Can an Islamist party be truly Democratic

[England my lionheart]

The situation in Egypt has given the Muslim Brotherhood an outstanding opportunity to attain legitimacy and entry into mainstream Politics.

The MB are an Islamist revivalist organisation and just like Mubaraks Government would not recognise non Muslims,a non Muslim or Woman could not be President, given this,can an Islamist Party be truly Democratic .

 

[ellenjanuary]

Considering that I don't see how the world gets through the next ten years without a complete, global economic collapse, world wars, and the end of civilization as we know it? No.

 

[England my lionheart]

Considering that I don't see how the world gets through the next ten years without a complete, global economic collapse, world wars, and the end of civilization as we know it? No.

I'm with you on this sadly

 

[Breathe]

I don't feel that an Islamist party will be democratic. I don't see how any group who attempt to enforce religious laws on others can be democratic.

Some things I don't see a problem with, like banning cow slaughter in India and Nepal, or prohibiting pork and alcohol in the Middle East. The majority of people are of those religions, and it doesn't really inhibit people's freedoms too much.

Yet when it comes to not allowing women to be presidents, or disallowing other-religious people from anything, or making life difficult/dangerous for the converts?

Would an Islamist party, for example, start allowing people to convert out of Islam without fear of reprisals--even if the majority of people did not want people who de-converted to have reprisals against them? If they would be punished anyway, it would definitely not be democratic.

Religious interpretations and government rulings generally do not mix. A nation's governance should not impede the individual's human rights.


My opinion.

 

[ellenjanuary]

I'm with you on this sadly

Sux, huh?

I really cannot do news, and when I hear debate about current events; I'm like... I feel like I'm in some kind of twisted Animal Farm... I don't wanna go on about my depressing hypotheses; but listening to the talking horses whinny about Obama nation, as I watch the flames sweep up the walls of the barn...

But, hey; I got candids of my Gwynnies at the Oscars! Smiling, happy, non-ragged Gwynnies; that's the important thing.

 

[ellenjanuary]

I don't feel that an Islamist party will be democratic. I don't see how any group who attempt to enforce religious laws on others can be democratic.

Some things I don't see a problem with, like banning cow slaughter in India and Nepal, or prohibiting pork and alcohol in the Middle East. The majority of people are of those religions, and it doesn't really inhibit people's freedoms too much.

Yet when it comes to not allowing women to be presidents, or disallowing other-religious people from anything, or making life difficult/dangerous for the converts?

Would an Islamist party, for example, start allowing people to convert out of Islam without fear of reprisals--even if the majority of people did not want people who de-converted to have reprisals against them? If they would be punished anyway, it would definitely not be democratic.

Religious interpretations and government rulings generally do not mix. A nation's governance should not impede the individual's human rights.


My opinion.

But if there is a long view... I don't agree. It's a loaded question.

But I'm not really up for defending Islam, ain't exactly my favorite flavor right now; yet I cannot help but think, all the crap America does under a Religious Right imperialistic mandate... do I really need to do the research?

I agree about what you're saying; even agree that it is highly unlikely in the near future... but can, in the sense of a decade or two of wallowing in global capitalism? No god but god, after all...

 

[England my lionheart]

Sux, huh?

I really cannot do news, and when I hear debate about current events; I'm like... I feel like I'm in some kind of twisted Animal Farm... I don't wanna go on about my depressing hypotheses; but listening to the talking horses whinny about Obama nation, as I watch the flames sweep up the walls of the barn...

But, hey; I got candids of my Gwynnies at the Oscars! Smiling, happy, non-ragged Gwynnies; that's the important thing.

Hey hasn't she just signed a record deal,i'm sure i read that somewhere.

 

[proffesb]

I don't think any fundamentalist religious state could be a democracy. But as far as a non-fundamentalist Muslim state it is possible depending on how the population interprets the koran and how intertwined their religious beliefs are with the state .

Sadly I do agree that the world is set up for unfortunate things, this has happened before though and we're still here. There is hope.

 

[Oneatatime]

There are secular Muslims out there such as the British Muslims for Secular Democracy but I think that these are something of a minority.

 

[Father Heathen]

Freedom and democracy cannot truly exist within cultures that are largely fundamentalist. In the case of Egypt, they're merely going to replace one dictator with another. Ho hum.

 

[Sunstone]

Fundamentalists -- regardless of whether they are Jewish fundamentalists, Christian fundamentalists, Muslim fundamentalists, or Hindu fundamentalists -- simply do not have a good track record on democracy or even on representative government. So sad.

