|
By Yamin Zakaria London, UK
The
moderates ask: Is Islam compatible with democracy and freedom? The radicals ask:
Is democracy and freedom compatible with Islam? So whats
the difference? The difference is in the ordering of the words - that
determines which notion (Islam or freedom and democracy) is used as the
reference point. That will be taken as the axiom to evaluate other idea(s).
Therefore, the moderates use democracy and freedom as the yardstick to
judge Islam, but the radicals take, Islam as the reference point to judge
democracy and freedom. Let us first elucidate some of these terms, before
examining the aforementioned questions. According
to the experts, democracy and freedom have a symbiotic relationship; one
cannot function without the other. Indeed, it is very difficult to visualise
free election without adequate level of freedom. Without this freedom, it would
be difficult for the masses to exercise their voices and votes. Hence, freedom
is an essential prerequisite for democracy. From now on, we will assume that
stating freedom will automatically imply democracy and vice versa.
The label of moderate or radical is attributed to: how liberal
or how strict, one interprets the Islamic texts. Liberal interpretations are
naturally assessed by, how compliant it is to liberal values. Note, what
precedes the method (liberal or strict) of interpreting Islamic text is the
mindset acquired in the first place. It is this mindset that determines who is a
radical and who is a moderate. Since
the moderate-mindset is a recent trend, it would be fair to assume that the
original group was a monolithic one, without moderates, and they formed the
radical camp. Now the
question is: what are the reasons for the development of this moderate-mindset?
The main cause is the intense pressure emanating from a hostile
environment/media, usually coupled with their ignorance of, Islam and/or the
political situation. Consequentially, a typical moderate-mindset is defeated and
apologetic. It is this defeated mindset that causes the moderates to scream at
the freedom fighters, instead of the aggressors in Here is the pertinent question on reformation: if Islam is
reinterpreted (reformed) to be compliant with democracy and freedom, then what
reasons do we have to adhere to Islam in the first place. In that case why not
simply adopt the original version of democracy and freedom? If you are offered
with a choice between an original IBM computer and a Taiwanese IBM compatible
clone with a similar specification, which would you pick? Also, if the two
(Islam, democracy and freedom) are compatible that should be self-evident. Those
undertaking such a mission are testifying by their own action that the two are
incompatible and thus the need to reform one to make it compatible to the other.
Hence, the exercise of reformation is irrational and dishonest from the
onset. Islamic
text is too well narrated for it to be altered, thus the immediate target is
reforming the Muslims, their perception and ideas of Islam. This attempt to
induce reformation within Muslims is the intellectual onslaught that is part of
the war on terror (Islam). We see hateful apostates, lesbians, to university
professors with Muslim heritage promoting this common theme of reforming
Islam. These individuals are given inordinate amount of resources and media
publicity to poison the minds of Muslims and non-Muslims. Accordingly, they
argue that the problem is the alleged misrepresentation of Islam by the radicals
that is what makes Islam look incompatible with democracy and freedom.
Is it simply down to interpretation now? Surely, the basic core
values of any ideology must be permanent and fixed, not subjected to arbitrary
interpretations. Is it a coincidence that the Islamic topics that are subjected
to interpretations are those under attack from the hostile media? So, no call
for reforming the Islamic rituals like prayers and fasting, but plenty of
enthusiasm for reforming the ideas of, Jihad, Islamic State, Penal Codes
etc. Even the
self-appointed foreign leaders are demanding that Muslims should adopt freedom
and democracy. In a recent speech, George Bush bluntly stated that: freedom will reign from Let us
now examine the view of the radical camp. For them Islam is the yard-stick to
judge, democracy and freedom. They are going to pose the question: is democracy
and freedom compatible to Islam. We can gauge the compatibility, by examining
some of the similar elements between Islam and democracy. If these similar
elements fail to make the case, then we do not need to examine the
distinguishing elements between the two ideological adversaries.
