Islamofascism. That is the term currently used to describe the emergence of radical Islam throughout the Middle East, whose tremors are felt across the entire globe. Typically, this association describes the rise of Arab nationalism combined with the powerful Islamic groups which dominate these countries. However, this word is incomplete. Providing a separate term for “fascist Islam” is like providing a separate word for fascist Nazism.

It doesn’t make any sense because the latter implies the former, and the following article will explain how the birth of Islam is rooted in fascist fundamentals and Islam was, quite literally, the first fascist ideology of mankind, a religion perfectly engineered for world domination.

Origins:

Before we delve into the principles of Islam and what makes it so dangerous, we first have to know of its origins. Islam (literally ‘submission’) is the doctrine that was revealed to Muhammad by the one and only God, the God of Abraham (Allah) in the 7th century. Not only is the Islamic holy book, the Qur’an, the full unchanged revelation of God, as compared to the ‘altered’ and ‘corrupted’ Bible and Torah, but Muhammad is also the final prophet i.e. no other prophet will or could ever come after him.

After recieving these words from the angel Gabriel, he recieved persecution at the hands of the Arab polytheists. He then conquered Mecca, subsequently entered the Kaaba and promptly destroyed all the idols that lay within. After which he went on a large scale conquest of the Arabian peninsula, conquering cities and destroying statues of the pagan gods. However, Muhammad’s actions could be justified by him simply being a great conqueror and religious leader.

He unified a bunch of nomadic, uncivilized tribes into a great world-conquering nation, similar to Genghis Khan. But whoever Muhammad was, what came after was far worse. And Islam is far more than just the Qur’an. Following the death of Muhammad was 1400 years of genocide, destruction and war, a war which goes on today.

When talking about the early Muslim conquests, many people default to the argument that Christianity, the precursor to Islam was equally as bloodthirsty and violent, and spread itself by conquering other regions and the famous Crusades. But, looking at the history of Christianity and Islam, it is easy to see why this is not the case. Christianity, first of all, was not founded by a warlord. Jesus’s principles of peace and turning the other cheek predated Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. by two millenia.

Secondly, Christianity is a radically different religion from Islam in the case that early Christianity began as the cult religion revolving around the death and resurrection of Jesus. It’s primary spread has always been by missionaries, not by the sword. Even though Christianity has regularily indulged in great acts of violence, it is not condoned by Jesus or by the New Testament.

It took more than a millenia for Christianity to fully encompass just Europe, while the Empire of Islam extended from Spain and Northern Africa all the way to the western reaches of India in merely a century after the prophet’s death. This was not simple conversion, but full on military conquest carried out by an Islamic state.

The pagan people living here didn’t particularily like having their countries conquered, their traditions and religions destroyed and their culture replaced. This is what the Persian poet Ferdowsi had to say about Islam 400 years after his country’s collapse:

Damn this world, damn this time, damn this fate,

That uncivilized Arabs have come to

Make me a Muslim

Where are your valiant warriors and priests

Where are your hunting parties and your feats?

Where is that warlike mien and where are those

Great armies that destroyed our country’s foes?

Count Iran as a ruin, as the lair

Of lions and leopards.

Look now and despair”.

Islam still dominates these regions, and is an integral part of it’s culture. The only reason why the world was not fully engulfed by the holy fire of Islam was mere geographic chance which allowed Europe to discover the new world first, sparking the Age of Exploration, allowing the Europeans to turn the tide on the Muslims, making Christianity and not Islam the world’s largest religion.

Granted, Islam’s history has not all been full of violence. There have been periods, early in it’s history that the Islamic world provided a degree of tolerance unheard of in Europe to both People of the Book (Christians and Jews) and kafirs (pagans), particularily towards the Jews. They were reduced to the status of dhimmis (protected) and had to pay a special tax called jizya, however they were also allowed to keep their own religious courts and laws and had great degrees of autonomy, and this practice continued into the early modern period in the Muslim heartlands of Syria and Iraq and in the Ottoman Empire.

There was even a time, during the Islamic Golden Age, where there was an effort to gather all the world’s knowledge in the Baghdad House of Wisdom, both Muslim and non-Muslim, where pagans were allowed to serve in the army and when Muslim scholars were at the forefront of every field of science. But, even the Nazis were renowned for their scientific prowess.

As Islam matured, it became more and more radical and dominated by clerics and their hadiths, and increasingly less tolerant towards heresy and blasphemy, and more resembling of modern fascism. For this part, I will be comparing it with the most popular and powerful form of fascism, Nazism.

