(np) The Future of Jihadism in Europe

[Ray Easton]

Kai writes:  'And regarding "liberal democracy" ... Trump or Marine Le Pen or Frauke Petry don't want to call off liberal parliamentarism (a more realistic term than 'democracy'), do they?'
I lack sufficient knowledge to have any opinion worth sharing in the case of the Europeans.  As for Trump...
Who knows what Trump wants?  Many of us believe or at least suspect that he has no "wants" beyond enriching his ego and his pocketbook.  But the important question is not so much what he wants as what the effects of his coming to power are likely to be.  
Does he actively *want* the destruction of "liberal democracy"?  It hardly matters.  What matters is that he clearly has not the slightest commitment to it.  And when his poll numbers drop to the level of the sewers -- imo, an inevitability -- *then* he will be not only willing to see "liberal democracy" destroyed but will actively pursue that result.
Ray
------ Original message------From: Kai Frederik LorentzenDate: Fri, Dec 23, 2016 03:29To: rich;pynchon -l;Cc: Subject:Re: (np) The Future of Jihadism in Europe

I read this before. Was it in the New York Times? I think so. Anyway, I don't share the thoughts at all. Neither do I think that democratic events like the Brexit or the election of Donald Trump are primarily bad, nor can I accept the picture of Germany as - what a pathetic wording! - "represent[ing] the future of liberal democracy". Merkel and her cronies? Or Cem Özdemir from the Greens (and graduate of the young leader program of the American Council on Germany) who started to roll the war drum for Hillary ("We need a No Flight Zone for Syria!") about two weeks before the US election? (Me I loved it to see his face on TV growing longer and longer during the election night.) And regarding "liberal democracy" let me say two things: Trump or Marine Le Pen or Frauke Petry don't want to call off liberal parliamentarism (a more realistic term than 'democracy'), do they? And, second, of course we here in Germany need more direct democracy in form of plebiscites on the federal level! The 
 Italians and the British just had it. I want that too for Germany. That you seriously speak of a "two front battle" shows, well, how far away from things you are. At least you, unlike the other P-listers who contributed to the thread, have a real interest in Germany, and I appreciate this!  But Germania is NOT the poster child of Western liberalism. Never was, never will be ---  


Am 22.12.2016 um 23:22 schrieb rich:
Germany is in an intriguing yet familar position. Some consider the bulwark for european liberalism, a powerful economy, taking in a large amount of refugees yet fighting on a two front battle against Isis and their ilk, NSU and their ilk, along with what must be a steady loss of confidence in various institutions (with the BfV, Volkswagen, the almost comical attempt to build a new airport in Berlin)
Out of all the countries of Europe, we must have a Germany that leads against so much that is seemingly headed in the wrong direction (Trump, Brexit, rise of the French right, etc). No country's past weighs as heavy as that of Germany's. The irony that it represents the future for liberal democracy since the end of WW2 can't be lost on anyone.
Germany is the battleground, the bulwark. Forget the US, Britain and France (the voices emerging there iare not pretty). Only Germany knows what depths such voices have led to. But it needs partners. Its soul is on the line

rich

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen <lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:

Here in Europe we don't feel like "satirizing" the issue these days ... Many things will change profoundly. Like it or not.  History is here again! And Hegghammer's article is a gem.


Am 22.12.2016 um 10:30 schrieb John "I know nothing about the social sciences but like to comment on it" Bailey:
"economically underperforming Muslim youth""available jihadi entrepreneurs""operational freedom for clandestine actors"Is there any novelist satirising the language of professionalneoliberal terrorism commentary today? We're in old DeLillo territoryhere. But writing on terrorism is increasingly framed in economicterms, as is most well-shared writing online.On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen<lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:Thomas Hegghammer:... If the jihadi radicalization problem in Europe does indeed get worse,it may be worth considering radical new approaches, both of the soft and thehard kind ... <http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/566/htmlThis article presents a ten-year forecast for jihadism in Europe. Despitereaching historically high levels in recent years, violent Islamist activityin Europe may increase further over the long term due to four macro-trends:1) expected growth in the number of economically underperforming Muslimyouth, 
 2) expected growth in the number of available jihadi entrepreneurs,3) persistent conflict in the Muslim world, and 4) continued operationalfreedom for clandestine actors on the Internet. Over the next decade, thejihadi attack plot frequency in Europe may follow a fluctuating curve withprogressively higher peaks. Many things can undercut the trends and lead toa less ominous outcome, but the scenario is sufficiently likely to meritattention from policymakers..
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20161223/8f876e38/attachment.html>