Islam and democracy
The practice—and the theory
Can rule by the people be reconciled with the sovereignty of Allah?
“TURKEY sets a fantastic example for nations around the world to see where it’s possible to have a democracy coexist with a great religion like Islam.” Those were George Bush’s words of welcome, this week, to Turkey’s President Abdullah Gul.
This was in 2008, but is this still valid?
Boadicea's Chariot 
This post will be moderated in order to conform with my understanding of Site Policy No 11:
http://bearsy.wordpress.com/site-policy/
No need to worry, Araminta, Site Policy no longer exists – Bearsy.
Turkey is just one example, so please feel free to widen the discussion.
Araminta: The trouble is that I don’t know enough about Turkey. Still that won’t stop me saying something! As I understand it, Turkey was established to be secular – and has endeavoured to remain that way. Indonesia was also supposed to be a secular state, and tries to maintain the image. So was America, and so was Australia.
However, it would seem to me that religion still gets dragged into the state. As I understand it, Turkey has problems trying to keep fundamentalist demands at bay. Indonesia has a lot of inter-religion strife. And in both the USA and here, Presidents and Prime Ministers seem to think that their religious affinities are an important feature in their election campaigns.
Not answering the question at all… never mind 🙂
Ara; good blog…
we need Levent’s perspective on this!
Are you saying that the principles of Western democracy are in most cases, contradictory to the tenements of Islam?
My brain is a bit fried tonight though, so I can’t construct a proper argument. I will have to come back to this tomorrow.
Thanks so much for your message btw 🙂
In answer to the question, No. Turkey is a secular state. As support, compare the list of muslim majority countries here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_majority_countries
with the corruption index here:
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2009/cpi_2009_table
I particular, note those that are officially ‘Islamic States.’
Pakistan – 139, Iran – 168, Afghanistan – 179, Saudi Arabia – 63, Yemen – 154, Mauritania – 130.
Bugrit! ‘In’ particular…
Sorry everyone, I was otherwise engaged and distracted, and suffering too Claire from “fried brain” syndrome.
I will come back tomorrow to answer.
Boadicea: I’m not an expert on Turkey either, so no problem; I agree with Claire though, Levent’s perspective would be interesting.
Bravo: thanks, I will follow your links later.
If Turkey is truly secular then the statement of George Bush is right. A secular state means that the laws of the country as here in France are not determined in any way by religion.And no religious appartenance or power gives you importance in the affairs of state.Provided you then have the other trapings of democracy, voting, constitution, separation of powers then you have a democracy. If the laws of the land are to some extent determined by a religion, and I understand that is the principle of Sharia, then the democracy is inevitably limited because in certain areas anyway the people’s vote doesn’t determine the law of the land.
It is the importance of Ataturk that he made Turkey secular and was the first muslim leader to break the link between Church and state. Whereas Christianity jhas the famous statement render to Caesar what is Caesar’s we have a philosophic basis for secularity, I am not sure Islam does, though probably if they want to they can find something. But that is the reason that ‘good muslims’ feel they have to contest secularity.
MoO: I had forgotten that France, too, is a secular state. Do your politicians mention their religious affiliations in elections?
This is supposed to be s secular state, but Parliamentary sessions open with the Lord’s Prayer, and most politicians make a great noise about what brand of religion they follow.
The UK of course does have the Separation of Powers – which means the stablished Church is not directly involved in politics – just like the Law and the Army. Denmark proudly boasts the same separation – but has a Church Minister!!
Janus, except that Bishops sit in the Lords. Does Denmark have a church tax, like Germany?
bravo, nice to see you again! Yes, the bishops sit in the Lords and have a voice but are excluded from the Executive as such, because they are ‘under’ the Queen like the Law and the Army.
Denmark does indeed have a church tax. people can opt out of it if they wish but I suspect most don’t know or bother. It is a stealth tax!
In France it is ‘religiously ‘ followed. There is no swearing in on bibles, there is no with thanks to our lord,with the help of God, there is no grace, there are no prayers, the politicians aren’t filmed in church except at important funerals, heroes of the state are buried in the non religious Pantheon.
