Clash-of-civilizations rhetoric ideologically legitimized both foreign wars and domestic attacks

Evidence

The “clash of civilizations” rhetoric therefore became dominant in the aftermath of 9/11 and was the ideological basis for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well domestic attacks on Muslims and Arabs. For a while it appeared that the neocons were unstoppable—but they overplayed their hand. During its first term, the Bush administration built a “coalition of the willing” to invade Iraq, rejecting criticisms from allies it derogatorily labeled “old Europe.” The war on Iraq, however, did not go the way the neocons wanted it to. Instead of greeting US forces as liberators, the Iraqi people resisted and rejected US hegemony. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 421

Categorization

• XREF: Direct evidence for the reader’s core thesis linking domestic Islamophobia to imperial wars. — connects to: Popular ‘us versus them’ discourse can be recoded to support the power bloc; Justifying everywhere war requires reviving the archaic category of common enemies of humanity — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 830; Semantic and philosophical redefinitions are being weaponized to legitimate state violence. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 122 (+66 more)
• QUESTION: Does Kumar elsewhere name the specific domestic policy instruments (CVE, surveillance, policing) that the rhetoric enabled?