Democracy in Pakistan....what are you thoughts.

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Chaltahai: *

Hey it's Poo-Tang! If you know you are going to froth like a rabid dog, wear a bib. It's simple common courtesy, lil pooty!

How do you know that i don't know sh** about democracy? Take the foot out of your mouth and stick it up your a$$ before I place mine virtually offcourse. :)
[/QUOTE]

lets not get that touchy....................
return my bib chalti hai thats common courtsey , but u still seem to be frothing.

well my foot is still stuck up ur A$$ when I get it back I will think  about ur suggestion.
22

PYC

My point is not that i want a democracy. I myself am opposed to the idea as our Prophet ruled by Islam so we should do the same.
My point is about democracy itself. True democracy which every ruler mentions is not actually implemented because true democracy would mean Musharraf wouldn't even have control but we all would. Democracy is just a front to make out that us the Pakistanis and our opinions actually matter but in reality they don't.
Show me how one policy from Pakistan comes from other than the elite ruling and the main families in Pakistan. Democracy....yes between the big guns yes.

Yes ruling does require education i don't deny it. But education in what exactly. Would you find something wrong with someone who has a degree in Islamic economics or does that not qualify......can you be specific. I agree education is important and also knowledge of the reality. Just because someone has a degrees means nothing. Benazir has a wall full of them. It is what you do with them that matters.
So one needs to be educated but in what....someone who has a degree in Western economics which in their essense benefit those who are rich and are problematic to those who are poor isn't benefitting Pakistan so the question about education is an interesting one.
I myself feel Islam is taught in the wrong way in many places and is taught theoretically rather than practically.

Would you PYC find someone who had sufficient knowledge of Islamic economics as legitimate to be in Pakistan politics, because my debate with education is not should we have it, we need the accountants,we need the doctors,we need the economists, but my debate is with what is taught that makes someone legible. So in Law in Pakistan you study British Law at universities as an example. Would an Islamic law degree count in you eyes?

I myself take my education seriously and want to study to be an accountant as any state needs these professions to be progressive I agree as a state can't run without doctors for example but will someone who's education is in Britsh Law benefit Pakistan.
Islam is practical and can be used in every day life and contradictory to what you said, Islam was implemnted pver soicieties a lot larger than Pakistan and was very progressive. We had the best education in Al Azhar and we had progression in that we had people who were educated in what would actually benefit the Muslims.
Nowadays the syllabuses are set in ways in which we have A Western style education and politicians come with Western policies which are completely alien to the rest of the people and are based around a corrupt ideology at that.

So education is beneficial but education in what?

23

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by s_H_e_I_k_H: *
PYC

My point is not that i want a democracy. I myself am opposed to the idea as our Prophet ruled by Islam so we should do the same.
My point is about democracy itself. True democracy which every ruler mentions is not actually implemented because true democracy would mean Musharraf wouldn't even have control but we all would. Democracy is just a front to make out that us the Pakistanis and our opinions actually matter but in reality they don't.
Show me how one policy from [Pakistan comes from other than the elite ruling and the main families in Pakistan. Democracy....yes between the big guns yes.

Yes ruling does require education i don't deny it. But education in what exactly. Would you find something wrong with someone who has a degree in Islamic economics or does that not qualify......can you be specific. I agree education is important and also knowledge of the reality. Just because someone has a degrees means nothing. Benazir has a wall full of them. It is what you do with them that matters.
So one needs to be educated but in what....someone who has a degree in Western economics which in their essense benefit those who are rich and are problematic to those who are poor isn't benefitting Pakistan so the question about education is an interesting one.
I myself feel Islam is taught in the wrong way in many places and is taught theoretically rather than practically.

Would you PYC find someone who had sufficient knowledge of Islamic economics as legitimate to be in Pakistan politics, because my debate with education is not should we have it, we need the accountants,we need the doctors,we need the economists, but my debate is with what is taught that makes someone legible. So in Law in Pakistan you study British Law at universities as an example. Would an Islamic law degree count in you eyes?

I myself take my education seriously and want to study to be an accountant as any state needs these professions to be progressive I agree as a state can't run without doctors for example but will someone who's education is in Britsh Law benefit Pakistan.
Islam is practical and can be used in every day life and contradictory to what you said, Islam was implemnted pver soicieties a lot larger than Pakistan and was very progressive. We had the best education in Al Azhar and we had progression in that we had people who were educated in what would actually benefit the Muslims.
Nowadays the syllabuses are set in ways in which we have A Western style education and politicians come with Western policies which are completely alien to the rest of the people and are based around a corrupt ideology at that.

So education is beneficial but education in what?
[/QUOTE]

If Islam isn't demoracy, then what kind of sysytem is Islam? Should we have all the power rest in the hands of one person?
If thats the case, you should love the present setup>

24

It's about who has soverignty....the caliph implements the rules he doesn't make them...Allah has made a system with which to rule by and for the caliph to add his own rules is Kufr and is not Islamic.
Democracy is when people are soverign and not Allah so rather than having Allah's legisaltion we have people's legislation which is not Islamic. Democracy itself is a false concept.
The current system is no different from any other Pakistani regime. The same people have power in that they are the elite, the means of entry is the only difference in this case. Pakistan has been given a false democracy in different masks over the last 55 years.

25

hazizad

When we talk of democracy we get fooled by the western system. The Islamic system is “Consultation” with the Shura. Here is a guide:-

"At the basis of the political system of Islam lie three basic principles: Tawhid (oneness of Allah), Risalat (prophecy) and Khilafat (state of being vicegerent). Without the complete understanding of these principles, estimating many-sided aspects of the Islamic form of state administration are very difficultly; therefore let us begin from the brief assessment of each of them. "

You can read the details from:-

26

Re: hazizad

Here are some more urls:

http://www.themodernreligion.com/pol/elections-hell.html
http://www.themodernreligion.com/pol/elections-ruling.html
http://www.themodernreligion.com/pol/euro-democracy.html
http://www.khilafah.com/1421/category.php?DocumentID=10&TagID=1

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/politics/khalifa.html#prerequisites

27

Come again? What was that question again? :either I'm deaf as a doorbell-blind as a bat or the questions's sticky as peanut butter:

28

Re: hazizad

Who decides the make up of the Shura? Are they voted into their position, or are we to believe that anyone that has some knowledge of the faith is automatically deemed worthy of being included in the Shura?

29

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by s_H_e_I_k_H: *
It's about who has soverignty....the caliph implements the rules he doesn't make them...Allah has made a system with which to rule by and for the caliph to add his own rules is Kufr and is not Islamic.
Democracy is when people are soverign and not Allah so rather than having Allah's legisaltion we have people's legislation which is not Islamic. Democracy itself is a false concept.
The current system is no different from any other Pakistani regime. The same people have power in that they are the elite, the means of entry is the only difference in this case. Pakistan has been given a false democracy in different masks over the last 55 years.
[/QUOTE]

Your saying that the rights of a people as citizens of their own nation, to have a say in their own governance is a false concept?
I think this is tantmount to dictatorship, how can anyone say that the people have no right to run their own affairs?
As for the Caliph, go find a Caliph who is worthy of being called a leader, and perhaps I will change my mnd on "Islamic systems of governance." Also, You said that a system representative of the people, is a system devoid of the sovreignty of God?! First of, what maks you think that a system run by the people wouldn't implement Allahs laws, and thus uphold the sovreignty of god?
Also, what "rules" are you talking about, and what makes you think that the Caliph is the only one that could uphold and implement these rules?
Also, who is given the authority when it comes to interpreting these "rules?" We see the difference in interpretation all across the Muslims world, and if we want a peaceful society, we couldn;t possibly force a sigle interpretaion of the "rules" on everyone. So who decides what Allah "rules" are? Some would like to present Islam in a conveniant little package with a bow on it. But this is a ridiculous notion, which makes no sense in lite of the fact that we have so many varying interpretations within the religion big and small...
I dont think you will ever find a new "Caliph," because this person would never be able to represent his people.
UNLESS, he is voted into to power, surrounded by advisors, and representatives of the people, who would guide him in making proper decisions.
BUT, then we would still need a way to make sure this person does not abuse his authority; So a system of checks and balances are called for...
So again, even without trying, we have created a "democratic" system.
If your Caliph is chosen, and made to rule in a way different from this, he wouldn't be anything else other than a dictator.
I sincerely hope you dont intend to leave our fate in the hands of god... I dont think picking some guy, planting his butt on a throne and calling him the Caliph is going to help anyone...

30

Re: Re: hazizad

It seems to me that you people are only against democracy, because its a “western” system… Although, I would argue that Democracy is a Universal system of upholding civil rights. Its just that the Westerners implemented the system first. If the Muslim world had done the same, and called it something other then Democracy, I dont think you people would be questioning it.
I see democracy as the ideal form of governance, in which all citizens are taken into account.
The Consultations in the Islamic system are fine, this initself seems democratic to me. But you people fail to go beyond this. I think the Quran specifies this as the ideal system, UPON WHICH WE HAVE TO BUILD… And building upon this system of consultations will eventually lead us to Democracy, which itself is still in line with Islam.
We have to ask ourselves, who decides on who the counsilors are?
And who is there to make sure the leader wont abuse his authority or go againt the will of this “counsil?” God? I dont think so!!

