I thought it inevitable that someday I’ll read a Jew telling me whether I am free or I am oppressed. The thought occurred to me years ago when I read a Jew, who identified himself as a human rights expert, saying that the Christians of Egypt do not know what is good for them because they are not revolting or turning their country into another Lebanon or Syria or Sudan or Libya.
Actually, I live in the West, and have been for nearly six
decades. Unsurprisingly, I just read an article written by the Jewish Clifford
D. May, under a title: “Russia, Ukraine and the West’s grand delusion of
freedom,” and the subtitle: “Liberty must be defended or surrendered – there’s
no third option.” May is telling the rest of us we are deluding ourselves into
believing we are free, when in reality we are not. Are we ever going to be relieved
by a respite from Jews telling us what we don’t know about ourselves? See for
yourself; May’s article was published on March 1, 2022 in The Washington Times.
Going through the article, I don’t see as little as a
hint that suggests Clifford May is referring to the cultural disease injected
into society by those of his ilk, according to which you are labelled
antisemitic, are cancelled and your life is ruined if you say A instead of B,
or if you say B instead of A. Well, if the Jews are not the problem, how is it
that we are deluding ourselves into believing we are free when we are not?
The answer to that question is that Clifford May holds to
the philosophical point of view that we are not free and don’t even know it
because out of the billions that lived on Planet Earth and departed, and the
billions more who are alive today, a handful of men (he named four dead ones,
and Putin who is alive) had visions of empire.
To convince us that his philosophy is correct, Clifford
May took liberty contorting logic into a pretzel while describing elites in
America and Europe who cling to the “grand delusion” that there is an
international community which believes in the adage that no one wins a war. He
rejects this notion as he does the one which contends that everybody prefer to
seek diplomatic solutions to address legitimate grievances while rejecting
armed conflicts in pursuit of territory, resources and power.
To buttress his argument, Clifford May cites the example
of John Kerry who explained to Vladimir Putin in 2014 that invading Ukraine is
something you don’t do in the 21st century as you might have in the 19th
century. Well, are you convinced, my friend? If not, Clifford May has a follow
up that should convince you because it relies on him ridiculing John Kerry.
Here is how he did that:
“Mr. Kerry last week expressed concern about the massive emissions
consequences that might result from the current Russian war on Ukrainians. As
White House climate envoy, Mr. Kerry reached out to the neo-czar: I hope
President Putin will help us to stay on track with respect to what we need to
do for the climate”.
What Clifford May fails to grasp is that the stories to which he clings
are so rare and so inconsequential, only a handful of people such as himself, are
aware of them and affected by them. In contrast, climate change (whatever the
merit of the arguments pertaining to the subject) is something that everybody
is aware of, and many are affected by it here and around the world.
At this point, Clifford May mercifully leaves his
philosophy aside, and starts to describe what he sees developing in America. He
says there are people with a leftist political bent who seem to be on Putin’s
side. He explains that they oppose inflicting sanctions on the Russian economy.
They also oppose weapons being sent to Ukraine. They want to see America
withdraw from NATO, and end the imperialist expansion that has led to the
current conflict.
To his dismay, Clifford May sees that people with a
rightist political bent also seem to be on Putin’s side. He says he does not
understand these people given that Putin wants to destroy America and they want
to make America great again. Meanwhile, he understands those on the right who advocate
letting Putin have his way in Ukraine, Europe, the Middle East and Latin
America so that the US may pivot to Asia and deal with the greater threat
that’s brewing there.
But while he understands that argument, he sees
difficulties with it. They are that the rulers of Russia, China, Iran, North
Korea, Venezuela and Cuba have formed an Axis of Authoritarianism whose agenda
is to weaken and diminish America. And so, if America withdraws from these
parts of the world, says Clifford May, there will be a repetition of Putin doing
what he did with Syria when he expanded his naval base in the Mediterranean and
restored Russia as a major force in the Middle East.
Clifford May ended the discussion the typically Jewish
way. It is that he made statements which do not respond to the question raised
by the very premise of his discussion. That is, whereas he started the
discussion by denouncing the men whose ambition has been to create an empire
for themselves, he did not respond to the accusation that such men are not in
the enemy’s camp, but operate from within the American sphere of influence.
Here is how Clifford May reported on that accusation: “They
want to see America withdraw from NATO, and end the imperialist expansion that
has led to the current conflict.” Translation: It is America’s men who dream of
empire, and cause the horror we all suffer as they try to realize their dreams.
Without a convincing refutation of that contention, the
evil that Clifford May has attributed to those he attacked, will instead be attributed
to those he praised. And the closing statement of his current article will read,
not the way he wrote it, but as follows: