The Freedom Fighter

John Brown was a mad man. Of that, I have no doubt. Was he a Freedom Fighter? He died in the cause of freedom. He died fighting to end the oppression of the American Slave.

It’s all the rage today and for the past decade to attempt to label the people fighting for  a cause as FREEDOM FIGHTERS.

What is a Freedom Fighter?

Is a Freedom Fighter anyone fighting against a superior force?  Is a freedom fighter anyone willing to fight against perceived oppression no matter the ideals for which that group is fighting?

Were Bolsheviks freedom fighters?  Are Palestinians freedom fighters?  Were the Viet Minh freedom fighters?  Are the Taliban freedom fighters?  Are Sunni insurgents who are backed by al Qaeda freedom fighters?  Are the Hezbollah soldiers backed by Iran in the fight against Lebanese Christians and Israelis fighting for freedom?  Are they freedom fighters?

They fit the definition of Wikipedia.   Yet, are they fighting for freedom or the freedom to oppress as they see fit to oppress.

Hezbollah is an arm of the Iranian Revolution.  They are fighting to establish an extension of the Shi’a form of Iranian oppression over the people of Palestine to include the Jews and Christians of the area.  They would impose the Iranian Revolutionary form of governance over the people of Palestine.  Hamas, Fatah and the PLA would impose their form of governance which would be Sharia Law on all and sundry in the area.  Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Expression and Speech would be on the same level as that of Iran and Saudi Arabia if these folks win.  Yet, many consider these groups to be “Freedom Fighters.”

I would make the assumption that to be labeled a Freedom Fighter, one must be fighting for freedom.  Freedom being defined as:

: the quality or state of being free: as a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another : independence c : the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous

Being released from something onerous.  The absence of coercion or constraint.  I would say destroying a nation that allows free speech and freedom of religion in favor of imposing a Religious Ideology would not qualify as fighting for freedom.  We may as well reach back into history and call Hitler or Napoleon Freedom Fighters.

Geronimo fought for the way of life of his people. Freedom Fighter?

Che Guevara was called a Freedom Fighter.  Some went so far as to call Fidel Castro a Freedom Fighter.  Simon Bolivar WAS a freedom fighter even though in the end he attempted to establish himself as an Imperial Ruler.  He fought to liberate the people of South and Central American from the Colonial oppression of Spain and other European Powers such as Portugal and the Catholic Church.  George Washington could be categorized as a Freedom Fighter.  He fought for Independence.  He was offered absolute power and turned it down in favor of freedom and liberty.  The Haitians during the Presidential Administration of Woodrow Wilson could be labelled such without stretching the term.

Woodrow Wilson who championed Self Determination was absolutely not a fighter in the cause of freedom.  He championed Freedom and Self determination but only so long as you were White, Anglo Saxon and, preferably, Protestant.  Ho Chi Minh, regardless of where he wound up, began as a Freedom Fighter.  When Uncle Ho approached Woodrow Wilson, he was in the fight against colonial oppression.  He fought for the liberation of Indo-China from French, then Japanese and then, once again, French Colonial control.  Once Uncle Ho became the power in North Vietnam, he was no longer a Freedom Fighter.  Not because he was “the MAN,” but because he sought to enslave his fellow Vietnamese with the yoke of Communism.

I would posit that no person who fought for Communism could ever be labeled a Freedom Fighter.  Communism is a form of coercion.  It is a form of constraint.  It is enslavement of mind, body and soul.  One can not fight for freedom and simultaneously fight for the cause of Communism.

Ho Chi Minh ~ fought against colonial oppression of both the Japanese and France then led North Vietnam in the fight to impose communist rule over the soveriegn people of the nation of South Vietnam. Freedom Fighter?

There are many confused folks out there who are wont to use the term Freedom Fighter when speaking of fighters in the cause of Allah.  People fighting for the right to darken a land with the laws of Islam.  Sharia Law.  The imposition of Sharia law is the imposition of a set of laws that enslave mind, body and soul of whole peoples.  The choice of religion is taken away.  Nearly all choice is taken away in the lands of Sharia law.  One must be Muslim or pay a tax for not being so.  That’s no choice.  One can not choose to leave Islam.  The Sentence for leaving Islam is Death.  Once one becomes a Muslim, to depart from the Umma is apostasy.   Apostasy is a crime punishable by death.  The plight of women in Islam is well known.  It matters not if it is cultural or religious or a combination thereof.  Women are chattel property in Islam.  Women have no true rights.  They must dress, act and think as the Patriarch demands.  They must marry whom they are told to marry.  They must act in accordance with the whims of men.

With this in mind, how can a Palestinian be called a Freedom Fighter.  The man who fights for Palestine is fighting to impose Islamic Law over a people who may not want to have Sharia Law imposed on them.  I’m sure the Christians of Palestine will not be content to live under Sharia law.  The Jews of Palestine will not wish to live under Sharia law. Yet, this is the avowed goal.  Palestinian Muslims wish to return Palestine to Islam.  All of Palestine.  The destruction of the Jewish State and the implementation of Islamic Law over all.  Islam uber alles, so to speak.

The Maoists in Nepal and Tibet.  Are these folks freedom fighters?  I think not.  They wish to impose Maoist Communism on the people of these two States.  Having been successful in Tibet with the “assistance” of the Maoist Chinese, they fight on in Nepal by kidnapping tourists and holding them for ransom.

Mahatma Gandhi ~ led the non-violent cause of India towards independence from Britain. India then became a Communist Nation. Freedom Fighter?

We, in the West, too often support a cause based on faulty perceptions.  Someone labels a group Freedom Fighters.  Suddenly and without thought, Westerners jump on the bandwagon.   We should put a little thought into our support of these groups.  What group would you support in Iran if you were to choose?  There are secularists groups in Iran.  Secular Socialists.   Secular Communists.  Secular Islamists.  These are the Islamists themselves who are moderate Muslims and wish for Iran to have a Secular Government and Religion to be extracted from the political sphere.

Who would we support if it came down to it?  I think our government would be fooled again.

Personally, I’d rather have Saddam Hussein and his Ba’athist Party in control of Iraq than the fools emplaced by Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfield and George Bush.   Anyone who espouses religious control of the people is a murderer in waiting.  Pat Robertson as Imperial Christian Leader of the Christian States of America would be no different than the Ayatollah Khomeinii.  Of that, I have no doubt.  He would tell us that GoD ordered that all non-believers, heretics, infidels should be put down and we’d have Americans who would understand and obey those orders.  I could see an American Basijji being imposed on us as well under a Christian Administration with the power to do so.  Chastity police roaming the streets of LA, New York, Miami and New Orleans.

With that in mind, Freedom Fighters need to maintain their vigilance right here in America.  We need not imagine or find foes outside of our borders.  We have enemies of freedom right here in America.

Che Guevara ~ led the peasants of South America against the oppressive landlords and governments. Went on to fight for Fidel Castro and Communism. Freedom Fighter?

The Obama Administration is pushing hard to end internet freedom.  That is, however, a bi-partisan issue.  Members of both parties wish for this power.  The same power held by Communist China.  The power to shut down the internet on the mere suggestion of a threat to national security.  Republicans are in on the scam to end internet freedom.  They lie and say that they aren’t for it even as they were poised to vote for PIPA and the similar bills.  Then the American People spoke out on the issue.  The people of the United States who love their freedom spoke out and the people’s representatives, by some miracle, listened and acted accordingly.  The Big Money of MGM, Sony, Virgin and the other Entertainment Moguls who would have stifled freedom in the name of profit were defeated.  But!  It’s only round One.  They’ll come around again with their greed and demagoguery in the name of Profit and Greed.

Can America be considered to have fought for freedom over this past decade?  We fought the Taliban in Afghanistan only to have a Sharia Constitution  imposed on the people of Afghanistan.  We destroyed the Ba’athist Regime of Saddam Hussein only to install a Constitution in Iraq that is based on Sharia Law.  We installed a Government in Iraq via crooked elections that is full of infighting Thugs who are consolidating power into one or two people.  I would be surprised by another Iraqi election.  Afghanistan elected Hamid Karzai to continue his corrupt associations with Warlords and Muslim Thugs.

