August 11, 2006

Arend on "Islamic Fascism"

Georgetown's Anthony Arend has noticed Bush's new-found affection for the term "Islamic Fascism". According to Arend, the term "Islamic fascism" was first employed on May 25th of this year and has been used on a number of occasions since. Arend comments:

The use of these terms-- "Islamic fascism" and "totalitarianism"-- is most interesting. Unlike many previous Administration statements that characterized the enemy merely as "terrorists," these statements indicate an effort to describe both a brand of ideology and a method of imposing that ideology-- I take totalitarianism to be a method of imposing the ideology. As some level, the use of these terms seems to be a theoretical advance. . . .

Moreover, the use of "Islamic fascism " and "totalitarianism" also seems to have a significant public relations component. It reminds me of the Second World War. At that time, the United States and its allies were often portrayed as fighting a war against "fascism" or "totalitarianism." By using these words, Bush seems to be connecting the current conflict with what is often seen as the epic battle between good and evil that played itself our in World War II.

These are excellent points, though I'm not sure that "totalitarianism" is only a method. It certainly seems that sharia law is, itself, a brand of totalitarianism, and the imposition of sharia law on the world is the goal of the Islamic fascists. In other words, totalitarianism--i.e., acceptance of total control, by the ulema, of all aspects of personal, economic and political life--is the ultimate end sought. I have a bit of difficulty with the idea that totalitarianism is merely a method.

At any rate, it's critical that the people understand that we're not at war with an emotion (terror), an unsavory tactic (terrorism) or the adherents of that tactic (terrorists). Although many of our enemies are terrorists, our enemies could cease the use of terrorism tomorrow and not end this conflict. If Hizb'Allah stopped shooting unguided rockets at cities (i.e., terrorism) and started firing guided missiles at Israeli military bases (not terrorism), this would not end the conflict. The conflict in Lebanon is a perfect illustration of the fact that we're not at war with "terror" (i.e., an emotion), "terrorism" (i.e., a tactic) or even "terrorists" (i.e., political militants that employ that particular tactic). We can quibble over whether "fascists" is the perfect word, but I'm willing to accept it as a fairly reasonable approximation of what we're facing in this struggle. The sooner we all understand that, the better.

Props to Prof. Bainbridge.

By Ragnar Danneskjold, Typical Bitter Gun-Clinger at 11:47 AM | |