veiled4allah veiled4allah: is there an Islamic fascism?

Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs Home
« Memo to Bin Laden: Go to Hell | veiled4allah archives | I don't suppose any of you know Icelandic »
Comments (5, last by PG) | Trackbacks (1 in, 0 out) | 

Email this link | Print this entry | RDF

Further Reading | Elsewhere | Search Options
Add this entry to your hotlist (View your hotlist)

is there an Islamic fascism?

Date: February 20, 2003 | 18 Dhu-l-Hijjah 1423 Hijriah
Subjects: fiqh
Some of the visions of Muslim extremists like Bin Laden are, if not technically fascist, fundamentally totalitarian. Bin Laden's political views seem to be based on those of his comrade, Ayman Zawahiri. This particular ideology is called hakimiya. Here is Zawahiri's own explanation of hakimiya:

Democracy is shirk-u-billah (assigning partners with God). The distinction between democracy and tawhid (monotheism), is that tawhid renders legislation the sole prerogative of God whereas democracy is the rule of the people for the people ..... The legislator in democracy is the people while the legislator in tawhid is the Almighty God .... Hence, democracy is shirk (idolatry) because it usurps the right to legislation from the Almighty and offers it to the people.
This view is based on the ideas of Syed Qutb:

Qutb's theory essentially views society as one of two things: Islamic or Jahili. A Muslim, by declaring his faith in Allah at the same time repudiates all man-made systems and laws. Islam represents a clean break from Jahiliyya just like the Quran was a clean break from existing literature and the Prophet and his companions were a new society, an Ummah, completely different from the Jahili society around them. There is no link, no relationship between Islam and other systems. A Muslim can not reform Jahiliyya by preaching or warning, he must obliterate it and build an Islamic Society from new foundations. This is a simplistic, but fair exposition of Qutb's thesis. He does come up with arguments that show Western Civilization as wicked and materialistic and its adverse impacts on Muslim society. The way out is al-Hakimiyya, the declaration of total sovereignty and rulership of Allah, a full revolt against human rulership in all its forms, systems and arrangements, the destruction of the kingdom of man to establish the kingdom of God on earth... A revolution based on this theory does not think of improving the existing system, of understanding it or participating in it, but of destroying it first and then building a new one. It is based on the assumption that there is nothing good in the system.
Zawahiri's hakimiya is a total perversion of Islam. Nigerian scholar Sanusi L. Sanusi says:

The reality of course is that this theory, attractive as it may be, is not Islam. The prophet (S. A. W.) never claimed that he was sent to destroy both the good and bad. Even the hadith "Al-Islam Yahdimu ma qablahu" (Islam destroys what came before it) is a portion of a hadith in Sahih Muslim quoted out of context and which refers to the evil deeds of Jahiliyya, not the good ones. The prophet said, "I have been but sent to complete noble attributes (Makarim al-Akhlaq)". He was not the first prophet. Islam was not the first message received, the Quran was not the first of revelations. The Religion of Islam, the Prophet of Islam, the Book of Islam are but fulfilments and seals to what had passed before. Allah says in the Quran "Today I have Perfected your system of belief and made full My favours bestowed upon you and chosen al-Islam as the creed for you" (Al-Ma'idah:3) Islam does not pretend to separate itself from world civilization. Indeed as the early companions expanded the dominion of Islam they borrowed extensively from what was on ground in the more politically organized States of Persia and Iraq what was necessary for the Arabs, a nomadic people, to learn as they settled in towns. Innovations were introduced to the interpretation and distribution of booty, the creation of an Islamic calendar, the opening of a Diwan (roster) for welfare from the State etc. The Muslim takes what is good from civilization around him, and leaves what is bad.
British Muslim scholar Azzam Tamimi provides an even more detailed criticism of hakimiya:

Islamists, who treat the questions of democracy or power-sharing as matters of aqidah (faith), usually have no specialised or adequate knowledge in the humanities, and are indoctrinated with some shallow Islamic literature. They tend to define things with extreme simplicity. For instance, they understand Islamic government to mean "God's rule" and democracy to mean "people's rule". No only are issues of politics too complex to be simplified in this manner, but the conception of God's rule is totally misunderstood. The early Muslims understood God's rule to be a doctrine for the emancipation of humanity so that kings and landlords no longer monopolised wealth or power or law-making, and that clergymen no longer had the right to monopolise the right to interpret God's Will or to speak in His Name. "God's rule" is a revolution which means that a governor has an executive power but not a legislative one. "God's rule" does not mean that God comes down to govern or administer humanity's affairs. "God's rule" means the sovereignty of the law, which is a fundamental thing in the modern state, the state of law and order. God's rule is therefore consistent with the rule of the people or their representatives, who in the old Islamic literature are frequently referred to as "ahl al-hall w'al-aqd" (an elected group of highly qualified and experienced individuals), within the framework of the supremacy of the Islamic law, Shari'ah.
The term "Islamofascism" is thrown around quite freely in some quarters. There is such a thing, just as there are extremist interpretations of Judaism, Christianity, and Hinduism that call for the fight against anything "other". What's wrong with the term "Islamofascist" is when some people apply it to any Muslim who seeks to an integration of Islam and politics, even if that Muslim condemns Bin Laden and Zawahiri. Such a distortion inhibits debate.

There are certain policies and certain beliefs that are fascist and rightly deserve to be called so, policies and beliefs that dehumamize those who are of a different religion or ethnic group and that promote violence against the other religion or ethnic group.

