Georgia: oil, neocons, cold war and our credibility | 41 comments (41 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

Marxist (none / 1)

don't see how the term "fascism" can be used to describe the phenomena in question, even by a "marxist scholar". Especially by a "marxist" scholar.

Really.

They should revoke his Marxism license.

The Fates are kind.

by Gaianne on Mon Aug 11th, 2008 at 02:42:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Marxist (none / 1)

I hereby revoke his/her license, as a former Trot.

No, but seriously, such scholarship of that sort as I once had is summarised in my comment upthread, entitled "we need some definitions." I freely confess I may be way wrong in some strict sense. But in the concrete situation, I think that to adopt the term "Islamofascist" is to give credence to a more dangerous enemy. It should not be too hard to find another less fraught term to refer to the Taliban and the Wahaabists (sp?) and such.

by PIGL (stevec@boreal.gmail@com) on Mon Aug 11th, 2008 at 08:19:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Marxist (none / 0)

Perhaps we could call them "Talibans" and "Wahabists" and such.

For a somewhat broader term, we could could call them fundagelicals or "Islamic fundagelicals" when we need to distinguish them from the vanilla version.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Aug 12th, 2008 at 11:57:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Marxist (none / 0)

Calling things by their names; usually a powerful move. I agree entirely!

Somewhere, I read an article to the effect that the term "fundamentalist" was not applicable to Islam because the history of disputatious biblical exegesis to which it refers does not exist in Islam. I have no idea if that claim makes sense.

by PIGL (stevec@boreal.gmail@com) on Wed Aug 13th, 2008 at 10:06:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Marxist (none / 0)

While technically speaking that's probably correct, most of the Christian factions being called "fundamentalists" are not fundamentalist in the technical sense of the term. "Fundamentalism" refers to a specific historical sect/movement within US protestantism, centred around the periodical Fundamentals. I'm a bit hazy on the details of their particular version of theology, but I'm pretty sure that Catholics, for instance, can't be "fundamentalists" in the historical sense of the term.

However, like "evangelical" - and to an even greater extent - it has in common parlance become a catch-all derogatory term for religious wingnuts. And I don't think it's worth the bother to try to salvage the original meaning of the word (at least not outside scholarly discourse).

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Aug 14th, 2008 at 01:52:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Georgia: oil, neocons, cold war and our credibility | 41 comments (41 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Top Diaries

Energy (and Other) Events Monthly - December 2023

Clean Energy Wire's Fact Sheet on Upcoming Dutch Election

Recent Diaries

Stoltenberg: A Big Win for Ukraine

Mark Rutte: Using the Nation to Become Secretary General

December 2023

Netanyahu Tells Biden Fu*k Off

Keeping Up with COP28

A Sort-a Truce Extended 24 Hours

Energy (and Other) Events Monthly - December 2023

NeXiT the Trump Era of Dutch PM Wilders

Erasure of Palestinians the Zionist Dream

21st Century Pax Americana and Violence

Dublin Far Right Riots After Knife Attack

Clean Break From Peace to War

Woodrow Wilson's Collapse and the Peace Movement

A Children's Sing-Along Annihilate Everyone In Gaza

Xi - Joe Launch a New Communication Probe

The Israeli War Hoax of 40 Beheaded Babies

If Palestinians Are 'Animals'? What Are the Israelis?

Gaza Atrocities and the UN Fail

Clean Energy Wire's Fact Sheet on Upcoming Dutch Election

Broadening the War to Lebanon and Syria-Iraq

Occasional Series