Islam and democracy are contradictory in their intellectual foundations, practical applications, and ultimate goals.
Democracy’s moral power lies in the idea that the citizens of a nation are the sovereign, and — in modern representative democracies — they express their sovereign will by electing representatives. In a democracy, the people are the source of the law and the law in turn is to ensure fundamental rights that protect the well-being and interests of the individual members of the sovereign.
For Islam, democracy poses a formidable challenge. Muslim jurists argued that law made by a sovereign monarch is illegitimate because it substitutes human authority for Allah’s sovereignty “Allah’s political dominion (hakimiyyat Allah”). But law made by sovereign citizens faces the same problem of legitimacy. In Islam, Allah is the only sovereign and ultimate source of legitimate law.
If, as many Muslim and Western orientalists contend, Allah’s dominion or sovereignty means that Allah is the sole legislator, then one would expect that a caliph or Muslim ruler would be treated as Allah’s agent or representative. If Allah is the only sovereign within a political system, then the ruler ought to be appointed by the divine sovereign, serve at His pleasure, and implement His will.
Islam aims to establish an “Islamic State” or “Caliphate,” which is a religious state whose primary and most important goal is to serve and spread Islam globally, and to implement Sharia derived from the Quran, Hadith (sayings of Muhammad), Muhammad’s biography, and interpretations.
On the other hand, democracy aims to establish a “democratic state,” which is a secular (worldly) state whose goal is to serve the people (regardless of their religions and beliefs) and to implement principles of human rights, individual freedoms, and complete equality among all citizens regardless of their religions, beliefs, and ideologies.
 |
| Democracy is the religion of the West. Syria — Idlib Governorate. Road signs put up by Islamic organisations. |
To understand the essence of the difference between a “democratic state” and an “Islamic state,” we must carefully consider the fundamental characteristics of each:
1- What is the definition of the state?
- Democratic State: Rule by the people.
- Islamic State: Rule by Allah.
2- What is the source of authority and legitimacy?
- Democratic State: The people.
- Islamic State: Allah.
3- What is the highest intellectual and legislative reference for the state?
- Democratic State:
Its reference is the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” of 1948, as a modern unified global reference accepted among the peoples of the Earth. It is based on accumulations of ancient and modern human ethics, literatures, and philosophies, such as ancient Greek philosophies, “Constitution of Athens” attributed to Aristotle, the ancient Greek primitive democratic system around 500 BC, the “Bill of Rights” enacted by the British Parliament in 1689, the “Virginia Declaration of Rights” in America in 1776, the American Bill of Rights in 1789, the “French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen” in 1789, and other philosophies and accumulations.
- Islamic State:
Its reference is the Quran, Hadith, Prophet’s biography, and accepted interpretations by Islamic jurists according to each Islamic school (Sunni, Shia, Ibadi, etc.).
4- Are the texts of intellectual and legislative reference subject to amendment, improvement, development, and change?
- Democratic State:
Yes, the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” and the Constitution of the democratic state and all its laws can be amended, improved, developed, or changed, partially or completely, according to the will of the people, provided that freedoms and rights are not restricted but rather expanded or protected.
- Islamic State:
No, the Quran, Hadith, Prophet’s biography, and original interpretations are sacred texts not subject to any amendment or change, even if the people desire it.
5- In whose name does the ruler, president, king, or prince govern?
- Democratic State: In the name of the people.
- Islamic State: In the name of Allah.
6- Who holds the ruler, president, king, or prince accountable?
- Democratic State: The people (through parliament and other institutions).
- Islamic State: Allah on the Day of Judgment.
7- What is the distinctive form of the state?
- Democratic State: A secular/worldly state, aiming to satisfy the people.
- Islamic State: A religious state, aiming to satisfy Allah.
 |
| Democracy is the juggernaut of the era. Syria — Idlib Governorate. Road signs put up by Islamic organisations. |
8- How are laws and new procedures legislated and enacted?
- Democratic State: Through direct vote by the people or through their elected representatives (voting on laws).
- Islamic State: Through Islamic jurists and religious scholars (issuing fatwas).
9- How are disputes and controversial issues resolved?
- Democratic State: Through the referendum of the people.
- Islamic State: Through the consensus of Islamic scholars (Fatwas).
10- Who is a citizen?
- Democratic State:
A citizen is a person who resides within the territory of the state temporarily or permanently, regardless of their religion, belief, ideology, or lifestyle. They are subject to laws that comply with human rights and ensure equality with other citizens.
- Islamic State:
There are five types of subjects:
First type: Muslim مُسلمْ.
Second type: Dhimmis ذُمي (non-Muslims residing in the Islamic state under a covenant and paying the jizyah).
