|
By Josh Marshall
|
|
Posted: 10/26/07 07:11 PM [ET] |
Did you know it was Islamofascism Awareness Week? Oct. 22-26.
It’s the brainchild, if that’s the word for it, of David Horowitz, a man who is probably most charitably described as a rather entrepreneurial self-promotion artist, though perhaps more accurately as one of the great buffoons of the modern American soapbox. Horowitz’s basic MO is finding the silliest opponents he can find, goading them into a shouting match and then working himself into a frenzy about how the “left” is out to get him and then taking the moment of attention to shake the trees for some more right-wing money for his next show. Money, that is, for his center, the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, which I only found out today he has recently had renamed in honor of himself.
The promotional material for Islamofascism Awareness Week promises that the “nation will be rocked by the biggest conservative campus protest” ever. So far the results have been a little less than historic. But along with former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), Daniel Pipes and a few other yahoos, Horowitz has been making the rounds of campuses across the country.
Setting aside Mr. Horowitz’s buffoonery, what about the term “Islamofascism”? It’s frequently bandied about by Republican politicians, including President Bush, and it’s become a staple of right-wing commentary. But is this an apt name for the danger we face today from Muslim extremist groups, or is it just more spin and claptrap aimed at propping up the administration’s failed policies?
We say there’s a lot in a name. But many names come into existence and stick for no particularly good reason whatsoever. Actual students of fascism find it pretty hard to tie the term even to many of the European movements that carried the title during fascism’s heyday between World Wars I and II, let alone would-be post-war imitators in Latin America and elsewhere. Certainly we needn’t constrain ourselves by the professional literature in deciding how to frame the public debate. But all violent and illiberal movements have parallels of one sort or another, pretty much by definition. And it’s dubious whether the label makes sense for movements from a different century and culture. Fascism’s racism and general irreligion would seem to create some hurdles to its use as well.
Presumably we’re talking about various forms of violent religious extremism within Islam. “Radical Islam,” “Islamic terrorism,” “Islamism” and “Muslim extremism” all seem like serviceable enough terms.
But let’s be crystal clear about their real inadequacy. They don’t fill the key need of inflating the political egos and intellectual pretensions of those who most push for their use. The battle against fascism and later communism were not only by most measures the greatest battles and dangers the United States has ever faced. They were also the greatest mixes of military struggle and intellectual engagement. For people who make their livings with pens and keyboards especially, that combination is simply intoxicating. That is, among other reasons, what is behind the very deserved reputation of George Orwell.
But this isn’t 1938 or 1948. A bummer, perhaps, if you’re aiming to write a political essay for the ages. But not a bad thing if you’re trying to live a life, raise a family or a bunch other things. If the War on Terror is on a par with the struggle against fascism and communism, or far graver, as some claim, the case can be made with fact and argument. The craze for “Islamofascism” is just an effort at verbal bamboozlement, flipping the volume up to 11, a hedge against the evident losing of the argument on the merits. Orwell wouldn’t be amused.
Marshall is editor of talkingpointsmemo.com.
His column appears in The Hill each week.
E-mail:
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
|
