37recruiter; and ideological dogma. The dogma’s
“narrative” is its propaganda.
The difference between Hizb ut- Tahrir and al-
Qaeda is akin to the dispute within communism
as to whether change comes from direct action and
confl ict.
If you take the theory of dialectical materialism
in communism— and whether we should step back
and allow the course of history to carve its own way
or intervene to affect it— purists of that theory will
argue that you don’t have to do anything, that the
means of production will naturally shift from the
bourgeoisie to the workers, and any intervention is
futile because that’s just the way history works.
Others will say we must take direct action.
Such differences on a theoretical level also exist
between Islamists of the po liti cal (or “entryist”)
type, those of the revolutionary type, and jihadists.
Of course, jihadists believe in taking direct action;
they have an entire theory around that. I’d argue, in
fact, that the rise of the so- called Islamic State
under Abu Bakr al- Baghdadi does somewhat vin-
dicate Osama bin Laden’s strategy and his belief
that making the West intervention- weary through
war would lead to a power vacuum in the Middle
Bereitgestellt von | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services
Angemeldet