Occasionally in the past year as ISIS has seemed to have gone through its death throes, the Counter-Jihad Mainstream pronounces various pieces of its obituary.
For example, last week, Jihad Watch posted an article with this headline:
The Islamic State’s caliphate has officially ended as its last stronghold is liberated
The broader Western Mainstream, of course, follows suit, and more or less agrees (as it does, despite a lot of superficial animosity between it and the Counter-Jihad Mainstream, about many aspects of the Problem of Islam).
My take on this is different, as I've written before here (see my 4-part series on it). I theorize that the primary objective of the ISIS Muslims was not to conquer the West by establishing a Caliphate (since the Caliphate's raison d'être is to conquer the Earth for Allah) -- not because they didn't want to do that, but because they realized they could not do that, given the spectacular superiority of their enemy, the West, relative to their current abilities. Their primary objective was to unleash unprecedented geopolitical destabilization which would in turn trigger a mass exodus of Muslims from the Muslim world into the West.
As I described what I've called the "Jihad of the Feet" in an older essay of mine (The Multifarious Strategy of Jihad):
... at first [in the 1950s and 60s] it was a slow trickle, then in the 80s and 90s it began to pick up; then after 911, the West didn't do the normal thing and shut off the water, but rather paradoxically & perversely turned the spigot way over to allow a gush of immigration, and kept it going for years as though it were running a nice big, long bubble bath. Then, after the logical devolution of the Arab Spring into the metastasizing train wreck of ISIS, it's like the West took a sledgehammer to the water pipes, or backed up a van to knock over the fire hydrant, or actively pitched in to topple levees to help this Mohammedan Katrina devastate our societies.
It would be a case of shortsightedness, stuck in the conventional box, to insist on seeing ISIS as merely a gang that, with respect to ultimate goal of conquest, was trying to do it through the front door. Rather, it is reasonable to surmise, they sought to effect sufficient geopolitical trauma through a widespread "strategy of sidération" (a useful French word difficult to translate with just one English word; which may be rendered as "a state of shock, disarray and paralysis").
Meanwhile, the Counter-Jihad Mainstream has been reporting stories that afford a glimpse of the effects I'm talking about -- for example, this week:
Hungary: Muslim “refugee” discovered to have beheaded 20 people for the Islamic State
-- with Robert Spencer's apposite explication:
He was ordered expelled from Hungary after being caught with forged documents on December 30, but he was detained on Friday, so clearly he didn’t leave after he was expelled. Also he seems to have moved freely around Europe for quite some time. His story is evidence that European authorities are overwhelmed and cannot deal adequately with the Muslim migrant crisis they have inflicted upon themselves.
But of course, it's not just a matter of triggering mass immigration into the West in order for individual Muslims to perpetrate terror attacks now or in the near future; but also, and more importantly, to lay the demographic seeds for a much longer-term goal of jihad in the distant future (I estimate approximately 100 years from now, give or take a generation or two).
Now if only Spencer and his acolytes can put together and connect these various dots he has been reporting...
No comments:
Post a Comment