You must use the word Islamist!

The AP has revised its stylebook to no longer include the term Islamist. They explain why:

Islamist” is frequently used as a label for conservative Islamic political movements, particularly Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, the group’s Palestinian offshoot. It generally carries a negative connotation.

Has the AP thought that maybe it carries a negative connotation because fascistic movements – religious or otherwise – generally do?

The disgusting Council on American-Islamic Relations which has previously lobbied AP to drop the term because they say it “has become shorthand for ‘Muslims we don’t like'” and “is currently used in an almost exclusively pejorative context” is elated:

We believe this revision is a step in the right direction and will result in fewer negative generalizations in coverage of issues related to Islam and Muslims.

Of course Islamists and their lackeys will often interchange and conflate Islam, Muslim and Islamist in order to feign representation and to save Islam and Islamism by equating any criticism as racism and an attack on people. But Islam as a belief and Islamism as a far-Right political movement cannot be off limits to criticism.

Even if the AP drops the term by accepting the Islamist narrative and capitulating to it, we refuse.

As an aside, AP has also dropped using the term “illegal immigrant”, which is a good thing. No human being is illegal. They might be undocumented but they are not illegal. Human beings are more than their immigration status.

AP, see the difference? One is about real live human beings; the other is a far-Right political movement.

If Islamism is so concerned about  negative generalisations, it can start by ending its very indiscriminate murder and mayhem.

(News via Terry Sanderson)


  1. rafiqmahmood says

    An Islamist is someone who knows what Islam really means, sees personal advantage in it and carries on regardless suppressing any moral qualms he might once have had. Islamism is one of a kind with fascism and is the archetypical authoritarian totalitarianism.

    A Muslim is someone who, through upbringing or deception, has a superficial knowledge of Islam and is a principal victim of Islamism. Like most people, Muslims have a good moral sense but may be distracted from it occasionally by the persuasions and rhetoric of Islamists, whom they may trust as having superior knowledge of Islam – which indeed they do.

    (I use the pronoun ‘he’ in the first paragraph advisedly.)

  2. Rick Crudo says

    If an immigrant does not enter the country legally, why is it wrong to call them illegal? Because it has a negative connotation?

  3. atheist says

    I agree I will probably carry on calling Theocratic Muslims “Islamists” just as I call Theocratic Christians “Christianists”. Same thing, different religion.

  4. rafiqmahmood says

    Islamism is already a politically correct word because there is no difference between Islam and Islamism. There is, however, a great deal of difference between the vast majority of Muslims (who are the main victims of Islam) and Islamists so it is important to keep using these words. They are already well established and there is no need to invent new ones.

    If there were a competition for substitutes would call it and them Fascislam and Fascislamist but I realise they are rather difficult to pronounce and are unlikely to catch on. Islamism and Islamist is good enough. S

    Shame on Associated Press for kowtowing to CAIR who are actually doing a disservice to the majority of Muslims by their demands.

    As far as “illegal immigrant” is concerned, I agree that it is a stereotype and a slur.

    It is true that the people concerned may be committing an illegal act by not complying with immigration regulations but illegality carries with it a connotation of wrong-doing and that is not always justified.

    One of the greatest forms of unfair discrimination in the world is the spurious discrimination on the artificial concept of nationality. That is fundamentally immoral. It is not the colour of your skin that matters so much as the colour and insignia of your passport.

    I am not an “illegal immigrant” – my immigration status here in Indonesia is perfectly in order – although I am most assuredly a criminal at large (albeit uncharged and, so far, unchallenged).

    Every day I write on facebook and elsewhere posts which flout the laws of the country where I reside, particularly relating to “religious libel on the internet” and “sedition against state institutions” such as Pancasila. I shall continue to commit these illegal acts as long as I am able because not to do so would hurt my conscience and I would be neglecting my moral duty.

    Personally I don’t care about the label “criminal” or “illegal” but in common parlance they are equated with wrongdoing – a mental association obviously encouraged by governments. Calling people “illegal immigrant” is, to all practical purposes, a slur and it is good that it is not going to be used by AP.

    Another ghastly phrase over used by politicians in the UK which makes me squirm with anger is “bogus asylum seeker”. If the Islamists continue their march across the “Muslim World” and more and more states fall under their yoke there are going to be a lot more people seeking refuge in those parts of the world where the air is freer. We had better get used to it if our free societies and laws are going to continue to be based on morality and justice.

    • atheist says

      Islamism is already a politically correct word because there is no difference between Islam and Islamism.

      You’re wrong. Look especially at US & UK Muslim support for women’s rights (i.e., they believe women are better off in their new country than in majority-Muslim nations).

  5. left0ver1under says

    Associated Propagandists have a “stylebook”?

    They should focus on fact checking instead of “political correctness”. They’re not very good at it.

  6. Guy Otten says

    I have never met an islamist who admits to being one; they say they are Muslims, but there is a distinction, though at root it is hard to sustain because any devout Muslim is art risk of being turned anti-social and becoming an Islamist, simply because islamism iswritten into the base of Islam

    • atheist says

      Based on the “holy book”, you could make the exact same argument about devout Christians. Do you really believe that Christians are incapable of living in a secular society?

  7. Pitchguest says

    What a load of crock. Don’t they realise that “Islamists” for a word meaning “Muslims we don’t like” is *precisely* what they need to differentiate between the moderates and the extremists?


  8. says

    “As an aside, AP has also dropped using the term “illegal immigrant”, which is a good thing. No human being is illegal.”

    It’s more of a problem with the English language that it is unable to distinguish between “person who immigrated illegally” and “illegal person who immigrated”, both of which would be “illegal immigrant”. Claiming however that “illegal immigrant” means the latter, or implies the latter, by default is incorrect.


Leave a Reply