Words in Wartime
This label is used not only by Rush Limbaugh and neoconservatives, but also by some pundits who usually choose their words with care, such as Christopher Hitchens. Yet nobody seems to have defined it. Its more a bit of invective than a useful term of identification.
The Left has been using fascism as a cussword since the days of Hitler and Mussolini. It was already very old and weary by the time it was annexed to Islam. But whats fascistic about al-Qaeda, unless fascist just means a form of politics I dont like, which doesnt take us very far toward understanding what it is?
After all, nobody calls himself an Islamofascist. The original Fascists, led by Mussolini, called themselves Fascists, just as Communists called themselves Communists. The American Heritage Dictionary gives as its primary definition of fascism a philosophy or system of government that advocates or exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with an ideology of belligerent nationalism.
Not very helpful. Its more an expression of disapproval than a dispassionate and objective definition. And it hardly applies to al-Qaeda, which doesnt seem to combine state and business leadership. What grounds are there for thinking al-Qaeda aspires to dictatorship? Its chief announced goal which we have little reason to doubt is to drive the U.S. Government out of the Middle East. You may reject both that goal and the methods used to achieve it, but that doesnt make it fascistic, unless youre using fascism as an all-purpose synonym for nasty.
And what is the extreme right? The Left generally stands for socialism, dictatorial or democratic; but the term right-wing has no such single or consistent meaning. Its applied, usually abusively, to various political systems that cant be reconciled to each other. Conservatives, neoconservatives, capital-F Fascists, monarchists, constitutionalists, libertarians, and even anarchists are all called right-wing, their only common denominator being their hostility to socialism. Some socialists label even liberals right-wing.
Islamofascism seems designed to produce semantic frustration. It should be possible to understand al-Qaedas purpose without approving its terrorist tactics. After all, any cause, however noble, may be advanced, and also compromised, by inhuman methods. This basic distinction seems oddly hard to grasp. The United States has a grim record of bombing enemy cities and killing their civilian inhabitants, yet few Americans seriously ask whether these grisly means were justified by their alleged ends.
Even today, few Americans are raising such questions about the war in progress in Iraq. How many civilians have died in a war that is supposed to be bringing that country democracy and other blessings? We arent getting reliable figures; our government isnt publishing them. Estimates run as high as 100,000; defenders of the war call this a wild exaggeration, but would it disturb them much if it were accurate? At what point if any would they agree that the human price of defeating Islamofascism is just too high? Cant we at least have an official body count of the innocent noncombatants? Just an estimate? If not, why not?
And this, I think, is the point of this bogus label. Just as all political scandals are now awkwardly suffixed -gate, as in Watergate, so all foreign enemies can be equated with the World War II-era enemy by being plastered with the suffix -fascism. This implies that they are absolute evil, to be destroyed at any cost. Whatever it takes.
In the same spirit, all resistance fighters are now called terrorists and all American troops heroes. No heroism can be ascribed to the enemy forces, even if, in their own minds, they are giving their lives to fight a foreign invader not to establish anything that can be called fascism.
In other words, Islamofascism is nothing but an empty propaganda term. And wartime propaganda is usually, if not always, crafted to produce hysteria, the destruction of any sense of proportion. Such words, undefined and unmeasured, are used by people more interested in making us lose our heads than in keeping their own.
The rest of the world hasnt picked up this word. Undistracted by our propaganda, it sees clearly what the U.S. Government is doing in the Middle East.
|Copyright © 2004 by the
Griffin Internet Syndicate,
a division of Griffin Communications
This column may not be reprinted in print or
Internet publications without express permission
of Griffin Internet Syndicate
Archive Table of Contents
Return to the SOBRANS home page.
|FGF E-Package columns by Joe Sobran, Sam Francis, Paul Gottfried, and others are available in a special e-mail subscription provided by the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation. Click here for more information.|