Relation with Fascism:

On the surface, the only thing these two have to do with each other is that they both are authoratarian ideologies with violent tendencies, but the similarities go far deeper than these. The similarities are not between the ideologies themselves, but rather in the way the operate and seek to accomplish their goals, starting with:

Inherent Superiority:

Both Islam and Nazism even exist is because they have a clear purpose: which is to expand by whichever way possible, which is precisely what makes them so powerful. The justification for conquest lies in their own belief in their inherent superiority over everyone else. For Nazism, this lies in the superiority of the Aryan race, and the need for expansion lies in the policy of lebensraum or living space, which explains that it is justifiable for the Germans to take over the territory of lesser peoples like the Slavs, to provide them with the resources they need. It is only the natural right of the superior race.

In Islam, this belief lies not in the people (the Arabs), but the very ideology itself. Islam is the final revelation, and so is the perfected thesis of Abrahamic doctrine straight from the one and only God, who clearly has said in his own words that he doesn’t like those who don’t believe in him. And so, it’s only natural for the followers of the true faith to spread God’s good word, at the expense of everyone else.

The end goal of Nazism was to put the entire world under the control of an ethnically pure, perfected race and the end goal of Islam too, is to put the entire world under its domination, and both condone the use of military force to fulfill these purposes. Some say that Islam prohibits violence such as conquest, but it’s kind of hard to prohibit something which your own prophet did. Throw in some dogma about being oppressed by a morally inferior but powerful people and you have an ideology built for conquest.

No Separation of Church and State:

An argument that I’ve heard is that fascism cannot ever work with religion because it is inherently anti-God, as it tries to replace God with the State. And of course, an ideology as evil and depraved such as fascism cannot coexist with God-derived morals. This can be disproved by pointing to the example of Japanese fascism, which was a mixture of both fascism and state religion.

The Emperor was literally a religious figure, of divine descent and the Imperial cult was, for all intents and purposes, a religious ideology mixed in with Japanese hyper-nationalism. They too, carried out practices which can only be called religious, such as constructing Japanese shrines in occupied territories and forcing people to pray at them, or forcing people to take a pledge of allegiance while facing the direction of Japan (such as in Singapore). Even in Nazism, the idea of a “God” is still there. In any religion and fascism both, there has to be an infallible source of the ideology which followers are fanatically devoted to. And in both religion and fascism, faith is still required.

Coming to the main topic, in both cases there is no separation of Church and State, by which I mean Ideology and Government. This is where I believe Islam greatly differs from Christianity. Even though Christianity has played a large influence on the governance of Christian nations, the doctrine of “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s” and further the New Testament’s hostility to “teachers of the law” and Jewish priests atleast partly stops Christianity from following completely into the hands of the clergy and earthly bodies as well as provide a basis for a secular form of organization.

In Islam however, there can never be a separation of church and state, as any form of government must be decided on sharia (divine law). Islam is not just a religion, but a whole corpus of laws, government, culture etc. There is no distinction between having an Islamic country and having an Islamic law, which is why the idea of an Islamic republic makes no sense. Any republic cannot be Islamic, and vice versa. In this sense, an entire nation is governed by only by Islam, and nothing else. Today this can be found in states such as ISIS or Iran.

This is identical to the form of government in fascism. Fascism, by its very definition is both a political and social form of organization which advocates the establishment of the fascist state, which in turn will pursue its goals of racial ascendance. In both, social changes must be undertaken not by individuals but by the totalitarian state which it creates, and must resort to authoritarian principles to fulfill the ideology’s main goals. Total power in the hands of the unholy alliance between State, Religion and Military which act with a singular mind is the unique recipe for the loss of personal liberty and the denigration of individuality.

Complete Domination of Culture:

The lifeline vital to the functioning of any authoratarian state is the reduction of individuals to identical puppets of the government, and for that it needs to power to dominate every facet of societal life. It is no wonder why Islam is so powerful when you see the influence that it exerts on individuals, families and entire countries. Once a society converts to Islam, everything else follows.

Islam is an all-consuming entity, it completely and utterly dominates every aspect of life in a way that no other religion is able to. The totalitarian state that the ideology creates explained in the previous section seeks to control and coordinate every institution and social environment. Everything must be directed by the state, from the moment you are born to the moment you enter the grave.

The natural consequence of this is the loss of individuality and complete submissiveness, which ironically is what Islam literally means, “submission”. Even your thoughts are not safe, as even the conception of heresy will be found out by the ever-present Allah, who has the power to peer into your deepest thoughts. If you’re pious, you will ultimately reform yourself and reject any heretic thoughts. If you aren’t, then you’re dead.

