Talk:Islamic democracy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Islam
Islam Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Islam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

Interesting idea, but too one sided, and as said on the deletion page, an essay. The article could explore Islamo-democratic regimes such as Turkey, but doesn't really do so.

p.s. I have tried editing this article into something respectable. The user Livajo (?) pointed out a copyright violation. I have appended a list of Islamic democracies.

Contents

[edit] VFD discussion

This article was proposed for deletion December 2004. The discussion is available at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Islamic Democracy

[edit] Possible copyright problem in history

Below text moved from Wikipedia:Copyright problems listing from December 12:


[edit] Friction between western democracies and Islam

I've removed this section twice now. I don't think it's relevant to this article, given the clear definition on its scope with which it starts. I think the discussion is worth an article, but it needs to be created and linked from elsewhere, not from this page. --G Rutter 14:54, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Why? (roll) I think it is perfectly relevant, which is why I included it. Otherwise it's going to have some godawful long title like "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction_between_western_democracies_and_Islam_in_a_political_context" ! If it was elsewhere, it would probably end up becoming something quite different, and a target for both redneck American fundamentalists and middle eastern Islamic fundamentalists at the same time... Come to think of it, why did you cut that part out, but leave the piece about the former Soviet Union in?
I left the Soviet section in as it's a start to discussing the democratization (or not) of predominately Muslim countries in central Asia. Your section is on Muslims living in the West and they're treated by those countries, which is outside the scope of this article. How about "Islam and Western democracies" or something like that? You could link to it from the Democracy article for at start. Actually, there's probably two articles there- one on the French ban (there's a one sentence mention in the Democracy article) and one on the relations between Islam and the West - the Shabina Begum case in the UK would make an interesting discussion. Let me know when you create them and I'll try and help. --G Rutter 18:47, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I think that this section should be restored. Islam and Western Democracies have had a long interaction, and this has affected Islamic perception of democracy. European imperialism in North Africa, and current American occupation and involvement in large sections of the middle east also affects this. Turkey's possible future into the EU, is also involvement with western democracies, and will dictate the fate of a large region. MacRusgail 16:20, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of countries

[edit] Turkey

"The Turkish government supports mosques, and requires religious instruction for all students. " By reading this and the previous sentence I get the impression that Turkey has always supported religious education which is incorrect. Religious education was injected into Turkish education by the 1980 military junta.

The more I look at this article the clearer it becomes that this article is beyond recovery and should be deleted. It is fundamentally flawed. What is Islamic Democracy? First paragraph talks about types of democracies. But following the same rule one can arrive at a definitions like Christian Democracy, Buddhist Democracy. But I have not seen a section with these names.

[edit] Germany

Hi, I put back Germany as a democratic country with a significant Muslim minority. I think it depends what you call "significant" of course, but according to Wikipedia's article, "Approximately 3.7 million Muslims (mostly of Turkish descent) live in Germany." Germany has a population of "82,531,700" according to the same article. They're certainly one of the more visible minorities there. There's not many of them in rural areas, but Berlin has a large Muslim population I think. See what you think...

- R. Bell

  • personally I think it's a significant minority, but you only need one example of a European country. Kappa 08:08, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The French and German governments seem to have taken very different approaches towards Muslims, and Muslim immigrants. France has clamped down on the burqa, but Germany seems to be much more open.

[edit] Why isn't Iran in the list of countries for Islamic democracies?

Just an interesting question that I had, for whoever that wants to answer it. Why isn't the Islamic REPUBLIC of Iran considered a democracy according to your list??? Is it because your definition of democracy differs from what the Islamic republic offers? If yes I would love to know what aspects of it conflict with democracy in your opinion, since there are elections, a parliament, a popularly elected president, and ...

M.T

I've now added Iran to the list- you could have added it yourself you know. I didn't write the list, so I don't know why Iran wasn't included, but it could have been a mistake. Of course the Council of Guardians and the Assembly of Experts do wield undemocratic influence over the electoral process, etc but given the other countries on the list I don't think that Iran should necessarily be excluded. --G Rutter 09:19, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Algeria

Given the change in the political scene in Algeria, the country needs to be added to the list. The influence of the military is still playing a role somehow but the last presidential elections in April 2004 was witnessed to be fair by international monitors. Morever, the president Bouteflika (in his second term winning 85% of the electoral vote) has promised to solve the problem in the Berber region of Kabayle as well as to free women from restrictive family codes (following somehow the example of Morocco) and introducing the second version of the so-called “true national reconciliation” from the civil war.

Any comments? Svest 14:24, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I think that "democratic" is a relative term, and is not absolute or constant. In addition, some regions of a state can be more democratic than others. Put it in, if you haven't already. MacRusgail 16:23, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New edits

I congratulate the work of Guy Montag for monitoring the article! W/O that effort we'd end up with almost "500" countries in the list, including Jupiter and probably Israel itself. Cheers -- Svest 00:03, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Morocco (North Africa) (98.7%)

Should it be mentioned that Morocco is an occupying force in Western Sahara? That isn't particularly democratic. - FrancisTyers 00:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Islamic democracy? Turkey?

