Thus, Islamic fundamentalists, in returning to core Islamic teachings, believe that they are wrapped up in a “Cosmic Struggle as a defense of basic identity and dignity” against the unbelievers. (Jurgensmeyer, 164)The second marquee of fundamentalism, apocalyptic orientation, can be found within the context of this cosmic struggle. Jurgensmeyer provides several clues as to when a perceived cosmic struggle may translate into a real-world Sacred War: He notes “If the struggle is thought to be a defense of an entire culture, if the loss of said struggle would be unthinkable, and when the struggle cannot be won in real time or in real terms” the likelihood of real-world violence escalating in the form of a Holy War, increases. (Jurgensmeyer, 165) The ‘struggle’ in this particular case, is that of the Islamist terrorists and their expressed acts of violence against the non-Muslim world. The cause of this struggle, as seen by the Islamists themselves, is indeed “a matter of being robbed of one’s dignity due to the illegitimate actions of the Western World; Islam being the absolute victim of the intolerance of the West”. (Strozier, 139) It is also true of this struggle, that in the foreseeable future it is impossible to be won in real-terms; the entirety of the world will never be subjugated to Islamic Law seeing as in many Western countries such as the U.S and Britain, the Islamist front is simply too outnumbered to present a legitimate military threat to the current order (we will talk about other—more effective—means of subjugation in the Islamist arsenal as well as the threats of Muslim expansionism later). Thus, if we follow Jurgensmeyer’s logic, it is certainly the case that this perceived apocalyptic struggle in which Muslims are forever entrenched due to the commands of their divine creator, is also manifested as a sacred war (in the form of calculated terrorist actions) within the real world as well.
Along with this notion of an apocalyptic war, come “distinct perspectives on death, time and violence” (Strozier, 11). According to Khosrokavar, ”Apocalyptic violence is a secularized form of violence to establish the reign of genuine Islam here on earth, not to promote apocalypse”. (Strozier, 145) Unlike Christian fundamentalists, Islamic fundamentalists are at least as obsessed with the current state of the world, as they are with the next; their aim is not as much to bring about the end of the world, as much as to purify it through the rigorous and comprehensive application of Allah’s will to all matters and all people across the globe. Although Islamic eschatology does provide for an end-of-days mythos, its significance in cultivating the fundamentalist mindset pales in comparison to the edicts passed down directly from Allah– which command the Umma to ‘fight non-believers’ and further the cause of Islam through Jihad. Thus, in contrast to the world’s two other major monotheistic religions, Islamic fundamentalism gains its ‘apocalyptic orientation’ not through the expressed bringing about of the end of the world, but rather through the post-modern concept of bettering the world around them in the here and now (of course this is Islam’s definition of bettering the world, i.e. Islamizing the non-Muslim world)
Changing perspectives on death in this struggle can be seen within the persons of suicide bombers who carry out their holy mission of striking terror into the hearts of Allah’s enemies. Those who would sacrifice their lives for the cause of this cosmic struggle are exhibiting an apocalyptic strand of thought which—either consciously or subconsciously—recognizes that one is living in a kairotic time that promises to herald in a period of drastic change if only the proper austere measures are taken to bring it about (i.e. violent Jihad). As noted previously, Islam is as concerned with the ‘here and now’ as with the ‘ever and ever-after’; Kairotic time is thus a potent concept when Islamists decide if and when to act. Dr. Rantisi, one of the essential founders of the HAMAS movement, urges that these ‘suicide bombings’ be referred to as ‘ishtishhadi’, which means ‘self-chosen martyrdom’. (Jurgensmeyer, 75) This especially highlights the truth that those we call suicide bombers are neither deranged individuals nor radical apostates of Islam, but rather self-motivated devout youth seeking death in the way of Allah as a means of promoting a greater cause than themselves. For them, the time is now—and they are the ideal agents of Allah’s will. Although it can be argued that young men are driven to these extreme ends through feelings of humiliation, alienation, and victimization (especially when residing outside of their native Arabic countries), the fact remains that peaceful coexistence is not and has never been a core tenet of Islam, and the attacks of these suicide bombers are NOT detached from the ideologies for which they profess to commit them. (Strozier, 144) We, the victims of these attacks, must always bear in mind that the violence they incur is not an end in itself, but rather a means to an end. This end is one both Islamists and Islamist terrorists agree upon: the conquest of the west, the submission of the U.S. to Islamic law.
