Oh, say Ken Livingstone, for instance.
Or anybody who shares similar views.
IMO, politics certainly cannot be described as linear as there is so much more to it than a simple left and right, but if there were a way to add elements to our traditional linear way of looking at it by adding reference points in terms of dogmatism, chauvenism, authoritarianism, reactionary tendencies, degree of moral relativism and whatnot, I think we might begin to understand why the tacit support and/or apologia for Islamism is stronger on the far left than the middle or right. Dogmatic and reactionary people who rely on the easy excuse of "I am a moral relativist" are much less likely to address the actual nature of the Islamist belief system than those who aren't, and are much more likely to view the world through a certain sort of template where they are blind themselves to this reality.
What do Islamists believe? What do I believe? Does my identification with a label mean I need to rationalize these differences?
If the terms left and right have come to mean whether or not I object to Islamism, then perhaps I am a right winger now. I have certainly been accused of such by a thing that posts here. Perhaps, though, we just need a new language that defines us, for if we have come to the point where standing up for equal rights for women is "right wing", standing up for the rights of gay people is "right wing", standing against fundamentalist theocrats is "right wing" while acting as apologists for the Mullahs is "left wing", then in the last 30 years we have truly experienced a paradigm shift involving the inversion of the meaning of these terms.