Third type: Musta’min مُستأمَن (temporary non-Muslim visitor or resident taking temporary protection from the Islamic state).
Mustaʾmīn or Musta’man is a non-Muslim foreigner temporarily residing in Muslim lands with aman or guarantee of short-term safe-conduct.
Fourth type: Mu’ahid مُعاهِد (foreign non-Muslim having a covenant or agreement with the Islamic state and may visit it).
Kāfir mu’ahad are people who make peace with the state or the leadership of the. Muslims not to war for the benefit.
Fifth type: Harbi حَربي (non-Muslim combatant who refuses to embrace Islam, pay jizyah, or make an agreement with the Islamic state).
Harbi Kafir; it is permitted to kill a Harbi. However at times it is also permitted to enslave him or to impose Jizyah on him forcefully.
Second type: Dhimmis ذُمي (non-Muslims residing in the Islamic state under a covenant and paying the jizyah).
Third type: Musta’min مُستأمَن (temporary non-Muslim visitor or resident taking temporary protection from the Islamic state).
Mustaʾmīn or Musta’man is a non-Muslim foreigner temporarily residing in Muslim lands with aman or guarantee of short-term safe-conduct.
Fourth type: Mu’ahid مُعاهِد (foreign non-Muslim having a covenant or agreement with the Islamic state and may visit it).
Kāfir mu’ahad are people who make peace with the state or the leadership of the. Muslims not to war for the benefit.
Fifth type: Harbi حَربي (non-Muslim combatant who refuses to embrace Islam, pay jizyah, or make an agreement with the Islamic state).
Harbi Kafir; it is permitted to kill a Harbi. However at times it is also permitted to enslave him or to impose Jizyah on him forcefully.
11- What is the status of religious and ideological minorities in the face of the majority?
- Democratic State: Equality among all citizens regardless of their religions, beliefs, and ideologies.
- Islamic State: Equality among all Muslims. Special status for Dhimmis (Jews, Christians, and others). Different status for the rest of the non-Muslims (Musta’mins, Mu’ahids, and Harbis).
12- What is the status of men and women in the state and public life?
- Democratic State: Complete equality between men and women in all aspects.
- Islamic State: Men are guardians over women. The state is governed by Muslim men.
13- What is the state’s stance on the presence of citizens in society from followers of different religions and beliefs such as Christians, Jews, Muslims, heretics, apostates, pagans, polytheists, secularists, atheists, and agnostics?
- Democratic State:
They are all regular citizens subject to the same law. They have the right to hold all positions, including the presidency, leading the army, and governing, with complete equality with other citizens. Their presence in society is natural. They have the right to freely spread and promote their religions, beliefs, and ideas in society like others.
- Islamic State:
Non-Muslims (infidels) are non-ordinary subjects/citizens. They have a special status. They are not entitled to hold the presidency, high positions, or exercise governance. Their permanent presence in society is conditioned upon an agreement (dhimma contract) with the Islamic state, which includes paying the jizyah tax, and the condition that they do not spread their non-Islamic religions, beliefs, and ideas (infidelity) in society. It is obligatory to invite them to Islam by the Islamic state.
 |
| Democracy is the hallucination of the era. Syria — Idlib Governorate. Road signs put up by Islamic organisations. |
14- What is the state’s stance on secularism (separation of religion from the state)?
- Democratic State: Secularism is the foundation of the democratic state.
- Islamic State: Secularism undermines the Islamic state fundamentally.
15- Does the state have an official religion?
- Democratic State: No.
- Islamic State: Yes.
16- Does the state propagate or promote a religion or belief among people?
- Democratic State: No.
- Islamic State: Yes, it propagates and promotes Islamic religion and belief.
17- Does the state prohibit the spread of a specific religion or belief among people?
- Democratic State: No.
- Islamic State: Yes, it prohibits the spread of any religion or belief other than Islam.
18- Does the state punish apostates from a particular religion or specific ideology?
- Democratic State: No.
- Islamic State: Yes, it punishes apostates from Islam by death penalty, and it encourages leaving other religions to embrace Islam.
19- Does the state restrict people’s freedoms?
- Democratic State: Freedom is the norm. It only restricts a citizen’s freedoms if it threatens the life or freedom of another citizen.
- Islamic State: It only prohibits speech and actions if Islam forbids them.
20- Is it permissible for a citizen to criticise, reject, ridicule, or mock the state’s system and its highest legislative authority?
- Democratic State:
Yes. It is permissible for a citizen to criticise or mock anyone or anything, including democracy, secularism, ideas, arts, sciences, people, constitution, religions, beliefs, and sacred or non-sacred books. They can also criticise or mock state symbols such as the president, king, emblem, or national flag, as it falls under the freedom of expression, which is a human right.