Why do you think that Islam has so many rules and regulations, borderline excessive? Is it really necessary to pray 5 whole times a day? Does it really matter whether or not you shave your moustache? What does religion have anything to do with your attire? Should religion really interfere in the economy?

The answer to them all is the same, it is to make sure that whoever you are and wherever you are and at whichever time, you will always, always remember your Islamic identity. Have you ever thought about how so many Muslims around the world dress themselves in a similar way, particularily Muslim women? Could you imagine if all Christians around the world dressed in the same way? All the way from Africa to Indonesia the same burqa is worn, to ensure that even if you are the only Muslim there, you will still remember your identity, and secure solidarity.

The same goes with the daily prayers, Islamic schools, sharia courts, the halal and haraam, the several rules and regulations, even uniformity in their very names, to make sure that people thousands of miles separate from each other still follow the exact same religion. This is why Islam has so many facets within it, from economics to law, to make sure that everything that could ever exist has an Islamic basis, and nothing outside Islam is ever needed.

By having Islam contain everything, it dominates all aspects of culture, and so ensures a collective Islamic identity of Muslims throughout the entire world, even in nations where they constitute a minority and do not control the state. The Jews did the same thing in Europe, when it was mandated for them to wear grotesquely large caps and always dress in black, to have them always stand out and feel as the other, and make sure that they never integrate but remain true to Judaism.

The total control of culture is what Islam shares with Nazism. Islam and Nazism both seek to exercise control over its own society and the societies it occupies, “from the economy and trade associations to the media, culture and education.”

Unchanging Nature

In George Orwell’s 1984 there was a phrase mentioned about how the authoratarian government in the book tried “to have the pendulum swing back and then stop”. This quote captures the power of change and the threat it poses to any institution, ideology and nation. In fact, a large percentage of any ideology is configured in such a way as to ensure that it doesn’t fall to the ravages of time.

For millenia, we have tried, and failed, to create a singularily perfect idea which does not perish. Islam is no different. To give credit where credit is due, I have to say that the most impressive aspect of Islam is its resilience to change. The fact that an ideology has managed to mantain its ideals and values for the past 1400 years is a great accomplishment. Muslims see this as well, who take great pride that the Qur’an is the unaltered version straight from the mouth of God (but through Muhammad of course).

Granted, Islam is not entirely the same as it was when it was born. It has become more radical, for one, and there have been divisions and different schools of thought. But most of them have not managed to last, and today only two major denominations of Islam remain, primarily Sunni and Shia Islam. Compare this to the several thousand denomations of Christianity and other religions.

As for the 4 major “schools” of Sunni thought, which do have distinctions between laws relating to blashphemy, prayer etc., these are only variations in the interpretations of Islamic law, not in the entire religion. Just like two democracies can have different interpretations of the Law of Torts and both still remain democracies, these schools don’t change the religion. Moreoever, to me it seems like a large part of these distinctions were made simply for the purpose of solving all the contradictions that appear in Islamic thought, as in which texts which will be considered more important than the others. There is a distinction between these schools (and this is not a joke) on whether the finger should be moved or not when mentioning the name of Allah.

One of the primary ways Islam secures its unchanging nature is its rejection of any form of idolatry. One of the cornerstones of Abrahamic thought is that it worships only God, not a man or king or prophet, but only God as revealed in the holy books. This idea is perfected by the Islam, which removes any and all sense of idolatry to complete devotion to the one book, which ensures that there is no room for change or reinterpretation.

Muslims are not allowed to build great tombs, nor venerate saints, or worship prophets, keep images or even create the likeness of a man, to make sure that Islam does not deviate from its original form, to make sure that no man usurps the authority of Islam. Any form of heresy or blasphemy is quickly punished by straight up death, to make sure that no heretic lives long enough to spread his word.

In this way, heretics never become martyrs, they cannot build monuments for him to remember him in any way, making sure that his rebellion dies with him (sound familiar?). This allowed the sole basis of the religion to remain the book, which they take great care in keeping identical and is taught to every Muslim child, unchanged from the way it was 1400 years ago.

This is accompanied by it being the final revelation, differing from other Abrahamic religions who still anticipate the coming of another prophet. In Islam, Muhammad was the final prophet, who provided closure to all the prophecies. There can be no other after him, effectively closing the line of prophets and holy books. The revelation was also not revealed in parts to different prophets, but in its entirety to one man, as to make sure that there is no chance of it being misconstrued in the future. Islam is, in all sense, a 1400 Jahre Reich.

