The right term used for all the wrong reasons
The right term used for all the wrong reasons
By Don Rose
Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune
Published September 6, 2006
Much as I hate to agree with George W. Bush on anything, he is quite correct and fully accurate using "Islamic fascism" to identify the current enemy in this all-too-dangerous world. Where he and his cohorts are absolutely wrong is extending the concept to compare opponents of the Iraq war to "appeasers" of the fascists of World War II.
A number of critics failed to draw the distinction between the accuracy of the phrase and its contemptible political misuse by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and others.
The phrase "Islamic fascism" also is viewed as politically incorrect in certain quarters and hurtful in others--notably the Islamic Society of North America, whose new president, Ingrid Mattson, fears it stigmatizes all of Islam. Nevertheless it is fully justified, both in describing the politics of the militant Islamists and their interpretation of the faith.
The jihadists, terrorists and suicide bombers apparently all seem to believe they are engaged in a holy war on behalf of what they perceive as Islam, even though many are engaged in destroying fellow Muslims. Their theology of violence is drawn largely from the religious interpretations of the Egyptian philosopher Sayyid Qutb, the intellectual father of the Al Qaeda movement. They receive their bloody sermons and inspiration in mosques from radical imams.
The assemblage of fringe Islamic groups engaged in terrorism and guerilla warfare against the United States and its allies meets virtually every definition we have of fascism: a bellicose, militant, totalitarian and usually racist political movement or form of government; a government so convinced of its own power and rectitude that it seeks to convert or destroy any non-believer, any infidel.
The fanatical Taliban in Afghanistan matched or exceeded the authoritarian dictates and deeds of any historical fascist government. The Wahhabists in Saudi Arabia preach an essentially fascist doctrine. Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda movement is pure fascism by any definition of the word, as is the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamic fundamentalist movement rampant across North Africa. In part it is due to Sharia law, which makes no separation between church and state.
Let's stipulate firmly that the fascists do not represent all or anywhere near a majority of Islam. But let's recognize they are out there and understand what they do represent.
Fascism is a term first coined in the aftermath of World War I by a far-right anti-communist sect in Italy. The name comes from the "fasces," an ancient Roman symbol of strength and unity.
The fascists gained power in Italy, and Benito Mussolini became the exemplar of the fascist dictator by the early 1920s. Within a decade Adolph Hitler's National Socialist, or Nazi, Party took power in Germany. It did not use the word at first to describe itself, but it was quickly identified as fascist. It added its virulent anti-Semitism to the doctrine.
In late 1930s Spain, Gen. Francisco Franco's Falangists, who won their civil war, were easily identified as fascist. Fascist movements appeared throughout Europe, even in Great Britain, gaining power in some Balkan nations and later in South America. Before our entry into World War II there were a couple of homegrown fascist movements, some of which, such as the Ku Klux Klan, exercised considerable power in areas of America--some as near as Indiana.
The first person to label the Al Qaeda terrorists fascist was the then-leftist writer Christopher Hitchens. In the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center he called the acts "fascism with an Islamic face" in his column in The Nation magazine. He later moved substantially to the right, becoming a supporter of the Iraq war.
When Bush began promoting his "war on terror" he did not sort out terrorists by race, religion or national origin. But former U.S. Sen. Bob Kerrey, a member of the 9/11 Commission, pointed out that it was absurd to declare war on a tactic--terrorism--without further identification, so he offered the phrase "radical Islamists."
For want of a better word, "Islamist," meaning militant fundamentalist, became the accepted journalistic term of art, discomforting moderate followers of the faith because it was often misunderstood. At the same time, right-wing commentators and talk-show hosts began using "Islamo-fascists."
Bush caught up to them in recent weeks and started speaking correctly of Islamic fascism. If we can speak of Italian or Spanish fascism without condemning all Italians or Spaniards, we can do the same for Islam. Problem is, the language is being used now as part of a campaign to rhetorically turn the disaster of Iraq into "the good war" against the Nazis.
I'm pleased to acknowledge the president is using the right words here. But for all the wrong reasons.
----------
Don Rose is a freelance writer and political consultant in Chicago.
By Don Rose
Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune
Published September 6, 2006
Much as I hate to agree with George W. Bush on anything, he is quite correct and fully accurate using "Islamic fascism" to identify the current enemy in this all-too-dangerous world. Where he and his cohorts are absolutely wrong is extending the concept to compare opponents of the Iraq war to "appeasers" of the fascists of World War II.
A number of critics failed to draw the distinction between the accuracy of the phrase and its contemptible political misuse by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and others.
The phrase "Islamic fascism" also is viewed as politically incorrect in certain quarters and hurtful in others--notably the Islamic Society of North America, whose new president, Ingrid Mattson, fears it stigmatizes all of Islam. Nevertheless it is fully justified, both in describing the politics of the militant Islamists and their interpretation of the faith.
The jihadists, terrorists and suicide bombers apparently all seem to believe they are engaged in a holy war on behalf of what they perceive as Islam, even though many are engaged in destroying fellow Muslims. Their theology of violence is drawn largely from the religious interpretations of the Egyptian philosopher Sayyid Qutb, the intellectual father of the Al Qaeda movement. They receive their bloody sermons and inspiration in mosques from radical imams.
The assemblage of fringe Islamic groups engaged in terrorism and guerilla warfare against the United States and its allies meets virtually every definition we have of fascism: a bellicose, militant, totalitarian and usually racist political movement or form of government; a government so convinced of its own power and rectitude that it seeks to convert or destroy any non-believer, any infidel.
The fanatical Taliban in Afghanistan matched or exceeded the authoritarian dictates and deeds of any historical fascist government. The Wahhabists in Saudi Arabia preach an essentially fascist doctrine. Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda movement is pure fascism by any definition of the word, as is the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamic fundamentalist movement rampant across North Africa. In part it is due to Sharia law, which makes no separation between church and state.
Let's stipulate firmly that the fascists do not represent all or anywhere near a majority of Islam. But let's recognize they are out there and understand what they do represent.
Fascism is a term first coined in the aftermath of World War I by a far-right anti-communist sect in Italy. The name comes from the "fasces," an ancient Roman symbol of strength and unity.
The fascists gained power in Italy, and Benito Mussolini became the exemplar of the fascist dictator by the early 1920s. Within a decade Adolph Hitler's National Socialist, or Nazi, Party took power in Germany. It did not use the word at first to describe itself, but it was quickly identified as fascist. It added its virulent anti-Semitism to the doctrine.
In late 1930s Spain, Gen. Francisco Franco's Falangists, who won their civil war, were easily identified as fascist. Fascist movements appeared throughout Europe, even in Great Britain, gaining power in some Balkan nations and later in South America. Before our entry into World War II there were a couple of homegrown fascist movements, some of which, such as the Ku Klux Klan, exercised considerable power in areas of America--some as near as Indiana.
The first person to label the Al Qaeda terrorists fascist was the then-leftist writer Christopher Hitchens. In the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center he called the acts "fascism with an Islamic face" in his column in The Nation magazine. He later moved substantially to the right, becoming a supporter of the Iraq war.
When Bush began promoting his "war on terror" he did not sort out terrorists by race, religion or national origin. But former U.S. Sen. Bob Kerrey, a member of the 9/11 Commission, pointed out that it was absurd to declare war on a tactic--terrorism--without further identification, so he offered the phrase "radical Islamists."
For want of a better word, "Islamist," meaning militant fundamentalist, became the accepted journalistic term of art, discomforting moderate followers of the faith because it was often misunderstood. At the same time, right-wing commentators and talk-show hosts began using "Islamo-fascists."
Bush caught up to them in recent weeks and started speaking correctly of Islamic fascism. If we can speak of Italian or Spanish fascism without condemning all Italians or Spaniards, we can do the same for Islam. Problem is, the language is being used now as part of a campaign to rhetorically turn the disaster of Iraq into "the good war" against the Nazis.
I'm pleased to acknowledge the president is using the right words here. But for all the wrong reasons.
----------
Don Rose is a freelance writer and political consultant in Chicago.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 3:12 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home