Islam is a Political Movement, Not a Religion

ISLAM = SUBMISSION. BUT SUBMISSION TO WHAT?

The Case for Viewing Islam as a Transnational Ideological Force Rather Than a Private Faith

From its inception in the 7th century, Islam has straddled the line between faith and statecraft, wielding scripture as both spiritual doctrine and political decree. Unlike many religions that emerged as reflections on divinity or moral philosophy, Islam began and evolved as a vehicle for conquest, law, and governance. To understand Islam purely as a religion is to ignore its foundational character as a system of rule—a codified mechanism of control, territorial expansion, and societal regulation.

Historical Roots of Expansionism and Control

The Prophet Muhammad was not merely a spiritual leader; he was a military commander, lawgiver, and head of state. Islam’s early history is defined not by quiet contemplation, but by a rapid succession of conquests across the Arabian Peninsula, the Levant, North Africa, Persia, and beyond. This was not simply the spread of belief—it was the imposition of an order. Unlike Christianity, which spread largely through missionary work and cultural assimilation, Islam’s expansion was martial and legislative. The conquered were given three choices: conversion, submission via the jizya tax, or the sword.

What followed was the establishment of caliphates—political entities governed according to Islamic law. From the Umayyad to the Ottoman empires, governance and religion were inseparable. The Caliph was both head of state and spiritual successor to Muhammad. This model of rule is unique in its continuity; where theocracies in other traditions largely collapsed or modernized, Islam's desire for political dominion has never retreated—it has merely adapted.

“I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. So strike [them] upon the necks...”

— Surah Al-Anfal 8:12

Sharia: The Machinery of Control

Central to Islam’s political framework is Shariah, or Islamic law—a detailed legal system derived from the Qur’an, Hadith (traditions of the Prophet), and scholarly consensus. Sharia is not a parallel moral code like the Ten Commandments or the Sermon on the Mount. It is a totalizing system that prescribes regulations for criminal punishment, economic transactions, inheritance, diet, sexuality, and political loyalty. It does not coexist with secular governance; it supersedes it.

For this reason, Sharia is fundamentally incompatible with democratic systems, which rest on the notion of man-made law, pluralism, and the sovereignty of the people. Sharia recognizes only the sovereignty of Allah, mediated through clerical interpretation. Apostasy, blasphemy, and heresy are punishable by death—not merely discouraged. Islam, in this model, is not just a belief system; it is a state-form in waiting.

A blind man killed his slave woman for insulting the Prophet. The Prophet said: “Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.”

— Sunan Abu Dawud 38:4348

The Modern Political Arms of Islam

This framework has not remained dormant. In the 20th and 21st centuries, we have witnessed the resurgence of Islamic political movements that explicitly reject secular governance and embrace Islamic supremacy. Chief among these are the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, is not a charitable religious organization as it often claims. It is a vanguard movement committed to the global imposition of Islamic rule, beginning with the infiltration and co-optation of existing political systems. Using mosques, schools, charities, and political lobbying as tools of soft jihad, it spreads an ideological program that is fundamentally antithetical to Western liberalism.

The IRGC, meanwhile, is the armed enforcer of Iran’s revolutionary theocracy, exporting Shiite Islamism through militias, espionage, and terror proxies like Hezbollah. Their mission is not national defense—it is the export of a model of Islamic revolution that seeks to undermine and outlast Western democracies through a combination of subversion and ideological warfare.

“I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah…”

— Sahih Muslim 1:33

Thought Control and Rejection of Modernity

One of the distinguishing features of political Islam is its meticulous enforcement of intellectual conformity. Dissent is not tolerated; alternative views, whether theological, philosophical, or political, are labeled as fitnah (sedition). Where Christianity and Judaism have undergone periods of internal reform, rational inquiry, and secular reconciliation, Islam has largely resisted Enlightenment currents. This resistance is not accidental—it is structural. A decentralized religion can evolve. A political-legal order cannot afford ambiguity.

Islam's rigidity has made it, paradoxically, both medieval and dangerous in the modern era. In a world of free speech, pluralism, and gender equality, Islamic ideologues turn reactionary. The Luddite impulse—burn the art, censor the media, suppress the intellectual—is not a fringe element. It is a systemic reflex designed to protect the monopoly of clerical authority and preserve the illusion of eternal truth.

“We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through the sword but through da’wah.”

• Qaradawi promoted ideological subversion, demographic manipulation, and infiltration of Western institutions, especially through “moderate” Islamic organizations aligned with the Brotherhood.

  
  

The targeting of Salman Rushdie, the Charlie Hebdo massacres, and the censorship campaigns across European campuses are not spontaneous outbursts of outrage; they are coordinated expressions of a system that sees free thought as an existential threat. This is not faith—it is enforcement.

A System Out of Time

Islam, as a global political ideology, is profoundly out of sync with modernity. It clings to pre-modern legal codes and sociopolitical structures while leveraging the technology of the modern world to spread and reinforce its worldview. The paradox is chilling: a doctrine born in the 7th century now broadcasts its authoritarian ethos through smartphones, social media, and transnational finance.

Its danger lies not just in its violent offshoots but in its capacity to insinuate itself into tolerant societies, cloak itself in religious freedom, and then demand immunity from criticism. It is not merely a religion—it is an immunized ideology. And in an age where belief is protected but ideology must be challenged, this distinction is critical.

Adlouni, MB“The Brotherhood must work to understand the structure of American society and infiltrate its institutions to bring about Islamic change from within.” Mohamed Akram

Conclusion

To regard Islam solely as a religion is to misunderstand its core architecture. It is, at its root, a political system wrapped in the language of faith. It prescribes not only how to pray but how to govern, wage war, punish dissent, and regulate thought. In this regard, Islam functions more as a movement of control than a path to personal salvation. The West must recognize this—not out of prejudice, but out of a sober assessment of the historical and present-day record. Political Islam is not a spiritual curiosity. It is a governing doctrine—and one that is, by its nature, at odds with the freedoms and values of modern democratic societies.