Islamists and Islamism

In the New York Times (link), Thomas L. Friedman uses an interesting verbal formation in his discussion of the current situation in Iraq.

We are up against some really evil, cynical forces: die-hard Baathists, Qaeda-inspired Islamists and criminals. They continue to kill large numbers of innocent Iraqis without ever spelling out a political demand. That's because their only interest is that America fail. They have no coherent vision for Iraq. Their only vision is that America must fail. Because if the U.S. succeeds in tilting Iraq onto a more progressive track, Baathism and Islamism will be diminished everywhere.

"Islamists." "Islamism." How is "Islamist" different from "Islamic"? How is "Islamism" different from "Islam"?

Alhtough Friedman doesn't say, one assumes that "Islamists" are those super-crazy, ultra-fundamentalist Muslims who want to see Islam supplant all other belief systems. "Islamists," the Ivory Madonna guesses, are Islam supremicists. The ones who want to impose their own religious beliefs on the rest of the world.

What a useful formation! Particularly when it is extended to other areas of the world.

In India, we see Sikhists and Hinduists. In Israel, there are Hebrewists.

And here at home, Christianists.

Sure, they call themselves "Christians." And I'm sure that Friedman's Islamicists call themselves Muslim. But now, we have a real name for them.

Thanks, Thomas L. Friedman.

M.

---

The Ivory Madonna's story is told in Dance for the Ivory Madonna by Don Sakers.