Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Eternal Wars Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Does Islam Preclude Democracy?
Phoenix Rising    10/4/2002 8:12:37 AM
This is primarily to Muslim, since he seems to be the primary advocate of political Islam here. I've been wondering about this for a while now, just never got it into words. Why should Islam, if there is one particular correct interpretation of it, be inimical to democracy? I'm thinking here particularly in terms of the British parliamentary system, where almost all legislative and executive powers ultimately reside in parliament. If there is anything that all Houses of Parliament universally agree on, it won't make the London Times, but it will definitely get put into effect. I'm not sure that they agree on much more than that the sky is blue, but in principle, if the tenets of Islam were so universal, then they would almost certainly be democratically legislated in the parliament of any Islamic state as easily and uncontroversially as the U.S. Congress does such things as naming federal buildings. Furthermore, in a representative country, a vast majority of which would be theoretically composed of Muslims, any individual or party perceived as un-Islamic would quickly lose power, the way that scandal-tainted politicians tend to collapse here. Parties that eschewed Islam would have little chance of political success. The constitution of an Islamic state would almost certainly permit political lobbying on religious grounds, which I think would be innocuous enough that the West would not raise too many strenous objections, and the mosques tend to be influential and resourceful in the Islamic world. Whenever experts would be called to testify before the legislature, as legislatures are wont to so, they would almost certainly be drawn from Islamic universities and similar institutions. At the moment, the climate there favors the extremists. The prevailing view that there is only "one true interpretation" of Islam means that for one Muslim to disagree with another is practically a challenge to a duel ... and the extremists tend to be the ones who are the most well-armed and the most ruthless. More proportional representation might do some good at moving the debate back towards the center, and might make some of the currently silent centrists, if they're there, feel a greater sense of empowerment and a willingness to take on the extreme elements of society. The inevitable compromises of democratic politics might make it seem like a "pure" interpretation of Islam is getting lost in the mix somewhere. However, the existence of so many different interpretations of Islam as the world stands today seems to indicate that no living human has the 100% perfect solution today. As such, the inevitable compromises seem more likely to bring about a result as close to whatever the "true" interpretation might be as imperfect humans are capable of estimating. In short, there is no reason why a Muslim democracy looks like it would be any less Islamic than an Islamic dictatorship or theocracy ... if that is honestly and truly what the people of the Muslim world really want. I hope that this is what ends up happening in Iran, and hopefully Iraq as well, once Saddam is gone. Time will tell. --Phoenix Rising
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
Phoenix Rising    RE:Does Islam Preclude Democracy?   10/25/2002 2:31:51 PM
Matt, Abdullah is the current King of Jordan; Hussein, his father, reigned in Jordan from 1953 to (IIRC) 2000, and for the last few years of his rule, he was the longest-serving ruler of any nation on the planet. I'll leave it to Muslim to explain why he is a 'traitor.' --Phoenix Rising
 
Quote    Reply

muslim    RE:Does Islam Preclude Democracy?   10/26/2002 4:07:30 AM
About Hussien, He had the power and the popularity to turn the country into an Islamic country, yet he didn't. Every single speech at a Friday prayer had to be approved by the secret police, and had to contain a prayer praising the king. If someone disagrees with him, they would be in and out of prision every 6 months or so. And other typical attributes of an opressor. But the biggest thing is, and I can't remember the year on this, Black september. Alongside Arafat, Hussien was responsible for the death of over 100,000 palestinians. My dad still remebers stories about how his family used to hide their palestinian IDs at checkpoints so that they won't get beat up by the officers, and they saw palestinains being beat up, till God knows what point, and for no reason. The only thing that kept him in power is his almost daily PR campagins... He made sure the people either loved him or feared him. He was constantly in hospitals and orphanages visiting the poor and the sick. People loved him for that. So basically, what we had in hussien is far more dangerous to the people than saddam can ever be, becasue Iraqis don't really like Saddam... But as for Jordan, Hussien was bad, and yet the people LOVED him. AS for Abdullah, he is a little kid in a position he doesn't deserve... The first few months, he couldn't even speak Arabic clearly. And, like his father, had the secret police everywhere, especially cabs, just waiting for someone to say something against him. Like father like son, neither one cared about people except when it came to thier own reputation.
 
Quote    Reply

muslim    RE:Does Islam Preclude Democracy?   10/27/2002 2:34:41 AM
It is true that the laws will be implemented by an imperfect being, but that doesn't necessarily mean the implementaion will be flawed, or bad. If the education aspect is done correctly, it is possible to create a society of checks and balances that ranges from your average citizen to the scholars, and from the military to the judges. I think this is something you are not thinking about, if two people disagree on what is the right way to do something, there is always a way to settle the issue, it is either one of them is wrong, or both could be right. If one of the is wrong, there are institutions that can make sure only the right is implemented without implementing the law themselves. It's simple, two argue (one of them is the caliph). Scholars can analyze the problem, reach a conclusion, show it to the judges, and ruling will be made on how it should be done. If this is followed, I don't see a way things can escalate to civil war. The other thing you are not considering is learning from past mistakes, I am sure you are familiar with the war between Ali and Mouaiah (the one that sparked the whole shia/sunnah division). Today, we can look back at that conflict and see how similar situations can be solved in a better way. Again, I really don't see how imperfect humans can't implement a system DESIGNED specifically for them unless there is a flaw in the system itself.
 
Quote    Reply

Matt Smith-Iwilltry    Popularist Treachery!   10/27/2002 5:03:57 AM
>He had the power and the popularity to turn the country into an Islamic country, yet he didn't. Sensible Fellow. Traitor? >But as for Jordan, Hussien was bad, and yet the people LOVED him. Love him, hate him, somewhere along the line you makr your choice, at least King hussein APPEARED to give a sh!t. >Alongside Arafat, Hussien was responsible for the death of over 100,000 palestinians. Alongside? How? Palestinians you said, not Jordanians. >had the secret police everywhere, especially cabs So THAT's what they're doing. The bastards! I don't care what people think either, reputation be damned! ~~It was obvious, wasn't it???~~
 
Quote    Reply

norden    RE:Does Islam Preclude Democracy? to muslim   10/28/2002 1:32:10 AM
Muslim, I have read your posts and respect your position, however church and state are not symbiotic. there is a myriad of reasons as to why, but fundamentally its muslim-centric which is racist. in regards to your article. "He had the power and the popularity to turn the country into an Islamic country, yet he did'nt." I'll sum that statement up as Islamic arrogance. I could say expansionist hegemony also. Hijacking friday prayers for political reasons is pretty much the norm in Islamic cultures. Iran is the worst. Rafsanjani in particular Khamenii just as bad. I personally view iran as a military dictatorship. Pasdaran ring a bell? Im off track Now Black September Hussein Sr. and Arafat bedfellows. Get a history book. or start with this www.geocities.com/capitolhill/parliament/2587/black.html Arafat will go down in history as one of the founding fathers of the genocide now and yet to come. he's an Egyptian street savvy thug with a gift for exploiting the disenfanchised (read stupid, lazy, illeterate) to his own ill gotten gains. He almost toppled Jordan got his ass kicked. wanted asylum and got it in Lebanon a very stable pro-western, peaceful, prosperous nation with a very small military. He brought lebanon to its knees. Robbed the country of tens of millions (US 1970dollars)Instigated ethnic cleansing. Then other foreign militaries and mercenaries came in to feed on the scraps. Alluha Akbar I doubt any Arab leader believes Arafat privately. Publicly they will support him because if he's killing Jews its better than destabilizing Egypt, Syria, Jordan, or Saudi. R
 
Quote    Reply

norden    RE:Does Islam Preclude Democracy? to whitebull   10/28/2002 9:37:39 PM
same with Farrakhan (look at his 1996 M.E. friendship tour) I think 1996 do a google. He refers to the US as the "Great Satan" and the says the "Black House" must fall then comes home to a priveleged affluent lifestyle in America. Jesse Jackson very sad he even played the race card with the Japanese at that Honda plant. EXTORTION! The African American community needs a great leader to motivate the youth. All they seem to have is bigots, militant youth gangsta rappers, and Spike Lee "oh I said bigots" Sorry to go off the subject but you had to say JJ
 
Quote    Reply

American Kafir    Answering Harry Belafonte (to Swhitebull)   10/30/2002 9:11:36 AM
Although I have my own set of disagreements with Colin "let 'em have Kuwait" Powell, Harry Belafonte's attacks on Powell require a response, carefully worded so as to not impart any modicum of dignity to Belafonte. "Grits Dummy good."
 
Quote    Reply

muslim    (no subject)   11/1/2002 4:17:10 AM
It seems to me that many of you liked king hussien. It also seems that you are all looking at him through the lense of the west, understandable, after all, I judge the rest through the lense of Islam. AS for black september, if you look at that through the lense of Islam, it was plain and simple wrong, Jordanian or Palestinian, they are both mostly muslims, and I have no doubt that many of the casualties were muslims. Hussien had the biggest ego, using catch phrases like "We are the nation, we are the people" We was refering to him. Another aspect of his ego was that he claimed to be a desendent of the prophet (who knows how true this is), and based on that, he claimed to follow Islam (as best as he could). IF he had an shred of Islam in him, he would not have killed those palestinians, he would've welcomed them. AGAIN, from your eyes, you guys can love him as much as you want, but from the eyes of Islam, he was a traitor in that he had the power, knew the truth, yet he still refused to obide by it. And that doesn't just apply to him, it applies to Arafat, Asad, Bashar, Saddam, Fahd, Mubarak, Osama, and the rest of the gangsters' union. A muslim is a muslim, no matter what nationality he may fall under, and that is why it is a must for every Muslim to at least work to remove such traitors and replace them all with one who will rule them by Islam. It doesn't matter if America likes it, it doesn't matter if you guys like it, it doesn't matter if it will the possible total destruction of the muslim nation, without unity, the muslims are weaker than a sheet of paper, without unity, muslim blood is cheaper than dirt, and without unity, we might as well be dead.
 
Quote    Reply

Phoenix Rising    RE:(no subject) / Pan-Islamism   11/1/2002 4:55:52 PM
Muslim, You say, "IF [Hussein] had an shred of Islam in him, he would not have killed those palestinians, he would've welcomed them." The problem with that is that the fighting was most definitely going both ways ... the Palestinians were talking about overthrowing him and setting up their own regime in place of the Hashemite monarchy. Doesn't a welcoming generally have to go both ways to mean much? --Phoenix Rising
 
Quote    Reply

muslim    RE:(no subject) / Pan-Islamism   11/3/2002 4:08:35 AM
"he problem with that is that the fighting was most definitely going both ways ... the Palestinians were talking about overthrowing him and setting up their own regime in place of the Hashemite monarchy. Doesn't a welcoming generally have to go both ways to mean much?" The question is... if Jordan had been an Islamic state from the very beginning, would the palestinians (who were mostly muslims) have wanted to overthrow him? I think not... As a muslim, I can say that it is almost a dream, a dying dream might I add, that there would be such a state that we will not NEED to overthrow, and that is why I say that the palestnians would not have wanted to overthrow the king if he really implemented Islam the way it should be.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy