democratization. Consequently, for the management of such crises, political and spiritual leaders have found the return to the fundamental principles of Islam as the only solution. Not only capitalism and democracy proved to be utopian and incapable of solving the problems of Islamic societies, but socialism also failed badly. The most concrete example in Hanafi’s view is the resounding failure of the Egyptian socialist state and the 1952 revolution. The author is of the opinion that this revolution was only seen in economic terms, but in the other segments the traditional culture was preserved, so that “Islamic socialism” proved incapable of adapting to social-political and religious aspirations. Within this incapacity, the religious factor has become increasingly important, ultimately becoming a means of discrediting the political class that gave rise to separatism and radicalism among the spiritual-economic aristocracy that was seen as an immediate solution to these problems.

The second aspect has in view the fact that traditional marxism was seen as a means of modernizing these societies that had been applied but not adapted. The main issues that had to be adapted to the implementation of the scientific ideology of Marxism would have to compensate for the perceptual and mentality characteristics of society (myths, symbols, imagination and anthropomorphic thinking). At the same time, Islamic fundamentalism promotes a contemporary, symbolic and imaginary discourse opposed to modern ideologies. Starting from this point, there is a strong politicization and sacrament of politics that progressively transforms the symbols of Islamicity into authentic and strongly individualized ego. In other words, the path to political manipulation opens which, on the one hand, has the main purpose of maintaining traditional structures of domination, and on the other hand, the realization of the Islamic political utopia (eg. the achievement of the universal Islamic state) on fundamentalist principles . Amplifying this idea, the ability of Islamic leaders to ideologize a religious tradition is done in two ways : First, the reorganization of religious principles is made to have a much more convincing and original tinge. Secondly, we are talking about an idealized adaptation of religion to serve as a means of achieving machiavellian goals. The two aspects can be summed up to the thesis that each interpretation of the Quaran becomes an instrument for various practices, the adaptation of the fundamental teachings reinforce the motivations of these actions, and the emphasis of a learning essence (depending on the purpose ) provide continuity in achieving the goals (be they peaceful, warlike, or terrorist).
The foundations underlying terrorist acts are generally considered to be utopias and are subject to a wide range of prejudices . But before talking about Islam and terrorism, consider it necessary to look carefully at the two in order to establish whether or not there is a link between Islam and terrorism, precisely to bring light to these prejudices. The underlying issue is that of an exlusive interpretation beyond the context of sacred texts, a problem that can arise at any other religion in the world (including Christianity ) and which can lead directly to legitimate violence by religious principles. The exegesis of the sacred texts often affirmed the old principle: “Any text drawn from