Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Muslim self-rule is the answer (CAUTION: Reading involved)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 04:52 PM
Original message
Muslim self-rule is the answer (CAUTION: Reading involved)
Believing that the huge investment of human life and tax money worth trillions of dollars in the Muslim world would bring peace and prosperity to the West is no less than living in fool’s paradise...just a matter of time for the existing investment to backfire in the worst manner we can imagine...opinion makers, who promote a war within Islam, such as Thomas Friedman and Daniel Pipes, define Islamic State as a breeding ground for the terrorists...The reality, however, is in total contrast to the description the Western public is fed with by the media on daily basis. Of course, there are some basic differences between the objectives of a state in the Western thought and Islam. Once the concept of the basics is clear, it is not difficult to do a proper risk assessment and understand requirements and outcomes of the two different governing mechanisms....important fact for the Westerners to understand from the history is that Muslim masses are not independent as yet of the colonial powers. They were freed from direct colonialism only to be indirectly ruled through puppets until this day...concept of Islamic state, which has been purposely twisted and presented in a way to avoid the emergence of an Islamic State. The fear is that such form of governance mechanism will make remote control colonialism impossible on the one hand and become a challenge to the ever-growing tyrannical form of government, say in the US, on the other.

Non-Muslims need to understand that the objective of State in Islam is not to annihilate the non-Muslim world or march on country after country to impose Islamic way of life like the U.S is doing to the Muslims...Islam has its own value-system applicable to both the rulers and the ruled..Unitarianism is the fundamental principle that explains almost every aspect of doctrinal and practical Islam....The battle cry for the Western position vis-à-vis state is “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s.”<1> Islam responds with the slogan: Din wa Dawlah (Islam is religion and State). Even if this formula is not found in the Qur’an in the exact words, the entire Qur’an revelation is integrative in that it sees Muslims as moral beings who should think and act in a theo-centric manner at all times, i.e., in their capacity as State citizens, too....much-researched question whether there exists at all a definitive Islamic theory of State.<2> German orientalists such as Gustav von Grunebaum<3> and Tilman Nagel<4> tend to affirm. In fact, the Qur’an does not refer to a State in the contemporary sense at all. Rather it assumes a moral community, the Islamic Ummah, which guarantees the right physical and spiritual environment for the successful implementation of its principles and norms.

Al-Mawardi maintains that the establishment of Islamic State is a religious obligation, because its main object is the defence of the Faith and the preservation of order through the implementation of Revealed Law. He is of the view that a secular state is based on the principles derived through human reasoning, and therefore it promotes only the material advancement...misconception of unaccountability of the ruler under an Islamic system is a reality in the US today. It is known as the separation of powers..under the US concept of state accomplishes several things. First, we see that it is a continuation of checks....as the national government was purposely made inefficient, it would leave private power or the power of business or corporate elites untouched....under an Islamic form of governance it is the right of the common people to censure the head of the State and all other officials....In an Islamic State, a priestly class exercising unchecked domination and enforcing laws of its own making in the name of God is satanic rather than Divine....exposed to absolutism for the first time...one does not find as much oppressive governments as we witness today under the “democracy” of Musharraf and Mubarak....have actually become democracy of the elite or the junta in service of the powers that keep them alive....

A state based on the principles of Islam can never be a threat to non-Muslims or interests of non-Islamic states....Instead of wasting innocent lives on both sides of the divide and instead of wasting trillions of dollars of the tax-payers money...first step in this regards is ceasing external support to illegitimate rulers and other opportunists — both at Mulla and moderate extreme — who fool the West in the first place....


http://www.icssa.org/self_rule.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. No state has ever been effectively based on religious principles
Ambitious people will use religion to gain power and keep it, but it is simple lip service, not true devotion. The religious state doesn't exist, because religion will always be used to justify the pursuit of power. Does the Qu'ran outline an endless holy war until all the infidels are destroyed? Nope. But that's where interpretation comes in. If you want to lead a Christian state, its much easier to steal from your citizens if you have an outsider bogeyman to blame their troubles on, and to inspire fear. The Islamic state is a good bogeyman. On the part of an "Islamic" state, the US is a much superior bogeyman, because the warnings are closer to the truth, but the purpose is the same--keep your citizens worried about the looming outsider menace while you pick their pockets, and use their fear to maintain your authority. Oldest tricks in the book.