So now we have a religion, which is a social, religious and political ideology, which is inherently superior to all others, has in it the strength to completely dominate foreign societies and continously expand, and has made itself completely eternal, the precise goals of fascism. Islam managed to achieve what fascism couldn’t a millenia ago. But now that Islam has firmly secured its place, what does it do? This is the main and final comparision with fascism, in its treatment of the kafir.

Tolerance Towards Others:

Out of all the previous topics, this is perhaps the most well-known and requires the least explanation. I don’t think I have to mention the violence done towards Jews, Christians or Hindus in places like Africa or the Indian subcontinent in the modern period. Some people say that Islam shares its genocidal tendencies with all other religions, which might have been true in the past but the difference is that all other religions, be it Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism or Judaism have greatly reformed and modernized itself over the past two centuries. Islam has tried, and succeeded in some parts of the world, but in the majority it still remains the backward desert war cult it was 1400 years ago. And since it has not changed, it has a great tendency to revert to what it did historically. To illustrate this, look at Islam’s treatment of others, I will point towards two examples, the treatment of the Hindus and the Zoroastrians.

Treatment of the Hindus:

The history of Islam in India represents one of the bloodiest and brutal conquests in human history. It is estimated by Indian professor KS Lal that the Hindu population fell 80 million between 1000 AD and 1525 AD, a scale unparalleled in human history. Unlike the Jews and Christians, Hindus were not People of the Book and so were not entitled to dhimmi status, they were kafirs, infidels, and checked every box on the list of pagan idolatry.

Beginning with Mahmud of Ghazni, who was famous for destroying temples on a large scale, the Muslims began a large scale genocide of the native Indians. Not just Hindus, as Islam is responsible for erasing Buddhism from India and later vast massacres of the Sikhs in Punjab. After the Ghurid conquests, every major temple in Northern India had been destroyed and vast amounts of gold and silver in the form of idols and images stored in them were looted.

They targeted Brahmin and Buddhist institutions, Bakhtiyar Khilji of the Delhi Sultanate is famous for destroying the millenia old university of Nalanda, a world renowned place of Buddhist and Sanskrit learning. Nearly every Muslim king in India had commited a massacre of Hindus at some point, and these are just a few examples. The Muslim kings were responsible for singlehandedly destroying the ancient tradition of India, and I’m not even mentioning the massacres in the modern period such as those in East Pakistan in 1971 or the ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Kashmir.

This created a major conflict between the Hindu and Muslim populations of India, which finally erupted in the Partition, which led to the largest mass migration in history as well as wholesale slaughter by both sides.

The ruins of Nalanda

Treatment of the Zoroastrians:

Unlike the Hindus, who were hundreds of millions in number and constituted the vast majority of India, the Zoroastrians of Persia were a far smaller group, and so subject to far harsher rule than the Hindus – whom the Muslims atleast had to pander to at times.

Zoroastrianism, the oldest monotheistic religion and the followers of which once controlled the entire known world, which had been the state religion in Persia was subjugated so harshly it is a wonder how they managed to survive in Iran at all. The Muslim invaders did many of the same things they did to the Hindus, beginning with the destruction of Zoroastrian places of learning, such as Ctesiphon by the Rashiduns who had holy books burnt or thrown into the river. In the city of Esterabad (now Gorgan), so many Persians were killed by the Umayyads that their blood was used to power flour mills. This practice continued as Muslims regularly destroyed and desecrated Zoroastrian fire-temples, put them under harsh tax levies and such terrible persecution that they were forced to flee to India.

The ruins of Ctesiphon, all that remains of the Zoroastrians

Under the Qajar dynasty beginning in 1796, the Muslims treated the Zoroastrians similar to how the Nazis treated the Jews. The community was regarded as outcast, impure and untouchable. Harassments and persecution were the norms of daily life.

They were compelled by enactments to wear the dull yellow raiment already alluded to as a distinguishing badge, like the Star of David for the Jews. They were heavily taxed, and if they could not afford to pay, their children were beaten and even tortured and their religious books were thrown in fire, and massacres too were not uncommon. It was so bad that many of them undertook perilous journeys to India. If this is not a good example of what happens to minorities under Islamic rule, I don’t know what is.

It was them yesterday, it could be us tomorrow.

And there you have it, 3600 words later. I didn’t expect this post to go for this long, but I feel that this topic is important enough to merit it this post. Surely, I’ve only briefly touched upon the topics and you could go far more in depth, but I don’t feel like there’s anything more that can be said that hasn’t already been. If you liked this post and would like to share my effort, I would greatly appreciate it if you shared this post on social media. If you have any feedback, or anything else you would like to add or what you agree or disagree with, leave it in the comments. I’d love to know what your own thoughts are.