Dr. Khalifa Abdul Hakim, a Pakistani scholar, philospher, and writer stated in his book, "The Prophet and His Message",
"The subject of the relation of Islam to democracy would present further difficulties, because democracy seems to have become as undefinable as religion or love. From the beginning of democracy, in any part of the world, up to the present times, (when it almost seems to have taken the place of religion as an ideal or a way of life) opinions about its nature and value have been divergent and contradictory."
How do you describe democracy? Would you agree or disagree with Dr. Hakim's statement? When considering Islam and democracy, do you believe that democracy would disrupt the spiritual freedom within Islamic countries, or could it benefit places such as Saudi Arabia, where Islam is the foundation for their politics?
democracy is a system of government in which each citizen has a say. Under such a system, there must lie an assumption of basic equality amongst all people eligible for citizenship. The controversy Dr Hakim points out over democracy's value seems ironic if he is referring to a controversy that spans more than a single government. When the US was in its beginning years, the founding fathers spent quite some time debating the best form of government. Their individual ideals led them to democracy. I don't know enough about Islam to know if there could be a way to mesh it with democracy in general.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what spiritual freedom exists in such countries as Saudi Arabia, but it seems any government that aligns itself with one particular religion is straying from pure democracy. That said, I believe there is much good come to countries that take sociological, and moral truth into account when setting up a government.
Democracy as captured, I believe, in its' essence is the idyllic concept of the empowerment of common men by common men for the benefit and well being of the whole unit. I have said idyllic because the heart of this type of government is selflessness in which those who have been given power must lay down their individual desires in order to effectively view the needs of the whole unit. This of course, is in contradiction to man's natural state. This I believe, is why Dr. Hakim claims that democracy is indefinable and contradictory, man's nature will most always use what he has been given for his own gain.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, I believe this would be true if democracy were to be set in place in an Islmaic nation. Whether the religion is in agreement with the religion or not is not a point worth debating. If that religion were the needs of the unit, then it should exist peacefully with the government, if indeed the leaders had a selfless heart. This is true in light of the way I defined democracy without regard to its origins, that being in the root of the common men who would choose their own leaders.
Finally, I do not know in enough detail the Islamic religion to be able to say whether this government would be of benefit. That really is all I can comment about in that regard.
Democracy has become a term that western governments use in order to describe the governmental systems of countries of which they agree with. The U.S. has considered countries such as Mexico as democracies for years even though it was not until 2000 when there was any other party than the PRI in any contention for rule. We have no real definition for Democracy any more and therefore cannot determine if it will work with Islam. I believe that it is possible for Islamic countries to act in ways that the U.S. and other western countries would support, so in essence be democratic.
ReplyDeleteLaisez faire government, free will. I do believe that democracy is a way of life. Though I don't believe that it is like love or religion. I believe that it give the right to a person to choose that they want to do. They don't have to be religious they can make their own decisions. That is not how most Middle Eastern countries are run. Most need religion to keep stability and like American's fear of communism; they fear what democracy will do to them. Like what happened to Russia once the USSR collapsed.
ReplyDeletei think that democracy is a form of government in which everyone should have equal say in whatever happens. although this is pretty idealistic, it has definitely become undefinable, as Dr. Hakim said, like love, and those countries who claim to have a democracy could try harder to make it so all peoples have a say. today, especially in America, it seems to be simply a popularity contest, where the "elites" get to decide on the fates of the people without much consultation.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, democracy is a popular system of government in many countries, however it should be promoted in the middle eastern countries aside from religion. Dr. Hakim says that democracy will negatively affect the islamic religion, but i believe that is only true in countries such as saudi arabia where islam defines their politics. In other countries, separation of religion and politics should be promoted.
ReplyDeleteI think that a democracy is a form of government where everyone has a voice. i think that it is a way of life, however it doesn't really replace religion. I think that Dr. Hakim would promote islamic law, in countries like Saudi Arabia, yet he neglects to see how Islam and Democracy are cohesive in countries like Turkey.
ReplyDeleteLet's suppose that we define democracy as government for and by the people. Now let's take Fictitious Country X and say that the majority of its people are uneducated and/or uniformed; would a democracy work? Would a government voted by these people truly serve their needs? Are they even aware of their needs?
ReplyDeleteI believe democracy can exsist within Islamic countries but it has to be seperate from religion. Also the people have to be informed of issues and be in a position to react, in many places in the middel east this simply is almost impossible. Especially where governments are based on religions to which the people devotly practice. I agree with the scholar that democracy has so many variations, middle eastern countries need to find their own way to make it work. It has been proven to work in countries like in Turky so if gone at in the right way it could succeed.
ReplyDeleteDemocracy is a type of government ruled by the people, in some way which or form. Wether each issue of the government is voted on by the entirety of the state, or by elected officials to represent the views of the majority. The problem where islam and democracy come in contact is that the islamic religion has specific ways in which the state should be governed, unlike christianity. Since there is the existence of Islamic laws, a democratic government would have to be unlike any other in existence in modern day. I must agree with Dr. Hakim's statement about democracy, since in todays day in age the term is used so freely and it has entirely lost its true powerful meaning.
ReplyDeleteMuch of my definition of Democracy relates to many of the ones that are listed above. And speaking of above, I have to agree with his statement of it because each personal definition is different of the next, making much of it contradictory. It's hard to say whether or not Democracy would would because these Middle Eastern countries have been practicing the same ideals for many ages based off of their religious beliefs. Needless to say, Change would not be something they could believe in right now.
ReplyDelete