Islamic Democracy

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

I think this is something I have read that is closest to what I think ‘Islamic Democracy’ could be. What do you guys think?

http://goldendrippings.com/books/[Aslan,%20Reza]%20No%20god%20but%20God%20-%20The%20Origins,%20Evolution%20&%20Future%20of%20Islam.pdf

Therein lies the crux of the reformist argument. An Islamic democracy is not intended to be a “theo-democracy,” but a democratic system founded upon an Islamic moral framework, devoted to preserving Islamic ideals of pluralism and human rights as they were first introduced in Medina, and open to the inevitable process of political secularization. Islam may eschew secularism, but there is nothing
about fundamental Islamic values that opposes the process of political
secularization. Only the Prophet had both religious and temporal authority, and the Prophet is no longer among us. Like the Caliphs, kings, and sultans of history’s greatest Islamic civilizations, the leaders of an Islamic democracy can hold only civic responsibilities.

A government of the people, by the people, and for the people can be established or demolished solely through the will of the people. After all, it is human beings who create laws, not God.
Even laws based on divine scripture require human interpretation in
order to be applied in the world. In any case, sovereignty necessitates
the ability not just to make laws, but to enforce them. Save for the
occasional plague, this is a power God rarely chooses to wield on
earth.

Those who argue that a state cannot be considered Islamic unless
sovereignty rests in the hands of God are in effect arguing that sovereignty should rest in the hands of the clergy. Because religion is, by definition, interpretation, sovereignty in a religious state would
belong to those with the power to interpret religion. Yet for this very
reason an Islamic democracy cannot be a religious state. Otherwise it
would be an oligarchy, not a democracy.

P.S. apologies for the bad formatting.

2

Re: Islamic Democracy

[QUOTE]
Those who argue that a state cannot be considered Islamic unless
sovereignty rests in the hands of God are in effect arguing that sovereignty should rest in the hands of the clergy. Because religion is, by definition, interpretation, sovereignty in a religious state would
belong to those with the power to interpret religion.
[/QUOTE]

That's exactly what the clergy want, hence any system devoid of clergy power will be opposed by them.

3

Re: Islamic Democracy

Maududi wrote gave a really good speech in 1948 about the nature of Islamic democracy. He also argued against clergy rule, and was pretty much in line with the sentiments expressed in your original post.

In the arab world, Hasan Al-Banna went the same way. You see the result in the former government of egypt, where the Brotherhood-linked ministers and officials in power were not from amongst the clergy but were generally engineers and doctors instead.