But Islam is not itself a fascist ideology. In fact, Islam condemns all such hatred and violence. I have posted about this in the past to my blog and to my website and I encourage anyone who doesn't believe me to take the time to read my archives and to browse my site.
~ Posted by Al-Muhajabah, a member of the reality-based community, at 10:00 PM

Comments

one of the top five commentors on this blog! Jonathan Edelstein said: Total comments: 91   gold stargold stargold stargold stargold star

I remember taking part in a discussion like this on soc.religion.islam a few years ago. Someone made the point that divine legislation doesn't cover everything, and that as long as shariah plays the role of a constitutional limitation, there's nothing wrong with democratic decision-making within those limits.

There's also shura, but the relationship between shura and democracy is probably worth a book in itself.


~ Posted at February 21, 2003 06:48 AM | Comment Permalink
moderator Al-Munaqabah said: Total comments: 996   gold stargold stargold stargold stargold star

One time there was a thread at a discussion board I sometimes visit about how democracy is allegedly unlawful as an Islamic system. I posted a question "what about shura". The person advocating for the other view agreed that shura was Islamic. The fact is, a good shura system could probably pass for what most people understand as "democratic" even if it isn't exactly the same as one of the Western systems. Some people who criticze "democracy" have a very specific idea of what that means and are not necessarily opposed to consultative decision-making. They just don't know enough about political theory to see the contradiction when they denounce "democracy" but support shura.

Sometimes the language we use can obscure rather than clarify the ideas that we mean.

~ Posted at February 21, 2003 03:01 PM | Comment Permalink
Thebit said: Total comments: 26   gold stargold star

Salaam Sister.

You have made a very good point.

There is a tendency among some to think that a democratic society must mean a liberal Western democracy. The peope who promote this idea are often atheists and secularists, or those with a similar world view, who abhor religion, especially if it provides a judgment on a societal matter; and, perhaps quite ironically, our own "Islamists" (to use a very poorly defined term), who, as Azzam Tamimi pointed out, have a shallow reading of Islamic literature and betray our intellectual heritage. The latter seem nothing more than demagogues.

Yes - a Muslim society will be different , very different, to a UK, or a USA, or a France and so on. It would probably be more "sober", less driven by individualism, and probably geared around socioeconomic justice. There is no shame in admitting this. Personally, I think such a society, with a much heightened moral conscious, would prosper; in fact it ought to prosper, using the word 'ought' in its fullest moral sense. And in doing so it would redefine the meaning of the phrase "social prosperity", from a society driven by the craving of wealth and status, to one which is "at ease with itself and the very fabric of the Universe."

Yet being different need not mean a Muslim society is a heaving mass of hate and rancour, ready to "chop the head off of the infidel". The shameful thing is that it is our "Islamists" promote this idea of Muslim society.

All the best. And thank you for bringing up this subject.

Salaam `alaykum

~ Posted at February 28, 2003 01:47 PM | Comment Permalink
Khan said: Total comments: 1  

Wow ....... Brother Thebit, you have put the words very nicely.

I wish I could have expressed my feelings in that way.

~ Posted at February 28, 2003 09:39 PM | Comment Permalink
one of the top five commentors on this blog! PG said: Total comments: 64   gold stargold stargold stargold stargold star

Kenneth Pollack made an interesting comment at recent State Dept. presentation about how "democracy" has gotten confused with "market capitalism," and so some Muslims are afraid that accepting democracy means they must accept Madonna and MTV and other Westernization that will damage the community's ideals of modesty, self-restraint, etc... the Puritan values, one might say.

Nor is this confusion baseless, considering that the National Security Strategy of the US essentially equates democracy and lower marginal tax rates. There is, I think, a genuine fear by some American conservatives that Muslim nations moving toward democracy will take up the European, specifically French and German, models rather than the American. Yet free-market capitalism seems less compatible with Islam's injunctions of charity, justice and interpersonal connection than the more welfarist systems of Europe.

~ Posted at March 25, 2003 08:57 AM | Comment Permalink

All comments are copyright their authors

RSS feed of comments on this entry

Finished reading and posting comments? Return to veiled4allah

Trackbacks

What is trackback?
You Pinged Me

Here's who's pinging me:

RSS feed of trackbacks to this entry

Note: The links in the "You pinged me" section are generated automatically as a way of showing who is linking to me. Display of these links does not constitute endorsement of the content of those sites.


Further reading

Recent entries

The following is a list of the ten most recent entries in veiled4allah as of Mar 02, 2006:

View a list of all entries in veiled4allah

Related entries

This entry has been tagged as covering the following subjects: fiqh. The following is a list of the ten most recent entries in Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs that share any of these tags:

A semantic analysis of this entry also suggests the following keywords to search for related content on: muslim society, islamic literature, bin laden, market capitalism, decision making, islam, Islam, democracy, god, God, Muslim, muslim, islamic, society, Islamic, rule, people, good, shura, mean, system, different, made, religion, systems

What links here: View a list of other entries in this blog (if any) that link to this entry

Or look generally for informational pages on my website tagged with fiqh

Results of Semantic Search

A semantic search of Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs suggests the following as the ten entries most closely related to this entry:



Elsewhere

External resources

Check out other web pages (if any) that I've bookmarked via del.icio.us that share the same tags: fiqh

Explore reference materials from Answers.com about these subjects: fiqh

Read news stories at Common Times about these subjects: fiqh

View search results at gada.be metasearch service for these subjects: fiqh

Find books at Amazon.com on these subjects: fiqh

Other views

Check Waypath for blog entries generally related to this entry, or Technorati or Bloglines for blog entries that link to this entry.

Technorati tags: View blog entries, bookmarks and photos tagged by others with the same subjects as this entry:



Search options

     

For external resources on the topic of this entry, you can run a search for its title is there an islamic fascism? (Google, DayPop, Feedster) or keyword(s) fiqh (Google, DayPop, Feedster). DayPop is a search engine similar to Google that focuses on searching news sources and blogs. Feedster searches blogs via RSS feeds.