Misplaced Pages

Talk:Islamofascism: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:09, 9 June 2006 editVector4F (talk | contribs)422 edits Move← Previous edit Latest revision as of 01:11, 9 October 2024 edit undoDrsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users804 edits Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Hitler: ReplyTag: Reply 
(628 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{| width=85% align=center cellspacing=3 style="border: 1px solid #C0C090; background-color: #F8EABA; margin-bottom: 3px;"
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{WikiProject Islam|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=low}}<!--Common talking point-->
}}
{| width=80% align=center cellspacing=3 style="border: 1px solid #C0C090; background-color: #F8EABA; margin-bottom: 3px;"
|- |-
|] |]
| <center>This article survived '''two''' ''''']'''''. An archived record of these debates can be found ] and ].</center> | {{center|1=This article survived '''two''' ''''']'''''. An archived record of these debates can be found ] and ].}}
|} |}
{{Archive box|search=yes|
* ] <small>(April–May 2005)</small>
* ] <small>(May–August 2005)</small>
* ] <small>(April–November 2005)</small>
* ] <small>(Nov 2005–Jan 2006)</small>
* ] <small>(January–April 2006)</small>
* ] <small>(April 2006–Aug 2009)</small>
* ] <small>(Aug 2009–April 2020)</small>
}}

== Archive notes ==
Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.
If further archiving is needed, see ]. If further archiving is needed, see ].
Line 25: Line 42:
*]: November 29, 2005 - 17:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC) *]: November 29, 2005 - 17:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
*] *]
----


__TOC__


== Mentioning Islamic fascism as an actual phenomenon ==

While not the main subject of the article, that being the derogatory term, I believe actual occurrences of a ] of ] and ] (as an actual ideology) deserve a mention. I should note similarly the article ] was solely about the derogatory term but even that mentioned past and present actual "ecofascist" movements, although it has become about genuine ecofascism ideology as the prominent topic after the tragic Christchurch shootings.

Anyway some examples of this trend are the ] (a Egyptian corporativist party inspired by the government of ] which wanted to implement Islamic values as part of its ideology) and the ] (Libyan branch of the ], albiet unsuccessful). --] (]) 17:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

== This article needs a rewrite ==

There's no mention of either Islamist critiques of facism or the influence of Juliues Evola's Revolt Against the Modern World on Islamism. Why not quote Islamists themselves? This article seems very Eurocentric, as if Islamists have never written about facism before (Hassan Al Banna mentions facism in his magnus opus Peace in Islam https://islamicbulletin.org/en/ebooks/resources/peace_in_islam.pdf ).


"Nazism came to power in Germany, Fascism in Italy and both Hitler and Mussolini began to force their people to conform to what they thought; unity, order, development and power. Certainly, this system led the two countries to stability and a vital international role. This cultivated much hope, reawakened aspiration and united the whole country under one leader. Then what happened? It became apparent that these seemingly powerful systems were a real disaster. The inspiration and aspirations of the people were shattered and the system of democracy did not lead to the empowerment of the people but to the establishment of chosen tyrants. Eventually after a deadly war in which innumerable men women and children died, these regimes collapsed"


Here's what Khomeini had to say:

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/10/07/archives/an-interview-with-khomeini.html


'''FALLACI:''' Love or fanaticism, Imam? It seems to me that this is fanaticism, and of the most dangerous kind. I mean, fascist fanaticism. In fact, there are many who see a fascist threat in Iran today, and who even maintain that fascism is already being consolidated in Iran.
== Criticism of the term ==


'''KHOMEINI:''' No, it is neither fascism nor fanaticism. I repeat, they yell like this because they love me, and they love me because they feel that I care for them, that I act for their good. That is, to apply the Commandments of Islam. Islam is justice. Dictatorship is the greatest sin in the religion of Islam. Fascism and Islamism are absolutely incompatible. Fascism arises in the West, not among people of Islamic culture.
Juan Cole and Joseph Sobran have been accused of anti-Semitism. It seems to me that assuming these accusations are true, they are biased sources and thus ineligible for use as sources here (unless we add some kind of clumsy qualifier like 'Joseph Sobran, who has associated with Holocaust deniers, says that...'.


'''FALLACI:''' Perhaps we don't understand each other or the meaning of the word fascism, Imam. By fascism I mean a popular phenomenon, the kind we had in Italy when the crowds cheered Mussolini, as here they cheer you, and they obeyed him as they obey you now.
On the other hand, it's impossible to *prove* that these people are anti-Semitic, since unless someone is quoted as saying 'I hate Jews' it's pretty much impossible to prove anti-Semitism in general. How should we handle a case of likely (but not necessarily provably) biased sources? ] 19:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


'''KHOMEINI:''' No. Because our masses are Moslems, educated by the clergy — that is, by men who preach spirituality and goodness. Fascism would be possible here only if the Shah were to return or if Communism were to take over. Yes, what you say could happen only if Communism would win and wipe us out. Cheering, for me, means to love freedom and democracy.
:I can't speak to Joseph Sobran, but I believe the accusation against Juan Cole is . In any case, the bias of sources is irrelevant because ''all'' sources are inherently biased. Cole and Sobran are both critics of the term Islamofascism, and their criticism is presented as such. Misplaced Pages articles dealing with controversial topics should not avoid biased sources, but rather attempt to present those different viewpoints with a neutral point of view. ] ] 16:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


::Hmmmm, I can't speak for Cole either, but it does seem like a strong case can be made that Sobran is an antisemite. Should we add that? ] 23:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


:::Personally, I don't think it's appropriate to speculate about his beliefs in an article that quotes him as just one of multiple examples. ''He'' is not the subject of the article, and his name links to his article if one wants to know more about him. Since "anti-Semitic" does not equal "pro-Muslim", I don't think it's relevant information either. ] ] 01:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


] (]) 13:26, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
::::Sobran is notorious. Why are we citing such a marginal crank?--] 02:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


:It’s really an article about the term “islamofascism”, not an article about the relationships between Islam, islamism, and fascism. ] (]) 03:05, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
:::::I didn't add his quotation and I don't really know much about him. But, he has made a criticism which is not a marginal sentiment and is relevant to Islamofascism. I think it fits in the article well. ] ] 13:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
:@] There is no shortage of Islamists such as Khomeini denouncing/dismissing Fascism as unIslamic, inferior to Islam, etc. just as capitalism, liberalism, socialism, and any other ideology is inferior to the all-encompassing and perfect system of Islam. Does this mean there are no connections between Islamism and fascism? no such thing as Islamofascism? ] (]) 01:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
::Perhaps. I just thought it was relevant to document how Islamist have historically understood fascism. ] (]) 17:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)


== Timothy Winter and Evola ==
::::::If the criticism is not a marginal sentiment, then surely you could find a non-biased source which makes that criticism, right? ] 16:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


I will delete the part on Evola which mentions that he influenced Timothy Winter, because Winter but I will add it to both their pages respectively because it is important to point out. ] (]) 08:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
:::::::It's tough, considering the term is a neologism, which is used almost exclusively by biased sources in a war of words. There has not been any respected scholarship on "Islamofascism" -- so there really aren't any non-biased sources. (In fact, I think that's a fundamental problem with this article, which I mentioned in a topic above somewhere: the only thing to present is two sides of a dispute.) But many other people have expressed the same sentiment as Sobran, including , whom the article cites in a different context. To leave out the "it's propaganda" criticism would be, in my opinion, a glaring omission. ] ] 06:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


== Paul Gottfried ==
If "there really aren't any non-biased sources", and if the "it's propaganda" criticism is only made from biased sources, then you *should* leave it out (or else leave it in, but mention that it is a criticism made only by biased sources).


Is Paul Gottfried a reliable source in a conceptual discussion about fascism? I have not read the original source, but since he has direct ties to far-right orgs, it seems like he has a dog in the fight. Given the stigma of the label, it clearly is in his interest to define fascism in a manner that doesn't apply to his political activities. Also, if his claim is indeed that fascism only existed in Mussolini's Italy, why should he be included in any discussion about varieties of fascism? ] (]) 23:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Besides, there are different kinds of bias. It's one thing that someone criticizes the term because he's leftist. It's another thing that someone criticizes the term because he doesn't like Jews and sympathizes with fascists and Islamists because they don't like Jews either. ]


== Orwell and Hitchens ==
:I don't agree. Being a syndicated columnist and writer of some repute, Sobran is a legitimate authority per ]. To preclude him from the article because you believe "he doesn't like Jews and sympathizes with fascists and Islamists" violates ]


The Orwell quote should be removed as it pertains to a general discussion about fascism.
::The original research rule applies to the content of the article, not to the decisions about what content to include. It isn't "original research" within the meaning of the rule to decide that a source is a biased source.


Hitchens was not a scholar? He did not publish in peer reviewed journals and did not acquire doctoral qualifications. Journalist, author or critic would be a more accurate designation. ] (]) 11:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
:-- even if it's pretty clear that he's an anti-Semite, because that doesn't equate into pro-Muslim. Even if it did, though, I still don't see a reason for precluding him: it's a presentation of two viewpoints, and he has one. No matter his motivation.


