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
Matt Smith-Iwilltry    RE:(no subject) / Pan-Islamism- Muslim   12/3/2002 4:27:49 AM
An Islamic state from the very beginning, is that Jordan or Trans-Jordan? The Palestinian 'question' is a struggle for power, nothing more and nothing less, the Hashemite dynasty can be as Islamic (or un-Islamic) as it chooses, it doesn't alter the fact that a dynasty independent from Palestinian thugs is not required to listen to them. In the 70's that lesson was hammered home point-blank, does it require repeating? I think not, Palestinians have refused to take responsibility for their own actions for approximately 50 years now. What is left? A war of liberation that is a joke and famine. As long as Palestinians continue to present themselves as the front line of an Intifada they have nothing to expect but brick dust in their mouths and housing with 3 inch high walls. The "ideals" as espoused by their leaders are hollow, what does another meat-bomber acquire for Palestine? More work for the street cleaners.
 
Quote    Reply

muslim    RE:(no subject) / Pan-Islamism- Muslim   12/4/2002 6:46:52 PM
I don't claim that there are no problems in Palestine, what I am saying is that the problem in that region is much bigger than simply a struggle of power. It is the front line of the war between Islam and the West, to me, the problem in Palestine represents the situation of the entire muslim world. Just think about it, palestinians have no real leader, we both know Arafat is nothing but a joke with no real power. They act on their own wishes and desires, and their blood is being spilled, and no one is fighting any type of reasonable war to stop it. Now draw the analogy: Palestinian ----> Muslims (in general, all over the world) And everything you can say about palestinians will be true about all muslims. MY point is simple, the problem isn't Palestine, Israel, or the West, the problem is the Muslims. We are so divided, so ignorant, so STUPID that we let all this happen to us. Colonialists came and gave us FAKE leaders and countries to fight for, including Palestine, we ate it all up. Today, muslims are so divided, some countries are smaller than some US COUNTIES, when less than 100 years ago, the british WANTED to PAY the caliph for palestine, and he refused. Almost 500 years ago, the jews fled with the muslims to morrocow when the spanish inquesition occured. An army was sent to protect the honor of one woman, and today, muslim women scream, yell, and cry for someone to walk in the door and stop the rapists from raping her and killing he children (not only in palestine, but in chechnya, bosnia, and many more countries). The problem in Palestine is nothing more than a paper cut compared to what Muslims are going through and caused. And Jordan is posion Ivy desguised as medicine. I don't care about Palestine, it is land, sand, mountains, nothing more. Palestinians on the other hand are my brothers and sisters, but so are chechens, bosnians, and pakistanis, we are all muslims, and it is time that muslims live up to their History and the duty sworn in the Quran, Muslims need to stop fighting for land, and start fighting for Islam, we need to stop fighting for Saddam and arafat, and start fighting for Allah, for he is the only one who can hurt us or benifit us. The day the palestinian problem will end, will be the day the muslims will go BACK to Islam.
 
Quote    Reply

Jeff from Michigan    RE:(no subject) / Pan-Islamism- Muslim   12/4/2002 8:56:20 PM
Muslim - "Muslims need to stop fighting for land, and start fighting for Islam, we need to stop fighting for Saddam and arafat, and start fighting for Allah, for he is the only one who can hurt us or benifit us." You left out Osama and Khatemi was that deliberate? Also and interesting post from Jonah Goldberg that I agree with. Can you provide points to refute his article? link
 
