Islamic Terrorism and Mohammed’s Anti-Fashion Manifesto
Fascism is a religious conception in which man is seen in his immanent relationship with an objective will that transcends the particular individual and raises him to a conscious membership in a spiritual society. B. Mussolini
The Marxist doctrine is omnipotent because it is true. V. Lenin
The truth has prevailed and falsehood will inevitably vanish. Koran 17:81
What have blood splatted victims of terrorist attacks to do with fashion? Terrorists want to kill, and fashion is a beautiful enrichment of our everyday life. However, the interrelation between the will to kill and fashion is much closer than we think. As mentioned in my previous articles I look at terrorism from an aesthetic point of view. Based on the previously mentioned idea that Islam is not a religion at all but an archaic form of fascism, I’ll focus on Islamic fascism in terms of Islamic anti-fashion and its interrelation with terrorism. It is difficult to ignore the fact that the external face of Islamic fascism is an authoritarian style direction demanding from all Muslims the unconditional acceptance of uniformed dressing codes.
Fashion, in the way we understand it in the Western world is diametrically opposed to uniformed Islamic dressing codes. Fashion is a tool for individual differentiation. We “infidels” can choose freely what we want to wear. And this freedom of personal differentiation is our “ugly” face to those who have “submitted” to Allah. It is in the psychological nature of the sake that the way we are dressed is a thorn in the flesh of Islamic fascists.
Therefore, the conclusion is close at hands to assume that Islamic terrorist attacks in the Western World are murderous anti-fashion statements against the meaning of fashion. Significantly, the 9/11 terrorist attacks happened during the New York Fashion Week. Islamic terrorism has absolutely nothing to do with religion, politics or economy. The Islamic will to kill derives simply from a deep disgust against the way we look like. (For a more detailed discussion about beauty, ugliness, hate, and the will to kill please have a look at FASHION AND TERRORISM II.) Besides, an indispensable prerequisite for every form of fascism is the killing of “ugly” looking people belonging to the “wrong race”, the “wrong class” or the “wrong style”.
What exactly is fascism?
Although German Nazism in theory comes from the diametrically opposed end to communism, both ideologies are nevertheless nearly identical forms of fascism. They propagated a completely new world; a new order for an eternal paradise. Attempts to realize this 20th century utopia took place in a barbaric orgy of historically unprecedented violence. During the course of time hundreds of millions got killed under the supervision of sadistic clowns like Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao
The gas chambers of Nazi Germany, the Gulag extinction camps in Siberia, the mass killings in Mao’s China, the Khmer Rouge Killing Fields in Cambodia and the still existing labor camps in North Korea will remain in history as shocking monuments of a concept that can’t survive without enemies. How does this concept look like? How to describe it? The following definition makes it clear that communism and Nazism are just two sides of the same fascist coin.
Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass based party of committed nationalist militants…abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.” Paxton, R., The Anatomy of Fascism, p. 218
Based on this definition it seems surprisingly convincing that Lenin, the revolutionary creator of the one-party communist state, was the first fascist of modern times. One can safely say that Lenin created fascism long before Mussolini and Hitler by implementing Marx’s ideas into, as he said: “a potent political weapon of ideological transformation of the world.” The ideas that Lenin propagated – changing the entire world, the killing of enemies, uprising of the masses, transforming the individual into an insignificant tiny particle in comparison to the “truth” – gave birth to all forms of 20th century fascism.
For German Nazism, all history was the history of race struggle; and for communism, all history was the history of class struggle. Once this “alternative reality” was established as an irrefutable “truth” all ruthless actions against the enemies of the race or the class could morally be justified by appeal to nature, or by law of history. Fascism seeks to mobilize entire nations in support for an official state ideology. It does not tolerate any limits to its authority. and, as presented in George Orwell’s novel 1984, strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible. I think it is obvious at this point already that the concept of fascism can be extended to include Islam as well, since everything else than Islam is an intolerable falsehood for Muslims.
George Orwell’s dystopian 1984 “Newspeak” updated:
“Fascism is Anti-Fascism” – “Alternative Facts are Real” – “Islam is Religion”
George Orwell’s ‘1984’ is a dystopian novel published in 1949. The novel is set in a totalitarian world of perpetual war and government surveillance. The tyranny is overseen by “Big Brother”, the party leader who enjoys an intense cult of personality. Orwell describes a fascistic single-party system in which Big Brother together with a tiny core of oligarchs control all societal communication. The control includes even people’s personal history and the way they talk. The party is implementing an invented language called “newspeak”, which attempts to prevent political rebellion by eliminating all words related to it. Big Brother statements like “Freedom is Slavery”, “War is Peace”, and “Ignorance is Strength” act as a discouragement for anyone looking for something else beyond the official ideology. Even thinking controversial thoughts is illegal. Such “thought crime” is according to the regime the worst of all crimes.
In January 2017, after the election of Donald Trump, the book went immediately to the top of the Amazon best-seller list in the United States. Mainly due to the fact that an official White House speaker for Trump had promoted in a truly Orwellian manner the societal acceptance of so called “alternative facts”.
Orwell knew very well what he was writing about. He knew that Stalin was a mass murderer with quite some knowledge in linguistics. And it was Big Brother Stalin who produced an “alternative fact” that overshadowed reality. By exposing himself as a heroic fighter against German Nazism Stalin managed to coin his own version of genocidal fascism as an ethically glorified version of “anti-fascism”.
The branding of his genocidal fascism as an “anti-fascism” paradise is from a linguistic point of view brilliant, and must be praised as one of the most powerful linguistic manipulations of all times. From the moment on Stalin appeared on the political stage as the goodhearted Messiah of “anti-fascism” all criticism of his tyranny could automatically, and linguistically correct, be rejected as “fascism”. Stalin’s linguistic manipulation is comparably only with the successful branding of Islam as a religion. Islam is a tyranny and every criticism of inhuman practices within (Big Brother) Mohammed’s “Islam” can triumphantly be rejected as an insult against the only true messenger of God. I’ll come back to this in a moment.
One should with regard to Stalin’s “newspeak” not overlook the devastating fact that the terrible crimes of Lenin. Stalin, Mao, and Poll Pot are still today belittled by brain-dead left-wingers as regrettable accidents on the necessary way to a better future for mankind. Not to mention that contemporary left-wing fascists are presenting themselves proudly as anti-fascists. The conviction that democracy with functioning institutions is a continuation of fascism with other means is established within anti-fascist forces like a religious dogma. Besides, so called “Anti-Fascism” is even literally speaking very much in fashion. “Anti-Fascist Fashion” has become indistinguishable from “Jihad Cool Terrorist Fashion”. We know the style. Black work or military boots, black pants, black balaclavas or ski masks, black gloves and jackets, North Face brand or otherwise. Gas masks, goggles, shields or AK 47’s as accessories.
Hitler and The Aesthetics of 20th Century Fascism
Why did people became fascists in countries with a traditional Christian heritage? It might sound outrageous, but fascism and theistic religion in itself have much in common. The essayist Emil Cioran had pointed out that people “are converted to religion out of fear of suffocating within the narrow confines of this world.” Theistic religion is admittedly nothing narrow minded. It creates for those exasperated with existence some captivating illusions, such as an almighty God, and an eternal life after death. In fascism, the “narrow confines of this world” are overcome through bombastic visions of a wonderful life for the “right” race or class, eternal justice on earth, and a godlike cult of the leader.
As in theistic religion fascism is propagating chosenness. Fascistic chosenness is achieved through the “rebirth” of the race, or the “awakening of the class”. And, of course, through heroic struggle, sacrifices, and constant ruthlessness against internal and external enemies. As in religion through participation in ceremonial masses and pilgrimage, fascist rallies were propaganda events designed to reinforce enthusiasm for highest goals and to showcase their societal power to the rest of the world.
Nazi Party rallies were held with blaring Wagnerian overtures, stirring martial songs, banners, goose-step marches, human swastika formations, torchlight processions, bonfires, and magnificent firework displays. The rallies lasted several days and drew hundreds o thousands of Party members and spectators. They enjoyed the rousing speeches by Hitler that were often the occasion for the announcement of new Nazi directions.
Hitler created, like Lenin before him, his own “potent political weapon of ideological transformation of the world”, and a regime that could not exist without him. Hitler gained much of his success by using a very simple, straightforward language, short sentences, and powerful emotive slogans. Often beginning a speech quietly, he would gradually build to a climax; into an accelerating emotional blowout. His voice would rise in pitch, climbing in a crescendo to a ranting and screaming finale, accompanied by carefully rehearsed dramatic gestures. One has to admit that Hitler was one of the greatest orators of all times and a good showman.
In an interview for Playboy in 1974 David Bowie came very close to the reason for Hitler’s success by characterizing him as the first rock star. “Look at some of the films and see how he moved. I think he was as good as Mick Jagger. Hitler used politics and theatrics and created this thing that governed and controlled the show for twelve years. He staged a country.”
Bowie used to talk a lot, and not everything he said is worthwhile to remember. The characterization of Hitler as a rock star, however, hits the mark. Rock stars are entertainers who captivate the audience with their songs and who succeed due to their excellent show. With the eyes of a superstar Bowie saw in Hitler’s orations exactly the same what he was doing; entertaining the masses. And when it comes to the art of entertaining it is difficult to deny the fact that Hitler was much better than Mick Jagger.
