Incompatibility of Islam and Democracy - Essay Example

Incompatibility of Islam and Democracy Introduction Typically, there is a contemporary notion that the religious concept of Islam and the political ideology of democracy have limited compatibility. Occasionally, proponents of democracy encounter substantial opposition from proponents of Islamic law. Opposition between political institutions and religious systems usually presents some of the most challenging moments in a given state. Religious systems like Islam allow limited and even no freedoms to citizens. On the contrary, democracy holds liberalism as one of its core pillars. Based on the difference in ideology and conceptual frameworks between Islam and democracy, it has been almost impossible for these two systems to coexist harmoniously. The nature of Islam as a religion accounts for the reason why democracy is a distant vision in the vast Muslim world. Muslim scholars and political philosophers have conducted numerous empirical studies meant to establish the relationship between Islam and democracy. Most of these empirical studies are motivated by the fact that there has been a profound resistance of democracy by Muslims; thus indicating that Islam and democracy are not compatible. Modern Islamic States As an illustration of the aforementioned incompatibility, we will discuss interaction of religion and democracy in modern Islamic states like Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Indonesia. Admittedly, Saudi Arabia has been an absolute monarchy state since time immemorial. Citizens of Saudi Arabia have never participated in any political election (58-59).1 The only reason for this absence of participation is attributed to the fact that the absolute monarchy system in Saudi Arabia does not permit formation of political parties. The king, who is the leader of the royal family, literally rules the nation. However, the king must comply with Islamic law, commonly referred to as the Sharia. This means all functions and decisions of the royal leadership are made in accordance with provisions of Sharia. Influence of Islam remains fully practical particularly because the royal leadership performs all the executive, judicial and legislative functions.2 Presently, Saudi Arabia is an example of modern states where Islam remains fully influential in social, economic and political platforms. Unlike Saudi Arabia, Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy state. Citizens participate in election of parliamentary representatives. However, the king of Malaysia is appointed by a royal council of hereditary rulers. Citizens have limited participation in high-level politics. Recently, political parties like the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party have intensified the fight for restoration of Islamic law in national governance. However, the national government of Malaysia is keen to protecting the already gained democratic rights of its citizens. In Indonesia, a major constitutional amendment led to substantial reforms where the first democratic presidential election was conducted in 2004.3 Since then, Indonesia has witnessed gradual decline in interaction between Islam and political institutions. At this juncture, it emerges that strict adherence to Islamic law leaves no room for democracy in a nation. However, weakening influence of Islam in a state leads to a corresponding increase in democracy. Principles of Islam In order to understand the role of religion as a determinant factor of political systems, it would be appropriate to acknowledge the fundamental principles of the conflicting religious and political entities. In this case, understanding principles of both Islam and democracy will be instrumental in developing a comprehensive argument regarding to the absence of compatibility between these two systems. For a fact, strict compliance with Islam leaves no room for democracy. The Quran, which is the strongest cornerstones of Islam, strongly advocates against democracy in state governance. In Quran (33:36), it says, “It is not fitting for a believer, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have contrary opinion about their decision.”4 In addition, Quran (4:59) says, “Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and all those in authority”. Based on these two verses from the Quran, it emerges that all Muslims are subject to rulers allegedly appointed by Allah and His Messenger Mohammed as directed by the religious doctrine. Any contrary opposition in form of liberalism and democratic ideas amounts to disobedience of Allah.5 In this regard, it is evident that Islam is committed to preserving the underlying religious doctrine at the expense of people’s rights. Principles of Democracy Democracy feature as the most successful political ideologies today. However, contrary ideologies like socialism and communism still presents challenges in the progress of democracy. In addition, dogmatic religions like Islam also act as roadblocks in the smooth course of democracy. Democracy is a complex form of political liberalism which emphasizes on a leadership of the people, by the people and for the people. The first pillar of democracy is constitutionalism. A constitution is a set of artificial laws which not only secures citizens’ rights but also limit authority of governments. Constitutional laws are mostly derived from secular inspirations rather than religious beliefs. The second pillar of democracy is the participative role of citizens in elections. In democracy, no leader is deemed legitimate until he or she is freely elected by the majority. Thirdly, democracy asserts on the protection of minority rights and interest groups. This means any citizen or minute groups of citizens can challenge a government’s position without any risk of harassment and prejudice from the leaders.6 In this regard, it is acknowledgeable that democracy is solely interested in thriving from the wellsprings of popular support and preservation of individuals’ rights. Interaction between Islam and democracy can be comprehended by analyzing the social, political and economic platforms of a society Social Platform Socially, democracy provides a large room for cultural liberalism. Liberalism involves provisions of fairness and equality in social aspects like freedom of speech, freedom of worship, and entitlement to civil rights. In democratic states like U.S, individual citizens are at liberty to exercise self-realized desires like freedom of religious association, freedom of sexual orientation and equality in terms of social recognition by the state; as long as pursuit of these freedoms does not explicitly infringe on the rights and freedoms of other citizens. However, this liberalized principle of social democracy is not applicable in Islamic states.7 For example in Saudi Arabia, each citizen must be associated with Islam doctrines, and performance of Islam prayers is mandatory five times daily. Citizens enjoy limited freedom in terms of dress code and choice of sexual orientation. At any point in time, the Saudi society will not turn a blind eye to any form of social conduct that fails to comply with Islamic guidelines. For example, consumption of