31

OK Adnan, Allah has given us a complete system to live by in the Quran and Sunnah and it is a system made by Allah. It is a system made for man not by man. People are limited and make mistakes, Allah does not. Thus a system of Allah's complete system is far superior than a system made by man.
Yes a system made by people is devoid of soverignty of God obviously. Because Allah has made a system. A system where rulers make their own rules is contradictory to Allah's soverignty.
A system needs to be run by people but not when the rulers have power over what is being implemeted. That is the same for the caliph. He has walis,qadis etc running the state but the rules and system are all from Allah. Once man made rule comes in it delves into Kufr.
A caliph is voted in. People can elect a caliph.
There is majlis al shura which watches over a caliph.
A democracy is not when people are involved in running the state but when people are involved in the system of the state. Allah has a completed system made for man which is run and implemeted by man.
Democracy is a system made by man, run by and implemeted by man. See the difference.
If a Muslim was to of come up woith democracy i would criticise it. The fact is from Islam it is haram to have a man making legislation and to leave soverignty to the people and to Allah.
Allah has a system for people to run. Man has a system for people to run. The difference is in the system not who runs it. A system based on Islam or a system based on Kufr. Both are run by human beings but one is made by Allah the other by man. That is the conflict here.

32

Darnit Sheikh - i'm going to start calling you Shaky if you dont stop calling me PVC! ITS PCG!

  1. Okay, please READ UP ON ISLAMIC HISTORY. The jurisdictions and laws made IN THE TIME OF THE FIRST FOUR CALIPHS were based upon human judgement. If something was decided on, the answer was not in the Quran directly or in some hadith. If it was not in contradiction with Islam, it was implemented. A recent thread on slavery in the religion forum shows an article describing many of the laws made upon slavery during and somewhat after the 4 caliphs. These laws can't be found in the Quran. But the laws were made for regulation. You need public involvement and consensus for passing laws and this is one form of democracy

  2. there is nothing wrong with someone educated in Islamic economics, and they have every right to stand up for elections (perfectly allowed in Islam, and this is a democratic procedure). HOwever, the Rasul said that DEEN and DUNIYA go hand in hand. If you're going to educate yourself about DEEN and not DUNIYA, then your knowledge is incomplete. If you're going to lead people, you need to know about Capitalist Economics, Socialist economics, Communist economics as well. Balance is a key. Sure Islamic knowledge may be missing in our politicians, but hey, many of them werent even matric pass.

And NO education wont make someone holy and ethical. That's independent of education. But this is the age of information. Intelligent people rule today. And we dont value intelligence. People in arab lands are getting executed for writing books criticizing arab society. Is this right?

  1. I also think that democracy is opposed in its ENTIRETY because it is western. Islam has a lot of democratic principles incorporated into its theology. Maybe we can't vote homosexuality in as legal in Islamic government, but we can sure decide whether or not we want to make medical examinations mandatory to prove a rape has taken place, thus making it easier to convict rapists, rather than rely on 4 witnesses.

There's a lot of flexibility in Islam, Shiekh. People think that an ayah is supposed to be permanent, and they forget that different ayahs were revealed for different circumstances. They forget that all some of these stringent rules were not even introduced or stressed in previous revelations. If they had forensics and medical swab procedures available back then, dont you think that God would have encouraged their use over 4 witnesses??

You say dont Question, because its the Quran. I say DO QUESTION. Only then can you understand the ayahs. Please. Think. Its not going to send you to hell.

33

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by s_H_e_I_k_H: *
OK Adnan, Allah has given us a complete system to live by in the Quran and Sunnah and it is a system made by Allah. It is a system made for man not by man. People are limited and make mistakes, Allah does not. Thus a system of Allah's complete system is far superior than a system made by man.
Yes a system made by people is devoid of soverignty of God obviously. Because Allah has made a system. A system where rulers make their own rules is contradictory to Allah's soverignty.
A system needs to be run by people but not when the rulers have power over what is being implemeted. That is the same for the caliph. He has walis,qadis etc running the state but the rules and system are all from Allah. Once man made rule comes in it delves into Kufr.
A caliph is voted in. People can elect a caliph.
There is majlis al shura which watches over a caliph.
A democracy is not when people are involved in running the state but when people are involved in the system of the state. Allah has a completed system made for man which is run and implemeted by man.
Democracy is a system made by man, run by and implemeted by man. See the difference.
If a Muslim was to of come up woith democracy i would criticise it. The fact is from Islam it is haram to have a man making legislation and to leave soverignty to the people and to Allah.
Allah has a system for people to run. Man has a system for people to run. The difference is in the system not who runs it. A system based on Islam or a system based on Kufr. Both are run by human beings but one is made by Allah the other by man. That is the conflict here.
[/QUOTE]

Ok... You say there is a differnece in systems. Your problem is then, not with who runs the state, but rather, in which why it s run.
My question to you were, which you did not answer.
1. What "RULES" are you refering to, that are espoused by Allah, and which could only be upheld by a Caliph and a Majlis a Shura? Just a few of these important rules would suffice.

  1. I said before that the Koranic teachings are interpreted differently by different people... How do you explain the varying philosophies of the Sufis, the Taliban, the Wahabis, the Deobandi, the Sunnis, the Shia, the Ahmedi, and the many others even within these various interpretations, that vary in their own interpretation? Do you expect us to believe that all these groups will live under your definition of an "Islamic system?" (Im certain you will say that certain groups will not be included in this system, namely the Ahmedis, but then you should remember that there are many that woudn't welcome the Shias either). Do you think that you could possibly make a SINGLE system which would be acceptable to all these groups? Even a system comprising of only Sunnis would be fraught with problems, because then you would still have the extremist sunnis, such as the Wahabis and the Taliban types...

I think any attempt at reconciling all these groups will only lead to bloodshed, and you will come no closer to you Islamic system then before... The reason is that I dont think Allah ever espoused any exact system... Its a system that we are encouraged to build upon, but not a set mold. The Koran IS open to interpretation BECAUSE, if it weren't, we wouldn't have some many varying interpretation, all of whom are convinced they are right.
As for your theory that Allah will guide the Caliph, the Muslim world has seen MANY leaders that claimed to be guided by god... Our most recent example would be the Taliban and their henchmen. Do you honestly expect anyone to believe that the Taliban movement was guided by Allah?

34

PAKISTAN needs a system, a system that WORKS... Call it whetever you want, but in the end, you will have to feed, and educate your people.
Our debate on this "Islamic System" is futile. It will only lead to such long, unending debates that go on forever, while the comman man is starving to death. You could never impose an "Islamic system" on anyone because no one will agree to it, and this will only lead to bloodshed.
I say be PRACTICAL. Dont ignore the views of the comman people, dont assume that only one system will fit everyone.
The thing with Democracy, is that it does all this. It doesn;t impose any rules, it has no baggage with it, the rules are made in accordance with the wishes of the people, including religious needs, and the needs of the day. This is what the Caliph had done according to PCG.
BUT ONE OF MY POINTS IS THAT YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO FIND A NEW CALIPH. ITS NO LONGER AS EASY FINDING A RELATIVE OF THE PROPHET.
Finaly, I disagree with PCG on one thing, Westerners may have Democracy, BUT DEMOCRACY IS NOT WESTERN. Democracy is a system that has appeared in one form or another from the begining of time. Westerners shaped it into a sytem that worked for them, which is what we call "Western Democracy," and which is what you people are opposed to, but Democracy itself is NOT a Western concept. Muslims, just like the Westerners, have to fashion a system of democracy for themselves. Muslims are blessed with the basic concept of democracy already inherint in their faith. But they still have to BUILD ON IT, until it resembles something not unlike Western democracy (minus whatever it is you people are opposed to).

35

Now...the nobel laureate Amartya Sen, when speaking of the illiterate masses in India and whether they are the best judges of their givernance, once said that "A fit populace doesn't necessary get you democracy, it is democracy that gets you a fit populace."

36

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Chaltahai: *
Now...the nobel laureate Amartya Sen, when speaking of the illiterate masses in India and whether they are the best judges of their givernance, once said that "A fit populace doesn't necessary get you democracy, it is democracy that gets you a fit populace."
[/QUOTE]

Good point...

37

Adnan Ahmad - good point about democracy not being a western concept. I didn't take that into consideration, but what I meant was that currently democracy is a system being advocated by the "West". If it was socialism, these same people would be opposed to it also.

they're opposing for the sake of opposing, just because the west has accepted it. Although, the funny thing is - many concepts in capitalism, and democratic theory concurs with Islamic theory.

For example, a person is allowed to quote his own price for his merchandise according to the competition in the market. Competition between businesses is also allowed, so that improvement occurs. This is part of the base of capitalism. But this same base is refuted by Islamic scholars because they say it breeds selfishness among businessmen. Even the Prophet competed with other businessman when striking deals when he was working for Khadija. He wasn't selfish, though.

Thinking outside the box helps.