You just know in prehistory during an eclipse one caveman hit on the idea of saying something like "the sun god is angry, give me some extra food and I'll keep him from going out for good." He was the first religious politician. :D

I would say the religion has much less to do with the nature of the state than the personalities of the people involved in ruling. Most religions have good mandates, but religious states have been terribly corrupt and oppressive as a rule. Why? Because the particular religion has almost no impact on the human ambition and greed of the people who practice it.

Islam as a foundation has the potential to make a great nation, but a nation ruled by humans will fall into familiar pitfalls no matter what the hell the religious persuasions of its rulers are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. Let me disagree>
I see no difference between the status of 'dhimmi' in a Muslim country and that of 'Negro' in the 1920's southern states. In fact, I consider that it may be worse.

How anyone of a different gender orientation would do in a state ruled by Sharia should be a source of concern for our gay/lesbian/trangendered community. In fact, it should be a source of concern for women who do not want to be stoned for adultery when they are raped.

I am sure that by far the most Muslims do not want to convert the whole world by force, to perform female circumcision on young girls, to kill their daughters for 'honor', to encourage their children to blow themselves up so that they can kill Jews, to kill the Christians and sell their women and children into slavery. But it is indisputable that these do not seem to be problems in any but Muslim countries (counter-examples??). Now, as is said, this may be 'cultural', not Islamic. Fine, I am glad to concede the point. What has Islam done to correct the situation?

How do the people correct the ruler if he does not follow Islamic principles? Revolt & assassination? Counter-examples??? Will Christians and Jews be able to live under laws that they prefer, and tell the Islamic tax-collector to stuff it when extra taxes are imposed on them because of their religion? Will Christians be able to evangelize? What about secular humanists & atheists? Gay activists? Will Buddhists suffer the same fate as their statues in Afghanistan? How will their rights be protected?

Why was Bethelehem 80% Christian few short years ago, but now is 8-% Muslim? Why did the Christians flee Bethelehem?

I've got lots of questions, what are your answers.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Do you have a cite handy that Bethelehem was 80% Christian...
Edited on Tue Dec-30-03 08:50 PM by NNN0LHI
...a few short years ago? I would like to peruse those numbers. Thanks in advance.

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Yes, first 3 from google search "bethlehem christian muslim 80%"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I guess I will have take your word for it but I was unable to find the...
Edited on Tue Dec-30-03 10:51 PM by NNN0LHI
...numbers that you cited in your post over the last few years mentioned in any of the links that you have provided.

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. They are there, though:
from the last link given

"What has been the situation for Christians in Israel/Palestine?

In the last census conducted by the British mandatory authorities in 1947, there were 28,000 Christians in Jerusalem. The census conducted by Israel in 1967 (after the Six Day War) showed just 11,000 Christians remaining in the city. This means that some 17,000 Christians (or 61%) left during the days of King Hussein's rule over Jerusalem. Their place was filled by Muslim Arabs from Hebron.
During the British mandate period, Bethlehem had a Christian majority of 80%. Today, under Palestinian rule, it has a Muslim majority of 80%.

Few Christians remain in the Palestinian-controlled parts of the West Bank. Those who can - emigrate, and there will soon be virtually no Christians in the Palestinian Authority controlled areas. The Palestinian Authority is trying to conceal the fact of massive Christian emigration from areas under its control"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 06:42 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. My mistake. I assumed when you said this all happened over a few...
...years, that you meant...well, a few years. Not over a period of almost 6 decades as your links suggest. From your original post:

Why was Bethlehem 80% Christian few short years ago, but now is 8-% Muslim? Why did the Christians flee Bethlehem?

But now I see you are talking about this all happening since the creation of Israel in 1947. That is quite different. I guess using that logic one could say that America was a non-Christian nation a few short years ago too when the Native Americans controlled this country. At least until the Christian Europeans came here and began slaughtering them by the thousands. Glad we got that cleared up.

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Well,
Edited on Wed Dec-31-03 09:57 AM by forgethell
they both changed because of violence against the orignal inhabitants. Using the same logic, most of the ME was Christian until they were slaughtered or forcibly converted by Muslims.

But, let's just say I was wrong on this point. What about the other points. do YOU want to live in an Islamic Republic, or the Caliphate? I don't.

on edit: "America" was not 'A' nation before Eurpeans arrived, but rather several hundred, also known as 'tribes'. What did a Cherokee have in common with a Ute?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Let me begin by apologizing to DuctapeFatwa for hijacking his thread
I did find the story you posted interesting. I have been thinking about the premise. I am going to read it again and give it some more thought before commenting. Thanks for the post DF.

