We're the Islamic invaders of past centuries Muslims or Islamists?

Submitted by Prashant (United States), Aug 3, 2016 at 00:33

Dear Dr Pipes, you like to differentiate between Muslims and Islamists and call Islamism a modern phenomenon. The Muslim invaders of the past centuries who occupied Persia, parts of India,

Spain, most of the Middle East and established Islamic regimes of one kind or other whereever they went, very much look like modern Islamists to me. I cannot see any difference between the two. Why do you say that they were not Islamists? And, why do you say Islamism is a modern phenomenon? Instead of trying to understand your rather contrived definitions of Islam and Islamism, I would only say that my definition is much clearer: any Muslim who does not appreciate the importance of separation of church and state, is an Islamist. And, this difference must be understood not just in Delhi, London, Paris, and Washington. It must be appreciated in Islamabad, Riyadh, Damascus, Istanbul, and Tehran as well.

By this definition, I do not see any difference between Muslims and Islamists. And I think that Islamism is as old as Islam.

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".