|
Dear Sohail,
That orthodox Islam and liberal democracy are mutually exclusive on several
counts is by no means a difficult premise to substantiate. The
proponents of the view that somehow Islam and democracy are compatible only
consider some very rudimentary democratic processes operative during
Islam's formative years. Certainly there was mutual consultation on
various issues and the prophet's successors were "elected"
through a rather unsophisticated electoral process, but the concepts
of pluralism, egalitarianism, the dignity of all men and women regardless
of creed, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion were neither
encouraged, nor delivered through the legal and theological mechanisms
established by the prophet and his successors. These are all crucial for
the survival of genuine democracies.
Liberal democracies do not place conditions on what people can believe by
providing incentives or disincentives for upholding certain beliefs. They
do not place restrictions on who people can associate with, and who gets to
be the head of state--at least in theory. Within traditional
Islamic belief, only a Muslim who upholds Sharia
law can ever become the head of state. How democratic is that?
Once again, in an Islamic state built on theocratic
principles only Sharia law can be
instituted. How democratic is that? In effect the minority (religious or
ideological) in an Islamic state can never become the majority--a scenario
fundamentally opposed to the concept of democracy
I am looking forward to debating these issues with Mr. Chaudry
at the proposed seminar in April or May although I consider the suggested
topic a non-starter in many ways--:)
All Best,
Farzana
|