== Unreliable stories on the Muslim Brotherhood ==
:The article does not present Sobran's quote as an accurate description of the use of "Islamofascism", merely a criticism of its use. It does the same for the other four quotes, which are also attributed to people who (being people) must have biases of their own. Again, there's been no real scholarship here, so "third-party sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" (to quote ]) are out of the question. ] ] 16:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


Al Arabiya news is a Saudi backed news channel. The Saudi government is anti Muslim Brotherhood (since MB is backed by Qatar) and should not be trusted as a reliable source - especially by Tony Duheaume - a man with hardly any scholarly backing. That article sites 0 sources that
::Sobran's argument purports to be supplying facts (Sobran's observations of how the term is used) and uses those facts as a basis for his criticism. Bias which may affect the accuracy of Sobran's facts, therefore, is relevant. ] 16:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


. Banna personally ordered a translation of Mein Kampf (which is nowhere on ] article)
:::What do you propose to do? I see three options:
:::#Remove the quotation because it's biased. If there's controversy surrounding Sobran's credibility, I'm all in favor of giving him the boot. But, unless you can find a suitable replacement, this is not an acceptable solution by me because it leaves one of the primary criticisms omitted.
:::#Remove all the quotations because they're all equally biased. None of them are from respected, peer-reviewed, non-biased sources. As a source, Sobran is no less legitimate than the others. In my opinion, this solution is even worse, although it's not as one-sided as #1. Remember that the ] standard is verifiability, not truth.
:::#Label Sobran an "anti-Semite" and maybe a "Muslim sympathizer". This solution violates ] and, even though it's not his article, possibly ].
:::Any other ideas? As I mentioned above: considering the quotations are presented as perspectives, not facts, I personally believe these are all unnecessary. -- ] • ] 17:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


. Banna had personal copies ''Der Sturmer'' (could Banna even read German?)
I would suggest 1. Remove the quotation because it's biased. If you can find the criticism made by a non-biased source, use that. If it's really "one of the primary criticisms," then you should have no trouble finding the non-biased source. If you can't find one, it never was a primary criticism in the first place and *should* be removed.


Actually, "biased source" is the wrong phrase. You're right in that every source will have bias of some kind. But there's a difference between being, say, a Democrat, and just hating Jews, even though both of them are biased. You shouldn't quote a Jew-hater about Jews or about a subject directly influenced by his attitudes towards Jews. ] 17:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


:"Anti-Semite" does not necessarily mean "pro-Muslim".


The book I read on the Muslim Brotherhood is ''The Society of the Muslim Brothers'' by Richard P. Mitchell - who makes no mention of any of this. I tried looking in ''The Muslim Brotherhood and the West: A History of Enmity and Engagement'' but again there's no mention of any of that. At most it argues that the MB was funded by Nazis pre war but nothing like what Duheaume argued.
::But the former often leads to the latter. ] 23:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


With regards to Hamed Abdel-Samad, he cites a statement by Banna () where Banna praises the praised the militarism of Mussolini. But he forgot to include the last section of his speech: (translated from the Arabic with google translate)
:And even if it did: Why does being a pro-Muslim writer preclude someone from offering an opinion on Islamofascism? You concede that they all have biases. The origin of their bias does not matter -- the effect is exactly the same. -- ] • ] 18:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


<blockquote>But know, my dear, that there is a huge gap between the goal that Islam wants to instill in its sons the military spirit to achieve, and the goal that European politicians and leaders like Mussolini and others want to instill in their nations this spirit. Islam intends by this that Muslims work to preserve the legacy of God that He has bequeathed to them and to guide the whole world to that which contains light and guidance. They do not work out of desire for this world or greed for power, nor do they subject those whom God makes victorious to various types of humiliation and severe torment. As for Europe, it calls for the military spirit in competition for colonization and preparation to eliminate weak peoples and in desire for economic gains and material ambitions. There is a great difference between a divine, humane goal in which the individual becomes a victim of the interest of the group and a private goal in which the strong tyrannizes the weak and the victor devours the vanquished, and in which the atrocities of Tripoli, Tunis , Syria , Algeria, Marrakesh and the Rif are represented. It is strange to see that these are the teachings of Islam and that Muslims are in a deep sleep about them.</blockquote>Also it was Salam Saadi, not Hamed Abdel-Samad, who said that "Hassan Banna, the Egyptian founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, said in a book in 1935 that Italian fascist and dictator Benito Mussolini was practicing one of the principles of Islam.". It's citation three in https://brill.com/view/journals/fasc/7/2/article-p241_241.xml?language=en#ref_FN000003 ] (]) 19:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
::Someone who's pro-Muslim *because he hates Jews* should be disqualified from being quoted in an encyclopedia article about Islamofascism. Just because everyone has some bias doesn't mean that all biases are created equal or that it is impossoble to reject a source on the basis that he is biased in an exceptionally bad way. ] 23:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


