David Farrar: Yes Islamist terrorism is religiously inspired

A crazy article by Halim Rane at the ABC:

In the aftermath of violent attacks, public commentary quickly reaches for a familiar label like “religiously motivated terrorism”. The term sounds intuitive but it is analytically flawed, socially harmful and counter-productive to both national security and social cohesion.

I would argue that a more accurate and useful concept is “identity-motivated terrorism”: the use or threat of violence against civilians to advance an agenda grounded in the perceived defence, restoration or supremacy of a collective identity.

This shift in language is not semantic politeness. It reflects what decades of research in political violence, radicalisation and security studies have consistently shown — namely, that religion is not the causal driver of terrorism, even when religious language is loudly invoked. The underlying motivation is identity: racial, political and/or civilisational.

This is like 1984. You can’t speak the truth.

It is quite correct to say that Islamist terrorism is based on an extreme minority interpretation of Islam. It is not correct to say that it isn’t based on religious belief.

The attackers were supporters of Islamic State – whose mission is to explicitly have a state run on 9th century Islamic rules.

Since the 9/11 2011 attacks there have been over 50,000 seperate attacks where Islam was a factor. Not 50, not 500, not even 5,000 but 50,000. To claim religion is not a factor is crazy.

The death toll since 9/11 is 313,262 killed and 380,603 wounded. I don;t think those victims think it is socially harmful to call a spade a spade.

David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders