Well, sure, and ethno-nationalsim may also tap into that particular requirement. See for example that old but still useful account The True Believer by Eric Hoffer, who argues that extremist movements share a fundamental similarity.
That doesn’t mean that we can’t usefully differentiate them for other purposes though. Those engaged in religious wars are clearly very different in some prestty fundamental ways from ethno-nationalists.
For example, the goals of ethno-nationalists may be a lot more limited, and thus easier to satisfy with limited gains and compromises. The goals of religious warriors may be unobtainable in any rational sense - as in, it is unlikely that the whole world will adopt radical Islam any time soon, but it is perfectly possible to create a “Jewish homeland” or a “Palestinian homeland”.
I think I’d agree with Malthus that the vast majority of followers of ISIS (or who went on the Crusades for that matter) were guided by a sense of imposing their religion upon others in some form or another.
I don’t think that applies to Israel-Palestine as much - perhaps with certain Palestinian groups, but I don’t think most Fatah members or even most Hamas members are really guided by that sort of notion.
But the rewards of the next world as certain Islamic sects define them are material in theory, if not in fact. Having a lot of submissive girls to fuck is clearly quite different than Oneness with the Ultimate, or whatever it is other religious people think they’ll experience in heaven.
TODAY, the fighting between Israel and its Arab neighbors sometimes takes on religious tones. But never forget that during the Six Day War, Egypt and Israel were both run by their least religious leaders ever. Nasser was a secular socialist, and so was Golda Meir. Neither had a religious bone in his/her body.
Well, of course we do, but in taking it seriously we don’t think it’s like a golden suburbia. (or that we really know what the New Heavens and the New Earth are going to be like)
It wasn’t until the theocratic Iran started backing local militias - Hamas and Hezbollah - that the Arab-Israeli conflict took on a religious tone. As others have pointed out, Arab Christians were no small part of the anti-Israel Lebanese government and PLO in the early going. It’s only when Hezbollah became strong in Lebanon that Lebanese Christian groups started allying with Israel, and it’s only when Hamas became strong among the Palestinians that the PLO leadership started publicly talking up Islam.
It seems to me that the Crusades were religious wars; they said they were, and they weren’t fought over resources. Did many of the leaders have ulterior motives? No doubt.
I agree with Malthus that ISIS is waging a religious war. They certainly say that they are, and I believe them.
The Israel/Palestinian conflict is not a matter of theology; it’s a fight over territory and resources. Millions left or were driven from their homes and not allowed to return. That’s what it’s about. If they’d been allowed to return and there was still a war over a theocratic issue, then I’d call it a religious war.
As it is, it’s no more a religious war than between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland.
Thats a bit of an exaggeration. Around 700,000 Palestinians fled during the Israeli War for Independence and roughly the same number of Jews fled from the Middle Eastern Muslim countries.
Both were IMHO examples of ethnic cleansing but neither side had “millions” driven from their home.
