Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (45361)	9/19/2002 3:41:20 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You are amusing, John. You skim Emerson, tell me I'm "wrong" for making him part of the discussion, then chastise me for not reading Kepel when I'm only interested in a minute part of his conclusions, namely, that Islamism started to wane in the mid-90s. Do you really think I need to read everything he has to say before I challenge the conclusion? I don't. Here's a clue, there is a lot of available discussion and analysis of this questionable conclusion on Kepel's part. Doesn't mean I won't accept what he says when I get around to reading him, but I guarantee you that anyone who tells me that Islamism was on the wane starting in the mid-90s had better be able to make a good case for that proposition before I accept it. I think Kepel may have made the mistake of confusing a dead end ideology--which Islamism is--with its eventual, predictable decline. He might have gotten ahead of himself, as Laqueur sagely suggests. Islamism seems to thrive not where it takes over a state or a government, but where it is repressed. Take a look at Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. Paradoxically, it seems to meet more challenges where it is in control of a state, viz., Iran. Since it is presently repressed and not in control of any states, Iran excepted, I would tend to think that Islamism is increasing instead of waning. Repression, poverty, lack of hope, etc., are part of the social dynamite that are its mother's milk. Couple that phenomenon with the radicalization of Muslim immigrants to the First World and I see the case for a waning Islamism as being very hard to make. Virulent Islamism, the kind that attacks with terror, certainly seems to be on the rise. A significant fact is that suicidal terrorism has had a significant increase in the last few years, including the years when Kepel said it began to wane. Or haven't you noticed? What do you think, John? It seems to me that except for a few words about how great Wright, Kepel, etc. are, and how stupid Lewis is, you really haven't discussed their writings in any substantive way. Do you have any firm opinions or are you just....skimming?