Islamist groups are locally shaped and resist homogenizing categorization

Evidence

September 11, however, precipitated unanimous agreement in the foreign policy establishment that the War on Terror would henceforth frame US foreign policy. Barely had the ashes settled from the Twin Towers when loud proclamations that “Islamic terrorists” represented existential threats to the United States began to echo in the public sphere. From then on, US policy was geared toward “keeping Americans safe” from Muslim “evildoers.” These claims fly in the face of reality, as the previous chapter outlined, since Islamist organizations typically emerge from local conditions and are focused on those conditions. What then lies behind this Islamophobic rhetoric? The agenda behind this focus on the “Islamic threat” is the subject of this chapter. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 376 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Jihadi solidarity forms a global peer-to-peer niche replacing older territorial traditions. — Scott Atran, The Devoted Actor: Unconditional…, 1; Islamist groups differ by national context despite monolithic labeling; Islamist groups arise from local conditions, not from anti-American plots — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 376 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Islamist groups differ by national context despite monolithic labeling #corroborates (0.95)
• Labeling diverse Islamist movements with one term erases their national specificity #corroborates (0.93)
• Islamist groups arise from local conditions, not from anti-American plots #expands (0.85) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 376
• Islamist identity is misread when reduced to Arab nationalist sentiment #expands (0.80) — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 485
• Anti-Muslim sentiment operates independently of local political ideology #contradicts (0.75)