INDC: Yes, yes, well, since September 11th, I've certainly regarded you as one of the most eloquent defenders of the realm. To start … um, you’ve written rather extensively about Islamofascism’s threat to Western Civilization; can you give me a brief summary of your position and why you feel so strongly about this subject?

AS: Well … do you have all day? (laughs) Ok …the short version is, um, that Islamofascism represents this century’s first great crucial challenge to the continued advancement of Western pluralism and Democracy. The 20th Century presented us with the challenges of ultra-nationalism gone awry, then fascism and Naziism, of course, and then the failed ideology of communism. All of these competing ideologies posed a fundamental threat to the very existence of Western Democracy, and, at times, even the concept of civilization itself, with the advent of the nuclear age. In much the same way, this generation and perhaps many generations to come face a similar do-or-die struggle against the rising tide of Islamofascism, which also presents its own unique threats and represents sort of the, the … anti-Democracy. It’s the fundamental struggle of our time.

INDC: Wow, ok, could I get you to describe what you mean by the term “Islamofascism?” For those that might think that you're simply advocating a general clash of civilizations between Islam and the West, or who might regard it as a racist term …

AS: Well, in many ways, regarding a clash of civilizations, they could be right, you see, though I'm certainly not advocating such a disaster, but … Islamofascism isn't a throwaway term that's inclusive of all of Islam. Really it represents significant elements of the Muslim world that are maniacal traditionalists and religious fundamentalists, who apply this virulent strain of belief to the political as well as religious fantasy of restoring the ancient caliphate and destroying the West … the elimination of the scourge of the infidels, the non-believers, etc. You know, basically, all of us. It’s essentially a dangerous representation of Islam, that many would argue more literally represents Muslim orthodoxy.

That’s not to say in any way that it represents every man woman and child that practices Islam; rather, it's a minority interpretation that’s alternately supported by and at war with any modernizing element in the culture. But – the fact that it is generally tolerated and often supported by more moderate swaths of Islamic civilization represents a factor that could possibly mutate the war on terror into quite a literal clash of civilizations. Our resolute action now should aim to prevent this calamity by aggressively spreading the concepts of pluralism and reform in the greater Muslim world. To some extent, Islam needs to be at war with itself; the result of that struggle will largely determine whether the Muslim world as a whole is ever at war with the West.

INDC: Which would be disastrous …

AS: Which would be completely disastrous! Utilizing little hyperbole, it could be the downfall of Western civilization itself. Definitely their civilization, perhaps ours, you name it. Assuming radical Islam isn’t stopped or at least severely marginalized by modernization and moderation of the Islamic world as a whole, and the pace of the ease of technological development remains unchecked, we quite literally face the prospect of the destruction or at least crippling disruption of Western Civilization by attacks with weapons of mass destruction. Some event is actually likely.

Islamofascism has five elements that make it particularly dangerous: demographic and political trends that favor its spread, broken, medieval societies that foster its survival, the irrational and unquenchable extremism of its political and religious motivation, the increasing ease of obtaining destructive technology and the inability of pluralistic western Democracies to cohesively and ruthlessly unite to preemptively face the threat.

INDC: Ok, brilliant, but kind of depressing. Is there any hope for humanity?

AS: Oh sure, sure. You’ve got to remember, the West still maintains large systemic advantages in the battle before radical elements can partially bridge the gap by obtaining destructive technology. A concerted application of resources towards the twin goals of aggressively destroying terrorists and spreading western concepts of pluralism and social modernization gives us our only real shot at avoiding a more destructive wider conflict, or at least preventing catastrophes that would seriously cripple our continuing charge towards realizing the magnificent potential of Western Democracy. There’s plenty of hope, but we need courageous leaders with the will and dogged determination to strategically understand and attack the threat.

INDC: Like George Bush?

AS: No, George Bush is a homophobic poopie-head.

INDC: I’m … I’m … sorry?

AS: Ah, now I see where you were going with this … I'm not sure that George Bush is the man to lead this country, Bill. In addition to his administration’s tactical errors in the war in Iraq and his outrageous fiscal irresponsibility, his support of a Constitutional amendment that would relegate homosexual men and women to the status of second-class citizens probably invalidates him as a Presidential candidate.

INDC: Probably? So, you support John Kerry?

AS: John Kerry’s no prize, but at least he doesn’t hate gays.

INDC: Well, John Kerry’s not in favor of gay marriage either …

AS: Yes, but he’s also distinctly against twisting the Constitution to endorse a discriminatory far-right social agenda, something which I consider the fundamental struggle of our time.

INDC: But, but ... I thought that the potential nexus of destructive technology and Islamic radicalism was the fundamental struggle of our …

AS: Yes, that is too.

INDC: So you consider these both fundamental …

AS: Yes.

INDC: Ok, I have to admit that I’m confused. You're saying that there are two fundamental struggles of our time?

AS: They both constitute the struggle for true pluralism and universal respect for human dignity.

INDC: And you think that John Kerry will advance the, um, greater struggle abroad? The struggle for the strategic survival of Western values?

AS: That depends.

INDC: On?

AS: Are you gay or straight?

INDC: What? I don’t see how that …

AS: Are you gay or straight?

INDC: Well, I’m straight, but …

AS: Then I haven’t made up my mind.

INDC: About what?

