>>>>” AFAIK, Amir Taheri is not a radical > therefore he’s not an islamist.”
I never said Amir Taheri was a “radical”. Read my previous comments, am sure you’ve.
Islamism, is an ideology & often an ideology is a very personal matter. Whether one sits in Colorado, or Canada.. you get my meaning, right?
There are moderates, there are extremists. There are also those, the U.S. (regardless of degree of practice of the Islamist ideology i.e. moderate or extremism, classifies as “moderate” or “extremists”). Maybe there are those who are categorised as “moderates” who toe the line with “a given government’s policies” whatever…
The real intention here is quite simple & not for tit for tat, nor for semantics.
It really is very simple: Any one who subscribes to any type of Islamic Ideology is known as an Islamist. The degree of that subscription i.e. “Islamism” and in practice is what is what is known as a “moderate” or “radical” or for the latter “extremist”, “fundamentalist”, and so on… There is no point in wanting to play with words or semantics. It is clear to me, hope what I’ve said is clear to you as well.
“It really is very simple: Any one who subscribes to any type of Islamic Ideology is known as an Islamist.”
That’s where we disagree. And that’s where your definition of islamist is not the same as mine or the same as most people using the word today. An islamist is a radical, and Amir Taheri is not an islamist.
Continuing to use the word islamist when you really mean muslim, is very confusing to others these days.