The new turn of phrase from the Bush administration is to label the enemy in the Global War on Terror as Islamic fascists. Does this make sense?
I went to an old class handout on fascism and got the following list of characteristics of fascism:
Irrationalism: people are not rational, need to be led
Social Darwinism: different groups of people are engaged in struggle for survival
Nationalism: individual identifies completely with society, one small part of whole
Glorification of the State: state is vehicle for aspirations of nation/race
Leadership Principle: hierarchy of absolute, totalitarian leadership
Anti-communism: And anti-intellectualism, anti-rationalism, anti-modernism
Racism: central component of National Socialism, not necessarily of fascism
Looking at Al-Qaida, we can see that we have matches with Irrationalism, Totalitarianism and anti-Rationalism/Modernism. The Nationalism and Glorification of the State are obviously different in that Al-Qaida is trying to usurp nationalism and replace it with commitment to Islam. Of course, that is what would make it Islamic fascism. So the label is not too far off the mark for Al-Qaida.
But does this mean it is a good idea to use it? Clearly, it is meant to trigger the negative feelings Americans and Europeans have for fascists and dovetail with assertions that the Global War on Terror is a struggle on the order of WWII. It is also probably meant to draw a distinction between Muslims as a whole and the Muslims the US is fighting.
Will this distinction translate well into Arabic or will the rhetorical shift from fighting "Terrorists" to "Islamic fascists" (after a brief flirtation with the term "War with Radical Islam") only deepen the impression among Muslims that the US is at war with their religion and culture?
No comments:
Post a Comment