There is a distinct tendency among the Western chatterati to ascribe reasons for Islamist terrorism that the terrorists themselves never mention. This chronic ESP yields so-called explanations including (among other things):
- Revenge for colonialism.
- Revenge for the Iraq war.
- Revenge for Sykes-Picot.
- Revenge for Western military campaigns against secular dictators in the Muslim world.
- Revenge for Western support for secular dictators in the Muslim world.
- Solidarity with the Palestinian cause.
- Rebellion against economic stagnation and underdevelopment in the Muslim world (indeed always the result of Western foreign policy).
And so on.
Yet what never seems to come up in the discussions led by Very Serious Individuals is the reason that the Islamists perpetually themselves provide: waging jihad against the kaffirs (unbelievers).
Thankfully, in the latest edition of the Islamic State’s own online magazine, Dabiq, we are granted a new degree of clarity on the matter. The following is an excerpt from an article titled, “Why We Hate You & Why We Fight You” (emphasis my own):
“Shortly following the blessed attack on a sodomite, Crusader nightclub by the mujahid Omar Mateen, American politicians were quick to jump into the spotlight and denounce the shooting, declaring it a hate crime, an act of terrorism, and an act of senseless violence. A hate crime? Yes. Muslims undoubtedly hate liberalist sodomites, as does anyone else with any shred of their fitrah (inborn human nature) still intact. An act of terrorism? Most definitely. Muslims have been commanded to terrorize the disbelieving enemies of Allah. But an act of senseless violence? One would think that the average Westerner, by now, would have abandoned the tired claim that the actions of the mujahidin – who have repeatedly stated their goals, intentions, and motivations – don’t make sense.”
What follows is the ridiculing of journalists, politicians, and “apostate imams” who perpetuate the myth that these acts of violence are indeed “senseless” (emphasis my own):
“There are exceptions among the disbelievers, no doubt, people who will unabashedly declare that jihad and the laws of Shari’ah – as well as everything else deemed taboo by the Islam-is-a-peaceful-religion crowd – are in fact completely Islamic, but … their voices are dismissed and a large segment of the ignorant masses continues believing this false narrative.”
Now this is the crux of the matter isn’t it? When the Islamic State itself is ridiculing Westerners for claiming that Islamist terrorism has nothing to do with jihad or Shari’ah, we must surely, as a society, engage in a hearty dose of humility and introspection.
The article goes on to explicitly list six main reasons for which the Islamic State hates the West. These include being “disbelievers”; allowing activities prohibited by Allah; Atheism; and so on.
Curiously, only point #6 (i.e. the last point) makes any mention of Western foreign policy. What follows point #6 is most interesting indeed (emphasis my own):
“What’s important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary, hence the reason we addressed it at the end of the above list. The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you. No doubt, we would stop fighting you then as we would stop fighting any disbelievers who enter into a covenant with us, but we would not stop hating you.”
Conclusion: even if the West stopped interfering with Muslim nations and peoples, the Islamists would still hate us. They would still hate us even if we resigned ourselves to Dhimmitude within their so-called Caliphate.
Hence it is now up to the West to decide whether to continue perpetuating myths about the reasons for Islamist terrorism, or to start taking the terrorists at their word.
I suspect that the chatterati will already be scrambling to find excuses for why we shouldn’t take the Islamists’ words literally, “because that’s exactly what ISIS wants, man.” Or something similarly tenuous like that.
But hopefully these naïve delusions will eventually give way to a more honest discussion about the problem that confronts us today. I am however, perhaps unsurprisingly, not optimistic.
(For your convenience, you may download the entire latest copy of Dabiq by clicking here).