- Islamic State:
No. It is not permissible for anyone to criticise or mock Islam, Allah, the Prophet, the Quran, the Hadiths, or Islamic symbols. Whoever does so is considered an apostate or disbeliever, and the Islamic state punishes them with death or another severe penalty.
21- Who has the right to hold the presidency of the state and high positions?
- Democratic State: All citizens, regardless of their religions, beliefs, or ideologies, men and women alike.
- Islamic State: Only Muslim men. Women and non-Muslims are completely prohibited.
22- Is it permissible for a Muslim female citizen to govern the state (as a president/leader/queen)?
- Democratic State: Yes.
- Islamic State: No.
23- Is it permissible for an atheist citizen to be the president, king, or leader of the state?
- Democratic State: Yes.
- Islamic State: No.
24- Is it permissible for a Christian citizen to be the president, king, or leader of the state?
- Democratic State: Yes.
- Islamic State: No.
25- Is it permissible for a Muslim citizen to be the president, king, or leader of the state?
- Democratic State: Yes.
- Islamic State: Yes.
26- Who chooses the ruler of the state?
- Democratic State: Elections.
- Islamic State: The Islamic jurists (scholars) or the Muslim elite (dignitaries) choose or pledge allegiance to him.
27- What is the ultimate and highest goal of the state?
- Democratic State:
Its ultimate and highest goal is to implement human rights in society, execute the will of the people, protect life and liberty, achieve the well-being and happiness of citizens in life, or assist them in doing so.
- Islamic State:
Its ultimate and highest goal is to implement Islam, execute the law of Allah in society, spread Islam globally, and prepare for the Day of Judgment.
 |
| Democracy is the path to backwardness. Syria — Idlib Governorate. Road signs put up by Islamic organisations. |
 |
| Democracy is a polytheism to Allah. Syria — Idlib Governorate. Road signs put up by Islamic organisations. |
Some individuals who describe themselves as “moderate Muslims” promote the term “Shura /a consultative council” in Islam and claim that it aligns with democratic concepts, but the truth is that this claim is not accurate. Despite multiple interpretations of the concept of Shura in Islam, Islamic clerics have not reached a unanimous ruling on it.
Islamic clerics are divided into two groups:
1. The group that sees preference~recommendation.
2. The group that sees obligation.
The first group considers Shura not to be an essential value for leaders but rather a recommendation or preference. They believe that a leader deserves Allah reward if they follow Shura, but they do not see it as obligatory.
These Islamic clerics argue that there is no explicit text in the Quran imposing Shura, and they interpret the revelation of the verse of Shura (Surah Al-Imran:159) within the context of the companions of Muhammad only. Most Islamic clerics see this verse as encouraging but not obligatory, considering that Muhammad was supported by revelation and divine guidance in making correct decisions. They explain that the reason for the revelation of the verse was to show appreciation for the opinions of others and to soften their hearts.
The most renowned Islamic clerics in Islam, Ibn Kathir, said; “The Prophet used to consult his companions in matters to please their hearts and to be more active for them in what they do.”
The founder of the Muslim Brotherhood organisation and its first guide, Hassan al-Banna, states in his book “Risalat al-Taa’leem” (Message of Teachings):
If we were firm and declared it explicitly and clearly; that we, the people of Islam, are not communists, nor democrats, nor anything of what they claim.
He also describes democracy as a crumbling system:
This is our call, which has no method except the Noble Qur’an, no soldiers except you, and no leader except our noble Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him. So where in our system are these crumbling systems? Democracy, communism, dictatorship!
In his book “Social Justice in Islam,” Sayyid Qutb/Islamic scholar, one of the most important ideologues of the Islamist movement, clarifies that he does not approve of discussions about “Islamic socialism” or “Islamic democracy.”
He considers merely linking Islam with democracy an attempt to succumb to “those degrading attempts that a Muslim should not try in response to the fluctuating human thought trends, which do not prove their validity consistently under the pretext of the evolution of means of calling to Allah.”
He rejects democracy fundamentally because, in his view, it is “a human-made system for life or governance, carrying the potential for right and wrong from humans.” In contrast, Islam is “a way of life encompassing ideological beliefs, social-economic systems, and executive and legislative structures. It is Allah’s creation, free from deficiencies and flaws.”
Therefore, Qutb bases his objection to democracy on the premise that it is a “human” system, whereas Islam is “Allah’s creation.” Thus, any attempt to replace the divine with the human means stepping out of the religion and entering ignorance.
As for the claim by some Muslims about the possibility of reconciling Islam with democracy, this is considered ignorance. They will inevitably have to pay the price of reconciliation between them, which is:
- Abandoning half of Islam.
- Abandoning half of democracy.
