# Bush says we're fighting "Islamic fascists" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 10, 2006, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179 "2006-08-10T17:56:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/1 "2006-08-10T17:56:46Z")
> **[CNN.com - Bush: U.S. at war with 'Islamic fascists' - Aug 10, 2006](http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/10/washington.terror.plot/index.html)** > > President Bush said Thursday that an uncovered British terror plot to blow up planes flying to the United States was further proof "that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists." Not for the first time either, IIRC. “Islamo-fascist” and variants have entered common parlance via talk radio and blogs. But do you think the terms are accurate? I could see “Islamic extremists/absolutists/terrorists,” but “fascist” implies to me an ideology of absolute obedience to a state, cultlike worship of a leader, secret police, a military-dominated economy, big rallies, persecution of an ethnic minority, bad art, etc. What say my fellow Dopers? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/2 "2006-08-10T17:58:57Z")
Can’t call them “Islamo-Commies”, now can you? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/3 "2006-08-10T18:04:36Z")
We’re fighting a lot of people, ranging from religious fanatics to resistance fighters to the personally vengeful. He harps on the _Islamic_ part because he doesn’t want to embarrass his _Christian_ fanatic base; remember; Christian fanatic = good; Islamic fanatic = bad. The Islamic fanatics are theocrats, not fascists; he doesn’t want to call them that because the Republican party is stuffed with theocrats. ---
**Author:** ![Dumbguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2bfe46/32.png) [@Dumbguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dumbguy)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/4 "2006-08-10T18:21:42Z")
Political terms have been stripped of all meaning beyond their PR punch. Words like fascist, communist, socialist, terrorist, democracy, republic, and freedom no longer have any more practical value than new and improved, added value, or pearly white. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/5 "2006-08-10T19:03:22Z")
> [@Elendil's Heir](#): > > persecution of an ethnic minority, bad art, etc. big rallies: check persecution of ethnic and religious minorities: check. Bad art: check etc: double check I’d say it fits well enough, not perfect, but it’ll do. elucidator’s [Islamo-Commines](http://gallery.thomasloenbaek.dk/HUT_Demonstration_21-07-06/DSCN3074.JPG) would probably fit even better, but for some undeservedly reasons doesn’t carry the same ominous suggestions – which are definitely needed with the guys we’re dealing with here. Anyway. Now I’ve been hearing dopers whine and bitch and moan for years about him using The War on Terrorism (TWAT) and then he comes out and calls it for what everybody has known all along, and then this is wrong too. > [@Dumbguy](#): > > Political terms have been stripped of all meaning beyond their PR punch. Words like fascist, communist, socialist, terrorist, democracy, republic, and freedom no longer have any more practical value than new and improved, added value, or pearly white. and my favourite: ”progressive” – which some of the most reactionary groups now use to describe themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/6 "2006-08-10T19:18:53Z")
“Commies” implies Marxism, and Marxists and theocrats don’t always get along. Iran under Khomeini was very close to a fascist state, though, in all the OP’s respects. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/7 "2006-08-10T19:25:41Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > …Marxists and theocrats don’t always get along… An unassailable assertion. Think you’re on pretty firm ground there, **Lefty**. What I find myself wondering, to no particular point… I listen to wing-nut radio quite a bit, God alone knows why. But it seems to me thinking back that the “Islamo-facist” thingy was one I had heard quite a bit from the mouths of InsHannity, Limpbaugh, the CoulterBeast, and, of course, Michelle Malkin, “The Original Screaming Yellow Zonker”. Is this the first time the phrase has been picked up and utilized by the Bushiviks? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/8 "2006-08-10T19:36:04Z")
Islamo-Fascist is a fine term. First of all, it describes them pretty well. Second it helps separate them from Muslims who want no part of terrorism and are good and decent people. An alternate term you often hear is “Islamist” or “Radical Islamist”, and for my money that term is too imprecise, as it includes fundamentalist muslims that do not believe in Jihad against the west and who oppose terror as a tactic. For example, you could make the case that Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani is an Islamist. But I don’t believe he is an Islamo-Fascist as are the rulers of Iran, and he is an opponent of al-Qaida and other terror organizations. Until a better term comes along that accurately describes the foes in this particular conflict, “Islamo-Fascist” will do, at least for popular discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/9 "2006-08-10T19:37:10Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Is this the first time the phrase has been picked up and utilized by the Bushiviks? [Nope](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051006-3.html) > [@](#): > > The president; October, 2005: > Some call this evil Islamic radicalism; others, militant Jihadism; still others, Islamo-fascism. Whatever it’s called, this ideology is very different from the religion of Islam. He gotten more certain of the verbiage since then: > [@](#): > > The president; [May 2006](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060524-9.html) > We face an enemy that is totalitarian in nature. They’ve taken a great religion and have hijacked it to suit their own needs. They’re Islamo-fascists. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/10 "2006-08-10T19:39:18Z")
Based on Bin Laden’s stated goal of a world-wide Islamic state including the conversion or killing of non-Islamic individuals, I think the term works just fine. **Der Trihs** , while all of these definitions tend to be fuzzy and overlap somethat, wouldn’t you want to reserve the term “theocrat” for those situations that seem more focused on a particular way of life and less focused on killing all non-believers? By using the term “theocrat” with respect to AQ and Bin Laden, I think you do a disservice to those groups of people that want peacefull religious states. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/11 "2006-08-10T19:40:27Z")