: I took it out. If and when a reliable source is found, it can go back. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 03:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
== Islamic fundamentalism ==


== Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Hitler ==
The article ] seems to be along similar lines to this...
Maybe the two should be merged?
Or is there some big difference about where a muslim nation stops being big on religion and becomes islamofascist I'm missing?--] 19:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::I think the distinction is (as far as I understand it) is that Islamic fundamentalism is a very strict interpretation of Islam and forcing everyone to follow the religion in a very strict way. Islamofascism is more of people using Islam as a false front to enact fascism, which is their real goal. I guess it all boils down to the goal - is it to get people to follow the religion in a strict way, or is it to form a fascist country? Even with that description, it's kind of ambiguous. I guess think of it this way: It's a circle. At the 12:00 position is moderate, "normal" Islam. At 6:00 is the worst opposite of that. Islamofascism and Islamic fundamentalism are at the 5:00 and 7:00 positions. I don't know, that's the best I can figure to explain it, as I understand it, anyway. Hope it helps somewhat. --] 06:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


There needs to be some mention of the influence of Nazi German fascististic thought upon the Umma due to the influence that Hitler had on the ]. Richard Webster, who is generally sympathetic to Palestinians, blames the British for instilling both anti-semitism in Islamic thought as well as a fascist type response. He says all Abrahamic religions have components of fascism (Christianity, Islam, Judaism) because they want to make the entire world believers. (I don't agree with that, not in the present re Christianity, and Jews have never proselytized.) I also disagree about propaganda disappeared from Europe after WW2 (ha ha!) but I'm not the expert; he is. He is referenced as a source from the earliest versions of the article. A sentence of two that captures the relationship between Hitler's fascism and fascism in N Africa and other Arab nations via Amin should be mentioned (paraphrased) so as to include the impact of Nazi German fascist thought on Islam in the Middle East post-WW2:
==Move==
<blockquote>'Throughout WW2, Hajj Amin remained in touch with the German government, and in 1941, having fled... to Berlin, he held talks with Hitler... thanked him for the ‘unequivocal support’ he had shown for the Palestinians... Anti-semitic propaganda broadcast in Arabic from Berlin had a significant effect in Egypt, Iraq, Morocco, Tunisia and in other Arab countries.


Although such propaganda disappeared from Europe ... in Egypt anti-semitism was taken up not only by Nasser, but also, in a particularly violent form, by Sayyid Qutb... of the Muslim Brotherhood whom Nasser executed and who... shaped the thinking of modern, militant Islam including bin Laden. In Qutb’s view, Jews, who had always rebelled against God, were inherently evil...
User:Humus sapiens has suggested that the article ] be moved to ]. Do other editors agree with this proposal? ] 03:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


...the destructive form which anti-semitism has now assumed within militant Islam... is not authentically Islamic; is western. ...dreams of world-domination which drive extreme Islamists have been there from the beginning. But such dreams are not unique to Islam; they are the common property of all three Abrahamic faiths. For, in that they look forward to a time when the entire world will bow down to the God they worship, Judaism, Christianity and Islam have always been...ideologies of world-domination."</blockquote>
:Please can we not? I hate these sorts of "shudder parens" that are coming into vogue. Either delete the article or leave it. The word is what it is. Let the reader decide how to interpet it. <font color="green">]</font> 03:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
:For what it's worth, I also '''oppose''' the move. ] 03:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


:I'd '''oppose''' it but I think he's already done it. --] 06:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC) I can try, but this is not something I know much about. ] (]) 10:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
:: He did, but I moved it back before calling the current vote. ] 06:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm thinking that move would really only be merited if there existed a version of this word that wasn't an ''epithet''. ] 08:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


