The mere idea of a caliphate, or religious state, is inherently fascist. Especially, when considering the fact that a majority of Muslims both favor Sharia law and the establishment of a single, vast Islamic state.
because
score: 12
It would likely be a state typified by fascist characteristics, such as: nationalism, racism, scapegoating, human rights violations, militarism, sexism, propaganda, religious/political overlap, a ruling elite, anti-democracy, and anti-intellectualism.
I do agree, however, it is not "religiousness" in itself that makes it fascistic, fascism is not simply a reactionary movement, it must be class-collaborationist (Which it is, as they have the full support of the "precariat" and lumpenproletariat,), it must be ideally reactionary and appeal to some
sources:
past era of glory ("Caliphate") yet it has to be, practically a modernizing force (Daesh also fits here). Nationalism is also very important, and religiousness is only accepted as the backbone of the Sunni Arab national identity, while the humanist rules of Islam are ignored.
And that is why anti-islamism is the new fashion of anti-semitism: There is nothing inherent in the islamic religion that pushes people to terrorism or circumcising female genitalia (That is almost purely a sub-saharan trend) or blablabla, anti-islamism is pure idealist bullshit.
Agreed. While I personally view religion to be at times destructive on an individual level because it grants privilege to antiquated assumptions over historical and scientific facts, what makes it fascist is the fact that power is owned by 1 ideological group that views itself as superior to others.
Religion can only be used to legitimize an already existing condition, and in that case, much of the religion is ignored and some aspects are given importance, in order to legitimize the fascist state that Daesh is. So the problem is not ideology or religion but what fueled them, what gave them life
Calling someone a racist because he gives a good explanation to the Daesh phenomena is poisoning the well.
guardia_rossa
Prejudicial Language
Racial oppression is dependent on hierarchical organization of society dominated by a single group or ideology. Calling someone racist for opposing the idea of a religious is state is thus not only wrong and inflammatory, but also in and of itself ironically, an act of racism.
kbeaumont152
Racism is not about attacking what some people do because they are of a different ethnic group, this is fucking ridiculous.
sources:
He is explicitly saying that Daesh is inherently fascist because of it being a Caliphate, it is the contrary, of course, it is inherently a Caliphate because it fascist, and fascism needs to appeal to the historical high-ground of the nation (Reich, Romanum Imperium, Caliphate, etc...) but the fact that it is lead by ex-Baathist elucidates a lot.
In fact, you are being racist by immediately assuming that any critique to an group of arabs is racism just because it is criticizing arabs.
Equating a religion to a race is an extreme example of special pleading because it implies Muslims are inalienable from their beliefs. It's this very belief that's used to justify the slaughter of "apostates" attempting to leave Islam or question the acts of their religious leaders.
sources:
"You're racist for saying something that I don't ideologically agree with."
"Maybe but you're more racist for being ignorant of the fact that your argument is the exact justification used to murder poets in Saudi Arabia"
Regardless of the academic defintion of 'racism' it can be used in common parlance to cover a variety of types of discrimination. A racist wont stop to consider the differnece between arab and muslim
Studies show that people feel more positive towards those who look similar to them, which means, on some level, we're all doomed to be racist. So, we overcome this failing through open discourse, learning about one another, & by questioning our own actions & words, not by labeling others.
Attack the premise not the person. I promise to reply thoughtfully and totally cognizant of the fact that I'm only human and therefore capable of bias and error. I enjoy debating because I like to see the other side of things, not out of a desire to marginalize others.
I agree that most isms can sow the seeds of fascism, so singling out Islam w/o balancing the view w/ other examples is unfair considering US actions in the ME region since WWI. I was aiming to illustrate how pursuing theocracy ends w/ oppression, & that the desire for theocracy is the root of issue.
sources:
Ideology+power and authority to silence dissent+a desire to return to the ways of the past=fascism
kbeaumont152
