The War on Terror narrative has created gaps in the critical understanding of terrorism studies, particularly in how the media and the state label politically motivated violence. The understanding of what terrorism means for western states has shifted dramatically after the events of September 11, 2001. With that shift, there has also been an increase in social movements that attempt to work within or work outside the current government rhetoric. However, the existence of such movements and groups and the violent acts they commit has been on the rise. This paper seeks to explore whether or not the inconsistent labeling of far-right social movement violence in western states as ‘lone wolf violence’ or ‘hate crime’ rather than ‘terrorism’ is detrimental to the critical understanding of both terrorism and counter terrorism.

By examining recent conflicts in both Egypt and Syria, this paper examines whether or not Islamism has the potential to serve as a functioning political ideology. Through Middle Eastern countries previous attempts to Islamize politics, the existence of militant/radical Islamists, and western countries stereotyping of Islam, this paper argues that though Islamism cannot be ruled out as a valid political ideology; it is currently unable to be a functioning political ideology due to the fact that previous attempts to make Islamism the main political ideology have led to hindrance of democracy and violent uprisings across the Middle East that has yet to pacify.