TOS Blog: Daily Commentary from an Objectivist Perspective

Romney Pays Scant Attention to Islamist Threat; Obama Pays None

Although last night’s presidential debate focused on foreign policy, only Mitt Romney came close to mentioning the driving motivation of those in the Middle East (and beyond) who engage in religious terrorism; who murdered American citizens at the embassy in Libya, the World Trade Center, and elsewhere; who seek to destroy Israel; who seek nuclear bombs to terrorize the globe; and who brutalize and slaughter women, homosexuals, and “infidels: Islam.

Even Romney did not clarify the nature of this ideological force; instead, he said, “We’re also going to have to have a far more effective and comprehensive strategy to help move the world away from terror and Islamic extremism.”

Fortunately, Romney at least recognizes that the problem has something to do with Islam. Unfortunately, Romney’s characterization of the problem as being Islamic “extremism” does not point to the core issue. The problem we face is that many Muslims, unlike most Christians and Jews in the West, take their religion seriously and thus seek to establish a global totalitarian theocracy that enforces universal sharia law.

Only recognition of the fact that Islam—when taken seriously—is an ideology of murder, destruction, and enslavement, makes sense of Islamic violence and threats; and only such recognition makes possible a U.S. foreign policy that can end this threat.

Like this post? Join our mailing list to receive our weekly digest. And for in-depth commentary from an Objectivist perspective, subscribe to our quarterly journal, The Objective Standard.


Image: Wikimedia Commons

Posted in: Foreign Policy and War

Comments are welcome so long as they are civil.
  • Anonymous

    I’d like to find a way to put this recognition directly to Romney’s attention.

  • Roark

    Not that I am making excuses for Romney, but I think that he was letting Obama fall on his sword last night. Also, I think Romney has been privy to some inside info from Netanyahu about what may be going down quite soon if he is elected, so he was playing it tame in the debate.

  • Paul Scott Williams

    Dear Mr. Armstrong,
    With regard to the candidates ignoring the threat of Islamism, there’s just one thing to be said: What??? Although promising to end Bush’s immoral foreign invasions, torture, and indefinite detentions, upon being elected, he did a 180 and embraced foreign baby-killing with gusto, and Guantanamo is still holding a number of people we know now are innocent, but still aren’t being released. Romney is itching to get his hands bloody too. Anyone looking at this situation objectively can’t help but see that it is our immoral, socialist government that is the real threat. Any champion of capitalism should be promoting peaceful free trade with other nations, not killing their people and making ever more enemies. “War is the health of the State.”

  • Roark

    @Paul, since when are muslim theocracies “peaceful”. Your libertarian utopia is full of dead bodies.

  • John Gold

    We don’t need a better foreign policy to protect us against radical Islam – we need a better immigration policy.

    If the West and the US ended immigration of Moslems to the US and expelled all who could legally be, the probalem might get better. It certainly wouldn’t get worse.