The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
I do believe that the Soviets funneled some aid to the IRA.....
the biggest more reliable suppliers of funding was the USA. IRA members wanted for terrorist offenses are still legally harboured in the US. When George bush got legislation to intercept funds for terrorists in the wake of 9/11 he specifically exempted the IRA.
Yea, right, the soviet Union was the problem.....not.
keep to the Fen Causeway
P.S. Can we find the wretched dog that invented the term "Islamofascist" and do something very, very awful to him?
Islamofascism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In a 1979 debate with Michel Foucault in the pages of Le Monde over the character of the Iranian Revolution of 1979, the French Marxist historian Maxime Rodinson wrote that the Khomeini regime and organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood represented a type of "archaic fascism" ("un type de fascisme archaïque"). Albert Scardino claims that "Islamo-fascism" was coined by Muslim scholar Khalid Duran in a Washington Times piece, where "the word was meant as a criticism of hyper-traditionalist clerics". In 1990 the term was also used by Scottish historian Malise Ruthven who wrote in The Independent that, "authoritarian government, not to say Islamo-fascism, is the rule rather than the exception from Morocco to Pakistan."
I'd settle for the three dimwits mentioned in the section "Examples of use in public discourse" namely Mike Huckabee, Clifford May and George W. Bush.
However, I really 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.
It's altogther missing the "blood and soil and volk" mythos overlaid, like a Happy Face on Frankenstein's monster, on the political alliance between a militarised "lower upper middle class" and the high bourgeoisie, targeted at foreign sources of resources and the internal working class and intelligentsia. That, at least, is how I have always understood "Fascism."
I question the sincerity and political motivation of those how use the term "Islamofascist" to describe the religiously based opponents of modernity (or of western hegemony) that don't have white skin or the cross of jesus going on before.
Especially when those who use it are close to the "Christianofascism"...
"Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet
I do not see how the technical term "fascism" can be understood out of the context of the historical development of the european capitalist and imperialist powers between the Napoleonic and Second World wars.
The embrace, by certain militarist postcolonial Arab-world dictators , of a sort of postwar Stalinst economic policy may cause some confusion, but I do not think it is evidence for the claim under dispute.
I would willingly learn more, perhaps in some other lifetime when I am no mere tree.
They should revoke his Marxism license.
The Fates are kind.
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.
For a somewhat broader term, we could could call them fundagelicals or "Islamic fundagelicals" when we need to distinguish them from the vanilla version.
Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
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.
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).
by gmoke - Jun 10
by Frank Schnittger - May 31
by Oui - May 30 50 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 23 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 27 3 comments
by Oui - May 13 66 comments
by gmoke - Jun 10
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 101 comment
by Oui - Jun 91 comment
by Oui - Jun 58 comments
by Oui - Jun 257 comments
by Oui - Jun 112 comments
by Oui - May 31122 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 31
by Oui - May 3050 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 273 comments
by Oui - May 2742 comments
by Oui - May 24
by Frank Schnittger - May 233 comments
by Oui - May 1366 comments
by Oui - May 928 comments
by Oui - May 450 comments
by Oui - Apr 30273 comments
by Oui - Apr 2666 comments
by Oui - Apr 8108 comments
by Oui - Mar 19145 comments