a) There
are aspects of democracy like election that are not alien to Islam. However,
elections held in the capitalist democracy are usually farcical, where the
choices have already been made for the masses. Theoretically anyone can compete,
but in reality, only those that have the backing of the big businesses can
seriously enter the election race. In the Islamic state, elections would be
driven by the ability of the individual where anyone can compete subjected to
fulfilling the Sharia rules (Islamic laws); the role of business in the way of
donation would be kept out of the equation, enabling the ordinary individuals
to contest the elections. Hence, election has a totally different meaning
in Islam in comparison to democracy. b)
Another
element that is allegedly similar that exists in Islam and democracy is the
rule of law. However divine legislations cannot be changed but man made rules
can! The head of Islamic State (Khalif) cannot suddenly dispense with the Sharia
codes in dealing with its non-Islamic populations. The Khalif cannot suddenly
put the non-Muslims subjects (Dhimmis) into concentration camps, like the
American-Japanese were subjected to after c)
The final
example is the issue of freedom. Freedom is shaped by the laws and values of a
particular nation and it will vary from nation to nation. Therefore, the claim
that Islam provides freedom like the type found in a liberal paradigm is
baseless. Take the issue of marriage, a Muslim male may be free to engage in
polygamy in an Islamic state but not in most liberal democracies. No Muslim can
legally engage in extra-marital relationships that are permitted in liberal
democracy. There are numerous other examples to illustrate the fundamental
differences in the notion of freedom. In fact
the notion of freedom is dishonest and misleading. Once you curtail freedom by
imposing laws, freedom no longer exists. Indeed, where is the freedom when one
is asked to obey certain laws, and punishments are prescribed for breaking those
laws? The essential message of Islam is submission to the creator in every
aspect of your life by curtailing ones freedom. This submission is not left to
the wishes of the individuals, but for the entire collective society to enforce
via a political system (The Khilafah).
Some of
the moderates confuse freewill with freedom. The former is about physical
ability, and the latter is about legal permit. We have the freewill, i.e. the
physical capability to accept or reject any message. In contrast freedom is
referring to the legal limits in terms of rights and responsibilities, within a
society, where freedom only exists within those boundaries. Any citizen
of any country is physically bound to obey the laws of that country or face the
consequences. For them, freedom exists within the parameters of the laws in
place, where as they have the freewill to disobey and face the consequences.
It should suffice that even elements that are supposed to be identical between Islam and democracy/freedom are not. Do I really need to state the differences to make my case? Anyone with an impartial mind should see that: freedom and democracy is the chalk and Islam in comparison is the cheese!
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of the disseminator of the information. These are offered as a means to stimulate dialogue and discussion. *************************************************************************** {Invite (mankind, O Muhammad ) to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom (i.e. with the Divine Inspiration and the Qur'an) and fair preaching, and argue with them in a way that is better. Truly, your Lord knows best who has gone astray from His Path, and He is the Best Aware of those who are guided.} (Holy Quran-16:125) {And who is better in speech than he who [says: "My Lord is Allah (believes in His Oneness)," and then stands straight (acts upon His Order), and] invites (men) to Allah's (Islamic Monotheism), and does righteous deeds, and says: "I am one of the Muslims."} (Holy Quran-41:33) The prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "By Allah, if Allah guides one person by you, it is better for you than the best types of camels." [al-Bukhaaree, Muslim] The prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) also said, "Whoever calls to guidance will have a reward similar to the reward of the one who follows him, without the reward of either of them being lessened at all." [Muslim, Ahmad, Aboo Daawood, an-Nasaa'ee, at-Tirmidhee, Ibn Maajah] -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Recommended: http://www.islamonline.net http://www.islam-guide.com http://www.prophetmuhammadforall.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- All views expressed herein belong to the individuals concerned and do not in any way reflect the official views of IslamCity unless sanctioned or approved otherwise. If your mailbox clogged with mails from IslamCity, you may wish to get a daily digest of emails by logging-on to http://www.yahoogroups.com to change your mail delivery settings or email the moderators at [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the title "change to daily digest".
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
| |||||||