Don

Hi again forgethell. To answer your question of would I want to live in an Islamic Republic, or the Caliphate? Actually, I do not want to live in any type of theocracy, whether it was Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or whatever. But that is my choice. On the other hand it would appear to me that if the majority of a country does want to live in such a religious political system, I should have no right to interfere in any way.

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. But what about theminority?
As most of the people in the USA are at least nominally Chirstian, do they have the right to impose a theocracy against the minority? Don't bother to mention the constitution, after all, that can be amended. It doesn't even have to be amended. With the "right" kind of justices and judges, it could just be re-interpreted, you know, a "living document".

So if you would not want to live in a theocracy, and your rights trump those of the majority, why do you deny that to other, less fortunate people?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Of course we won't know until colonization whirls on down the drain

but it is unlikely that the state that emerges will be a caliphate, or even much of a "theocracy" as is commonly meant.

My speculation is that what you will end up with will be several nations who have an "official religion" as do many western european nations, and who operate along the principles of an Islamic economic system, which is the big secret of what the west is afraid of!

Aside from the obvious - people who govern themselves are less controllable than colonies, or populations kept under the iron fist of dictators who are willing to sell their mama for a dollar - and their oil for a little more - what the western corporations fear are the implications of the Islamic economy, practiced by over a billion people!

Just as an example, imagine if tomorrow, somebody pulled a coup in Saudi Occupied Arabia and announced that henceforth, they will not accept federal reserve notes from the US, or any other product of Alan Greenspan's admittedly remarkable imagination - but oil can be purchased only with silver certificates - or gold. :)

It is also important to remember that when people talk of a Caliphate, they are not usually talking about the final days of the Ottoman Empire, but a short time during the life of the Prophet Mohammed where a relatively small group of people developed a model community, not unlike some of the early Chritian communities in Antioch, etc.

Golden moments seen with the clarity of centuries of roseate hindsight are not likely to be recreated under the auspices of any faith tradition.

Another secret - the wild-eyed mullahs are the west's best friend in preventing any sort of democracy, self-rule, or "freedom," Islamic or secular, and when you take into consideration the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans do not know the difference between Islamic principles and pre-Islamic tribal customs, (and frequently present the same arguments against the latter that Mohammed did, to the great amusement of many who HAVE read the Koran );) it is not surprising that the meme "Islamic State" auto-generates in the western mind a mental jpeg of a frothymouthed, illiterate Mullah raving about women's socks.

Self-rule, not only for countries with large Muslim populations, but for the entire Majority World, is inevitable, and will not, and should not be expected to look like the west.

El Salvador is not Iowa, and Indonesia is not Connecticut.

The end of colonization will mean some changes, and those changes will impact negatively on US business interests. After all, we are talking about places who have put those US business interests ahead of the welfare of their own people for centuries.

But for most people, in both west and east, self-rule will open the door to progress, understanding, and the diminuition of ignorance.

And that's a Good Thing (TM)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. DTF
YOU ROCK!!! :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. Don't get me wrong
I'm for self-rule by anybody. but, with this right comes responsibilities. One is to livein peace with your neighbor. if the Palestinians had been willing to do this, they could have had self-rule decades ago.

would they have had everyhing they wanted, no. But they haven't got it now,either, and many, many, many innocent people have been killed to no point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Oh those sub-human brown folks
who can't sem to get it right! :eyes:
Your knowledge of the region's history seems to be sorely lacking.
The indigenous Jews of the region WAY BACK in the WAY BACK were NOT so excited about the influx of FOREIGN JEWS, but were marginalized MUCH as the ISRAELIS who recognize the need for PEACE WITH UNDERSTANDING are today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Now why do some people
always think it is about race?

