THERE WILL BE NO ISLAMIST REVOLUTION Olivier Roy Olivier Roy is a professor at the European University Institute in Florence. He is the coeditor most recently of Arab Society in Revolt: The West’s Mediterranean Challenge (2012). His essay “The Trans- formation of the Arab World” appeared in the July 2012 issue of the Journal of Democracy. Hillel Fradkin has quite correctly summarized my analysis before criticizing it. Therefore, apart from the rather crucial detail of what the “failure of political Islam” means, there is no misunderstanding be- tween us, but rather a decisive difference in approach and perspective. Fradkin is concerned about what constitutes the essence of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) as an ideological movement, whereas I concentrate on how the Muslim Brothers, as political and social actors, are shaped by the political, social, and religious context in which they now find themselves. Fradkin’s main argument is that my thesis on the reluctant entry of Islamists into the democratic process is belied by a “revolutionary dy- namic” that is unfolding after some months of moderation and cautious- ness; he stresses the fact that the MB has a clear-cut ideological blue- print that it is seeking to implement despite its tactical restraint. My view is that there is no such “revolutionary dynamic” and that the MB is no longer a revolutionary movement, but rather a conservative one. The Muslim Brothers are certainly not liberal, and they are thrilled by their sudden empowerment after many decades of longing in vain for access to power. They may try to establish an authoritarian state, but it would be conservative and rather pro-Western, more in Mubarak’s style than Khomeini’s, and would confront a strong democratic opposi- tion. I maintain that 1) their “ideology” is more an emotional and vague narrative than a blueprint for ruling, and will mainly affect censorship and gender issues; 2) no dynamic of “Islamic revolution” is at work in either Egypt or Tunisia; and 3) because society itself has changed along Journal of Democracy Volume 24, Number 1 January 2013 © 2013 National Endowment for Democracy and The Johns Hopkins University Press Debate