 

[Wombat]

The situation in Egypt has given the Muslim Brotherhood an outstanding opportunity to attain legitimacy and entry into mainstream Politics.

The MB are an Islamist revivalist organisation and just like Mubaraks Government would not recognise non Muslims,a non Muslim or Woman could not be President, given this,can an Islamist Party be truly Democratic .

Concerned for “democracy” in Egypt and the role of the ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ you would of course be aware of Sayyid Qutb and his experiences both in America and in Egypt and his position/influence as “ the leading Islamic theologian of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in the 1950s and '60s”…..?...........No?
In a nutshell… Sayyid Qutb went to the US in the 40’s-

“As a brown person in Greeley, Colorado in the late 40’s, studying English he came across much prejudice. He also felt quite appalled by what he perceived as loose sexual openness of American men and women (a far cry by any measure, from Musha, Asyut where he grew up). But, in fact this American experience was not truly a crisis for Qutb, but rather a moment of choice and fine-tuning of his already Islamic identity. He himself tells us on his boat trip over “Should I travel to America, and become flimsy, and ordinary, like those who are satisfied with idle talk and sleep. Or should I distinguish myself with values and spirit. Is there other than Islam that I should be steadfast to in its character and hold on to its instructions, in this life amidst deviant chaos, and the endless means of satisfying animalistic desires, pleasures, and awful sins? I wanted to be the latter man.”.

His US experience in many respects disturbed him..&#8221;Here are a people more concerned with the maintenance of their &#8216;Lawns&#8217; than their neighbors wellbeing&#8221;(paraphrase)&#8230;but it did not >radicalize< him.

He returned to Egypt determined to resist/argue and advocate against what he perceived as the corruption of Western/American influence&#8230;and >that&#8217;s< what the Muslim Brotherhood was about&#8230;.not radical or violent action.

Both Sayyid Qutb and the Muslim Brotherhood became radicalized when imprisoned and tortured by US/CIA TRAINED Security Forces and the US BACKED anti democratic forces in Egypt.


Concern now for the Muslim Brotherhoods role in a Democratic Egypt might be just a little bit late...... and a little bit ironic.

 

[England my lionheart]

Concerned for “democracy” in Egypt and the role of the ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ you would of course be aware of Sayyid Qutb and his experiences both in America and in Egypt and his position/influence as “ the leading Islamic theologian of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in the 1950s and '60s”…..?...........No?
In a nutshell… Sayyid Qutb went to the US in the 40’s-

I've read Milestones and some of another work of his,somehow he reminds me of Adolf Hitler and Mein Campf,there are some classic quotes from Milestones like ;

Jazz is his preferred music, and it is created by Negroes to satisfy their love of noise and to whet their sexual desires ...

“As a brown person in Greeley, Colorado in the late 40’s, studying English he came across much prejudice. He also felt quite appalled by what he perceived as loose sexual openness of American men and women (a far cry by any measure, from Musha, Asyut where he grew up). But, in fact this American experience was not truly a crisis for Qutb, but rather a moment of choice and fine-tuning of his already Islamic identity. He himself tells us on his boat trip over “Should I travel to America, and become flimsy, and ordinary, like those who are satisfied with idle talk and sleep. Or should I distinguish myself with values and spirit. Is there other than Islam that I should be steadfast to in its character and hold on to its instructions, in this life amidst deviant chaos, and the endless means of satisfying animalistic desires, pleasures, and awful sins? I wanted to be the latter man.”.

Qutb like Al Banna was deluded IMO

His US experience in many respects disturbed him..”Here are a people more concerned with the maintenance of their ‘Lawns’ than their neighbors wellbeing”(paraphrase)…but it did not >radicalize< him.

Mmm,i would disagree:

This movement uses ... physical power and Jihaad for abolishing the organizations and authorities of the jahili system which prevents people from reforming their ideas and beliefs but forces them to obey their erroneous ways [i.e. what they want to do] and make them serve human lords instead of the Almighty Lord. [p.55]

He returned to Egypt determined to resist/argue and advocate against what he perceived as the corruption of Western/American influence…and >that’s< what the Muslim Brotherhood was about….not radical or violent action.

Disagree,the Muslim Brotherhood were allies of Hitler and even the Egyptian Muslims of the time didn't want them,they assasinated dissenters and slaughtered 73 Jews in one day alone.