Was that “freedom fighting?”  If it was freedom, it was short lived.  It ended the moment that Religion took precedence over the will of the people.

All we did was throw out the dirty bath water and, then, jumped in the mud as we marveled over the immaculate mud around our ankles.

Freedom Fighters?

Was there ever a true instance of Freedom Fighters?  I can not think of many instances in history wherein the people were truly fighting for universal freedom.  The American Colonies fight against Britain?  The Irish against Britain?  Gandhi against Britain?  Eastern European revolutions against the Soviet Union?  The Arab Spring?  All of these were marred by instances of people fighting for freedom while enslaving or oppressing  others.  The American Colonies fought to be liberated from the British Empire while enslaving millions and importing millions more from Africa to be enslaved.

I just thought this picture was cool. A Freedom Fighter should fight in the cause of FREEDOM. Fighting in the cause of oppression does not earn one the title of Freedom Fighter.

How can Americans, then, have been called Freedom Fighters?  We fought for White Male  Liberty while simultaneously enslaving millions, committing genocide and denying equality to Women.  Americans destroyed and oppressed whole tribes of peoples across the North American continent.  Is that Freedom Fighting?  We then warred on Mexico because we wanted to take their land.  Freedom Fighters?  We then stole Hawaii and warred with Spain to take control of Spanish Colonies.  Freedom Fighting?

But all of those instances pale in comparison to the fools who called the Communists Freedom Fighters.  There were people in America who supported Mao and Lenin and Stalin and Ho Chi Minh.  There were probably some misguided fools who supported Pol Pot.

Mao was at times called a Freedom Fighter.  Stalin’s minions were called Freedom Fighters in Greece, Italy, South America among other places.  These men enslaved millions and slaughtered and starved millions more.  Unfortunately, FDR and Churchill had us fighting alongside that murderous Thug Stalin in World War II.  We fought Germany to free Eastern European nations from Fascist oppression only to leave them to Communist Enslavement behind the Iron Curtain.  In World War II, we allied ourselves with Satan in order to fend off beezlebub.

Were the Soviets who fought Nazis Freedom Fighters?  Were Nazis who fought the Soviets Freedom Fighters?

These labels that we place on people are idiotic.  No label can nicely and roundly fit a whole group of people.  It’s no different using the label “hero” for all Service Members who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.  I can tell you for a fact that not all of them are heroes.  A hero is someone who goes above and beyond duty.  A hero is supposed to be someone extraordinary.  A person who sits in an office on Camp Eggers or NKC for 12 months in Kabul, Afghanistan is no more extraordinary than a person who sits in an office in New York City for 12 months.  I don’t care if they wear a uniform or a pair of cut off jeans short and a t-shirt.

Heroes.  Freedom Fighters.

Is it all just nonsense?  I often wonder.  The plain fact is that if everyone is a hero, no one is a hero.  Nothing is heroic.  What do we call people who actually act in heroic manner?  Uber-heroes?

If a freedom fighter can fight for Islamic Sharia or Communism or Slavery, then there is no such thing as Freedom.  One can not freedom fight one’s way into universal bondage.

In America, it's called ObamaCare!

The Next Generation of Fighter will come from this Group. People who refuse to be wage slaves for Corporations.

11 comments on “The Freedom Fighter

  1. Dave, You write powerfully. I would argue with parts of this but I respect your opinion and agree with very much of it. I am posting this onto my blog, which may soon be taken away by our non-reps in our Congress and the US president.

    Keep on writing! Complete the first one soon. Don’t try to get everything in one treatise.

    Come back to the states (Commonwealth of Kentucky) in your case and write and publish. Maybe even marry and have or adopt kids.

    The world should await your writings concerning your experiences in the Middle East.

    Go Kentucky Wildcats!


  2. The writer of this piece is a brainwashed bourgeois laboring under false consciousness. Crapitalism must go by any means necessary while ensuring that after the Revolution for Socialism has been won it adhere to democratic principles.

