↓
 

The Gormogons

Home→Fallacy of Foreign-Political Egocentrism→Re: Prattle

Post navigation

← Christmas Lights
What Up With That? →

Re: Prattle

The Gormogons Posted on November 23, 2009 by Confucius, Œc. Vol.November 23, 2009

The Czar is correct in pointing to Bob Wright’s fatuity.

Wright errs profoundly in pointing to U.S. foreign policy as the malign demiurge that made Nidal Hasan a murderer. His argument is a textbook example of the fallacy of foreign-policy egocentrism.

Hasan became an Islamist. Islamists are to Muslims as bomb-throwing anarchists are to libertarians suspicious of state power. Islamism is a variation of the twentieth-century ideology that traveled under the name fascism, Nazism, or communism (among others). It substitutes the umma for the nation, Volk, or proletariat; sharî‘a for a political program; and the Islamic eschaton for the pure justice of communism or the Sieg des Volksgeistes or whatever. It’s much more intelligible if you think Lenin or Fanon than delving into the corpus of ḥadîth.

Playing Wright’s game of “who’s to blame?” leaves you with two options as you go back and back and back in a roundelay of “who struck John”—the West (here conveniently called “the right” for Wright and the New York Times’ readership) or the Prophet Muḥammad. Neither of those is satisfactory—or correct. The late Laurent Murawiec did as good a job as has been done in laying out the recent and politicial-philosophical roots of Islamism in The Mind of Jihad. If you want to understand the actual project of “radical Islam” or “political Islam” or Islamism—Muraviec’s book is illuminating.

The way to defeat do-it-yourself Islamism is to convince all the losers and psychos attracted to it that they can’t win. Wright then steals a base, claiming that absent Iraq and Afghanistan, we know that Nidal wouldn’t have become a jihadi. What about the Beltway sniper? The guy who shot up LAX? The major who fragged his fellow officers? The guy who shot up the recruiting station he mentions? There’s a much more obvious uniting thread to these guys than Wright says, and it’s an argument he dismisses summarily with an denial of Islam’s inherent belligerency. While, true, Islam isn’t essentially belligerent (although a legitimate caliph can, in fact, proclaim a jihâd, the last having been the spectacularly unsuccessful Ottoman attempt to rally the world’s Muslims against the British in World War I), it does contain an unusual wealth of resources to draw on if you want to commit violence in its name. Muslims have interpreted their religion in a variety of fashions, from irenic to just to oppressive to fanatic and murderous. All those options remain on the table, and most of the world’s Muslims seem to have opted for a silent resignation—not entirely for, not entirely against—during the current struggle between Islamism and its Western and “insufficiently Muslim” targets.

The DIY jihadis are not representative of Muslims, as some would have you believe, or of Muslims displeased with American foreign policy, as Wright argues. If they were the first, Islam would have to be eradicated—Anne Coulter’s black joke about “invading their countries and converting them to Christianity” is a brutally simple encapsulation of the kind of mindset one would have to adapt if one really believed that “Islam is the problem.” Wright offers a more seductive temptation—repent and change our evil ways, and these scourges of God shall disappear. Of course, if we did, say, pull out of the Middle East, let Afghanistan fall to the Taliban, leave Iraq and Israel to the tender mercies of Iran and its cat’s-paws, Syria and Hezbollah, who’s to say our politicians, soldiers, and bureaucrats wouldn’t find themselves on the end of psycho shooters with different criticisms of our policy—Jews enraged by Israel’s annihilation, Maronite Christians enraged at a Hezbollah policy of annihilation, the very Iraqis who are our allies today?

What Wright fails to realize is that there‘s no particular policy that makes madmen. The gleefully murderous nobody is a phenomenon not reducable to foreign-policy disputes. There’s a certain loser personality type drawn to grandiose violent ideologies which give their life drama and meaning they can’t find elsewhere. If it’s not one thing, it may well be another. (“It was all Lenin in here last year.”) We can’t know. Indeed, one could equally credibly argue the opposite of Wright’s case: that without a vigorous U.S. response, more marginal Muslim (and especially convert) psychos would be drawn to the apparently victorious march of political Islam, committing more acts of terror, drunk with the prospect of imminent victory and their exalted place in the new order, when “a real rain will come and wash the scum off the streets,” as a noted political commentator once contended.