AS: I don’t know who I’m going to vote for.

INDC: Oh, listen, Mr. Sullivan, I’m quite aware of your column in the Advocate that pretty clearly states that you won’t vote for Bush …

AS: I thought you said that you were straight? What are you doing reading the Advocate?! Are you sure that you're straight?

INDC: I am straight. This stuff gets around, you know …

AS: Look, the truth is, I have different audiences. I can’t very well write the same stuff for my blog or mainstream publications as the material that I write for a gay publication. I had to tell the Advocate that I won’t vote for Bush! It’s all about gay street cred, you know?

INDC: Well sure, but readers of your blog seemed to think …

AS: Well, I’ve been thinking out loud! Neither of these candidates is great, but at least John Kerry doesn’t intend to enshrine fundamental marginalization of gays into the Constitution, you know? It’s a deal breaker.

INDC: But you’ve also said that John Kerry’s inability to grasp the looming threats in the war on terror is a deal breaker …

AS: Yes. Both are deal breakers. I think that I may sit home and play with the beagle on election day. You know, just sit this one out.

INDC: So, you won’t vote for or endorse Bush because he might back a Constitutional amendment that prohibits gay marriage?

AS: Correct.

INDC: Even though you know that such an amendment won’t pass?

AS: It’s principle.

INDC: And even though you've stated that you think that the recognition of gay marriage is a demographically supported inevitability that will be realized in less than a generation?

AS: Faster, please.

INDC: And even though John Kerry, by your own admission, fails to fundamentally understand or advocate strategic solutions to what you clearly define as the looming threat to the very existence of Western Civilization?

AS: At least he’s not a homophobic dickhead.

INDC: Ok … Mr. Sullivan, I’ve got to admit, I’m a bit confused by your priorities here. I understand how Bush's discriminatory stance would hit you very personally and cause some extreme distaste for the president, but given your rather steadfast previous analysis of what you define as the threat to the very existence of Western Civ, and your belief that the successful agenda of the gay rights movement is an inevitability, I find it a bit strange that you would be willing to accept the candidacy of John Kerry …

AS: I haven’t decided yet.

INDC: But your column in the Advocate?!

AS: We've been over this; that’s a gay magazine. I can’t mix the gay writing with the straight writing. Are you certain that you're not gay? By the way ... has anyone ever told you that you have very pretty eyes?

INDC: Actually, sure, all the time … hey! Wha- … what does that have to do with … Mr. Sullivan, I already told you that I’m straight!

AS: Oh please, don’t flatter yourself. (laughs) You’re much too small and hairless, for my taste. Have I ever told you about my love for bears?

INDC: I seem to remember reading something about it on your blog, but I tried to block it out …

AS: They are wonderful! So hairy and burly and (sigh) … I consider myself a little bit of a bear, you know …

INDC: Look, that’s great, but can we get back to the looming threats to civilization?

AS: Check this out, this is a picture of me and the boyfriend looking at the ocean outside our "Cub Scout" Meeting in P-Town …

INDC: That's a very nice shot. What about ...

AS: And here’s a shot of some heavy canoodling in the hot tub …

INDC: Oh, no, dude, for the love of God please …

AS: Here's a couple of the boys getting down at the club ...

INDC: Ok, great, looks like fun, but ...

AS: Some of our friends, skinny dipping in the pool ...

INDC: Oh no! CUT IT OUT NOW, DUDE! I told you, I’m straight! And even if I wasn’t, I wouldn’t be turned on by Ed Asner's back hair! Can we please get back to political questions?!

AS: Are you a homophobe?

INDC: No! Not at all! I have gay friends, I work with plenty of gay folks, I live in one of the gayest neighborhoods in DC …

AS: All common homophobe excuses. Why can’t I talk about this part of my life? Why is my social life as a gay man something that should be excluded from view? Kept in the closet? Hmmmm?

INDC: Ok, number one, you’ve already stated that your gay audience and your more mainstream audience require different treatments … number two, I really wouldn’t want to hear about George Will’s straight sexploits, much less your tales of hirsute man-love …

AS: That was homophobic!

INDC: Please, please, please can we talk about politics? I'm not homophobic, and I actually support the concept of some form of equal marriage rights for gays, preferably one that removes government from the definition of marriage as traditionally dictated by religion. I just don't think that discussing personal details about sexual proclivities or featuring any type of pornography is appropriate for the setting of an interview. I’m begging you …

AS: Fine. What else do you want to know, this is your last question.

INDC: Uh, ok, uh ... I'll repeat: do you honestly think that the immediate advancement of gay marriage rights is a more important issue than determining who will more aggressively prosecute a war on terror that, by your definition, may determine the continued survival of Western Civilization as we know it?

AS: I don't necessarily think that George Bush has a superior vision or ability to execute than John Kerry.

INDC: And can you specify when exactly you came to that conclusion? You do realize that a common criticism of conservatives is that they have an inability to feel empathy until an issue affects them personally ...

AS: I said "last question." Good day.

INDC: Look, I guess many of us feel a little angry or confused by your prioritization ...

AS: Good day.

INDC: Ok, thanks for the interview. Have a good afternoon.

FIN

* Yes, of course it's satire.

UPDATE: For the OTB link-fest.

Also be sure to check out:

INDC Journal Interviews the Instapundit