In much the same way, Islamisms, while rejecting nationalism as a modernist
ideology, would seek autonomous control of the State to realize the com-
munity of virtue. In their own words, their goal is to dispatch the “infidels”
from within or without, take over the Muslim world, restore the Caliphate,
and reclaim a greatness lost. These Islamisms stand dedicated to ending the
domination of outsiders and/or obeisance to local autocrats who are either
directly serving the West and/or tolerating, if not supporting, Western com-
panies, banks etc. The American invasion of Iraq has inspired widespread
hatred and loathing and in turn, much of the resistance to the occupation has
been expressed by fundamentalist groups. (There is secular opposition as
well but that is not the present concern.)
Calls for the condemnation of evil Others, merciless retribution to the
“guilty”, and restoration of a former greatness resonate within our memo-
ries to nightmares of earlier moments that return and return. Our ears hear-
ken back to the 1920s and 30’s when, amidst the shouting masses and
charismatic fanatics, large numbers of people embraced Fascist political doc-
trines that, like contemporary Islamisms, preached anti-modern irrationality,
disdained human freedom, and vowed retribution to evil Others who “stabbed
the people” in the back. Shrill voices promised a Reich that would last 1,000
years. Fascism would not only prove to be contrary to the rational self inter-
est of Germany, but indeed, its valorized irrationality led to unprecedented
death, destruction and devastation. How could this anti-modernist irrationality
be understood? How can this understanding shed light on the “clerical
Fascisms” within certain Islamisms?
The seminal work of the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory charted the
rise of the modern world and its contradictions. In the 1920’s the dominant
response to the contradictions of modernity was Fascism that was widely
embraced. The foundational analysis of modernity, qua the “immanent critique”
of rationality, remains the Dialectic of Enlightenment (Horkheimer and Adorno
1991). They argued that market society and its legitimating Enlightenment
ideology that valorized Reason led to the demise of absolutism. The eman-
cipatory promise of the Enlightenment, freedom as the consequence of Reason
was soon belied as “Instrumental Reason”, quathe ideological authority of
purposive reason, itself became a new basis for domination. Their imminent
critique of ideological domination was supplemented by the incorporation
of Freudian psychodynamics (Fromm 1941). In their view, the modern fam-
ily fostered an authoritarian character that was prone to powerlessness and
286 • Lauren Langman