38

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PyariCgudia: *
Adnan Ahmad - good point about democracy not being a western concept. I didn't take that into consideration, but what I meant was that currently democracy is a system being advocated by the "West". If it was socialism, these same people would be opposed to it also.

they're opposing for the sake of opposing, just because the west has accepted it. Although, the funny thing is - many concepts in capitalism, and democratic theory concurs with Islamic theory.

For example, a person is allowed to quote his own price for his merchandise according to the competition in the market. Competition between businesses is also allowed, so that improvement occurs. This is part of the base of capitalism. But this same base is refuted by Islamic scholars because they say it breeds selfishness among businessmen. Even the Prophet competed with other businessman when striking deals when he was working for Khadija. He wasn't selfish, though.

Thinking outside the box helps.
[/QUOTE]

EXACTLY...There are so many things within Islam that seem to be way beyond their time. Its amazing that there are certain beliefs inherint in Islam were perscribed 2 thousand years before the Westerners could grasp these concepts.. I mean the fact that Islam allowed women so many rights in tribal Arabia, 2000 years before Westerners did, says so much. I mean, Women in America didn't even have the right to vote up until a hundred years ago. In fact, you could say that Westerners wouldn;t be where they are today if it weren't for Islam. It was Islamic literature and Philosophy that brought the Europeans out of their dark age. It is Islam that allowed them to break away from the strangle hold of the Church. So why are Muslims so insecure for?
Its funny that it was the Muslims that were thinking outsde the box while the Europeans were burning people alive for even thinking anything wrong with the Church.
Democracy is a system that IS advocated in Islam, just because Westerners have adopted it, shouldn't make us so weary of it.

P.S.
Can you please stop refering to me by my entire name...It seems so Formal.
You can call me Adnan, or AA, or even Dani...
Thanks.

39

Democracy is not perfect, but this should not be a reason to assume that is invalid. No system is ever perfect.
The essence of democracy is what we want, it virtues are whats important.
That being the right to self rule.

40

Democracy Crap

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Adnan Ahmed: *
Democracy is not perfect, but this should not be a reason to assume that is invalid. No system is ever perfect.
The essence of democracy is what we want, it virtues are whats important.
That being the right to self rule.
[/QUOTE]

Salaams

Democracy in Greek is from two words ‘demos’ and ‘cratis’ meaning humans rule. Democracy in Latin means demoscracia meaning humans rule.....

And Allah says 'the rule is for none but Allah'

'And rule by them by what Allah has revealed'
'whoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed is a kafir (disbeliever)...dhalim (oppressor)..... fasiq (evil doer)'QUran 5 44, 45 and 47

So from the definition of democracy it contradicts what islam says fundamentally.
To recap democracy means man rules and Islam means Allah rules.

Democracy means weak limited humans who don’t know right and wrong rules and
Islam means an unlimited creator who knows creation better than creation knows itself, rules

Democracy means the rich people subjugate the poor and Islam means we all submit to Allah whether rich or poor.

Infact one western intellectual said "the golden rule of democracy is: those who own the gold make the rules".

Thats why we see only the rich being able to run for elections and seek power.
So we find Al Gore and George W Bush are both from very rich families. We find that there are only really two political parties in USA and when a third candidate wanted to run he had to be a billionaire (remember Ross Perot) in order to do so.

We find the same situation in UK where we find again the rich running the country so we find big businesses bribing labour of conservative parties..... yeah and you guys thought Pakistan was bad.

So Bernie Eccleston (owner of Formula One) gives one million pounds to labour so that when labour legislates and removes all advertising of cigarettes from sports labour conveniently allows FORMULA ONE (remember they gave one million pounds) not to remove the adverts for cigarettes.

Microsoft gives millions of dollars to USA candidates so as to help legislate in his favour (what u guys think, they give this money out of charity????)

We find Nawaz Sharif coming to power building roads to connect his businesses and Shahbaz making millions in the form of 'cuts'. You know the Murree Roads? Benazir Bhutto she gives a 30% quota to the 'jiyalas' in getting jobs of Karachi.
Corruption is bred from democracy.....Nawabzada hookah made millios and let us not mention Mr. 10% who made it to Mr.25%.
When humans make laws they inevitably make laws that benefit themselves and thus misery and tyranny upon others.... lets not be fooled. So far the Democracy in Pakistan has brought the corrupt to power to further exploit the poor.

Frank Parkin says "A political system which guarantees constitutional rights for groups to organise in defense of their interests is almost bound to favour the privileged at the expense of the unprivileged"

Inshallah may Allah help us establish the khilafah to truly implement justice.

I have taken the liberty to reproduce some details from another collegue.