Islam and Islamism - Semantics and Dangers of Obfuscation

Submitted by Singha (India), Oct 31, 2007 at 12:43

I have pointed this out elsewhere as well. Radical Islam or Islamism is nothing but Islam in action.

Intellectuals like Dr. Pipes perhaps believe that a useful purpose is served by the distinction between Islam (dealing with God religion) and Islamism (dealing with politics).

Unfortunately Islam in its formative years saw religion and politics are headed by the same person. Mohummad set a very wrong precedent mixing up politics and religion. Islam's Islamism problem lie at its core. While it might be possible to separate Jesus from evangelical christianism, it is impossible to separate mohummad from Islamism. Islam and Islamism remain siamese twins with the same heart.

No useful purpose is served by the distinction unless, one want to position Islamism along with other failed isms, Communism, Nazism, Fasism and therefore damn Islam itself. While this semantic approach gives people including muslims the opening to attack islam, it also obfuscates and in a way makes islam, an imperialistic totalitarian belief system, look nice suggesting as if islamism is something different and is the sole problem.

I personally believe that we all should call spade a spade. The costs of obfuscation and and refusal to clearly see reality have always been calamitous.

Singha

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".