Both Sayyid Qutb and the Muslim Brotherhood became radicalized when imprisoned and tortured by US/CIA TRAINED Security Forces and the US BACKED anti democratic forces in Egypt.

Think again,the MB were born radical,read Al Banna on Jihad


Concern now for the Muslim Brotherhoods role in a Democratic Egypt might be just a little bit late...... and a little bit ironic.

I can't see how Democracy and the MB can be in the same sentence personally,i'll leave you with some more snippets from Milestones,how can they even be taken seriously.

any system, in which the final decisions are referred to human beings, and in which the source of all authority are human,

Islam ... is the only Divine way of life ... those who deviate from this system and want some other system, whether it be based on nationalism ... class struggle, or similar corrupt theories are truly enemies of mankind! [p.51]

Theres more on request but this last one sums them up quite well:

At the beginning the enemies of the Muslim community did not fight openly with arms but tried to fight the community in its belief through intrigue, spreading ambiguities, creating suspicions. They do likewise today. They have plotted and they go on plotting against this nation. Hundreds and thousands have infiltrated the Muslim world, and they still do in the guise of Orientalists. The pupils of the latter fill today the positions of the intellectual life of the countries whose people call themselves Muslim. Their aim is clearly shown by the Protocols [of the Elders of Zion]. The Jews are behind materialism, animal sexuality, the destruction of the family and the dissolution of society. Principal among them are Marx, Freud, Durkheim and the Jew Jean-Paul Sartre. [17]​

The Protocols of Zion! LOL

​

​

 

[kai]

It all depends on how the ruling party defines Sharia, i mean will they allow the people to vote them out in favour of a secular party if the people so decide?

The MB have already said a women cannot be leader thats not a good sign, but if the Egyptians agree to it then its none of our business is it? its when people start to disagree with their version of Sharia that it becomes authoritarian isnt it.

I just dont get how an Islamist party that institutes sharia can theoretically allow it to be got rid of again.

 

[Wombat]

I can't see how Democracy and the MB can be in the same sentence personally,i'll leave you with some more snippets from Milestones,how can they even be taken seriously.

Way to ignore entirely the history of the radicalization of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Guess that's taking the issue "seriously".


​

 

[England my lionheart]

It all depends on how the ruling party defines Sharia, i mean will they allow the people to vote them out in favour of a secular party if the people so decide?

Well Sharia is one of the pillars of the current constitution but like you say it depends how they define it,obviously thats what the MB wants.

The MB have already said a women cannot be leader thats not a good sign, but if the Egyptians agree to it then its none of our business is it? its when people start to disagree with their version of Sharia that it becomes authoritarian isnt it.

True,if they agree to it or not is none of our Business,i wonder though if non Muslims would have any choice anyway because they were not recognised under the last Government,it will be interesting though because the MB don't want Man made laws and their goal is Sharia.

I just dont get how an Islamist party that institutes sharia can theoretically allow it to be got rid of again.

Thats right,wheres the Democracy going to come from,i just thought it was funny when the MB said it was Democratic.

 

[opuntia]

The situation in Egypt has given the Muslim Brotherhood an outstanding opportunity to attain legitimacy and entry into mainstream Politics.

The MB are an Islamist revivalist organisation and just like Mubaraks Government would not recognise non Muslims,a non Muslim or Woman could not be President, given this,can an Islamist Party be truly Democratic .

We have Christians to thank for our present state of affairs. When this country was formed, it was not the Jews, Muslims or any other religion that formed many persons' religious base but Christianity. It is accepted by Islam that Jesus and Moses are prophets of God, therefore why would Islam be less capable of sustaining or supporting a democratic government? Is Christianity able to sustain or support a democratic government and Islam cannot? It may be that the Muslim people have not found it in their religion that democracy can be sustained or supported as it is here.

 

[England my lionheart]

Way to ignore entirely the history of the radicalization of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Guess that's taking the issue "seriously".


​

What you are saying here ? do you mean Qutb and especially Al Banna had nothing to do with the radicalization of the MB or the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem who sat out most of WWII in Berlin with his hero Adolf Hitler and even had an SS Muslim Division,how radical do you want it to be.

 

[England my lionheart]

We have Christians to thank for our present state of affairs. When this country was formed, it was not the Jews, Muslims or any other religion that formed many persons' religious base but Christianity. It is accepted by Islam that Jesus and Moses are prophets of God, therefore why would Islam be less capable of sustaining or supporting a democratic government? Is Christianity able to sustain or support a democratic government and Islam cannot? It may be that the Muslim people have not found it in their religion that democracy can be sustained or supported as it is here.

