the term "islamo-fascism", valid?

2FAST4U

Afraid I agree with you on this one..What in the hell am I doing....

__________________
[/b]drinking ale from a barrel[/b]

Durangodave

Good points, all. And, funny, I would actually feel a bit uncomfortable using the term "Islamofascism" myself. But as a metaphor, it might have some application:

I'll use "=" loosely

1.extreme nationalism = blind faith in a particular unifying human order, centered on a certain land and culture = very similar to radical Islam. (Yes Islam can be anywhere, but you gotta learn Arabic and journey to the motherland if you want to do it right.)

2. Inherent superiority of one group over the other = superiority of the believers (the rising Ummah) over the infidel west.

3. Authoritarian leader = radical-Islam's need to implement Sharia law would result in a pretty iron clad theocracy, if they had their way. I think the distribution of religious power among the various mosques is only where the theocrats are held in check by a more powerful state.

4. Can't really find the parallel to corporatism... you got me there.

I pulled this definition off wikipedia:

"Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion." (The Anatomy of Fascism. Robert O. Paxton. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004, p 218)

Fits "Islamofascism" almost to a T.... fits it to an S.

"community decline, humiliation"....yep

"cults of unity, energy, and purity"....exactly

"committed nationalist militants".... indeed, sort of: religious fundamentalism fill the same need as nationalism. Round pegs for round holes, just different colors.

"uneasy collaboration with traditional elites"... well, OK, not really

"abandons democratic liberties".... bingo!

"redemptive violence".... say it isn't so!

"goals of internal cleansing and external expansion".....Heavens NO!

Seems the word isn't too far off the mark. And I don't have a particular thing against Islam. I can get all riled up about any theocratic tendency.

__________________
"I must (deride me not) be somewhere where I can, without disaster, bicycle." Henry James, 1896

darkboong

Well, he's still there, although it appears that he is now teaching under close supervision. Someone else does the technical bits, he stands up and tells the class about his life. I had no idea the loon was Jewish, which would explain his Islamaphobia.

__________________
Free Beer !

stevebaby

1."A particular unifying human order centred on a certain land and culture" could just as easily be applied to Buddhism.As we've seen,there were foreign fighters in Chechnya,Bosnia,Kosovo and Afghanistan.Its's their faith that unites them,not race or nationality.Fascism was centred mainly on nationality ..."germanic",japanese,italian.Islam is quite multicultural.
2. I really don't get much of a sense of the superiority of islam,certainly not on the grounds of race or nationality.Perhaps moral superiority...like most religions.It's the difference between superior/inferior and good/evil.
3.Islam has certainly had authoritarian leaders such as khomeini,to whom the cult of personality definitely applied.I think they have been revered as religious leaders like the pope,rather than as strong and ruthless men like hitler or mussolini or franco.Hirohito was much more a figurehead than a true leader;japan was fascistic but I don't think a "classic fascist state".
Paxton's description is accurate in part but a bit too general in that many of his points could be applied to other ideologies.State communism on the soviet model would fit pretty well.So could neo-conservatism IMO.
But I agree with you about theocratic tendencies and the danger they pose for democracy.Most of the freedoms enjoyed in the west originated in a secular,humanist and liberal tradition which arose in spite of of the efforts of the christian church to suppress rational thinking.
It's a curious thing that the so-called religious right in the west and extreme islam seem to have so much in common.Only the names of their invisible friends are different.
I've noticed that bush has been using the term"islamo-fascist" a lot recently.I'll go back to Orwell's statement...that it just means anyone that you don't like.

__________________
I'm Rooting for Chiara!
Drink!Feck!Arrse!Girls!
bastard

Durangodave

I don't think so. Buddhism translates easily across cultures without any reverence for a particular place. Also, you left out my words "blind faith," which links fascism and religious fundamentalism. Buddhism is a very empirical religion.

Good vs evil? God's final and true revelation vs heresy? These are the criteria for the most stubborn notions of superiority. I agree though, nationality/culture is a lesser criterion for superiority in the case of radical Islam. But it still plays a large part in the religion's identity. Arabic, Mecca, etc.

Agreed, but look to the grand goal of radical Islam: the establishment of a global Caliphate. I think the sucessor to Mohammed would be the strong man we're talking about.

Extremes tend to bring out their opposites. Opposites mythologically, twins stylistically. I think that Osama BL and the real thinkers of radical Islam understand this, that we will disassemble our free society faster than they can do it for us, given just the right prodding.

Well thats exactly why I can't get myself to say the word. It sounds too much like a GWBush talking point.

__________________
"I must (deride me not) be somewhere where I can, without disaster, bicycle." Henry James, 1896

gavin11756

Funny thing about fascism is it was very popular during the 30s due to Hitler and Mussolini's success in organising their economies. There was full employment. It was lauded in Britain and the U.S

Fascism only became a dirty word after WW2. WW2 was a victory for communists and capitolists, a strange combination you may think. Well, not when you consider the Soviet Union was a slave workforce for western companies. You see, Nazis and communists hated each others guts, and given the jewish influence in both the Soviet Union and in film and newspaper ownership, fascism then became bad news, when in reality, people were living better lives than in the "democracies"!

There is no dount that the Nazis shared the wealth better and ran better societies. Just a pity about the atrocities ( both real and alleged )

Of course the "neo cons" are jewish almost to a man and the expression "fascism " is really part of their standard repotoire when abusing people they don't like.

Fuck Israel and the Lebs and Iranians etc. They should dig a bloody great hole and bury the lot of them!

__________________
Gavin