Islamism: A Word We Must Not Use?

Giving Islamism A Free Pass

Why am I not surprised that in the United Kingdom children as young as nine are being referred to a so-called far right deradicalisation charity? Because I have learnt that increasingly the supposed threat of far right radicalisation and terrorism is routinely used to deflect attention from the challenge that Islamism poses to the nation’s security.

How long before they find babies to deradicalize?

Nigel Bromage, chief executive of Exit Hate UK, the deradicalisation charity in question explained that the children referred to his organization were often well-educated, middle-class white children “who feel lost”[i]. It is unlikely that Exit Hate UK does much business with Islamist referrals since as Bromage explained it is ‘mainly far right, neo-Nazi and incel extremists who get referred to us’ Bromage noted that they ‘can spend as long as two years going through our deradicalisation programmes’!

The obsession with the radicalisation of white middle-class children ‘who feel lost’ is not only irrational but totally counterproductive. Cold hard statistics tell us that white middle-class children do not represent a threat to the security of British society.

As the think tank the Policy Exchange reported, Islamist-based attacks are responsible for 94 per cent of all terrorist killings in Great Britain since 1999. Last year, Islamic extremism took up 80 per cent of the police counter-terror workload. Yet even Prevent, the UK’s national programme, which is a cornerstone of the government’s anti-terrorism policy seems more interested in incel extremists than is the activities of radical Islamist. Since 2021, the number of so called ‘Right-wing extremists’ referred to Prevent has outnumbered Islamists two to one.

The tendency to inflate the threat of rightwing terrorism and deflate the problem posed radical jihadist has inevitably invited the support of censorious entrepreneurs who wish to silence any mention of Islamism. Labour politicians have also piled in to argue that the word Islamist smacks of Islamophobia. Thankfully there are still some sane voices in official circles who oppose the attempt to silence references to Islamism. Haras Rafiq, who is a co-author of the Prevent strategy, told Times Radio that it was “important we actually name” the ideology that has “underpinned most of, if not all” the recent terrorist entities[ii].

Rafiq stated that:

‘I’ve heard from some consultations that even the word Islamism is potentially to be removed,” he said. “You can’t deal with an ideological threat without naming it, without understanding it. ­Islamism is different to Islam in the same way that social is different to socialism’.

Rafiq added; ‘As a Muslim I would rather people name the ideology … that I don’t ascribe to,” he added. “I’d rather people name it because that actually helps us differentiate between normal everyday Muslims and people who are followers of the Islamist ideology’.

Unfortunately, there are very few public figures who are prepared call out the appeasement of the Islamists. Instead, they prefer to ignore or dance around the issue. Last November, the National Association of Muslim Police (NAMP) asked the Home Office and the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) to stopping using terms as “Islamist,” “Islamism,” and “Jihadism” in their public statements[iii]. The group suggested that terms related to Islamism should be replaced by terms such as ‘Daesh-inspired terrorism’ and ‘anti-Western extremism’.

The project of insulating Islamism from any sort of critical reflection extends way beyond the discussion of radicalisation and terrorism. The term grooming gangs has also invited the interest of would-be censors. Again, the Labour Party has been in the forefront of decoupling the association of these rape gangs from their ethnic background.

Back in 2019 the definition of Islamophobia adopted by the Labour Party put “grooming gangs” in inverted commas and suggested that using the term in relation to Muslims was racist. The wording was contained in a report by an all-party parliamentary group (APPG) of MPs co-chaired by Wes Streeting, now the health secretary. Since March 2019, the party has adopted the ‘definition and examples’ set out in the 2018 report, which includes a warning that ‘Asian grooming gangs’ were a modern iteration of ‘age-old stereotypes and tropes about Islam’[iv].

The APPG’s report refers to grooming gangs several times, warning that it is a ‘racist’ trope designed to smear Muslims. There is a danger that the British Government will introduce plans to officially adopt an illiberal definition of Islamophobia for all public bodies. This definition, formulated by the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims, warns that any criticism of Islam or the behaviour of Muslims constitutes a form of racial discrimination.

And that’s not all. Home secretary Yvette Cooper and security minister Dan Jarvis have both vowed to extend the recording of non-crime hate incidents to tackle Islamophobia[v]. In effect the expansion of the Orwellian notion of non-hate crime is in part designed to insulate Islamism from criticism. Its increased use would turn the police and the courts into enforcers of Islamic blasphemy law.

Islamism is fast becoming a word that cannot be said without inviting an accusation of racism or Islamophobia. Unfortunately, the fear of using this term is deeply entrenched within the outlook of the political establishment. Islamism is a term that is rarely used by officialdom in the United Kingdom. The mainstream media too finds it difficult to use this term. Organisations like the BBC avoid linking anything to do with Islam to terrorism and instead prefer to use such euphemistic terms as extremism. The verbal acrobatics surrounding the words Islamism and terrorism is symptomatic of the pusillanimous character of official discourse. At times it seems that officialdom wants to ban the use of the word Islamist from its vocabulary. Not so long ago the counter-terrorist police considered ditching phrases like ‘Islamist terrorism’ and ‘jihadis’ and replacing them with ‘faith-claimed terrorism’ and ‘terrorists abusing religious motivations’?

So why are they giving Islamism a free pass? Undoubtedly, some of this behaviour comes down to political expediency. Great swathes of the Labour Party are anxious not to rock the boat over Islamism lest it cost them votes. But when the Conservatives were in Government, they too tended to adopt a cowardly orientation towards political Islam. The main reason for the official policy of deflecting attention from the threat posed by Islamism is the fear the prevailing regime of multiculturalism would be exposed for what it really is; the establishment of parallel societies that subscribe to different values.

Highlighting the challenge posed by Islamism would draw attention to the incompatibility of some of the cultures that have been planted on the soil of British society. The British Establishment would rather pretend that the real problem are the critics of Islamism rather than those who promote this ideology. They would rather refer a 9-year-old to a de-radicalization charity than do the right thing and risk provoking the ire of the ‘Islamophobia is everywhere’ entrepreneurs. Such moral cowardice undermines the integrity and security of British society. But from their perspective that is a small price to pay for being able to avoid facing up to reality.

---

[i] https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/child-nine-was-radicalised-by-far-right-rd9hpwlbd

[ii] https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/islamism-is-a-useful-term-anti-terror-expert-insists-jg8776csg

[iii] https://islamism.news/opinion_and_interview/opinion/uk-muslim-police-association-wants-to-hide-islamism/

[iv] https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-policy-grooming-gang-racist-islamophobia-xm7mxf9fk

[v] https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/islamophobia-racist-grooming-gangs-pakistani-men-5c2lqxcdl