Experts Debate What Drives Islamic Terrorists [CPAC]

(CNSNews.com) - More than five years after 9/11, experts continue to debate what motivated the attacks on the United States and other violent actions by Islamic extremists against the West.

Differing views were aired at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, when Hoover Institution fellow Dinesh D'Souza argued that policies promoted by the radical left had made al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden "strong enough and emboldened enough to carry out attacks."

D'Souza said that liberal policies were seen as a "shameless and shocking assault on the values of people who live in very traditional societies, so we've gotten a backlash from that."

But Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch, argued that the root cause is religion, noting that "Islamic terrorists use religious texts to justify their actions."

"Islamic jihad has always been pursued whenever Muslim states and communities have had the means to pursue it," he said. "The problem is Islamic jihad."

"Mohammed advocated warfare against non-believers," noted Spencer. "Islamic jihad is an imperative rooted within the Islamic religion. All the sects that are considered orthodox by Muslims hold to this view. Jihad warfare is an imperative part of mainstream teachings."

He added that the reason "Islamic jihad terrorism" was not widespread for many years was because "they have not had the means until the last 25 years in the modern era."

Spencer said Saudi oil revenues now provide those means. "Saudis have been extremely successful in funding terror worldwide."

He blamed the left not only for liberal policies that enrage conservative Muslims, but also for the current situation in Iraq.

"If you look at our enemies in Iraq, the reason they feel a sense of victory is not because they are capable of defeating the U.S. military, but because they know that in America support for the war hangs in the balance," D'Souza said.

"In other words, Iraqi insurgents know that there is an active secular left in this country that is trying to convince the Congress and ultimately the president to get out," he added.

"So if they win in Iraq, it will not simply be because of their efforts, but also because of the collaborative help the enemy abroad is getting from the enemy at home," D'Souza said.

D'Souza said that liberal policies were seen as a "shameless and shocking assault on the values of people who live in very traditional societies, so we've gotten a backlash from that."

The problem with D'Souza's analysis is that it is by no means only, and not even primarily, "liberal" in terms of "left as opposed to right" policies that inflames jihadists; it is "liberal" in terms of "classical liberalism" or "Western liberalism" that they will not tolerate the mere existence of: It's not just licentiousness, but the liberation of women from the status of chattel; and not just secular law but the rule of law; and not just excessive individualism but rights of conscious; and not just relativism but representative government.

But what drives them to terroristic violence and mass murder as opposed to other possible means of resistance to liberalism and modernity? I think the simple answer is their embrace of Utopianism.

The perfected world, the Utopia, whatever form it takes -- whether a "people's democracy" based on "social justice," or the racially pure state, or the universal Islamic caliphate -- is always based on the absolute and uncompromising implementation of a ruling ideology that can brook no opposition, no competing system. The Utopia cannot come about by a process of evolution, or by the combined result of free choices by individuals. It cannot be created by the reform of existing, imperfect institutions.

The Utopia can only be built new, pure, complete and unsullied, on bare ground. Thus the practical consequence of Utopianism is always Nihilism. The creation of the Utopia is, for the believer, a moral imperative. But the Utopia can not be created until the existing order is swept aside, i.e. destroyed. They will destroy, destroy and destroy until the Utopia is achieved. But of course since the Utopia never will be achieved they will never move beyond destruction.

We must either compel them to lose faith in their delusional Utopian schemes and/or we must kill them. There are no other choices.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.