Contemporary Islamism combines ostensibly religious missionary “da‘wa” with the classic Leninist appeal to ideology and call to join the vanguard morally permitted to commit atrocities to throw off the oppressor class keeping you down (perhaps even unbeknownst to poor benighted, falsely-conscious you).

The way to defeat do-it-yourself Islamism is to convince all the losers and psychos attracted to it that they can’t win. That the movement’s millennial promise is false. They must be demoralized—and unfortunately the major way to do so is relentlessly kill a whole lot of their armed confrères, with all the awfulness that that grim duty entails. Going on the offensive against utopian radicals is not only an act of self-defense, but a step towards defanging the appeal of their ideology which, like every other version we’ve seen come and go since the French Revolution, derives a ton of its appeal from the promise of being on the inevitably victorious side of the Good. You have to smash that delusion—through military success and constant propaganda on behalf of the truth.

Indeed this approach of defeating those who would attack us (with violence when necessary) and continually presenting the case to the broader Muslim world through public diplomacy that we are not—as we are in fact not—enemies of Islam. Our carrot, if you will, is the goodwill and unique benefits of friendship with a superpower—e.g., liberating the Muslim lands of Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq. Free trade. Economic assistance. Advice on democratization. Etc.

Our stick is destroying those who attack us and our allies. You’ll notice that this is our counter-insurgency strategy writ large: cultivate working relationships with those who want peace and crush those who want war. This approach has the added benefit of making peace attractive and war deeply unattractive. Those who “love death” don’t love it as much when it’s a meaningless, hopeless, squalid thing, rather something they can characterize as part of a world-changing conquest of Evil on the part of Good. They must be denied that hope.

Mr. Wright chooses to believe that by our reorienting our foreign policy in some unspecified fashion (doubtless congenial to his political tastes), Nidal’s ilk can be appeased. One hopes he finds psychological consolation in this comforting delusion, but in retreating to it, he abandons all claim to seriousness.

Update: Ron Radosh agrees.

Confucius, Œc. Vol.
Confucius, Œc. Vol.

Don’t ask impertinent questions like that jackass Adept Lu.

Posted in Fallacy of Foreign-Political Egocentrism, Islamism permalink

About Confucius, Œc. Vol.

Don’t ask impertinent questions like that jackass Adept Lu.

View all posts by Confucius, Œc. Vol.

Post navigation

← Christmas Lights
What Up With That? →

Visitor’s Guide

About Us

A secret society dedicated to the restoration of the Kingdom of Poland-Lithuania, the imprisonment of Esperanto speakers, and furthering the eschatological doctrine of the Return from Occultation of the Thirteenth Imam, Val Kilmer. Seriously, what happened to that guy? He was awesome in Tombstone. ایمام سیزدهم

Scribble, scribble…

To contact your hosts and pledge your undying obedience, e-mail dr.j, gort, puter, theczar, themandarin or thenotoriousoev followed by the at sign, gormogons, then a ., and finally, com.

De Gormogonorum Mysteriis

Archives

  • July 2024
  • July 2023
  • February 2023
  • August 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • January 2000
  • September 1999
  • July 1998
  • May 1998
  • September 1997
  • August 1997
  • July 1997
  • February 1997
  • September 1996
  • August 1996
  • September 1995
  • May 1995
  • July 1994
  • April 1994
  • March 1994
  • February 1994
  • October 1993
  • March 1992
  • May 1990
  • September 1988
  • December 1986
  • September 1981
  • September 1979
  • May 1977
  • July 1976
  • May 1972
  • December 1970
  • August 1970
©2025 - The Gormogons - Weaver Xtreme Theme
↑
Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}