:I think I'd agree with an inclusion on the Mufti and Hitler, but specifically on the academic discourse on the subject. The idea that Hitler "introduced" antisemitism to the Muslim world or helped invent 'radical Islam', as argued by , is not without controversy. This is mainly because it assumes that:
:'''Oppose'''. Per article-naming conventions, parentheses are only used to disambiguate between identically-named articles, not to clarify an article's meaning or topic when there's nothing else to confuse it with. Hundreds of Misplaced Pages's articles are about "epithets"; if we used (epithet) at the end of every one, it would be unmanageably cumbersome, and if we ''didn't'' use (epithet) at the end of every one, only for ''this'' one, it would be horribly biased. The italicized "This article is about..." notice is ''more'' than sufficient for clarifying exactly what this article is about. -] 09:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
:# Radical or antisemitic tendencies in Islam did not already exist before the Hitler-Mufti meeting
:'''Oppose'''. Just put the pertinent information in the intro summary, rather than the article title. If there is a problem with the "Islamofacism" title, adding qualifiers doesn't solve this (a better article, however, would). --] 15:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
:# That there was an increase in, specifically 'radical Islamic', antisemitism post war, as opposed antisemitism by the anti-Islamist and socialist governments in Syria and Egypt.
:# That this increase could '''only''' be attributed to Nazi propaganda and not to other events post-war
:# That Nazi propaganda was widespread and taken at face value in the Arab world, and not challenged in any serious way, including on Islamic grounds
:# That most Arabs even had access to radios in the first place and could (and did) listen to Axis propaganda (Joel Beinin challenges the idea that Qutb was inspired by the Nazis, since evidence for his radicalism did not appear until at earliest 1948).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Beinin |first=Joel |date=2010 |title=Review of Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World; From Empathy to Denial: Arab Responses to the Holocaust |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41308720 |journal=International Journal of Middle East Studies |volume=42 |issue=4 |pages=689–692 |issn=0020-7438}}</ref>
:# That the Nazi ideology was not contradictory;
:Regarding the Muslim Brotherhood, as Ulrike Freitag and Israel Gershoni put it:
:''"To our mind, the Muslim Brothers' position vis-a-vis Zionists and Jews had its own logic: The Muslim Brothers aggressively agitated against the Zionist project and took a leading pro-Palestinian role in Egypt and the Arab world between 1936 and 1939. They did not need to nurture their hatred of Zionism, and sometimes of Jews in general, with external sources. Actually, at the same time they developed a clear-cut anti-Nazi and anti-racialist position. There is no hard evidence in al-Banna's rhetoric, ideology or practices that demonstrates any sympathy, let alone collaboration, with the Nazi regime in Germany or its aggressive anti-Semitism. On the contrary, al-Banna and other ideologues and activists of the Muslim Brothers rejected and denounced Nazism on the grounds of its racism and totalitarianism. They considered it to be a new kind of Western imperialism, crueller and more oppressive than the old imperialism of Britain and France. Therefore, to accuse them of Nazi influences because of their support for the Palestinian national movement and its leader, the Mufti, and because of his later collaboration with the Nazis amounts to guilt by association"''
:https://www.jstor.org/stable/41303595
:As Mia Lee puts it:
:''"Both sets of authors claim that Arabs increasingly participated in operations against Jews during the German occupation. But they do so without showing significant corroborating evidence of this alleged increase in violence, thus creating ambiguity about the reasons behind the rise of anti-Semitism in the region. Moreover, while they emphasise Arabs’ welcome of the Germans, neither set of authors convincingly addresses the findings of numerous studies from scholars of the Middle East that document how Middle Eastern leaders in the interwar era were suspicious or antipathetic toward imperial powers".. "There is no new evidence that the Mufti commanded the support of any significant number of Arab Muslims either during his exile or afterward. Moreover, neither book satisfactorily demonstrates that the Mufti’s anti-Semitic position was shared by Islamic groups in the Middle East during the war"''
:https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26852336
:Hitler was fascinated with Islam, but was also incredibly ignorant of even basic Islamic practices. For example, one of the ways the SS differentiated who was Jewish and who wasn't was by checking to see who was circumcised, and then killing them on sight. This was done completely ignorant to the fact Muslims also practice circumcision; the SS killed hundreds of Muslims Tatars before realizing their mistake.<ref>{{Citation |last=Motadel |first=David |title=Veiled Survivors: Jews, Roma and Muslims in the Years of the Holocaust |date=2015 |work=Rewriting German History: New Perspectives on Modern Germany |pages=288–305 |editor-last=Rüger |editor-first=Jan |url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137347794_16 |access-date=2024-10-09 |place=London |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan UK |language=en |doi=10.1057/9781137347794_16 |isbn=978-1-137-34779-4 |editor2-last=Wachsmann |editor2-first=Nikolaus}}</ref>
:The extent to which radical Islam ''needed'' Nazism to proliferate, that it couldn't possibly spread without the Nazis for other reasons, is not, to put it lightly, an idea without some skeptics. ] (]) 01:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:11, 9 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Islamofascism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconIslam Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPolitics Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconConservatism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Votes for deletion This article survived two votes for deletion. An archived record of these debates can be found here and here.

