Browse By

How Do You Root Out Thoughts via Global Policy?

There were a number of interesting ideas aired in the Democratic Presidential Debate last night (11/14/15), but to me the most interesting statement of the debate came from former Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: “We need to have a resolve that will bring the world together to root out the kind of radical jihadist ideology that motivates organizations like ISIS, a barbaric, ruthless, violent jihadist terrorist group.”

I can understand an effort to root out a barbaric, ruthless, violent jihadist terrorist group like ISIS.  But how do you go about rooting out an ideology?  To root something out is to dig all around it and only then yank it out, so as to be sure that one has removed it completely, eradicated it, removed all traces of it, ending the possibility that it will grow again from a remnant.  How can the nations of the world possibly do that to a set of ideas?  To root out an ideology, you must pull out not just the elements of the ideology itself, but of all the ideas, notions, values, preferences and beliefs that support such an ideology and prevent it from being pulled out.

What exactly will transpire if Hillary Clinton enacts an ideological root-out?  Will screenwriters, authors, reporters and public intellectuals be brought before government officials to answer for utterances that contain or support radical jihadist ideas, and to identify others who have been promulgating such ideas? Will the First Amendment be cancelled?  Will the nations of the world find all books and documents related to the kind of ideology that motivates ISIS, then burn them?  Will INTERPOL monitor conversations over social media, in newspapers, and at street cafes and interrupt them when they begin to veer into the kind of ideology that motivates ISIS?

What precisely does Hillary Clinton really have in mind when she says she wants the world to be brought together to “root out” an entire ideology from the face of the planet?  What is the policy to accomplish this?  Or are Hillary Clinton’s words empty of any coherent, organized meaning… which is to say, ideology?

3 thoughts on “How Do You Root Out Thoughts via Global Policy?”

  1. Charles Manning says:

    Obama, Clinton, Republicans, and many others seem to think the right answer to the problem posed by ISIL is to kill (“destroy”) ISIL — that is, kill anyone who accepts the ISIL ideology. I think we have a right to defend ourselves from ISIL attacks, but not to kill someone merely because of their belief. When the belief leads to preparation obviously intended to result in action, that triggers the right to self defense, including using deadly force in opposition to use, or imminent use, of deadly force against us. But there’s no justification for killing someone for just holding a belief, without preparation.

    The big idea that none of our leaders talk about is “destroying” ISIL ideology by logically demonstrating to its adherents that the inevitable international war that is supposedly underway, and will ineluctably lead to the ascension of Muhammad and final establishment of a world-wide caliphate, is just a fiction. Our leaders are reluctant to say that because the religious ideology of Christianity accepts a similar theory, which holds that Christ will rule an earthly kingdom following Armageddon. It’s hard to argue that one religious view should prevail over another. But I think that’s ultimately what Clinton meant.

  2. Dave says:

    “…are Hillary Clinton’s words empty of any coherent, organized meaning…which is to say, ideology?”

    Empty is good word for Hillary Clinton’s words.

  3. ella says:

    In ancient Egypt, when the Pharaoh wanted to destroy a person’s memory, just that was done. Every last bit of written material was destroyed and the people forbidden to speak of the person or anything the person ever did. Of course that did not entirely work either. It probably sounded good to Hillary at the time, and impressive enough to awe the listeners. Other than that it sounded like political rhetoric. Or the suggestion that the third world war should be a religious war bent on the eradication of a religious philosophy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!