“God save the queen”. “God bless America”. I suspect superstition is responsible for our adherence to these old ideas – just in case…… It’s Pascal’s Wager again….. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager. In the USA it’s also trés chic to proclaim religious affiliations in public – ostentatious church-going and oaths to Allah – from Obama to the Super Bowl. Whatever happened to meekness, I wonder?
Yes the US and UK really haven’t broken off with Christianity they still have all the symbols. Initially it comes as a bit of a shock in France, but it is impossible to treat all citizens equally if christianity is still ever present in the corridors of power as it is in the UK and the US.
I forgot you cannot get married in a Church or Mosque until you have been married civilly at the town Hall.
MoO: That’s exactly how it should be…
Janus, excuse my bad mannes, welcome back. I thought that might be the case. Squaddies in germany were exempt from the church tax – which was colected locally, but the buggers still tried to collect, sending tax demands and whatnot 🙂
Swipe me, I agree with moo.
Afternoon: sorry, I haven’t abandoned this, but a busy day means no time to spend at the PC until later in the day!
I’m sure it’ll wait… 🙂
Boadicea:
Your comment #3.
I am not an expert on Turkey either , but yes, Ataturk’s intention I believe was to transform Turkey into a modern secular state; a democracy. Since Islam is still the religion of the most of the population, I would think that Turkey is an example of Islam and democracy working.
It would seem that the fundamentalist challenge was largely kept at bay by the strong military influence in politics in Turkey, and since this has lessened the religious element is attempting to gain more power. My impression is that the secular state is winning the battle. It is not perfect but I think that the strides have been made in respect of the role of women, education, and human rights.
I think that MoO’s comment #8 is also very much along these lines.
And all the other examples?
Claire, your comment #4
No, I think I believe the exact opposite, but many would argue that this is the case. I’m not sure that I would call Turkey a Western Democracy; but there are other versions of democracy which are still “democratic”. It depends on your definition of democracy.
Btw. The question was:
Allah is not sovereign in Turkey.
Hi Bravo: I’ll get round to your comments in a minute! 😉 I could have a try at correcting your blockquote, if I can.
Please, Araminta.
[Yippee! Done. Edited by author of post]
Claire, is this a Freudian slip? “Are you saying that the principles of Western democracy are in most cases, contradictory to the TENEMENTS of Islam?” My caps. Are they like the Towers of Babel?
What do mean ALL the other examples?. There aren’t very many! I would say that Indonesia is the only I can think of, but it does have officially recognised religions, and I don’t know if it is a secular state. I think Turkey is the only secular Muslim state.
I would be happy to be corrected here, though.
Bravo: having consulted your list in the link again in your comment #5 there are a few more secular Muslims states, or to be more precise, secular states where Islam is the religion followed by the majority of the population.
Precisely, Bravo. It is not. This rather lends credence to the argument that Islam and democracy are not incompatible. It is possible, is it not, as has been mentioned in other comments, that religion and politics should be divorced and it also negates the argument that Islam dictates that in matters of politics, there is no higher authority than Allah.
Well, Ma’am, There are many more examples that lend credence to the opposing argument, are there not? It is true that what has been achieved may be aspired to again. It is also true that in the case of Turkey, repressive islam is stronger now than it has been for some considerable time. It is also true that what has kept Turkey in existence is the – entirely constitutional – influence of the Turkish Army, not the ballot box. None of this negates the islamic contention that an authority higher than allah, in whatever sphere, is an oxymoron.
Your comment #30 Bravo, Sir.
I cannot disagree with most of your comment but it is early days and I feel the general progress, despite obstacles thrown up by fundamentalists is encouraging.
I dispute your last sentence but will return.
Had food preparation and consumption not interfered then I could have dismissed this assertion sooner. In fact, Bravo, you did it yourself, if I have understand the above correctly, then a secular Islamic democratic state, that is Turkey, does not exist. But we both know it does.
Islamic contentions? I suggest that it this may well be one Islamic contention but not the only one.
Hello Minty, I see ‘religious wars’ now feature on both channels. 😉
Paul, hello to you, but this is not a war, it is an exchange of views. 😉
A lot of Western law was and still is based on Christian prohibitions – a hangover from when Church and State were much more closely interwoven.