Archives

Archive notes

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Misplaced Pages:How to archive a talk page. Previous discussions:

Meeting of Islamists and fascists during WWII
Wahhabism
Judgemental language
Talk:Islamofascism/Archive01#Aryan Nation material
SS photo
Definition of fascism
Proposed merger with Fascist (epithet)
how did this page get reduced to a collection if quotes?
Veiled censorship
Stop re-directing this article with neo-fascism or other non-sense
Blogs as sources
Please Stop Edit War!
Juan Cole and the 'F' word


Mentioning Islamic fascism as an actual phenomenon

While not the main subject of the article, that being the derogatory term, I believe actual occurrences of a ideological syncretism of Political Islam and Fascism (as an actual ideology) deserve a mention. I should note similarly the article Ecofascism was solely about the derogatory term but even that mentioned past and present actual "ecofascist" movements, although it has become about genuine ecofascism ideology as the prominent topic after the tragic Christchurch shootings.

Anyway some examples of this trend are the Young Egypt Party (a Egyptian corporativist party inspired by the government of Fascist Italy which wanted to implement Islamic values as part of its ideology) and the Muslim Association of the Lictor (Libyan branch of the Italian Fascist Party, albiet unsuccessful). --PanNostraticism (talk) 17:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

This article needs a rewrite

There's no mention of either Islamist critiques of facism or the influence of Juliues Evola's Revolt Against the Modern World on Islamism. Why not quote Islamists themselves? This article seems very Eurocentric, as if Islamists have never written about facism before (Hassan Al Banna mentions facism in his magnus opus Peace in Islam https://islamicbulletin.org/en/ebooks/resources/peace_in_islam.pdf ).


"Nazism came to power in Germany, Fascism in Italy and both Hitler and Mussolini began to force their people to conform to what they thought; unity, order, development and power. Certainly, this system led the two countries to stability and a vital international role. This cultivated much hope, reawakened aspiration and united the whole country under one leader. Then what happened? It became apparent that these seemingly powerful systems were a real disaster. The inspiration and aspirations of the people were shattered and the system of democracy did not lead to the empowerment of the people but to the establishment of chosen tyrants. Eventually after a deadly war in which innumerable men women and children died, these regimes collapsed"


Here's what Khomeini had to say:

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/10/07/archives/an-interview-with-khomeini.html

FALLACI: Love or fanaticism, Imam? It seems to me that this is fanaticism, and of the most dangerous kind. I mean, fascist fanaticism. In fact, there are many who see a fascist threat in Iran today, and who even maintain that fascism is already being consolidated in Iran.

KHOMEINI: No, it is neither fascism nor fanaticism. I repeat, they yell like this because they love me, and they love me because they feel that I care for them, that I act for their good. That is, to apply the Commandments of Islam. Islam is justice. Dictatorship is the greatest sin in the religion of Islam. Fascism and Islamism are absolutely incompatible. Fascism arises in the West, not among people of Islamic culture.

FALLACI: Perhaps we don't understand each other or the meaning of the word fascism, Imam. By fascism I mean a popular phenomenon, the kind we had in Italy when the crowds cheered Mussolini, as here they cheer you, and they obeyed him as they obey you now.

KHOMEINI: No. Because our masses are Moslems, educated by the clergy — that is, by men who preach spirituality and goodness. Fascism would be possible here only if the Shah were to return or if Communism were to take over. Yes, what you say could happen only if Communism would win and wipe us out. Cheering, for me, means to love freedom and democracy.


Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 13:26, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

It’s really an article about the term “islamofascism”, not an article about the relationships between Islam, islamism, and fascism. Prezbo (talk) 03:05, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
@Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) There is no shortage of Islamists such as Khomeini denouncing/dismissing Fascism as unIslamic, inferior to Islam, etc. just as capitalism, liberalism, socialism, and any other ideology is inferior to the all-encompassing and perfect system of Islam. Does this mean there are no connections between Islamism and fascism? no such thing as Islamofascism? Louis P. Boog (talk) 01:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps. I just thought it was relevant to document how Islamist have historically understood fascism. Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 17:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Timothy Winter and Evola

I will delete the part on Evola which mentions that he influenced Timothy Winter, because Winter but I will add it to both their pages respectively because it is important to point out. StrongALPHA (talk) 08:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Paul Gottfried

Is Paul Gottfried a reliable source in a conceptual discussion about fascism? I have not read the original source, but since he has direct ties to far-right orgs, it seems like he has a dog in the fight. Given the stigma of the label, it clearly is in his interest to define fascism in a manner that doesn't apply to his political activities. Also, if his claim is indeed that fascism only existed in Mussolini's Italy, why should he be included in any discussion about varieties of fascism? 37.96.36.84 (talk) 23:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Orwell and Hitchens

The Orwell quote should be removed as it pertains to a general discussion about fascism.