Quote    Reply

muslim    RE:(no subject) / Pan-Islamism- Muslim   12/5/2002 9:40:42 PM
"You left out Osama and Khatemi was that deliberate?" If I were to list them all, I would never stop. I just point out a couple as examples. But now that you mention it, they do SEEM like an exception because they CLAIM they are fighting for the sake of Islam, I say actions speak louder than words. If they really are concerned about the well being of Islam, why do they DELIBERATLY put Islam in such a position. Think about it this way: Let's say that you are the first democratic president the world has seen in 200 years. You rule over a small little country smaller than the size of some islands. Are you going to go around yelling and screaming, flexing your muscles to the world, or are you going to ask people to join you and make your democracy a success before you even think about expanding? You see, just by looking at their actions you can tell the Islam is definitly not their first priority, it seems that Osama's priority is to stand up to the bully and not even worry about the fact that the bully can beat the living s**t out of him, again, that is not Islamic. Islam doesn't say to run into 100,000 armed soldiers carrying a knife. As for the article, well, there are a billion places where I can start (maybe not that many), so I'll will take it point-by-point: The first point he discussed was that muslims in general aren't speaking out about the ones giving them a bad name. I agree with him on that. I really don't blame the world, or at least americans for not liking muslims. I only wish the hate us because we are doing things right, instead, all this hatered you see is becasue EVERY muslim leader is fake, money loving, power hungry, fat bastard, who doesn't even care about his own people let alone what the world thinks of his people. so do muslims need to condemn the likes of Osama? Yes, just as long as they don't replace their love of Osama with loving America.(I don't mean muslims should hate america and americans, they just shouldn't love the government, we have something better.) Second point: Jihad. "Until fairly recent times," writes Bernard Lewis, "[jihad] was usually, though not universally, understood in a military sense. It was a Muslim duty ? collective in attack, individual in defense ? to fight in the war against the unbelievers. In principle, this war was to continue until all mankind either embraced Islam or submitted to the authority of the Muslim state." 100% correct, if it wasn't simplifying the subject. I mean, yes we believe that at one point in time, the entire world will either be muslim or living under the authority of Islam, but that is just like our belief in Heaven and Hell, it's the future, and it is conditional. We don't know when it will happen, and we don't care. And it is conditional as long as we as muslims obide by all the rules of shari'ah, which includes not forcing people to be muslims or live under Islam. oh yeah, and this statement is invalid: "And if a burg's population becomes majority Muslim, it must be ruled by Muslims" NOT TRUE AT ALL!!!! Now, the rest of the article talks about why muslims should improve their image and how they failed in doing so. I give him credit for at least making seem like Osama is really a muslim problem (and he is), but muslims just aren't doing anything about him (and we aren't). Saddam, arafat, the hashimites, Mubarak, and all the other leaders are all muslim problems that stem from one single problem: <> We are so far away that our loyalties no longer belong to Allah and Islam, they belong to Osama, and palestine. If muslims actually went back to Islam (as a society, even if it happens in just one country), then we won't be easily fooled by these fake leaders, and we won't let them slide as the WORST leaders the muslim nation has seen in it's 1400 years of History. Then, and only then, will you see the likes of these leaders alone in their platform making themselves look back instead of spreading their nasty images across the muslim nation. And then, and only then, will see ONE, 1, Uno, Wahad (one in arabic) country representing Islam, and only 1 leader, chosen by the people to represent Islam and implement it to the people. Once that happens, then muslims should worry about whether or not Americans like them. The Quraishis didn't like the Prophet when he started the message, but 13 years after his life in Madinah, they were fighting in his Army, protect his life, and the message of Islam. In his 10 years in Meccah, the prophet NEVER worried about the fact that his own uncle was the leader in "anti-mohammed" movement, just like we shouldn't care whether America likes us or not. ONCE AGAIN: I AM NOT SAYING MUSLIMS SHOULD HATE AMERICA OR AMERICANS, WE JUST SHOULD BE SO CONCERED ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK OF US. ALSO: WHETHER AMERICA LIKES US OR NOT DOESN'T CHANGE OUR OBLIGATIONS, THE LIKES OF OSAMA STILL NEED TO BE CONDEMNED, THE LIKES
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3    RE:Does Islam Preclude Democracy?   4/28/2004 2:49:01 PM
I believe Islam does allow "temporary truces" with the infidels-and temporary may last for several hundred years. So a Constituion including non-muslim Iraqi's might be justified by this. After all the moslem Indians saw nothing wrong with fighting for the infidel Raj. If this sounds uncertain it's because it is.
 
Quote    Reply

Green Dragon    RE:Does Islam Preclude Democracy?   4/29/2004 6:33:37 AM
Islam might well offer a temporary truce. Both parties have to accept the deal. It is not Islams perogative to terminate such a truce. If this isn't crystal clear, I am more than happy to elaborate..
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3    RE:Does Islam Preclude Democracy?   5/1/2004 2:09:17 PM
It is not Islams perogative to terminate such a truce. If this isn't crystal clear, I am more than happy to elaborate. Previous Comment ........................ Quite true. Islam does not condone perjury as far as I know(yes they do have a funny way of showing it; no they are not unique in this). The biggest trouble in theory is that Islam doesn't have a "render unto Caesar" tradition. Thus they say they obey "Allahs laws not the laws of men". A Christian says the laws of men Are God's laws unless God says different(I.E. a Christian can pay taxes, he cannot be a deaths-head SS). Therefore to a Christian a democracy is another human authority and must be obeyed. Democracy is an ideology as well as a system of government and makes semi-mystical claims sometimes it is easy to see how a Moslem would find these troubling-I find these troubling sometimes. A Moslem will be forced to "make a choice" before a Christian would. So Islam doesn't preclude democracy; but it does make it harder.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5



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