alcoholic beverages is explicitly prohibited (122).8 It emerges that Islam does not only command and forbid its followers from engaging in specific acts, but also punish anyone found violating Sharia law. Saudi Arabia has a special unit of religious police meant to enforce Sharia in social settings. Anyone found with possession of drugs and other forbidden items risk lifetime imprisonment or a death penalty. However, democratic societies like U.K and U.S allows any citizen above the age of 21 to purchase and consume alcoholic beverages. Inasmuch as drug abuse and related offenses are controlled within a democratic environment, underlying laws are often relaxed to permit enough space for individual rights (103).9 In comparison, it is evident that Islam and democracy have limited compatibility in social platforms. Economic Platform Economically, Islam and democracy appears to have a rather unexpected relationship. Undeniably, capitalism is another cornerstone of democracy. A given society cannot be said to practice democracy when individuals in that society enjoy limited economic freedoms and rights. Conventionally, it would be expected that Islam would totally discourage capitalism because it accords economic freedom to individuals. However, practical economic contexts indicate that inasmuch as it is primordially a Western concept, Islam shows a partial support for capitalism (116).10 Technically, the economic concept of capitalism motivates individual citizens of a nation to pursue creation of as much wealth as they desire. Throughout the pursuit for wealth, the government takes a reserved position and exerts limited influence on individuals’ economic undertakings. The only intervention by the government comes in during objective legislation of economic policies and taxation. Admittedly, absence of explicit economic laws in Sharia is the main reason of this unexpected interaction between Islam and the democratic concept of capitalism. Capitalism originated in Europe. On the other hand, Islam originated in the Middle East. Despite lack of commonality in origins, both capitalism and Islam holds dearly the permission for individual ownership of private property. For example, manufacturing companies in Iran are owned by private organizations. Products from these companies are priced freely according to dictates of free market economy. In addition, production and sale of Iranian natural products like oil and natural gas is performed by multiple independent companies. In fact, the government of Iran exerts limited control on the oil industry, and has been known to formulate legislations meant to support competitiveness (127).11 The government only mitigates on the vices of capitalism like inflation by increasing monetary lending and reducing interest rates. At this juncture, it appears that Islamic states like Iran, which practice Sharia law, encourage proliferation of capitalism by discouraging monopoly and encouraging individual accumulation of wealth. Political Platform Politically, Islam and democracy portrays the most distant relationship compared to economic and social platforms. The primary purpose of democracy is to recognize and nurture ideas and wishes of the majority, while preserving rights and freedoms of the minority. Contrarily, Islam has a primary purpose of recognizing and nurturing virtues of Islam as inscribed in the Quran.12 Supposedly, Islam recognizes a state or a nation as an entity meant to establish and develop Islamic values. However, democracy recognizes a state as an entity created to establish and safeguard interests of the majority, regardless of whether those interests are religious, economic or social in nature. This explains why Islam suppresses all kinds of political ideologies emphasized by democracy, like popular election of leaders, secular legislation of laws and precedence of civil voices over those of leaders in authority. On the other hand, democracy seeks to uphold the rule of secular laws and expression of popular support at all expenses. Religion takes a back stage in democratic politics while in Islamic states like Saudi Arabia, religion takes the center stage in politics.13 In Saudi Arabia and other Islamic states, the concept of popular election is a myth to its citizens. It sounds like an inconceivable dream because the political center stage is automatically assumed by the royal family. King Abdullah, the current leader of Saudi Arabia, came into power not because of people’s support but as a result of royal privilege. Anyone with political ambitions to change both internal and external policies of Saudi Arabia must be from the most powerful clan of the royal families. Despite one’s superiority in political ideas and genuine willingness to helping citizens, he or she will never get a chance to run for the top seat because Saudi Arabia does not have a system for popular elections. International agencies often accuse the Saudi royal family of intense corruption and runaway abuse of civil rights. In democratic settings, any leader accused of practicing corruption risks impeachment from office because citizens have substantial control in governance.14 However, Islam does not permit the control of state by its citizens. According to Islam, all powers of the state together with the willingness to execute those powers belong to the king as a caliphate of Allah.15 Primarily, Islam asserts that Allah’s caliphate has full powers to partially or even wholly deprive citizens of their rights and freedoms. Conclusion In conclusion, it is acknowledgeable that Islam and democracy are synonymous to identical poles of two magnet bars. Any attempt to bring identical poles close to each other results in an inherent resistance. In this context, any attempt to merge Islam and democracy yields an inevitable failure. Incongruence of Islam and democracy is not as a result of limited efforts and willingness of respective proponents. It is because of opposing difference in the fundamental principles of both Islam as a religious system and democracy as a political ideology. Bibliography Donohue, John and John Esposito. Islam in Transition: Muslim Perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Esposito, John L. Saudi Arabia, the Flexibility of Islamic Fundamentalism. Pittsburg: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. Jung, Dietrich. "Globalization, State Formation and Religion in the Middle East: ‘Is Islam Incompatible with Democracy?’." Turkish Studies 9, no. 10 (2004): 12-34. Khatab, Sayed, and Gary, Bouma. Democracy in Islam, 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2007. Midlarsky, Manus. "Democracy and Islam: Implications for Civilization Conflict and the Democratic Peace." International Studies Quarterly 2, no. 5 (2008): 121-146. Norris, Pippa, and Ronald Inglehart. "Islamic Culture and Democracy: Testing the Clash of Civilizations." Comparative Sociology 12, no. 3 (2002): 34-39. Ramage, Douglas. Politics in Indonesia: Democracy, Islam, and the Ideology of Tolerance. London: Routledge, 2005. Slann, Martin. "The Incompatibility of Islam and Democracy: How each is irrevocably and diametrically opposed to the other." International Studies Quarterly 31, no. 7 (2010): 98-120. Read More