I’m thinking of – laws on divorce. Fore centuries it was impossible for the man in the street to get a divorce, and for some time after that extremely difficult for a woman to get one. Property laws, and custody laws were based on the fact that women were seen as ‘property’.
Then there is the Christian prohibition on active homosexuality.
There are abortion laws…
All these Christina prohibitions have been lowly removed from having the law to enforce them.
The big one, the right to terminate one’s own life, is still being battled over.
So I think that given enough education amongst the faithful, it is possible for Islam and democracy to co-exist – when Islam’s followers manage to disregard some of the tenets of that faith, in much the same way as the West has had to do with those of Christianity.
Thanks Boadicea.
Yes, I agree it is possible with education and time. It does require that religion is separate and secular law prevails, in most instances.
I don’t think that the result is going to be quite our Western idea of democracy, but if it is the will of the people then it is a democracy.
There is tremendous pressure by the West to enforce its ideas of democracy on the rest of the world, and in some respects this is beginning to slowly show results. Not all aspects of Western democracy are attractive though.
Looking at what is going on in the UK just at the moment, with huge numbers of people who aren’t living in the country being able to vote, what appears to be postal vote scams, leaflets being ‘lost’ by the Postal system (oh yes?) – I’m beginning to wonder whether the UN should be called in to check whether it’s an above-board election…
Then there is the antiquated voting system, which needs reforming and I don’t mean by PR, I mean by preferential voting… the fact that Scots can vote on English affairs, but not the other way round…
I’m not going to go on, but I could – it’s a shambles..
I’m only surprised that more countries don’t want to follow the ‘Westminster’ version of democracy.
It is indeed a shambles and not one that should be emulated. Not to mention the lack of moral values, or the confusion about such, as you mentioned in your last comment. No longer a model that emerging democracies should follow perhaps.
Perhaps there is a certain amount of truth is the view that Western civilisation has gone astray but I don’t think it is terminal.
Boa. I find little to disagree with in yout #37, nor in your #36 Araminta. It is my view that there is no justification at all for the proposal that the ‘West’ should impose its view of democracy and governance on anybody else.
On the other hand … but it’s early morning, I’still drinking my first cuppa char and smoking my first cigarette, so I can’t think too coherently. Have to go and prepare for teh arrival of daughter and grandchildren, (an ex-wife,) so I don’t expect I’lll have much time to myself for a few days. That is not a complaint 😀
As I was saying…on the other hand, is Turkey not a special case? The Turkish constitution was specifically set to exclude the influence of islam on the Governance of the country, with that part of the constitution specified as under the protection of the Army. No similar case exists in the islamic world, (as far as I am aware, I stand ready to be corrected.) The particular examples I give above are specifically islamic states and, without exception are cesspits of oppression and corruption. These are specific islamic states where allah is sovereign – which was, after all, the original question. ‘A secular state where islam is the religion followed by a majority of the population.’ This is not nit-picking, there is a big difference and it is a different question.
In those states where allah is sovereign, it is not, of course, allah who is sovereign at all, but a clique of old men with beards who claim that they know what the mythical allah wants.
A sovereign allah and democracy are, therefore, mutually exclusive ideas. (Change allah for jehovah or jesus if you wish, the last two statements will, or would be, just as valid – less, perhaps, the beards.)
Indonesia is mainly Muslim and was also established as a secular state. A bit of a mixed history, but it is a democracy with elections. There is, despite what a certain blogger says, a fair bit of inter-religion violence, and the extreme Muslims have imposed Sharia law in some of the provinces.
Did I type that, Bearsy? Oh! Is this a reference to one of my infamous typographical errors? 😕
Bravo: your comment #39. Hope you enjoy your visitors and thanks for your contributions here.
Phew, at least it gives me time to think about your comment #41! 😉
Boadicea. Yes, it is a very large mainly Islamic artificial construct so it is difficult to generalise. I don’t think that said blogger has ever denied that religious conflict exists though.
The following is the headline and the conclusion from an article on Indonesia in the Economist which seems to support the view that progress in being made.