Islam preaches various elements that are quite similar to the platform from which democracy has developed, and to support this claim, Irfan Ahmad and Bernard Lewis have written about this argument encompassing ideas of great importance. In the texts, A Historical Overview written by Bernard Lewis, and Democracy and Islam by Irfan Ahmad, both authors discuss the debate of whether Islam and democracy are compatible. This topic is worth investigating for multiple reasons, one of which is that the world’s population constitutes a large percentage of Muslims who now affect major political affairs on a global scale. By analyzing both articles, a conclusion can then be derived to answer this provocative question. By exploring various subtopics presented in each article, the compatibility paradigm can be justified.
Many have come to believe that the west is more superior to others. Martha Crenshaw argues that globalization is a key driver of terrorism because there is a comparison between countries having less access to means of production and others having more access. Furthermore, most religions go against each other’s beliefs and as for Islam; they have neglected the ideologies of the west. In order to understand how religious values are interconnected is through language games; we think in certain ways because of issues of power. There is a strong belief that Islam and politics are directly tied.
Civilizations developed by culture and may be of a single diversity or made up with multiple diversities, which draws a negative conclusion of Huntington's essay "The Clash of Civilizations" based on many factors. A closer examination of Huntington's essay reveals that he more or less followed the works even taking the title from Bernard Lewis essay "The Roots of Muslim Rage" where he stated, "that we are facing a mood and movement in Islam far transcending the level of issues and policies and the governments that follow them. This is no less a class of civilizations. Perhaps it is irrational, but surely historic receptions of an ancient rival against our Judeo Christian heritage, our secular present, and the worldwide expansion of both. It is crucially important that we on our si... ... middle of paper ... ...ountid=32521 Huntington S (1996) The Clash of Civilizations http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/pnorris/Acrobat/Huntington_Clash.pdf Inglehart,R & Norris,P (2003) The True Clash of Civilizations http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/162/27604.html NPR (2013) A Look Back At A Predicted 'Clash Of Civilizations http://www.npr.org/2013/09/03/218627286/a-look-back-at-a-predicted-clash-of- civilizations Pfaff, W. (2006).
This paper will demonstrate the compatibility and importance of religion with public policy by highlighting the wealth of common objectives that the two share, placing a key emphasis on the interdependence of Islam and Middle Eastern life. It will also explore the high-quality treatment extended to minorities in Middle Eastern states while drawing parallels with Western societies and discussing the incompatibility of Islam and the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights. In stating that religion should be detached from public policy the implication is that governments should be secular. This however is not possible in an area such as the Middle East as Muslims not only perceive Islam as a... ... middle of paper ... ...12 November 2010. British Broadcasting Corporation.
“Are political Islam and democracy compatible?” This question has been troubling both Muslims and non-Muslims living in East and West for a long time now. Contemporary Islamic political thought has become deeply influenced by attempts at reconciling Islam and democracy. Muslim thinkers who deal with political debates cannot disregard the significance of the democratic system, as it is the prevailing theme of modern western political thought. Hence, it is necessary for any alternative political system, whether it is religious or secular, to explore its position with regards to democratic government. In fact, a large literature and media publications have developed over the last century on this heated discourse of democracy versus Islam.
It was difficult for people to balance their cultural views alongside their religious views. Many ideas and events that a certain culture found to be permissible was found to be controversial to the message of Islam. Although it took tremendous effort from Prophet Muhammad (May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to convince the people of the Pre-Islamic world that Islam was ultimately the Path of Allah, once the people adopted this beautiful religion they found that altering their culture was simply to their benefit. Due to the fact that culture is a set of traditions that have been passed down for centuries, the people found it challenging to maintain the two. Many of the early tribes that were present in the Pre-Islamic world found it problematic to accept the message of Islam.
Author Akinfenwa Oluwaseun also has evidence in his article “The Role of Religion in Society…” that would effectively support claims and ideas made by Salman Rushdie in “Imagine There’s No Heaven.” In his article, Rushdie was questioning the causality of some gruesome things allowed through religious practices. He proposed, “…many unbearable things-female circumcision to name just one-can be excused on culturally specific grounds, and the universality of human rights, too, can be ignored?” (Rushdie 518). This was a very strong sentence in Rushdie’s work. He takes up a sarcastic tone in this sentence, by asking if human rights can also be ignored, and it would be just fine. Obviously, Rushdie believes ignoring basic human rights is not fine,
Salman Rushdie ("Yes, This is About Islam," New York Times 11/2/01) and Jonathan Ebel ("Territory is Not Mind," Sightings 11/15/01) both make some useful points in the process of taking up the question, but somehow leave standing the president's fundamental misconception that a religion has an essence. Surely it is not fair to say that September 11 is "about" Islam. Violent hatred and intolerance can be adduced in too many corners of the religious world to imagine that it comes, simply, from the doctrines of one holy book or another. At the same time, it is difficult for me to blame Salman Rushdie, especially, for perceiving something within Islam today that is prone to violence. His non-violent, literary attack on Islam was, after all, taken by some Muslims to justify very real threats to his life.
It would simply be a secular political system in which all people are treated as equals, which is unjust as each individual has their own relationship with Allah. As much as my generation would want to believe that Islam and democracy are compatible, it simply is not possible. Indeed, both can coexist globally, but merging the two would be like trying to fix something that is not broken. The root of Islamic law is incompatible with democracy; Islam is a theocratic system where it is only Allah that may judge you.
There is a desire for a single society consisting of Muslim’s that the key in the path to economic and modern development for Southeast Asia. Daniels’ chapters focus in on specifically how the UMNO has influence Malayan’s into practising the faith wholeheartedly, because of the special benefits that they acquire from it. However, the negative effects of the Malayan unity are heavily portrayed in governmental elections. Malay rights organizations, PERKASA, emerged as opponents of UMNO. These groups focus on strengthening citizenship requirements with the intentions to exclude groups that are not of Islamic practicing faith.