Center for a New American Security

Abu Muqawama had an email conversation with an American policy-maker yesterday in which it was revealed that both of us share an admiration for the writings of the late Raymond Aron. Then, this morning, Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post wrote of those politicians -- like President Bush, in Israel last week -- who invoke Hitler and the specter of National Socialism to end debates rather than broaden them. This got Abu Muqawama thinking about how Aron might have thought of our contemporary efforts to draft the 20th Century fascist phenomenon in to condemn political Islam by way of the label "Islamo-facism." (A term first used by Maxime Rodinson to describe the Iranian Revolution of 1978 -- "le fascisme islamique.")

Abu Muqawama was then drawn to the distinction Aron drew between communism and fascism: "there remains a difference between a philosophy whose logic is monstrous, and one that lends itself to a monstrous interpretation."

Bearing in mind Aron was a careful student of Marx but a harsh critic of Marxism, that distinction he draws between communism and fascism seems relevant. And it probably applies, in Abu Muqawama's estimation, to political Islam as well. Abu Muqawama does not think that even a great defender of liberalism like Aron would have had much tolerance for those who invoke the Nazis to condemn political or even radical militant Islam.

Abu Muqawama will have to go back, though, and see what Aron wrote about the Iranian Revolution. (Though he is not sure that would provide much insight into contemporary events, as the revolution would probably be seen as a "monstrous interpretation" rather than the result of an ideology/religion monstrous in and of itself.)

Update: Holy cow. Leading Aron scholar Daniel J. Mahoney just posted a comment. Check it out. This is worse than when Kilcullen writes in.