Skip to comments.An Islamic state in Egypt can still mean democracy (mega-dhimmitude)
Posted on 06/27/2012 11:24:18 AM PDT by Olog-hai
The West is understandably nervous about the election of Mohamed Morsi. The president-elect of Egypt is taking charge of a febrile situation. The economy is contracting and human rights abuses are rampantattacks on Coptic churches by Islamic groups have forced an estimated 100,000 Christians to flee the country.
Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood is philosophically committed to creating a state governed by Islamic law, and some say that his victory poses a threat to Israel. Now he wants to reach out to Iran.
But it would be wrong to conclude that Islamic democracy is a contradiction in terms. Whatever new state emerges in Egypt almost certainly won't be democratic in the liberal, European tradition, and there will be a constant fight to protect the rights of women and religious minorities.
But the presumption that Morsi's political Islam is the vanguard of theocratic dictatorship ignores historical and contemporary evidence to the contrary. Islam is simply too complex to be stereotyped as the faith of tyrants.
The record of modern experiments in Islamic statecraft is tragically mixed. On the good side, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Mali, Senegal, Turkey and now Egypt are all some form of democracy. Even Iran has permitted a degree of popular representation. When the liberal-minded cleric Mohammad Khatami ran for the Iranian presidency in 1997, he was hindered by a media blackout and opposition from Iran's clerical leadership. Yet he won 70% on an 80% turnout and was permitted to serve two terms. (Admittedly, Khatami's achievements in advancing civil liberties were few, and he was hampered by clerical intervention in parliamentary elections.)
The Brotherhood has certainly moderated its views in recent years to accommodate shifting domestic attitudes toward the veil, the presence of Westerners or alcohol.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
By definition it will not be democratic. Remember the whole we can’t make these places democratic when discussing Iraq’s future government?
Islam is not just religion, it is everything, a theocracy founded on violence.
Sure Egypt can still be a democracy. Only the male Islamist are allowed to vote. no problem. Females, Christians or any one else that disagrees with the Islamists, No voting rights for you!!!
A democratic nation is not naturally a free nation.
People like to forget that Hitler held and won a plebiscite.
Just how many bowls of hash did you smoke when writing this article, Mr STONELY?
islam cannot be democratic so let’s just change the definition of democracy
and Saddam Hussein always won his elections by a landslide
Briefer version of the opening:
“Fact, fact, fact, fact, fact. But it would be wrong to go by the facts.”
Democracy alone means little. Mob rule at the ballot box can be far worse than a monarchy or dictator. Unless Egypt recognizes some reasonable degree of individual rights and minority rights in a constitution, then their democracy means very little.
Sure, Islamism is compatible with democracy: democracy in the sense of two wolves and a sheep voting on what dinner will be.
Every American who has proposed spreading democracy around the world should be held in contempt if dead (I’m thinking of the original mostly — Woodrow Wilson), and called to repentance if alive. The American ideal that should be spread world-wide is the notion of limited government, which necessarily includes anti-democratic elements as a check on popular enthusiasms.
The war to “make the world safe for democracy” has occasioned so many other wars, including those in the Middle East, in its wake, and they will go on forever, until American and her allies start fighting each of them in turn as a war to make the world safe for limited government.
I’m not talking about rigged elections, I’m talking about an oppressive, tyrannical majority conductive free and open elections.
Unrestricted by natural law, democracry only moderates how many people can be abused at one time.