Islam and Democracy
Introduction
The literature that has been written about Islam and democracy are both highly complicated in terms of interpretation of the fundamentals of democracy and are in an equal sense argued from several points of reference. These factors are compelling and are significant to the level of democracy in the Islamic world. The comparative debate presented in arguments by Irfan Ahmad and Bernard Lewis creates major literature that reveals the limitations in this path of inquiry. The main proposition in their argument is the discussion of the cliché aspect that surrounds Islam and their objective levels. The core metrics factored proportionally are divergent and arbitrarily compatibility with democracy and the question of democratization within Muslim communities. The important factors captured within several facets regarding conflict that Islamic fundamentalists operation recreate the espoused metrics of democratic values. In the mainstream analysis, the operational framework includes the notions of democratic incompetency and within each core model, religious attributes are factored proportionally alongside the radicalized elements in the Muslim world. The western world’s views on Islamic democratic values demonstrate a more perilous viewpoint within the anti-factual synthesis. However, according to the articles, the important classifications of the specific changes in the Islamic society today is the important modernization of its institutions, seeped up with adequate infrastructure that is aimed at enhancing democratic campaigns. However, evidenced research proves that the religious hardliners and conservative Muslims do not operate within internationally accepted democratic values, albeit of the required change factors within its logical democratic composition.
According to Lewis (1996) Islam, holds all forms of government that are non-constitutional as well as non-parliamentary as being the greatest sin by humans. However in Irfan (2011), the direction towards transnational social movement is a permeable truth which is examined within the basics of narrowed conceptualization of facts. The two theoretical approaches are at the very least antagonistic and the authors are at pain to explain the link between Islam and democracy and how their interlinked levels are comprehensive for their positions. In a pervasively changing mode, the theory of Abdulkalam Azad indicates an overriding argument regarding the centrality of Islam in enhancing democracy.
The valuable construct in this analysis examines what pro-democratic values involve. The critical path of this argument links the theological composition in a closer scrutiny, for instance in the ways that Quran and hadith teach. Democracy being non present in the Muslim world has led to the generation of several explanations that preceded the third wave that presented the difficulties in identification of Islamic leadership that was reputable as a democratic advocate as the question inevitably took the direction of the cultural issue. As such, it is from this framework that the main question presented "is there compatibility between Islam and democracy (Lewis, 1996). Islam has been presented as an exception that is dramatic in the secular patterns as the church or state in its dualism has never been emerging in which case in these terms Islam has long been in existence as a state with the variation being in the religion, civilization as well as a political system with the latter being very hostile to democracy.
The first two factors according to Lewis, (1996) show hostility towards democracy because as from the state, the interpenetration of the state and religion has much been focused on the underlying aspect of the fundamentalism of Islam by the west. Lewis, (1996) further, stated that the Islamic democracy is deficits in freedom. However, this argument has not been entirely explained in relation to poverty or the natural resource wealth of oil but instead, holding the appearance of something concerning the nature of Islam by itself. Irfan Ahmad begins by stating the nature of the debate as standard with the question of the point of entry that is productive to which he reveals the there is. His argument comprises of propositions that are interlocking with the initial proposition being the shift of the debate from the field of normativity to the practice domain. Thus, the premise of incompatibility and compatibility reside on the premise of the belief that is unitary with an impulse that is reified and normative as the ultimate variable.
The argument based on Irfan, (2011) takes on democracy and Islam in self evidence with both being reified that creates a line of reason that is somewhat misleading in terms of its theological discourse. In his argument, Irfan, (2011) states that democracy cannot flourish in the communities of Muslims unless Muslims become democratic and inclined towards their religious positions. This assumption is untenable even in Western relations as the origin of democracy that lies in the argument of Roy Oliver, who states that if we waited for everyone to become a democracy they the French would still be under a monarchy. Furthermore, his argument is rooted in the anthropological understanding of historical and societal aspects as discourse has long been lagging behind a framework centered on the practice that holds no sensitivity to normal textual context.