Turkey is about as good as it gets but the MB would much rather live under the rules of their God than the rules of Man,not only that but they would like everybody else to aswell.

 

[Wombat]

What you are saying here ? do you mean Qutb and especially Al Banna had nothing to do with the radicalization of the MB...

From #12
"Both Sayyid Qutb and the Muslim Brotherhood became radicalized when imprisoned and tortured by US/CIA TRAINED Security Forces and the US BACKED anti democratic forces in Egypt" .

How can I make it any clearer? Qutb and hundreds of members of the Muslim Brotherhood (at that stage an organization in no way 'radical') were imprisoned and tortured (literally had 'the dogs set upon them'...sound familiar?) and this torture was conducted/overseen by US/CIA trained Security personel.

>THAT< brutalization tends to radicalise people.
You ignore entirely the role of the US/CIA and ask me if Qutb "had nothing to do with the radicalization of the MB"?

Sure he did...he showed his Muslim Brothers the dog bite wounds and many said-"Hell, I've got those too"...I guess it was their fault for talking about and getting upset about the role of a foreign power in torturing Egyptian citizens? Huh?

Al Banna? Yea he was a real trouble maker too wasn't he. What does a short walk to Wiki reveal about " the radicalization of the MB" and "especially Al Banna" in this "radicalization"?

"
He was appalled by the many conspicuous signs of foreign military and economic domination in Isma'iliyya: the British military camps, the public utilities owned by foreign interests, and the luxurious residences of the foreign employees of the Suez Canal Company, next to the squalid dwellings of the Egyptian workers.[8]

He endeavored to bring about the changes he hoped for through institution-building, relentless activism at the grassroots level, and a reliance on mass communication. He proceeded to build a complex mass movement that featured sophisticated governance structures; sections in charge of furthering the society's values among peasants, workers, and professionals; units entrusted with key functions, including propagation of the message, liaison with the Islamic world, and press and translation; and specialized committees for finances and legal affairs.
Directly attached to the brotherhood, and feeding its expansion, were numerous businesses, clinics, and schools. In addition, members were affiliated to the movement through a series of cells, revealingly called usar (families. singular: usrah).

Concerned with the increasing assertiveness and popularity of the brotherhood, as well as with rumors that it was plotting a coup, Prime MinisterMahmoud an-Nukrashi Pasha disbanded it in December 1948. The organization's assets were impounded and scores of its members sent to jail. Less than three weeks later, the prime minister was assassinated by a member of the brotherhood, Abdul Majid Ahmad Hasan. Following the assassination, Al-Banna promptly released a statement condemning the assassination, stating that terror is not an acceptable way in Islam."

And from Hassan al-Banna


"The British even invited al-Banna to their embassy for tea. He was complimented on his good character and his welfare work for the poor, the orphans and the widows was applauded. They explained that the world was very fragile and that Egypt must be built into a modern and prosperous state. They concluded that it was in the Ikhwans interest to get assistance from the British.
Al-Banna listened patiently, then told the Ambassador that Egypt and all its money is the property of the Egyptian people and that Britain's time in Egypt was coming to an end. Al-Banna was exiled to Upper Egypt in 1948."

So what was Al-Banna's role in the "radicalization" of the Muslim Brotherhood?

Recognized charity work and telling the British "that Egypt and all its money is the property of the Egyptian people and that Britain's time in Egypt was coming to an end"?

What an outrageous 'radical'.

or the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem ....

"When Palestine was under British occupation, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was a position appointed by the British Mandate authorities."*

Oh Poop! The British Mandate authorities "appointed" a Nazi sympathizer did they?

"In 1937, Amin al-Husayni fled to Lebanon to avoid arrest for anti-British activities, and did not return to Palestine. From Lebanon, he began communication with the Nazis."*

Gee perhaps this "radicalization" of Egyptian citizens had >something< to do with a sucession of foreign powers bleeding their country, torturing their citizens and “appointing” their Nazi sympathiser officials?

Grand Mufti of Jerusalem who sat out most of WWII in Berlin with his hero Adolf Hitler and even had an SS Muslim Division,how radical do you want it to be?

I'd like it to be so "radical" that this "appointed" stooge of the British Mandate Authorities be recognized as having ZERO role or influence in the Muslim Brotherhood and that introducing this bogus lap dog/Nazi reduces your arguement to rubble.