Hitchens was not a scholar? He did not publish in peer reviewed journals and did not acquire doctoral qualifications. Journalist, author or critic would be a more accurate designation. 37.96.55.252 (talk) 11:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Unreliable stories on the Muslim Brotherhood

Al Arabiya news is a Saudi backed news channel. The Saudi government is anti Muslim Brotherhood (since MB is backed by Qatar) and should not be trusted as a reliable source - especially this article by Tony Duheaume - a man with hardly any scholarly backing. That article sites 0 sources that

. Banna personally ordered a translation of Mein Kampf (which is nowhere on Mein Kampf in Arabic article)

. Banna had personal copies Der Sturmer (could Banna even read German?)


The book I read on the Muslim Brotherhood is The Society of the Muslim Brothers by Richard P. Mitchell - who makes no mention of any of this. I tried looking in The Muslim Brotherhood and the West: A History of Enmity and Engagement but again there's no mention of any of that. At most it argues that the MB was funded by Nazis pre war but nothing like what Duheaume argued.

With regards to Hamed Abdel-Samad, he cites a statement by Banna (archived in ikhanwiki) where Banna praises the praised the militarism of Mussolini. But he forgot to include the last section of his speech: (translated from the Arabic with google translate)

But know, my dear, that there is a huge gap between the goal that Islam wants to instill in its sons the military spirit to achieve, and the goal that European politicians and leaders like Mussolini and others want to instill in their nations this spirit. Islam intends by this that Muslims work to preserve the legacy of God that He has bequeathed to them and to guide the whole world to that which contains light and guidance. They do not work out of desire for this world or greed for power, nor do they subject those whom God makes victorious to various types of humiliation and severe torment. As for Europe, it calls for the military spirit in competition for colonization and preparation to eliminate weak peoples and in desire for economic gains and material ambitions. There is a great difference between a divine, humane goal in which the individual becomes a victim of the interest of the group and a private goal in which the strong tyrannizes the weak and the victor devours the vanquished, and in which the atrocities of Tripoli, Tunis , Syria , Algeria, Marrakesh and the Rif are represented. It is strange to see that these are the teachings of Islam and that Muslims are in a deep sleep about them.

Also it was Salam Saadi, not Hamed Abdel-Samad, who said that "Hassan Banna, the Egyptian founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, said in a book in 1935 that Italian fascist and dictator Benito Mussolini was practicing one of the principles of Islam.". It's citation three in https://brill.com/view/journals/fasc/7/2/article-p241_241.xml?language=en#ref_FN000003 Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 19:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

I took it out. If and when a reliable source is found, it can go back. Zero 03:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Hitler

There needs to be some mention of the influence of Nazi German fascististic thought upon the Umma due to the influence that Hitler had on the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. Richard Webster, who is generally sympathetic to Palestinians, blames the British for instilling both anti-semitism in Islamic thought as well as a fascist type response. He says all Abrahamic religions have components of fascism (Christianity, Islam, Judaism) because they want to make the entire world believers. (I don't agree with that, not in the present re Christianity, and Jews have never proselytized.) I also disagree about propaganda disappeared from Europe after WW2 (ha ha!) but I'm not the expert; he is. He is referenced as a source from the earliest versions of the article. A sentence of two that captures the relationship between Hitler's fascism and fascism in N Africa and other Arab nations via Amin should be mentioned (paraphrased) so as to include the impact of Nazi German fascist thought on Islam in the Middle East post-WW2:

'Throughout WW2, Hajj Amin remained in touch with the German government, and in 1941, having fled... to Berlin, he held talks with Hitler... thanked him for the ‘unequivocal support’ he had shown for the Palestinians... Anti-semitic propaganda broadcast in Arabic from Berlin had a significant effect in Egypt, Iraq, Morocco, Tunisia and in other Arab countries.

Although such propaganda disappeared from Europe ... in Egypt anti-semitism was taken up not only by Nasser, but also, in a particularly violent form, by Sayyid Qutb... of the Muslim Brotherhood whom Nasser executed and who... shaped the thinking of modern, militant Islam including bin Laden. In Qutb’s view, Jews, who had always rebelled against God, were inherently evil...

