failure Nasserism it’s just not a phrase for an ambitious dictator to want to be associated with.

    *You know where a lot of the land in Zimbabwe seized by the war veterans went don’t you? Libya propped/props up Mugabe with oil for land.

  9. Paul Marks says:

    I call him a socialist for two reasons:

    He calls himself a socialist – and has done his whole adult life.

    And he is a socialist – he subsidizes socialist groups around the world and nationalized most of the means of production, distribution, and exchange at home.

    It is the same with Kim in North Korea – indeed even more so. It is socialist – and whilst “Death Worship” (or whatever exact form of socialism is practiced in East Asia) may not be for export, socialism certainly is (North Korea has backed it in many nations – and on the world stage, although that South Korean socialist in charge of the UN does enough damage on his own).

    Not “meaningful” to call them socialists – yes it is meaningful.

  10. EndivioR says:

    Does anyone remember Gerry Healy? He was the Judean People’s Front, er I mean the British Trotskyist Movement, for most of the sixties and half the seventies. Apart from hypnotising the likes of Vanessa Redgrave, he used to put out a daily newspaper in full colour, the money for which came from Libyan oil, of course. And I understand he was also the mentor of Red Ken.

  11. Nelsontouch says:

    I recall an incident long ago when Gaddaffi invited loads of lefties for a get together int he desert.
    All kinds of left-leaning groups turned up, naive to a man I guess. There were vegetarians and greenies and various kinds of Trot.
    They saw a marching display by the Libyan youth movement, with each boy holding a chicken.
    The climax of the display: they bit off the heads of the chickens.

    It is not recorded how many of the fluffy lefties threw up.

  12. Paul Marks says:

    The Syrian socialists used to that as well – although I am not sure that “Baby Assad” really likes all this stuff.

    In China, Mao went one better.

    Red Guards used to cut the hearts out of living people (although only “reactionaries” of course) and eat them.

    I once watched a film of some old former Red Guards discussing it – “why did we do that?”, “it was really terrible” and so on.

  13. Paul Marks says:

    G.H. and co?

    Yes I remember them.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: