There is a parallel, but it is shallow. The author keeps pointing out the differences between the fantasy of Tolkien and the mythology within ISIS, and the more you think about it, the less the comparison holds. Religion, from the outside, is no different than any other romantic fiction. Does that mean that all romantic fiction and religion is essentially the same? I think that is a very shallow analysis.

You could draw similar parallels to any narrative which inspires actions that seem mad from the outside. The christian right of the US has the apocalyptic narrative of the Rapture, just waiting for the right circumstances to blow into the same kind of fanatic destruction as that of ISIS.

There is an allure in pointing to the mythology as the inspiration for some misdeed as if that may provide some insight, but I don't think so. The simple fact is that it doesn't take much to inspire us humans into doing things that seem unthinkable to others. Just about any fiction can inspire just about any deed. Mark Chapman shot Lennon after reading The Catcher in the Rye. Yes, perhaps it says something about the nature of humanity. But then what?

From the outside, any of these narratives seem like cosplay, like play acting. Just look at Manson or Waco, for example. The fiction is always ridiculous. The acts are real, though.

"A lot of people like cosplay." Everyone, apparently.