...the destructive form which anti-semitism has now assumed within militant Islam... is not authentically Islamic; is western. ...dreams of world-domination which drive extreme Islamists have been there from the beginning. But such dreams are not unique to Islam; they are the common property of all three Abrahamic faiths. For, in that they look forward to a time when the entire world will bow down to the God they worship, Judaism, Christianity and Islam have always been...ideologies of world-domination."

I can try, but this is not something I know much about. FeralOink (talk) 10:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

I think I'd agree with an inclusion on the Mufti and Hitler, but specifically on the academic discourse on the subject. The idea that Hitler "introduced" antisemitism to the Muslim world or helped invent 'radical Islam', as argued by Matthias Kuntzel, is not without controversy. This is mainly because it assumes that:
  1. Radical or antisemitic tendencies in Islam did not already exist before the Hitler-Mufti meeting
  2. That there was an increase in, specifically 'radical Islamic', antisemitism post war, as opposed antisemitism by the anti-Islamist and socialist governments in Syria and Egypt.
  3. That this increase could only be attributed to Nazi propaganda and not to other events post-war
  4. That Nazi propaganda was widespread and taken at face value in the Arab world, and not challenged in any serious way, including on Islamic grounds
  5. That most Arabs even had access to radios in the first place and could (and did) listen to Axis propaganda (Joel Beinin challenges the idea that Qutb was inspired by the Nazis, since evidence for his radicalism did not appear until at earliest 1948).
  6. That the Nazi ideology was not contradictory; that the Nazis did not also praise the explicitly secular and anti-religious regime of Ataturk
Regarding the Muslim Brotherhood, as Ulrike Freitag and Israel Gershoni put it:
"To our mind, the Muslim Brothers' position vis-a-vis Zionists and Jews had its own logic: The Muslim Brothers aggressively agitated against the Zionist project and took a leading pro-Palestinian role in Egypt and the Arab world between 1936 and 1939. They did not need to nurture their hatred of Zionism, and sometimes of Jews in general, with external sources. Actually, at the same time they developed a clear-cut anti-Nazi and anti-racialist position. There is no hard evidence in al-Banna's rhetoric, ideology or practices that demonstrates any sympathy, let alone collaboration, with the Nazi regime in Germany or its aggressive anti-Semitism. On the contrary, al-Banna and other ideologues and activists of the Muslim Brothers rejected and denounced Nazism on the grounds of its racism and totalitarianism. They considered it to be a new kind of Western imperialism, crueller and more oppressive than the old imperialism of Britain and France. Therefore, to accuse them of Nazi influences because of their support for the Palestinian national movement and its leader, the Mufti, and because of his later collaboration with the Nazis amounts to guilt by association"
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41303595
As Mia Lee puts it:
"Both sets of authors claim that Arabs increasingly participated in operations against Jews during the German occupation. But they do so without showing significant corroborating evidence of this alleged increase in violence, thus creating ambiguity about the reasons behind the rise of anti-Semitism in the region. Moreover, while they emphasise Arabs’ welcome of the Germans, neither set of authors convincingly addresses the findings of numerous studies from scholars of the Middle East that document how Middle Eastern leaders in the interwar era were suspicious or antipathetic toward imperial powers".. "There is no new evidence that the Mufti commanded the support of any significant number of Arab Muslims either during his exile or afterward. Moreover, neither book satisfactorily demonstrates that the Mufti’s anti-Semitic position was shared by Islamic groups in the Middle East during the war"
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26852336
Hitler was fascinated with Islam, but was also incredibly ignorant of even basic Islamic practices. For example, one of the ways the SS differentiated who was Jewish and who wasn't was by checking to see who was circumcised, and then killing them on sight. This was done completely ignorant to the fact Muslims also practice circumcision; the SS killed hundreds of Muslims Tatars before realizing their mistake.
The extent to which radical Islam needed Nazism to proliferate, that it couldn't possibly spread without the Nazis for other reasons, is not, to put it lightly, an idea without some skeptics. Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 01:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
  1. Beinin, Joel (2010). "Review of Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World; From Empathy to Denial: Arab Responses to the Holocaust". International Journal of Middle East Studies. 42 (4): 689–692. ISSN 0020-7438.
  2. Motadel, David (2015), Rüger, Jan; Wachsmann, Nikolaus (eds.), "Veiled Survivors: Jews, Roma and Muslims in the Years of the Holocaust", Rewriting German History: New Perspectives on Modern Germany, London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 288–305, doi:10.1057/9781137347794_16, ISBN 978-1-137-34779-4, retrieved 2024-10-09
Categories: