Is Islamofascism a correct term to use describing terrorists?

The definition for Islamofascism can be found here:

The word is included in the New Oxford American Dictionary, defining it as "a controversial term equating some modern Islamic movements with the European fascist movements of the early twentieth century". Critics of the term argue that associating the religion of Islam with fascism is offensive and inaccurate.
Islamofascism

Those that support the term:

William Safire writes, "Islamofascism may have legs: the compound defines those terrorists who profess a religious mission while embracing totalitarian methods and helps separate them from devout Muslims who want no part of terrorist means.

Those that criticize:

Critics have argued that grouping disparate ideologies into one single idea of "Islamofascism" may lead to an oversimplification of the causes of terrorism. Richard Webster says

"The idea that there is some kind of autonomous "Islamofascism" that can be crushed, or that the west may defend itself against the terrorists who threaten it by cultivating that eagerness to kill militant Muslims which Christopher Hitchens urges upon us, is a dangerous delusion. The symptoms that have led some to apply the label of "Islamofascism" are not reasons to forget root causes. They are reasons for us to examine even more carefully what those root causes actually are."

I personally have a hard time relating this term to Muslim extremist's, or fundamentalist since fascism was directly related to national socialism, or more towards government and corporatism as opposed to religious extremisms.

what say you, is this a accurate term to use? or is it a political catch phrase used to dehumanize a political/religious foe?

[edit on 15-12-2007 by LDragonFire]

Well, it has been proven that there is a link between Islamic "fanaticism" and the Nazis; the Nazis even supported them during WW2...

[edit on 15-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 15-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

For this term to work you would have to change it around so it would define every kind of terrorism. This term is nothing but stereotyping propaganda.

Example:

Islamofascist, Christianofascist, Buddisofascist, Hinduofascist, Taofascist, Satanistofascist.

Anyone else see the complete idiocy of the term Islamofascist now?



Edit to add:

Anyone interested in what's going on with the world today please research The Knights Templar. Basically what happened back in the 1200-1400's is happening today. With one exception, technology.


[edit on 12-15-2007 by CPYKOmega]

When have Hindus, Buddhists or Taoists ever committed an act of terrorism? Fact is, people that practice Islam... HAVE!!!

[edit on 15-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

You are missing the point I am trying to point out that this term is directed only at Muslims. And for it to fit the description that the op is trying to set out the terms I used would have to be in the dictionary as well.

Are you telling me that only the people of Islam are terrorists? Get real buddy.

Originally posted by CPYKOmega
Anyone interested in what's going on with the world today please research The Knights Templar. Basically what happened back in the 1200-1400's is happening today. With one exception, technology.


[edit on 12-15-2007 by CPYKOmega]

The Knights Templar were scapegoats of the Church... They didn't go around pillaging and raping... That was just a lie used by the church to demonize a group of people the church disagreed with.

[edit on 15-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Please check out this documentary about it if you are interested in the truth about the knights templar Speaker.

spikedhumor.com...
spikedhumor.com...
spikedhumor.com...

Fascists are people who dont tolerate views other than their own.

That sums up a large percentage of Muslims around the world in the non western countries, not just the terrorists.

Originally posted by Flyer
Fascists are people who dont tolerate views other than their own.

That sums up a large percentage of Muslims around the world in the non western countries, not just the terrorists.

Not to mention a lot of Christians.

reply to post by CPYKOmega



I have watched the first one. Good stuff.. Thanks for that

[edit on 15-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by CPYKOmega

Not to mention a lot of Christians.

Not compared to Muslims. I dont think we have many in Europe and theres only the idiots that protests against gays or whatever in the US.

Women get lashes for being raped in Saudi Arabia, they get put in prison for naming a teddy bear in Sudan. This isnt a few nutters, this is institutionalised across many countries, in fact in any country where the Muslim religion dominates.

Huge difference unless you can point out to me any Christian countries that imprison people for sex before marriage or anything that goes against the religion?

Islamofascism or Islamofascist is an appropriate term. It's just an easier way of saying Islamic Fascism which is prevalent in the world today. Didn't think it would be so difficult for people to see the obvious connection...but then again...liberal agendas are also very prevalent on the internet.

reply to post by LDragonFire


It is propaganda.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

In Iraq the western forces are infidel. Evil. The work of Satan. On the other hand we refer to them as soldiers.

Any opposition to our western forces are terrorists, insurgents and now islamofascists!

Believe what you will.

I think that the war on terror is nothing more than a sham. So much so, in fact, that I wouldn't be surprised if one of my christmas presents is a War on Terror(TM): Season One DVD boxset.

Needless to say, I wont be looking forward to Season 2!!!

Islamofascist:

Term referring to a cia agent provocateur or follower of one that uses Islam. The provocateur is usually funded by an intelligence agency ie cia, mossad, mI5. The intention is to recruit and fund terrorist operations using money laundered through central banks.

