Theoretical perspectives on the Islam-democracy discourse
Islamic resurgence and democratisation are two of the most important developments of the twentieth century, which have gained momentum since its final decades. Within these two developments, the question of the relationship between Islam and democracy, or the compatibility and coexistence of the teachings of Islam with the principles of democracy is one of the most pressing, serious, and critical issues facing the Muslim world today — an issue that is hotly debated, defined, and discussed by a diversity of voices. After the events of 9/11 and the subsequent war on terror, the relationship between Islam and democracy came to be discussed with much fervour. In the post-9/11 world, Islam has been frequently described as a "violent" and "terrorist" religion, unconcerned with peace, human rights, justice, tolerance, pluralism, and democratic values. This provoked widespread discussion (within and outside the Muslim world) about the relationship between Islam and democratic principles and with the Arab Spring — the uprisings and protests for the promotion of democracy and dignity in the Middle East-North Africa (MENA) region from December 2010 — these issues have become focal points of worldwide public debate; in MENA, South Asia, the west, and in the rest of the world
When we look back to the early 1900s, we find that terms like 'Islamic democracy' and 'spiritual democracy' were used by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Allama Iqbal respectively, in discussions that revolved around the relationship between Islam and democracy, although only theoretically. In the writings of Mufti M Shafi — especially in his tafsir (elaboration) on Quranic verses 3:159 and 42:38, both related to the Shura (parliament) — and later in Amin Ahsan Islahi and in the writings of Maulana Maududi, we find this discourse as well. Maulana Maududi wrote about this issue at great length and coined the term "Theo-democracy" (Ilahi Jumhuri hukumat) for the mixture of the two, on the grounds that Islam is neither theocracy nor democracy, but has elements of both. Azad especially wrote in 1912 in Al-Hilal about Islamic democracy and about the similarities between Islamic teachings and the French constitution adopted after the revolution of 1789. He raised the question of whether Muslims were simply adopting ideas from the French revolution and European thought, or whether the Quran itself taught democracy and the parliamentary system. Similarly, in the Middle East, it was (to mention just a few) Jamal al-Din 'Al-Afghani' who wrote against "despotic government" and in support of "republican government", and his colleagues, Muhammad Abduh and Rashid Rida — who emphasised implementing Shura and gradually turning it into parliamentary democracy, as well as Ijtihad (interpretation) and maslaha (public interest) — who wrote on and discussed this issue.
While Muslim scholars and thinkers have been writing and arguing for an Islamic democracy from the very beginning of the twentieth century, the term only gained prominence from the 1980s and 1990s according to (among others) Noah Feldman — Professor at Harvard University and author of The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State. For Feldman, the crucial question of whether Islam and democracy fit together in principle or in practice is no longer merely of abstract or regional interest. In his words, it has been "Debated in scores of Arabic books, articles, and fatwas (decrees) since the temporary success of Islamists in the Algerian elections of 1990." Here, it necessary to point out that he refers to those texts that are clearly about Islam and democracy, or Shura and democracy (for example: Fatima Mernissi's 1992 book, Islam and Democracy: Fear of the Modern World or John L. Esposito and John O. Voll's 1996 book, Islam and Democracy).
It is also necessary to point out that there are various scholars and writers who have made attempts to argue that both are incompatible, from Francis Fukuyama's thesis on The End of History (1992), Benjamin Barber's argument about Jihad vs. McWorld (1996), to Robert Kaplan's suggestion about The coming anarchy (2000), and more significantly, Samuel P. Huntington's essay and subsequent book on the Clash of Civilisations (1996), all have collectively reinforced, in different ways, the idea that the Muslim faith and Islamic civilisation are incongruent and divergent from liberty, democracy, human rights, gender equality and other emancipatory principles But a diversity of voices — ranging from proponents to opponents, Islamists to modernists and engages both Muslim and western scholars — have in the recent past strongly debated the issue of Islam and democracy. In the Islamic tradition, concepts and institutions like Khilafah, Shura, Ijma, Ijtihad, Baya'h, Maslaha, and values and legal principles such as freedom, justice, equality, human rights, public welfare, peace, tolerance, etc, are utilised by these scholars to provide an effective foundation for democracy in Islam or 'Islamic democracy', or to develop "Islamic forms of parliamentary governance, representative elections, and religious reform." Furthermore, the Constitution of Medina — the principles of which were based on the holy Quran and sunnah — is also interpreted in modern terminology as a source of constitutionalism, democratising reform, and pluralism in Islam.
Throughout the world, the majority of modernist or reformist Muslim intellectuals accept the term democracy and insist on consistency and compatibility between Islam and democracy with a reinterpretation of key Islamic political concepts and values, institutions and legal principles, embedded in the primary sources of Islam, the holy Quran and sunnah, albeit democracy here is conceived of with certain qualifications and limits prescribed by Shariah. Currently in the Pakistani context, the prominent voices that have discussed and deliberated on the issue of compatibility between Islam and democracy include, among others, Professor Khurshid Ahmad, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi and Dr Muhammad Khalid Masud, all representing different visions and perspectives on the issue. For them, (in a nutshell) in Islam, discussing democracy and the concept of democratic participation does not mean that the word democracy is a Quranic term or a term explained in the Sunnah. It only means that the Islamic legacy — cultural and intellectual — contains ideas and ideals, key concepts, institutions and values that show resemblance and similarity with democratic principles and perceptions. Some of the key concepts and values of the Islamic political order — rule of law, accountability of the ruler, responsibility of the government, general will, public welfare, constitutionalism, freedom, justice, equality and human rights (among others) — are compatible, consistent, similar and in harmony with the positive features and values of (modern) democracy. These concepts also provide evidence that the Islamic system of government, in the concrete sense, is democratic. Thus, taking into consideration the 'spirit' rather than merely the 'process' of democracy, it is feasible and reasonable to propose that the relationship between Islam and democracy, "complex and nuanced as it may be, is not inherently problematic even by western standards." But, at the same time, no one is arguing for its wholesale adoption of western democracy; and thus, it is safe to argue that while there are important and profound differences between Islam and democracy, at the same time, "a synthesis of sorts is eminently possible" between the two.
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (1) |
to Subscribe via email :
batavia-news-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
----------------------------------------
VISIT Batavia News Blog
http://batavia-news-networks.blogspot.com/
----------------------------
You could be Earning Instant Cash Deposits
in the Next 30 Minutes
No harm to try - Please Click
http://tinyurl.com/bimagroup
--------------
