Gotcha.
Anyway, Rebel, to address your point, yes. There's a functional difference between Islam and Islamism. I think if you look at a lot of my early posts here, you'd see more anger out of me, you'd see me mocking some liberal apologists' attempts to tell me how peaceful Islam is, how it's a beacon for feminism, and whatever else. You'd see me saying that no, this is how Islam is, and to try to deviate from it is intellectually dishonest. But that's a very flat way to look at the problem and to look at the relationship people have with religion in the real world.
The truth is that we shouldn't be sitting here demanding that the liberals adhere to Islam as we think it should've been adhered to. We shouldn't be telling them, "Hey, you can't do that," when they try to make Islam better than it is. It's great fun to imagine that everyone can just wake up one day and religion won't be an issue, but cold turkey isn't humanity's style.
It was tough for me to set aside my emotions on the matter and learn to stop asking
how Islam can be reformed and to just learn to thank whatever is or isn't holy that more and more Muslims are trying. They don't need my opinions on whether or not it can be made peaceful. They're moving forward without me, and that's how I want it.
The functional difference is that saying I'm against Islam means I am against it being practiced period. And I shouldn't be if I believe in people's rights to believe whatever the fuck they want to believe. And I do. Saying I'm against Islamism means I'm against Islam working its way into politics. It's saying, "I don't care about the details, and I don't care if it was supposed to be a political system--it's not going to be. And you, the adherent, are going to have to figure it out. It's your problem and your responsibility to keep it from crossing this line and to find out how to practice it peacefully." And, alhamdulillah, so many of them are up for that. How can I complain.