On the other hand, Bernard Lewis presents his argument in the approach of Islam holding several meaning with one of them denoting religion as a belief system with worship, doctrine and ideals that originate from a monotheistic family with religious scripture. By further, creating a discourse in the pre-empted religious component, the presentation by Lewis, (2011) captures the attributes of religious integration, and the matrix of Islamic interests. In simpler terms, Bernard Lewis states that the entire civilization had been natured beneath the aegis of religion despite being subject to multiple variations. In a further review, Lewis further states that even if they remain confined to defining Islam in religious terms the distinctions that are a significant need to be drawn. Optimally, his argument points to the fact that Islamic according to the Koran and the religious, traditional practices of Prophet Mohammed must be governed and propagated by truly aided operations mechanisms (Lewis, 1996). These were in existence prior to the back fall and corruption of later generations and the present reintroduction of doctrine of Islam and holy laws in its intellectual structure of classical Islamic theory. This presents according to the author a clear incompatibility with democracy that is liberal as it is regarded with contempts as a corrupting and corrupt form of governance.
How the authors formulate their arguments
In the first instance in historical perspective Bernard Lewis states that no encouragement is provided in regions holding predominant Muslims. Lewis’ argument points to the substantiation of the role that limited presentation of democracies that are functional with Turkey being the only country within the organization of Islamic countries to pass off an important democratic principle. Another historical aspect in Lewis, (1996) is the eminence of historical and cultural absence, and this included the belief of citizen with no reference to wording in Arabic or Persian for citizen with the cognate terming applied being the "countryman". This differs from the English wording connotation of citizen being derived from the Latin word civis which in Greek polites means the participation of one in affairs of the polices. On the contrary, the penetrative scope of Ifran (2011) examines social injustice, disorientation of values and lack of non reflective mechanisms relative to Arabic cultures and that of the Persian.
Ifran, (2011) in the same regard highlights evidenced factors and elements of discernment in Islamic law as well as traditions that are comprehended in the changing natural state of the law and democratic values. Accordingly, Ifran explains that Islam holds strong traditional disapproval of the rule that is arbitrary with institutions that are central in the sovereign traditional Islamic state as caliphate as defined by Sunni jurists as being contractual and consensual. These hold features that are contractual as well as consensual with a distinction from caliphs of specific despots. In his centralistic view, Ifran, (2011) points an enthusiastic level whereby the exercise of political power being developed and presented in terms of a contract with bounds created in mutual obligation between the ruler and those being ruled. Subjects in this case are bound by duty to obey the rule and execute his orders with the ruler also holding the duties in regard to the subject that are bear similarities with established cultures. Dissolving of the contract upon failure of the ruler of fulfillment as well as ceasing the capability of such obligations was rare which the author presents as an insight into elements of consent in the traditional Islamic perception of government.
Assumptions made by the authors
Several hadith descriptions offer the prescription of obedience as on obligation within the subject with certain indication regarding expectations; such as, one instance that refers to "not obeying a creature against the creator" this is simpler terms refers to the human not obeying the command as it stands in violation of the law that is divine. The other statement that holds a similarity is that there is no duty to sinful obedience that is as if to state that the sovereign commands are somewhat sinful with lapses in the duty of obedience with is worthy to be noted as utterances that are prophetic with the direction being so simplistic fights. As such disobedience is held in the same familiarity with Western political through without divine ordainment in the duty of disobedience. In the descent from the degrees of the realm of principles in the actual occurrence, we still observe existence of a checkered course although the centered point remains within elements in Islamic culture as a favor to democratic institutions in their development.