People love rock stars and people loved Hitler. For Germans he was an incontestable sensation. Holocaust survivor Faye Cukier remembered how tears ran down her teacher’s cheeks when she found out that Hitler would come to town. “They were tears of enthusiasm. They all loved him. He was like a rock star.” Significantly, the hysterical admiration of Hitler among young girls shows striking similarities to the hysterical behavior expressed when the Beatles had come to town.
In 1936, Walter Benjamin famously argued that “the logical result of fascism is the introduction of aesthetics into political life.” Fascism, Benjamin wrote, sees its salvation in giving the people not what they really need, but instead a chance to express themselves. Benjamin was right; what fascism gives to people is not personal freedom but the opportunity for a membership in a totalitarian style. Style is something that is principally opposed to individualism. A style, let’s say in architecture, painting, or music is recognized by some common characteristics. Everything personal, on the other hand, is generally not compatible with an adaption of commonalities. A so called “personal style” is a contradiction in terms. In fascism, individuals were incorporated in an impersonal style direction rigorously designed from above. Therefore, the fascist as a person, according to Mussolini, is “in an immanent relationship with an objective will that transcends the particular individual”. This means that the fascist does not appear as a free individual but as an uniformed individual confirming an immanent relationship with the fascist ideology.
Uniforms are types of clothing worn by members of an organization while participating in that organizations activities. Military uniforms, intended for identification and display, are meant to express submission under a central authority. In fascism people lived in a superabundance of stylistic submission. Fascist aesthetics reduced society and politics to a theatrical spectacle; a triumph of aesthetics over ethics, and Islam is reducing society to a stylistic spectacle; a triumph of submission over humanity.
Mohammed, Islamic Fascism and Islamic Anti-Fashion
The term Islamic Fascism is in use since the thirties of the last century and is drawing an analogy between characteristics of Islam and European 20th century fascism. There are several factors pointing towards some classical similarities between 20th century fascism and Islam. I’ll mention a few of them.
1 Violent resentments against education and unlimited trust in the authoritative truth of just one book written by worshiped shining lights like Marx, Hitler, Mao or Mohammed.
2 The quest for eternal world power of the master race, the working class, or the superior faith in a Caliphate stretching from the Morocco to the Far East.
3 Ruthless enforcement of moral and social order, and brutish forms of punishment.
4 Mobilization of the masses
Islam is historically believed to have originated in the early 7th century. Traditionally, it is said to be a monotheistic religion teaching that there is only one God, Allah, and that Mohammed is his messenger. With over 1.8 billion followers, known as Muslims, Islam appears to be the fastest growing community of faith. The primary scriptures of Islam is the Koran, viewed by Muslims as the final revelation of God. There are only two ultimate authorities about Islam – Allah and Mohammed. Allah is found nowhere else except in the Koran, and Mohammed is the author of the Koran. Islam means submission, and a Muslim is someone who has submitted.
I’ll show in the following that Islam is not a religion but an archaic form of fascism. The confessedly bold claim that Islam is not a religion can be based on a theological reasoning chain. Every religion, to start with, is a system of designated behaviors, practices, worldviews and ethics that relate humanity to the supernatural; to a cosmic order of existence. Strong confidence or trust in a supernatural order of existence is called faith. Within this context one should not forget that taste for something supernatural precedes faith. Faith implies trust and confidence in a God one can talk to when in need of advice, help, assistance, or consolation.
If one is praying to the Christian God, for instance, one opens in full confidence one’s inner personal life to God in order to find help and strength. Allah, however, is not a God one can talk to. Allah is the term for an abstract system that has nothing to do with one’s personal life. Faith for Muslims is faith in the supposedly eternal truth and rightness of Islam itself. Therefore, there is nothing personal about Muslim prayer. On the contrary, Muslim prayer is just a collective ritual. One prays at certain hours the same prayers facing the same direction.
These prayers function like military drills in order of cementing through submissive body movements a common obedience to the rightness of Islam. Generally, submission is in Islam synonym with worship, and submission to the dictates of the Islamic doctrine is elevated above all consideration of reason. Needless to say that reason is diametrically opposed to all forms of fascism. Fascism Fascism, Mussolini said, “is a religious conception in which man is seen in his immanent relationship with an objective will that transcends the particular individual and raises him to a conscious membership in in a spiritual society.” These words are revealing! One only has to replace the word “fascism” with “Islam” and one has a quotation which could stem from Mohammed himself. This means that Mohammed, descriptively speaking, could have been the first fascist, and that Muslims are expressing with their uniformed anti-fashion style a conscious membership in a fascist society.
It is not possible to see how Islamic fascism could contributing anything to the rest of the world in terms of entrepreneurial activities, technology, science, culture, or art. The only thing one can expect from Islam is a growing resentment. We know that no form of fascism can’t exist without internal and external enemies. Islamic fascism has existed for a long time. Given that a new generation of Islamic terrorists are hopeless male adolescents belonging to a rapidly growing sub-proletariat does not bode well for the future.