The result of this reconciliation would be a hybrid, distorted state, neither Islamic nor democratic, crippled in its functioning, contradictory in its laws, and incapable of achieving any real progress or true justice.
Elections in Islamic and Arab countries do not necessarily equate to democracy.
Elections alone do not establish a democratic system; they are merely a voting process (regardless of whether they are rigged, free, or controlled by the ruling regime).
There are regular elections in countries like Morocco, Algeria, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, and Turkey, but we all know that these countries are not democratic.
The issue of democracy and its relation to elections is not limited to Arab and Islamic countries; it is a problem faced by third-world countries and others like the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation.
The People’s Republic of China, to this day, holds elections for the National People’s Congress, consisting of around 3000 deputies elected indirectly through secret ballot by delegates elected by the people’s congresses at lower levels, despite being under the political monopoly of the Communist Party.
It is worth mentioning here that the Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party came to power through elections.
Moreover, the socialist bloc countries, which were subject to single-party rule (the Communist Party), regularly held elections before their official collapse in 1991. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the democratic process and the electoral mechanism in the Russian Federation present a different model of democracy, or what can be called hybrid systems.
Since the dream of Muslims is tied to the dream of the sovereignty of Allah and the sovereignty of His law on earth, they will only reap more backwardness, poverty, illiteracy, destruction, oppression, minority suppression, interfaith strife, wars, and decapitations until international bodies intervene to place their countries under the guardianship of the United Nations or similar entities. This is because they excelled in opposing the world, spreading terrorism extensively, persisting in their opposition to progress and modernity, and boasting of being the “best nation brought forth for mankind” without understanding the dangerous implications and consequences, which allow them the right to inherit the earth, enslave others, kill dissenters, capture their women, and subjugate non-Muslims, including Jews, Christians, and other religious minorities.
If Islam were in the service of democracy, and if Islam were the solution, they would indeed be the best of nations in terms of food, clothing, education, health, peace, inventions, civilisation, progress, and good ethics.
What is noticeable in the Islamic world is that the ordinary Muslim is ready to fight and engage in jihad for anything related to his religion, no matter how trivial it may be. But, on the other hand, he is not capable, nor does he have the desire or will, to do anything when it comes to defending his basic needs and interests such as food, clothing, education, healthcare, physical and mental safety, social justice, individual and collective rights, and working to establish true democracy that distinguishes between religion and state, where no one is allowed to exploit power in the name of religion or to apply its law, and to distinguish between Muslim and non-Muslim citizens.
It is evident that democracy did not find its way into the lives of Muslims from the beginning; as soon as Muhammad died, apostasy from Islam spread in the Arabian Peninsula. And if it were not for the intervention of Abu Bakr’s army, forcefully and bloodily, Islam itself would have been just a memory. As the late Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi himself said; “If it were not for the apostasy wars, Islam would have collapsed!” In the Battle of Yamama alone, between Abu Bakr’s army and the Banu Hanifa tribe and those allied with them, more than 22,000 people were killed, including 500 memorisers of the Quran.
Exploiting Asylum and European Democracy;
The European asylum system is designed to provide sanctuary for those fleeing persecution, violence, or untenable circumstances. While this noble endeavour is deeply embedded in the democratic principles of the European Union, it is not immune to exploitation, manipulation, and abuse.
The global refugee crisis has prompted Western democracies to open their doors to those fleeing persecution, violence, and authoritarian regimes. The very foundation of asylum is grounded in empathy, human rights, and the promise of a better life for those escaping oppressive regimes in countries such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon, along with their associated armed militias.
However, a concerning trend has emerged where some refugees, upon being granted asylum, engage in activities that appear to contradict their initial claims. This complex and pressing issue demands a thorough examination of its intricacies and a reevaluation of asylum requirements.
This includes showing allegiance to groups like Hamas, the Jihad group, and the governments of Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Iraq. This stark contrast between their asylum narratives and their actions raises legitimate questions about the legitimacy of their original claims.
In doing so, they not only compromise the safety and values of their host nations but also undermine the very principles upon which these democracies are built.
Adding to the complexity of this issue is the support provided by extremist leftist and anarchist groups within Europe to refugees with extremist ties. Their shared anti-Western and anti-establishment agendas create a concerning alliance that bolsters the aims of extremist elements within the refugee population.
The issue of exploiting asylum and European democracy by groups like the Muslim Brotherhood to bolster pressure groups and promote terrorism is a complex and concerning matter that warrants a deep political critique. It reflects the intricate intersection of democratic values, national security, and humanitarian principles. The primary concern is that the very asylum systems designed to offer refuge to those fleeing persecution can be manipulated to serve the interests of extremist organisations.
إرسال تعليق