Most Islamofascists are not actually followers of Islam they merely use the faith to justify the psy-op and to create cultural tension throughout the world.

Thats a better definition. I mean lets call a spade a spade terror is almost always provoked or self inflicted.

I hate the term. People don't even know what Fascism is anymore. When people think of Fascism, they think it's just a dictator or Nazis. Thats it. Nothing else.

Fascism is not a dictatorship merely, it's much more than that, it's an economic system, government system, and so many other things.

The economic system of Fascism is not really Capitalism as so many people assume, it's something else, however Capitalists benefit from a Fascist system so it makes no difference to them.

So for instance Saddam Hussein and Augusto Pinochet were not Fascists, the former being a Socialist Dictator and the latter being a Capitalist Dictator.

Another common misconception about Fascism is that it is inheritenly racist; this is not the case. Mussolini's Fascist Regime was not racist when it first started, and only became "racist" when he allied with Hitler due to war pressure, and Hitler forced racist laws on Mussolini. Most other Fascist regimes were not racist ether, such as Francisco Franco's regime.

It was really only the Nazi Regime and the Romanian Iron Guard that were so explicitly racist and anti-semitic (not sure if the latter was racist, but they did hate Jews, not sure if it was for racist reasons though as they were also an extremist Christian regime).

Regarding religion, it could vary. Mussolini's regime was largely secular, though they had to cater to the interests of the Catholics at times to gain support. Hitler's regime was whack religiously (too long to explain), Franco's was based on Catholicism, and so on. Generally Fascism however holds the nation itself as more important than religion.

So Islamofascist is just another example about how the true meaning of Fascism is just utterly skewed, it's been reduced merely to something to call your political opponents as a derogatory term.

Easy answer:
NO, both are simple 'labels' used to simplify and group together certain enemies of the State in the minds of its People. In some cases the extreme use of labels like these can actually result in 'terror', thereby making the State de facto 'terrorists'.

Hard answer:
yes and no.
Because of the way that Propaganda works, and the amount of it thrown around since 9:03 a.m. on September 11, 2001 to re-enforce latent stereotypes embedded in our psyches, the term "Terrorist" became synonymous with the bigoted images of Arabs from throughout the history of their use in Pop Culture. Through the use of these sterotypes, a common enemy can be identified.

However, as pop culture's knowledge of Muslims and Arabs grew, it became apparent to most people, that not every Muslim is Arab, and not every Arab a Terrorist. Plus, our Muslim friends in Saudi Arabia didn't much like the racist overtones. Sure, the Terrorists chasing Marty McFly in Back to the Future happened to be Arab, that doesn't mean all are.

Plus, the largest Populations of Muslims in the world are not Arab, or living in the Middle East, but are in Indonesia and India. So a new bigoted label needed to be coined in order to label the State's enemies and maintain the fear in the hearts of its Citizens.
So the term 'Islamofascist' was coined, to better define the States enemies while also invoking the historical fear of NAZIs and Fascists from the days of WWII. It may also be a 'pandering' to the older citizens who lived through that time, or shortly after, to try to help them understand this modern enemy that supposedly hates America because of its 'freedom.'

So to be clear, The term "Terrorist" with a capital "T" is a label. The word "terrorist" is just someone who terrorizes someone else. So if one were to play loose and fast with the word terrorist, everyone from your mother-in-law to the neighbors dog could be a 'terrorist'. Not as easy to call an in-law an Islamofascist, unless of course they are Muslim and they consider your interests subordinate to the family. I guess you could call them an Islamofascist if they didn't let you order Pork on a pizza you buy together...

Also, I did a quick Google News Search of the words Islamofacist and Islamofascism (which my computer's spellcheck doesn't view either as a word), and before 2002, there are 3 articles using Islamofascist and 7 that use Islamofascism. Not one of those was written before September 11, 2001. The one article that does show up from before 9-11, is an article where someones recent (way after 9-11) comment uses the word.

So I guess you can say that the word was coined on September 11, 2001 or shortly entered the lexicon afterward as a tool of propagandists. If it was actually coined before that date, it certainly was not used as part of normal American Citizens vocabulary.

DocMoreau

[spelling]


[edit on 15/12/2007 by DocMoreau]

[edit on 15/12/2007 by DocMoreau]

I am wondering if the term isn't correct what should we call them

Originally posted by The_Eye
I am wondering if the term isn't correct what should we call them

It's a Militarywood Production Picture , their role can be given any name.

We could call them all Tomatos and do a remake of Revenge of the Killer Tomatos.

It's all nonsense.

Name-calling by the big boys in playground.

[edit on 15/12/2007 by skibtz]

Originally posted by The_Eye
I am wondering if the term isn't correct what should we call them

Al Qaeda

Or is that too specific for most of us? Sure seems so.