Is Democracy Consistent with Islam?
Most
people are under the impression that democracy and Islam are somehow
incompatible. However, I don’t see any contradiction between democracy
and Islam, as such. Although, I admit, there is some friction between
Islam and liberalism.
When we say
there is a contradiction between Islam and democracy, we make a category
mistake which is a serious logical fallacy. There is a fundamental
difference between democracy and liberalism. Democracy falls in the
category of politics and governance, whereas liberalism falls in the
category of culture. We must be precise about the definitions of terms
that we employ in political science.
Democracy is
simply a representative political system that ensures representation,
accountability and the right of electorate to vote governments in and to
vote governments out. In this sense, when we use the term democracy, we
mean a multi-party, representative political system that confers
legitimacy upon a government which comes to power through an election
process which is a contest between more than one political parties in
order to ensure that it is voluntary. Thus, democracy is nothing more
than a multi-party, representative political system.
Some normative
scientists, however, get carried away in their enthusiasm and ascribe
meanings to technical terminology which are quite subjective and
fallacious. Some will use the adjective liberal to describe the essence
of democracy as liberal democracy while others will arbitrarily call it
informed or enlightened democracy. In my opinion, the only correct
adjective that can be used to describe the essence of democracy is
representative democracy.
After settling
on theoretical aspect, let us now apply these concepts to the reality
of practical world, and particularly to the phenomena of nascent
democratic movements of the Arab Spring. It’s a fact that the ground
realities of the Arab and Islamic worlds fall well short of the ideal
liberal democratic model of the developed Western world.
However, there
is a lot to be optimistic about. When the Arab Spring revolutions
occurred in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen, and before the Arab
Spring turned into an abysmal winter in Libya and Syria, some utopian
dreamers were not too hopeful about the outcome of those movements.
Unlike the
socialist revolutions of 1960s and 1970s, when the visionaries of yore
used to have a magic wand of bringing about a fundamental structural
change that would culminate into equitable distribution of wealth
overnight, the neoliberal democratic movements of the present times are
merely a step in the right direction that will usher the Arab and
Islamic worlds into an era of relative peace and progress.
The Arab Spring movements are not led by the likes of Gamal Abdel Nasser, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Jawahar Lal Nehru
and other such charismatic messiahs that socialist thinkers are so fond
of. But these revolutions are the grassroots movements of a society in
transition from an abject stagnant state toward a dynamic and
representative future.
Let us be
clear about one thing first and foremost: any government – whether
democratic or autocratic – would follow the same economic model under
the contemporary global political and economic dispensation. It’s a
growth-based neoliberal model as opposed to an equality-based socialist
model. It’s a fact that the developing, Third World economies with large
populations and meager resources cannot be compared with the social
democracies of Scandinavian countries where per capita incomes are more
than $40,000.
A question
would naturally arise that what would the Arab Spring movements
accomplish if the resultant democratic governments would follow the same
old neoliberal and growth-centered economic policies? It should be kept
in mind here that democracy is not the best of systems because it is
the most efficient system of governance. Top-down autocracies are more
efficient than democracies.
But democracy
is a representative political system. It brings about a grassroots
social change. Enfranchisement, representation, transparency,
accountability, checks and balances, rule of law and consequent
institution-building, nation-building and consistent long term policies;
political stability and social prosperity are the rewards of
representative democracy.
Immanuel Kant
sagaciously posited that moral autonomy produces moral responsibility
and social maturity. This social axiom can also be applied to politics
and governance. Political autonomy and self-governance engender
political responsibility and social maturity.
A top-down
political system is dependent on the artificial external force that
keeps it going. The moment that external force is removed, the society
reverts back to its previous state and the system collapses. But a
grassroots and bottom-up political system evolves naturally and
intrinsically. We must not expect from the Arab Spring movements to
produce results immediately. Bear in mind that the evolution of the
Western culture and politics happened over a course of many centuries.
More to the
point, the superficially “socialist” Arab revolutions of 1960s and 1970s
only mobilized the elite classes. Some working classes might have been
involved, but the tone and tenor of those revolutions was elitist and
that’s the reason why those revolutions failed to produce desirable
long-term results. The Arab Spring movements, by contrast, have
mobilized the urban middle class of the Arab societies in the age of
electronic media and information technology.
In the
nutshell, if the Arab Spring movements are not about radical
redistribution of wealth, or about creating a liberal utopia in the
Middle East overnight, what is the goal of these movements then? Let me
try to explain the objectives of the Arab Spring movements by way of an
allegory.
Democracy is
like a school and people are like children. We only have two choices:
one, to keep people under paternalistic dictatorships; two, to admit
them in the school of representative democracy and let them experience
democracy as a lived reality rather than some stale and sterile theory.
The first option will only breed stunted bigots, but the second option
will engender an educated human resource that doesn’t just consume
resources but also creates new resources.
Finally, I
would like to clarify that the militant phenomena in Libya and Syria has
been distinct and separate from the political and democratic phenomena
of the Arab Spring movements as in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen.
A question
arises that when political movements for enfranchisement turn violent,
do their objectives cease to be legitimate? No, the objectives remain
the same, but from a pacifist standpoint, we ought to make a distinction
between political movements for democratic reforms, to which we should
lend our moral support; and the militant phenomena, which must be
avoided at any cost due to immense human suffering that proxy wars and
military interventions anywhere in the world inevitably entail.
In legal
jurisprudence, a distinction is generally drawn between lawful and
unlawful assembly. It is the inalienable right of the people to
peacefully assemble to press their demands for political reform. But the
moment such protests become militarized and violent, they cease to be
lawful.
Expecting from
heavily armed militants, as in Libya and Syria, who have been described
by the Western mainstream media as “moderate rebels,” to bring about
political reform and positive social change is not only naïve but is
bordering on insanity.
*
Note to readers: please click the share
buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on
your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Nauman Sadiq
is an Islamabad-based attorney, columnist and geopolitical analyst
focused on the politics of Af-Pak and Middle East regions,
neocolonialism and petro-imperialism. He is a frequent contributor to
Global Research.
Featured image is from Kodak Agfa
The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Nauman Sadiq, Global Research, 2019
Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page
Become a Member of Global Research
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário