By Victor Davis Hanson
Sunday, February 22, 2015
It is disheartening to listen to Obama and his
administration voices childishly reiterating that ISIS has nothing to do with
Islam because it does not represent the majority of Muslims or what Westerners
perceive as normative values distilled from the Koran.
No radical ideology, religious or otherwise, starts out
coherently, much less representing the majority; but it eventually can if
appeased and left unchallenged.
Does Obama think that National Socialism could never have
represented the Germany of Goethe and Schiller just because it only appealed to
a minority of Germans in the 1932 election or was clearly a perversion of
traditional German values?
All that was true, but irrelevant two years later when
Germans who once laughed at the barbarity of National Socialism suddenly were
willing to look the other way at its thuggery, killings, and ethnic cleansing
in exchange for the sense of pride it lent a public that felt itself
victimized.
Western European observers of the 1930s who were worried
at what was going on in Germany did not, like our president, insist that
National Socialism had nothing to with socialism or Germany, but rather feared
that it might exploit both and end up not just representing Germany, but
enthusiastically embraced by a majority of Germans. They were right. Hitler
rose to power not because most Germans favored euthanasia and rounding up Jews,
but because they were willing to overlook that and a lot more if Hitler were
able to win back respect for traditional German influence and status.
It matters little right now that most Muslims in theory
reject ISIS and find its barbarity a perversion of what they see as traditional
Islam, in the way National Socialism distorted classical socialism and German
values and history. The key instead is to what degree by its success in gaining
territory and numbers, and in humiliating the West, will ISIS gain adherents
among Muslims?
ISIS assumes that most Muslims, despite their present
reservations over its methodology and religious contortions, harbor some quiet
admiration that at least radical Islam strikes back at Muslims’ supposed
oppressors. ISIS like Hitler expects that in time it will win psychological
resonance for a large minority of Muslims — at least in sufficient numbers to
ensure its existence and growth. The abyss from Bismarck and Hegel to Auschwitz
was not inherently greater than from the Koran to ISIS, given the unchanging
nature of humankind.
Psychoanalyzing Hitler or declaring that National
Socialism was a betrayal of classical Germany or fearing conflating Nazism with
Germany itself was a useless parlor game in the 1930s. All that mattered was
whether Hitler’s thuggery could be humiliated — its bluff called in the
Rhineland or at Munich — and shown to be weak and a prescription for disaster
before it became too strong.
No comments:
Post a Comment