The Jihadism of the Radical Left

In Islam, the word “Jihad” means “to struggle.” It is a word that describes Islamic terrorists making war in their own region or in the west, but it is also describes the internal struggle of non-violent Muslims against their own inclinations to sin and vice. The ideological left in the United States has adopted both forms of Jihadism.

I’ll start with the non-violent, more internally focused version. This form of leftist Jihad is relatively benign, but still pernicious. It consists in the radical left’s obsession with “checking their privilege.”* Supposedly, oppression is ingrained in the fabric of social reality, even in the very core of our being. In order to combat oppression, therefore, one must combat it even at the level of unconscious biases. When we do or say or think anything that betrays our privilege, we must repent. What’s more, we have to shout down anyone who questions the doctrines of SJWism so that they don’t lead us astray from the SJW religion. Hearing anything that doesn’t reinforce the dogma might turn us into nazis, so we can’t hear opposing viewpoints, nor can we allow anyone else to. No one can be allowed to “perpetuate a system of injustice,” which is what everyone except us (the SJW coalition) is doing.

The more violent form of left-wing Jihadism is a logical extension of the no-perpetuation rule at the end of the last paragraph. But the focus creeps from one’s own internalization of the systemic injustices committed by the infidels to the infidels themselves. It’s not only that we can’t allow the infidels to corrupt us. We have to intimidate them with threats of violence. Perhaps it won’t be long before the militant factions of the radical left will start actively seeking out victims instead of waiting for provocative speakers to have events nearby.

The Antifa have proven in the last week that they should be classified as a terrorist organization. Just this week, they have used threats of force to get two events canceled in two different cities. In Berkeley, they were able to stop an Ann Coulter event because the University and the police were either unwilling or unable to provide adequate protection for Coulter and her supporters against Antifa thugs. In Portland, the Rose Parade was canceled after the Antifa threatened to attack any participating Republican protestors. The reason they were taken seriously in these two instances is because they have engaged in violence before. When Milo Yiannopoulos went to Berkeley to speak several months ago, the Antifa mob set fires and threw stuff at buildings, making it too dangerous to hold the event.

As we know, you don’t negotiate with terrorists. These people have rejected the terms of any debate that might be had, because they reject debate as a phallogocentric tool of the capitalist fascist patriarchy. The only options available are to capitulate or to refuse to capitulate. We’ve seen what happens when we capitulate: we preserve peace, temporarily, but they win. What will the consequences be if we don’t acquiesce to the left-wing fascists?

Well, they’ll attack us. That’s what terrorists do when you don’t do as they say. They are advocates of lawlessness.

But that’s what the police are for. When people publicly and flagrantly break the law, the police should stop it. It might result in some people getting hurt, including some innocents. But the long-term consequences of rewarding the Antifa by doing as they say when they threaten us will be far worse. It’s like parents giving lollipops to their children every time the children throw tantrums. Don’t reward bad behavior if you want to have well-behaved children.

If we want to get rid of the Antifa’s thuggery, we shouldn’t reward it; we should punish it. Obviously, we have an interest in preserving public safety. But public safety should never be contingent upon the consent of a fringe group that rejects the fundamental principles of a free society. These people aren’t brave; they will stop being a serious problem if we stand up to them and vigorously defend our free institutions. So let’s stop giving them ground.


*Go to Everyday Feminism for a whole host of mostly unnecessary and ridiculous discussions about privilege and oppression, including such gems as “Can Having Genital Preferences for Dating Mean You’re Anti-Trans?” and “The Gender Non-Conformity of My Fatness.”




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s