Reading the recent interview with foreign ISIS members fleeing Baghuz, the colonial nature of ISIS is revealed.
After reading the interview with foreign ISIS members it appears ISIS had a kind of apartheid system in place where foreign westerners “applied” to marry other westerners. One woman from the UK married a Dutch convert, her friend married an American and the other an Australian and Bosnian.
It shows that ISIS was partly a colonial movement based on religious-Nazi-style principles, not only in its genocide of indigenous people and enslavement but the way it practiced separate systems for western/European members and local people. Was it “separate but equal”?
It’s interesting to identify this aspect of ISIS which included its kind of own internal colonial white supremacy aspects where converts and westerners received privileged not afforded to local people. The more I read, the more I’m convinced of this aspect.
Interesting, the interview reveals that foreign fighter families were encouraged to surrender in Baghuz while locals fled to the desert. Because the foreigners couldn’t survive in the local environment…because they were colonists essentially. Always foreign .
Media reports speak of “radicalization” and other issues, but often miss this colonial desire to take over a country and rule it. Dominance was a key part of the ISIS mentality and zealous hatred for local people, minorities, who were labeled “enemies”.