Or are you trying to say that the palestinians DON't want to push Israel into the sea? My knowledge of the area is not that of an expert, but I do rread more than one source for my information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangeone Donating Member (395 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Maybe

They don't like living under occupation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Muslim occupation?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangeone Donating Member (395 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. Israeli

So you think that the IDF check whether or not a Palestinian is Christian or Muslim before shooting him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. I think they check
if they are rioting, attacking Israeli troops, smuggling bomb-making equipment. In that case, I doubt if they would care if they were Muslim, Christian, or Jewsih.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChemEng Donating Member (314 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
16. How would you (and others in Muslim states) react if
all of the nominal Christian countries in the world decided to become "Christian States"? Say basically all of the countries in the Americas, all of Europe, Australia, and most of Africa? Anyone not a Christian would be branded an infidel, unless they converted? I don't think anyone wants to see that, do they? Then why would they want to see an Islamic state? It is too damn easy for corrupt leaders to hijack Islam for their own purposes. Do we need to look any further than Iran for proof? Or Afghanistan and the Taliban?

I think the Muslim religion has been hijacked by people who want power, and care not a whit about religion. Especially when I hear phrases like:

Islam responds with the slogan: Din wa Dawlah (Islam is religion and State). Even if this formula is not found in the Qur’an in the exact words, the entire Qur’an revelation is integrative in that it sees Muslims as moral beings who should think and act in a theo-centric manner at all times, i.e., in their capacity as State citizens, too....much-researched question whether there exists at all a definitive Islamic theory of State.

I prefer that states were secular, and free from religious influences. That way, I don't have to worry about crazy mullahs or crazy priests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. I think the author understands that westerners feel that they know

what is best for people in other parts of the world, and naturally there is a special concern about the Middle East, whose natural resources have been so profitable for western business interests.

However, this particular piece is about people in other parts of the world deciding for themselves what is best for them.

Just as in the United States, as legalized apartheid drew to a close, few African-Americans watched it go with regret, even though they understood that many white people sincerely believed that segregation was the best plan for them, as western colonialism fades into its twilight, it is only natural that an increasing number will respectfully decline to defer to what Sahib feels is best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChemEng Donating Member (314 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Will Sahib defer to Ahmed?
What if some, or most, muslims don't want your version of an Islamic state? Or is that just T.S.?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
20. What?? Let the people decide?? Scary idea!!
What would happen if the people decided to elect some fundamentalist??

One that would do his best to curtail a woman's rights over her own body?

Do his damnedest to make sure that marriage is only allowed if it is based on the his religion's definition of it.

Claims that "God" is on his country's side and invoke His name after every speech.

Give massive tax breaks to religious organizations?

Advocate financing religious organizations to do "charitable" work?

Appear at a racist college and praise their religiosity?

Say that his inspiration is a book that advocates killing the enemies of the religion it espouses, slavery, mutilation, stoning of adulterers, blasphemers, and homosexuals, warring on women (except virgins) and children, the subjugation of women, among other bloodthirsty acts, and commands it's followers to convert everyone to it's faith? A religion with a rich history of bloodshed, tyranny, and suppression of learning?

Pretty scary stuff. Sure glad it couldn't happen here...because we have God on our side and his prophet in office.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. You're GOOD!
Guten Rutsch! :party: :toast: :party:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
22. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. Here. go read my New Year message. you're not outraged enough
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Character Assassin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-04 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. I'm outraged only that you would want anyone to take that crap seriously
It has all the classic hallmarks to fool the historically challenged, including the dubious application of certain catch phrases designed to impair thinking and incite emotionalism ("a land born of genocide") and even takes a stab at quasi-existentialism ("Is the United States a nation at all? In the sense that it declares itself to be so, and thereby becomes one according to the institutions and constructs of its own design, sure.")

The Politburo and Party thanks you.

The process of reclaiming the continent has begun. And yes, it is one continent.


While you're busy plotting out the Reconquista, the rest of us will be busy actually having a life.

It was remarkably clever of Mr Jefferson to pen his own remake of the Great Law of the Iroquois, and it is remarkably courageous of the Founders to apply themselves to the task of wresting it from the slimy maw of exploitation in a capitalism T shirt and install it firmly in the temple of Hope.


Yawn. This is too common a fallacy. The Iroquois were indeed an influence, but minor in comarison to the Enlightenment itself, and to consider what Jefferson achieved as merely a 'remake' of what they already did is to display a hate of truth as transparent as the slanted history behind your diatribe.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChemEng Donating Member (314 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-04 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Islam has not yet had its Reformation.
Christian nations were exactly where Muslim nations were 500 years ago.

When muslim countries can shed the cloak of the mullahs (as we shed the Pope after centuries of wars), things might improve.

The U.S. unfortunately is going backwards in the church/state arena.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 12:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC