Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 08:33 PM Aug 2013

We should STOP using the term "Islamist" on DU

1)It isn't a real word.

2)It was popularized as a propaganda term by George W. Bush.

3)It's one of the ugliest terms in right-wing rhetoric in North America, the UK and Europe and it gives aid and comfort to reactionaries and anti-Muslim bigots anytime non-right wing people repeat it.

4)It doesn't actually MEAN anything.

5)None of the crimes that were committed in the name of this non-word had any connection to any of the teachings of Islam.

6)it insults the 99.99% of Muslims who haven't ever done anything harmful to anybody.

7)It grates on the ears every time anybody says it and it irritates the eye,s and mind anytime anybody posts it.

We are better people and this is a better discussion board than the sort of place that uses such terms. Let's get this annoying, bigoted earworm out of DU's collective head.

30 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
We should STOP using the term "Islamist" on DU (Original Post) Ken Burch Aug 2013 OP
It's a perfectly legitimate word Spider Jerusalem Aug 2013 #1
The term "extremists" should be used instead. Ken Burch Aug 2013 #15
I think the descriptor ought to be a tad more precise than "extremist," like, taking into account WinkyDink Aug 2013 #18
BIG difference. VADem1980 Aug 2013 #20
I take your point. Ken Burch Aug 2013 #23
Islamist is roughly the same as the Christian term Dominionist NuclearDem Aug 2013 #25
It's like "Christian Right", IMHO jberryhill Aug 2013 #2
I agree etherealtruth Aug 2013 #10
Bush was alive in the 18th century? NuclearDem Aug 2013 #3
Uhm, you're wrong on pretty much every point. riderinthestorm Aug 2013 #4
Would the term Calphists be more appropriate? Harmony Blue Aug 2013 #5
Aren't Calvinists Christians? jberryhill Aug 2013 #6
Wingers LOVE the term, the term "christianist" is hardly EVER used,...lol..doesn't even spell check uponit7771 Aug 2013 #7
Do we have to stop using "fundamentalist" and "socialist" as well??? DreamGypsy Aug 2013 #8
(5) is humorous. Igel Aug 2013 #9
I've always used the words islamist and christianist as words for Zorra Aug 2013 #11
+1,000 malaise Aug 2013 #12
Agreed! nt MrScorpio Aug 2013 #13
It's been in academic use long before George W. Bush Recursion Aug 2013 #14
I stand corrected on the Bush thing. Ken Burch Aug 2013 #17
It's not an illegitimate word, IMO..... AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #16
I'm fine with the word. I think we all know what and who it describes. badtoworse Aug 2013 #19
"Chiristianists" xfundy Aug 2013 #21
Agreed...though "Christianitists" would, IMHO, be closer Ken Burch Aug 2013 #22
I wouldn't say they have taken over Lee-Lee Aug 2013 #28
dictionary.com: Islamist... cherokeeprogressive Aug 2013 #24
I can see both sides but it is a real word. I would prefer Islamic Fundamentalist. hrmjustin Aug 2013 #26
I think there are quite a few true RWingers here now PowerToThePeople Aug 2013 #27
Agreed, somewhat Scootaloo Aug 2013 #29
Interesting gopiscrap Aug 2013 #30
 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
1. It's a perfectly legitimate word
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 08:52 PM
Aug 2013

and calling, say...Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood "Islamists" is perfectly legitimate. Islamism is a political movement in the Muslim world that calls for the state to be built on Qu'ranic principles. This definition seems to apply to Morsi et al, and in fact I think the only place I've seen "Islamist" used here with any frequency has been in the discussions about Egypt.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
15. The term "extremists" should be used instead.
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 09:53 PM
Aug 2013

And there's no difference between extremists who twist the Koran to justify their actions and those who twist the Bible. It's exactly the same thing in both cases.

 

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)
18. I think the descriptor ought to be a tad more precise than "extremist," like, taking into account
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 09:57 PM
Aug 2013

motive, maybe?

 

VADem1980

(53 posts)
20. BIG difference.
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 10:07 PM
Aug 2013

Islam constitutes a political minority suffering justifiable rage stemming from years long abuse at the hands of white colonial oppressors.

"Islamist" is a racist term as it conflates Muslims with terrorists and should thus not be used.

 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
25. Islamist is roughly the same as the Christian term Dominionist
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 10:42 PM
Aug 2013

Yes, it's been horribly abused by the Islamophobes in the West recently, but that doesn't make it any less an appropriate term for that set of values and goals.

I'm not willing to give up an academically sound and accurate term just because the right misuses it, same way I don't care to stop using "socialist", "Marxist", or "communist" anytime in the future.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
2. It's like "Christian Right", IMHO
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 09:00 PM
Aug 2013

Maybe it's just me, but I thought it suggested something other than Islam, the same way that certain people abuse the word "Christian" in the political sense. It doesn't, to me again, mean "Muslim", and is nicely separated from that word, which would otherwise refer to a religious group whose members have the full range of political ideas as anyone else.

"1)It isn't a real word.

2)It was invented by George W. Bush."

I'm more curious about this pair of assertions. What is your definition of a "real" word? I'll have to go Google that.

I refudiate your attempt to deny the fluidity of the English language. I really like "refudiate" too - a combination of "refute" and "repudiate".... sort of a refutation with enhanced passion. While, yes, Palin is a complete ditz, I think she stumbled onto something actually useful there by accident.

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
4. Uhm, you're wrong on pretty much every point.
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 09:03 PM
Aug 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism

Its even a proper dictionary word, certainly not invented by GW Bush...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/islamism

Definition of ISLAMISM
1: the faith, doctrine, or cause of Islam

2: a popular reform movement advocating the reordering of government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam
— Is·lam·ist noun

First Known Use of ISLAMISM
1747

DreamGypsy

(2,252 posts)
8. Do we have to stop using "fundamentalist" and "socialist" as well???
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 09:14 PM
Aug 2013

Certain words, spoken by certain people, can become epithets even though that was not the original meaning/intent of the words.

From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of ISLAMISM
1: the faith, doctrine, or cause of Islam
2: a popular reform movement advocating the reordering of government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam

— Is·lam·ist noun

First Known Use of ISLAMISM
1747


Should one be clear and precise about one's use of "Islamist" or "Islamism"...yes. Should the word disappear from conversation...no.

My recollection is that Dubya's first steps on this mortal coil were a number of years later than 1747...but I may be wrong.

Igel

(35,268 posts)
9. (5) is humorous.
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 09:33 PM
Aug 2013

A lot of Xians have done things bad. Usually they're condemned by those who he claims as co-religionists. Not always by all.

Nobody tries to say that the Inquisition wasn't done by Xians. Or that the Crusades weren't done by Xians. It's a Big Deal that they were done by Xians.

A lot of people have trouble decrying and condemning what Islamists do and even more in condemning the people themselves. WTC falls? Conspiracy theories abound by those who refuse to believe it could be Muslims who did it--because it doesn't comport with their particular version of Islam. Hamas had no trouble with saying that Muslims did it because it did agree with their version.

The problem is who gets to define what Islam is. It's squishy. Because condemning another Muslim is frowned upon--takfir isn't a popular sport. Actually fighting is a bigger problem, fitna is condemned. It made life hard for CAIR.

We pick and choose those definers that make life easy for us and make it possible to further domestic US politics. Xian groups, however, are called upon to examine what in their teaching--if anything--can trigger violence, because that also furthers domestic US politics.

Over the centuries, many Xianities have purged the themes and thoughts that allowed it. This was made easier by there being an admitted diversity of Xianities. But there can be only one Islam--okay, perhaps two, with Shi'ism and Sunnism. Within Sunnism, esp., there's a tendency to deny any splits or schisms.

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
11. I've always used the words islamist and christianist as words for
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 09:41 PM
Aug 2013

hateful, bigoted RW quasi-Muslims and RW quasi Christians who have no real clue about the doctrines they purport to believe.

I think they are good, simple labels for this purpose, words that distinguish these groups from sincere spiritual Muslims and Christians, who I do not wish to disrespect by lumping them in with religious poseurs.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
16. It's not an illegitimate word, IMO.....
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 09:53 PM
Aug 2013

There ARE Islamic extremists who DO seek malevolent aims, using religion as one of their weapons and/or as an excuse for their agitprop(just as the Bible get used by the Christian Far-Right!); the Muslim Brotherhood is a great example.

Though it certainly has been abused over the years, sadly: 90% of Muslims are decent people......and even many of the 9-10% who may not be so much wouldn't necessarily resort to terrorism.....

xfundy

(5,105 posts)
21. "Chiristianists"
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 10:11 PM
Aug 2013

is an equally valid, if not moreso, term.

Christianists similarly pervert their "religion" into a hateful, tyrannical, hateful, dangerous movement. In fact, they have taken over the religion in the USA.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
22. Agreed...though "Christianitists" would, IMHO, be closer
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 10:23 PM
Aug 2013

Since it makes clear that the usage describes the appropriation of a whole faith tradition itself.

 

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)
28. I wouldn't say they have taken over
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 10:51 PM
Aug 2013

Some of the most ardent and dedicated organizers of the Moral Monday protests here in NC are coming from religious institutions.

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
24. dictionary.com: Islamist...
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 10:37 PM
Aug 2013

— adj
1. supporting or advocating Islamic fundamentalism

— n
2. a supporter or advocate of Islamic fundamentalism

 

PowerToThePeople

(9,610 posts)
27. I think there are quite a few true RWingers here now
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 10:49 PM
Aug 2013

Over the past couple of days I have seen many more low post count posters spewing truly RW crap. Not the 3rd way stuff we have had going on, but true Fox news- Freeper talking points. I think they have seen an opening with the infighting to jump some more moles onto DU.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
29. Agreed, somewhat
Tue Aug 20, 2013, 11:24 PM
Aug 2013

"Islamist" does have a valid meaning. It's actually been adopted by Muslim political parties in many nations. Its meaning is "political belief that has some amount of influence from Islam." It's a hugely broad term that can cover a huge variety of political beliefs and approaches. For instance the political party that won Tunisian elections a while back is self-described as an Islamist party... because they found their principles of social justice in the Islamic notion of zakat, charity and caretaking for the poor. They're very much a left-leaning party, they just view it as coming from a religious ideal, similar to Christian Democrats in Europe.

However, the term "Islamist" is pretty much never used in its valid political form in American media, and certainly not on American-based message boards. Rather it's used as a hostile, context-free "dirty word," in the same way the American right so loves to use the word "socialist."

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»We should STOP using the ...