Yeah, the Nazis were worse. Much worse.
The Nazis, in full control of a technologically advanced European state, in some ways THE most technologically advanced state on Earth, intended to conquer the world and impose their master race ideology everywhere.
They had a significant potential to make this actually happen, despite the significant odds against them.
The Islamists, assuming they gain control of all Muslims on earth, will have charge of a third-world society with no ability to produce any of the essential tools of modern warfare, much less create new and more destructive ones.
IOW, the Nazis had an actual chance of winning by overpowering their opposition. The Islamists have no such chance, and can only win if their opponents utterly wimp out, which I must admit is possible.
I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “ummah,” although I suspect you’re misusing the term. Ummah refers to the community of Muslims believers on earth, not to some specific plan for the future.
islam would be more likely to persist as a cancer on humanity's soul for centuries or millennia.
Good arguments on either side, and I think we can both agree that the species is far better off without either one.
BTW, what's the proper word for universal muslim rule? (An impossible goal, as there is no universal muslim faith, any old ass can declare hissssself as the authority on what mad mohammad meant when he said "x")