Actually, he says we are at _war_ with islamic fascists. I guess he is just giving advance notice that if we capture these guys they will be treated as prisoners of war with all the Geneva Convention rights due POWs. (or maybe not… what do _you_ think?) So how many “things” are we at war with right now… drugs, poverty, crime, terrorism, islamic fascists… I forget–has Congress declared was on Obesity yet? THAT’s gonna be a tough one. There’s a LOT of “fifth column” types in our midst. Maybe 30 or 40% of USA citizens? And if you figure the percentage by _weight_… golly! ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/12 "2006-08-10T19:42:04Z")
There isn’t enough organization for fascism, so far as I can tell, and too many different enemies to lump them togather. Iraq, for instance, is a sectarian free-for-all, so nothing like a fascist state currently exists. Al Qaeda is stateless and decentralized. Afghanistan is, again, substantially a loose confederation of different ethnicities, none having an upper hand whilst the US occupies that region. It’s quite possible both Iraq and Afghanistan could splinter someday, and whether or not some al Qaeda figure will grow up into a fascistic leader is entirely uncertain. Among the purported goals of al Qaeda is the creation of a pan-Arab Islamic state (with the elimination of Israel, of course), but right now they’re pretty focused on blowing up Westerners and fomenting unrest wherever they can, and that includes plenty of Asian regions. They’re just pack of thugs, really. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/13 "2006-08-10T19:57:52Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > **Der Trihs** , while all of these definitions tend to be fuzzy and overlap somethat, wouldn’t you want to reserve the term “theocrat” for those situations that seem more focused on a particular way of life and less focused on killing all non-believers? By using the term “theocrat” with respect to AQ and Bin Laden, I think you do a disservice to those groups of people that want peacefull religious states. Not really. You can’t make people all live according to one, strict, set of religious rules without force and the threat of force. The belief that there is One True Way that should be followed combined with the willingness to use force and coercion pretty much guarantees eventual attacks against unbelievers. They might not say so or even believe so at the beginning, but that’s what would happen in any attempt to set up a theocracy. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/14 "2006-08-10T20:26:34Z")
Calling them fascists (did that start with Hitchens? Sullivan? one of those neo-con Op-Ed promoters around 2001)\* is simply a way to tie the hatred toward one universally despised group from the 20th century to the people we want to hate in the 21st century. Any objective study of fascism eliminates the Islamists on several major points. (“Islamists”–in contradistinction to Muslims–works quite well, but it does not get the emotional _umph_ that one can encourage by appealing to the hatred toward fascism.) In addition, by calling them “Islamic Fascists” he provides a way to avoid calling them “Islamic Fundamentalists” to the chagrin of the Christian Right. - (It turns out that I was close for the popular impression, picking Hitchens and Sullivan, but as the Wiki article on [Islamofascism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chalst/islamofascism) points out, there is a “cottage industry” engaged in claiming (or blaming) early credit for the phrase. However, since the word fascism fails to describe the Islamists, accurately, it is still a bunch of hooey.) ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/15 "2006-08-10T20:42:20Z")
It would help if we had a good solid definition of the term “fascism” to begin with. Certainly, if defined as a creature of its time and place, “fascism” as a self-described polotical philosophy existed only prior to 1945 and in some isolated places thereafter, and has no connection to present day “Islamists” or “Islamofascists”. However, it is somewhat difficult to pin down a definition, as “fascism” embraced a whole diversity of movements which often had little in common other than a hatred of the Western status quo and communism. Some definitions of their unifying characteristics seem to fit “Islamicists” pretty well: > [@](#): > > “Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.” Substitute “religious” for “nationalist”. From: [Fascism - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Scope_of_the_word_Fascism) ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/16 "2006-08-10T20:47:49Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > Until a better term comes along that accurately describes the foes in this particular conflict, “Islamo-Fascist” will do, at least for popular discussion. Except for the fact its COMPLETELY inaccurate: > [@](#): > > Merriam-Webster defines fascism as “a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition” More Wahhabbi extremism (as represented by Al Qieada) does not exalt the nation state or race. They consider nation states as obsticals in the way of a Islamic caliphate, they have no hang ups about race (they are quite a happy to employ Arabs, Africans, Asians from the far east, Asians from the Indian sub-continent, and of course Europeans). This doesn’t make them any “better” morally speaking than Facists, it just means they are NOT facists and describing them as such just muddies the waters. Of course its handy to characterize them this way if you want to surreptitiously sweep totally unrelated foreign policy issues into the same bracket as Al Quieda (e.g. Saddam Hussien, the Baathist movement, the Iranian Theocracy, etc.). This is clearly the idea behind the Islamo-facist tag. ---
**Author:** ![Cluricaun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bb73d2/32.png) [@Cluricaun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cluricaun)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/17 "2006-08-10T20:48:53Z")
> [@](#): > > “Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.” With no snark intended at all, what does that make us? ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/18 "2006-08-10T20:49:18Z")
> [@Loopydude](#): > > There isn’t enough organization for fascism, so far as I can tell, and too many different enemies to lump them togather. They used to be called Islamic Fundamentalists with some regularity. I wonder why that went by the wayside? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/19 "2006-08-10T20:50:43Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > It would help if we had a good solid definition of the term “fascism” to begin with. If we don’t, then it “helps”, in that it allows lazy people like Bush to call anyone who he disagrees with a fascist. But I think we do. See **griffin** ’s post above for a nice, compact consensus version. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179/20 "2006-08-10T20:54:32Z")
> [@Cluricaun](#): > > With no snark intended at all, what does that make us? Well, if you voted for Bush in 2000 or 2004, that makes you an aider and abetter. The rest of us are “stuck in the handbasket for Hell.” [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-were-fighting-islamic-fascists/368179.md?page=2)