[edit] POV

  • The references are made in wrong direction than the context. It is a kind of offensive action against personalities.
  • It is better to discuss about Iran in subsections rather than preamble.
  • Ruhollah Khomeini is belongs to recent years. It is better to mension other people from past centuries also. See Hassan Modarres etc.

Farhoudk 12:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Translations

Could someone with knowledge in the source language please clean up the Notes section? It's difficult to understand what e.g. the following means:

"When not referring to the people votes results in accuse of tyranny then it is allowed to resign ourselves to people vote but as secondary commandments like eating corpse"

clacke 02:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


"When not referring to the people votes results in accuse of tyranny then it is allowed to accept people vote as a secondary commandments, like eating corpse"
Primary commandment: Eating corpse of animals is Haraam.
Secondary commandment: In case one is in danger of death due to hunger then he/she has permission to eat as much as prevents his/her death. So it turns to Halaal in this case. But as you can see it is conditional.
The quoted sentence shows week compatibility of their POV and democracy, since it is conditional. As you can see in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_democracy#Shia.27s_viewpoint the idea of Khomeini is completely different.
Farhoudk 19:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the explanation. I've never heard of secondary commandments before, since I haven't studied Islamic concepts much. But the sentence is still not correct English, and quite hard to follow, so I was hoping that someone could make it more readable. Does it mean something like this?

If not letting the people vote would result in accusations of tyranny, then voting is allowed as a second commandment, like when eating the corpse of an animal.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by ClaesWallin (talk • contribs) 15:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC).
Yap. "referring to" is better translation than "letting" Farhoudk 05:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "majority religion"

it is completely untenable to call an "Islamic democracy" any democracy that happens to have an Islamic majority population. By this argument, France would be a "Roman Catholic democracy", and India a "Hindu democracy", both countries upholding strict separation of church and state, as does Turkey. Saying that Islamic democracies "attempt to reconcile Islam with a secular, democratic state" is nonsense. Nobody ever said a democratic state needs to be secular. A democratic state is first and foremost anything the electorate bloody well wants it to be. A country can very well be democratic and not secular. Saying that they "attempt" to reconcile Islam with democracy is hilarious pov, implying that this is somehow more difficult than reconciling Christianity with democracy (we would need to state that "Greece is attempting to reconcile Orthodox Christianity with a democratic state". dab (𒁳) 10:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I would point out that whilst I agree that whilst Turkey is commonly reffered to as a secular republic, it does not separate whurch and state, wuite the opposite. Islam in Turkey is the established religion, and the only religion administrated by the state. That's not to say you could call it an Islamic Democracy andy more than you could call the UK an "Anglican Democracy" -but it's not secular in the same way as India or the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.18.20.16 (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A very poor definition

"A democratic state where the majority of the population are Muslim"

Following this wonderful piece of logic, can we conclude that France, Italy, Spain etc. are "Christian democracies"?

And Turkey is a secular republic. It's more secular than Greece, Norway as they have official religions.

Thus I'm going to remove the associated parts. You may clean up the mess, but don't undo it altogether. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slntssssn (talk • contribs) 13:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Turkey is a Secular Greco-Roman democracy with a Islamic majority population

It is a Islamic country or a state with Islamic majority population but with a governmental system based on a secular Greco-Roman (also called 'Western') model of democracy, although it may have Islamic parties. The Turkish government is not based on a model of Islamic democracy which is Islamic Shouracracy - a party-less republic.ILAKNA (talk) 14:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Could you provide a reliable source that support this position? AecisBrievenbus 16:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What about political parties?

I feel this article would be improved by mentioning the various political parties that stand for some sort of 'Islamic democracy' - i.e., Islamic parties that accept and work within a democratic system. Examples include Turkey's AK Party, Malaysia's UMNO party, the Pakistan Muslim League and various parties in Indonesia. See this article from The Economist: [2] Terraxos (talk) 13:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Islamic democracy

The presence of Islamic parties in a Greco-Roman democracy modeled system of government in an Islamic country ie. with a majority of Islamic population & even if provided in the constitution that Islam will be the prevailing religion, although 'labelled so' does not turn it into a Islamic Democracy which is Islamic Shouracracy - a party-less republic For a government to be a 'Islamic democracy', the label has to match with the contents also. This applies to all these kinds of governments wherever they may be.ILAKNA (talk) 14:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Could you provide a reliable source that supports this position? AecisBrievenbus 16:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[Q:5:50]("Do they want the rule of the Ignorance {ie. not based on God's guidance} & who is better from God in rule {as He is the All-Knowing & the All-Wise, no one is knowing more than Him because He has always existed since from before the beginning of creation & there was no time that He did not exist, no one is wiser than Him because He has created everything so He has the detailed knowledge of everything because He has designed it so He knows how everything works} for a people who are certain" {about God}). As per this text, the Greco-Roman democracy qualifies as the rule of Ignorance & not rule of Islam. The rule of Islam is Shouracracy [Q:42:38] or Islamic Democracy. The detail of working of Islamic democracy was posted here.ILAKNA (talk) 04:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] POV

The two definitions provided don't match the definition of democracy. It all seems like a kind of contradictio in terminis to me. PS I've your so found of your regimes, get your own word for it and don't abuse the Greek language. Bombshell (talk) 19:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)