Strength and weaknesses of the author’s arguments
One of the Islamic belief states in its traditional ascriptions of remarks by the prophet Muhammad in the statement "variations in opinion within the community as that is the mercy of God as a sign". In other terms diversification is a concept that is welcomed and not matter of suppression with the typification of the behavior being Sunni Muslims in the acceptance even currently in the four varied schools in the jurisprudence that is Islamic (Lewis, 1996). Muslims hold the notion of the holy laws as a divine inspiration as well as a guide with four significant variations in schools of thought concerning the law. The ideal being the possibility of orthodox notions even with existing variations with the creation of principles as the acceptance of diversification as well as the tolerance that is mutual in the variations of opinion that cannot surely be negative in a parliamentary government. The final aspect worth mentioning is the Islamic inventory mention of the double qualities concerning dignity as well as humility with even the subjects in their humble opinion as they hold the dignity that is personal in the traditional Islamic perception as well as the avoidance of ignorance by leadership. In customs by the Ottoman for instance, the rulers received main state dignitaries in holy days as the position was held for receiving them as a sign that is in respect of the law with the enthroning of the new sultan being greeted by cries that stated "the sultan should not be proud" God is greater that you".
Conclusions reached by the authors
The initial thousand years in the history of Islam have been presented in the relationship of civilians to Christendom as being of dominance with the Spanish loss as well that of Portugal in the remote periphery of the west having minimal impact in the heartlands of Islam. This exceeded the compensation in the advance in the direction towards Europe's continental heart such that as late 1683 Ottoman army lay in encampment before the gates of Vienna. This is in addition to an earlier period in the seventeenth century the corsairs in Northern Africa experienced raids as far north of the British Isles within the early period of the nineteenth century (Irfan, 2011). However, the power of Islam was in clear retreat of the growth of Europe as they sought themselves as being targets of conquest as well as colonization as Muslims held the natural wonder of the wrong growth. Islam had always been held in the general success of terms of the world unlike the foundation of Christianity were the founder was crucified, as his followers viewed the religion as being the faith that was official in the Roman Empire only after there was persecution of the minority. On the other hand, the Mohammed established the state within his lifetime of in which he also existed as the ruler with collection of taxes, dispensation of justice, promulgation of laws, commanding of armies as well as the making of peace. Furthermore, the education of Muslims with the chagrining of the newfound potency is a factor that levels at the periphery of changing positions of power and politics.
The case made by the arguments of the author
Islam as mentioned in the arguments above by the authors stems from the start of the interpretation that is nearly identical to the power of cult or religion, as well as the state with Mohammed being only the prophet but the ruler. This is the respect that holds the same resemblance of Judaism in the Old Testament that is similar to Christianity. It should be noted that Christianity has undergone reoccurrence as well as being endured for centuries under the persecution that is official prior to the creation of the state as well religion within Rome under the ruler ship of Emperor Constantine in the period of the fourth century (Lewis, 1996). The distinction continues to be maintained between powers that are temporal and spiritual this long before the Christian states were in existence with no exception holding the distinction of the throne and altar as well as the church and the state.
Conclusion drawn from these articles
The work of Irfan Ahmad explores holistically the comprehensive framework which is established on the relevant Islamic doctrines. In his analysis, the forecast is relevantly based on ethical, political and economic factors. From an analytical perspective and in reference of his articles, the core models expanded within the course of underlying the pervasiveness of Islamic institutions equally explain its comparative link with the bureaucracies of Islam. Irfan Ahmad’s perception examines in depth the Middle East crisis, the background information and a research and informed position. His establishment captures the essence of war, how violations of human rights were carried out and how the West aided the democratization process in the Middle East. Based on the analytical changeover of pro-democratic elements, it is evidenced comparatively that the critical levels of analyzing the research levels and leverages in Islamic regimes only demonstrate the level of intolerance measured within this level.
Thus, within this factor, there is a notable displacement of a disentangled religious measurement impression which thus examines in a more dynamic level the external relationship between the Islamic ethical values and the existing perceptions in democracy. In a perfect point, Irfan has been exclusively guided by other comparative texts and works that directly relate to the impact of Islamic revolution, rule of law and the ethical perspectives that are measured within his point of view.
References
Lewis, Bernard (1996). Islam and Liberal Democracy: A Historical Overview. Journal of Democracy, Volume 7, Issue 2, 52-63.
Irfan Ahmad (2011). Democracy and Islam. Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 37, Issue 4, pp. 459 – 470.
Steven, F. M., (2002). Islam and Authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy 55 (1): 4-37.