    Workers must first cast off their mind-forged manacles (Wm Blake), then actively oppose their exploiter, via non-violent non-cooperation whenever possible (the General Strike), by armed resistance when necessary.

    • The writer of this comment lives in a dream land wherein Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot and the rest of the Socialist Paradisers never existed.

      There is no such thing as a political or economic system wherein people do what’s best for the group. Humans are greedy and power hungry. Socialism simply leads to autocratic despotism.

      Despite the pretensions of persons such as the above commenter.

    • You are a fool of world class proportions, or a degenerate Marxist. The Age of the “Common Man” ended with the industrial revolution. The world does not need nor will it long endure this corrupt collectivist mentality and failed ideology. The age of the individual is again on the ascendency and you who would enslave us with the tyranny of the masses will fade into or be bludgeoned back into obscurity.

  3. You quote the definition of freedom….but you have forgotten about the protagonist that is the United States; a country that feels it has the right to change by either coercion or domination, the freedom of other nations to run their countries as they wish.
    Since you mentioned Geronimo, should it not be mentioned, much more strongly than you have, that all indigenous peoples were completely free before the ‘Americans’ wanted to take their land and stifle their culture…. Freedom fighter(s) most certainly applies. Just because a group/nation is against the will of the United States does not disqualify them from the title of “freedom fighter”…
    Below is how the definition of freedom should be written:

    : the quality or state of being free FROM THE WILL OF THE U.S: as a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint BY THE U.S. in choice or action b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of THE U.S. : independence c : the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous, as THE WILL OF THE U.S.


    • You should probably read the rest of my blog.

      This is a blog entry. Not a book. You could add a number of entities in the same manner that you added the US. Perhaps, your own prejudices keep you from seeing that obvious fact. The US has only been on the World Scene in this way since the end of World War II. That’s not even a century. Compare that to the actions of Great Britain, France or Spain.

      The influence and power of the US has been exercised with restraint in comparison. I disagree with much that the US has done. That said, we’ve done nothing that others haven’t done and aren’t doing right now.

      Free from the power of the US

      Free from the power of Europe

      Free from the power of China

      Free from the power of Russia

      Free from the power of Islam

      Free from the power or Christianity

      I can’t stand hypocrisy. Mention the US sure. The US is hardly the worst to have come on the scene in the history of the World. Folks who are ignorant of history may think so.

  4. I meant no disrespect nor directed animosity with my comment.

    My post was about Geronimo, remember?
    My re-write of the definition of freedom was from that specific point of view, directed at all of the people who think Geronimo et al, were just savages, killing because that’s all they knew. The revision was directed at the people who believe that the US did no wrong.

    Now that I re-read it, I guess I wasn’t that clear; my writing does need work.

    You wrote: “Perhaps, your own prejudices keep you from seeing that obvious fact.”
    Why did you feel the need to include a belittling comment like that in an otherwise informative reply?

    Close the comments if you are just going to disrespect and belittle people’s ‘ignorant’, singular comments.
    You seem angry; the kind of angry that won’t allow anyone else to be angry.

    • Not angry. Just direct.

      I do not think that the Natives of this land were savages. On the contrary, they were, in many cases, more civilized than us. Merely held different world views. However, many of them could be and were just as savage as us.

      The Natives who were in the Americas when the Europeans came had conquered others before we conquered them.

      The angle from which you wrote was a prejudicial angle.

      I’m not Christian but Jesus said it best; “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”

      • If you think the natives where so compassionate you might read Theodore Roosevelt’s “The winning of the west” . Your vision is a vision from Holly
        wood, not history.

      • So, you think that another people has the right to come to America and take our land from us simply because they have superior arms and numbers?

        Of course, the “Natives” attacked us. We were invading their lands and stealing them from them. We were destroying their way of life.

        We had no manifest right to take their lands. We invaded, waged war, raped, murdered and pillaged their lands and their people and YOU expect them to what??? Stand by and apologize to us for having been there in our way.

        What the fuck is wrong with you?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.