Jump to content

Talk:Political aspects of Islam

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

UMN Intl: The Rise of Political Islam A Baraka unto the Muslim World

[edit]

The Wikipedia article lacks some information.

1) The Political Structure “Bait ul Mal” 2) The Global Campaign for the Revival of Islamic Culture “Quran Psychology”

These two points are the driving force behind the Revival of the Global Islamic Chaliphate in the 21st Century

For more information do some research or google the above title “UMN Intl: The Rise of Political Islam A Baraka unto the Muslim World” The most outstanding work on strengthening Political Islam is done by an organization known as the United Muslim Nations International.

Needs to be Edited

[edit]

The part about Shia following Imams should be edited. Imam Ali was the fourth Caliph, so it should be incorperated into: Shia followed Caliphs until Muwaoiyah became Calpih. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.115.33 (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the part about Early Caliphate and Political Ideals must be corrected, the Alquran verses in paragraph 3 and paragraph 4 are wrong Demisari (talk) 05:11, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Poll

[edit]

I'm calling a vote:

Should the article "Islam as a political movement" remain as an article?

Yes: BL

No (make it a redirect):

Too early for a vote (try revising): Uncle Ed, Khym Chanur

This page is way too long, for the pittance of information it actually gives. It would ALMOST be better to delete than to have it.

But what we need is a clear explanation of the political aspects of Islam. No one in the West understands it. Or if they do, they haven't dropped by the Wikipedia yet. *sigh* I might have to become an expert on it, just to revise this article. With 10,000 registered users, why must it be me?

Okay, the pity party is over. I learned a lot about Middle Eastern politics to write about the Arab-Israeli conflict and revise articles like Palestinian. I guess I could take on a little more. But I'd rather work on the Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial. Help me out, eh? --Uncle Ed 21:19, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Edit

[edit]

From the sentence: Islamists claim that the origins of Islam as a political movement are to be found in the life and times of Islam's prophet, Muhammad and his successors, the Caliphs (for Sunnis), or the Imams (for Shia). I cut off the Caliphs (for Sunnis), or the Imams (for Shia), as it is much more complicated than that, since Islamists don't agree.

For example, Islamist Muhammad Qutb only talks about the caliphs Abu Bakr and Umar as exemplary. Taqiuddin al-Nabhani, of Hizb ut-Tahrir, on the other hand, maintains Islam did not really go wrong until the abolition of the Caliphate in 1922.

Also, Shia conside the Imams to be Caliphs, i.e. the rightful sucessors of the prophet, although they seldom use the word "Caliph" in my experience. --BoogaLouie (talk) 19:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Alquran verse in the Early Caliphate and Political Ideas text are wrong Demisari (talk) 05:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Political aspects of Islam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious

[edit]

These are some features of a democracy:

  • Majority Rule: the system of government is based on parliamentary majorities
  • Representative Elections: the people are allowed to elect representatives to speak for their views and interests.
  • Multi-party system: voters have the opportunity to choose from a variety of political parties, representing a wide range of political opinion.
  • Freedom of speech: no restriction is placed on the right to opinions and express then openly.
  • Civil liberties: An important characteristic of democracy is that it grants top civil liberties to the citizens.
  • Rule of law: Another characteristic of democracy is that it ensures rule of law. Law is supreme and all the citizens are equal in the eyes of law. No one is above law.
  • Freedom of association: no restriction is placed on people organizing political parties to take part in democratic life.
  • Freedom of Assembly: no restriction is placed on the right to hold meetings or organize demonstrations provided those do not violate the rights of others.
  • Respect for individual rights: the state protects individuals whose rights are threatened by the actions of others.
  • Respect for Minority rights: minorities should not have their basic rights violated by the majority.
  • Respect for the Law: citizens who are given democratic rights should obey the laws that provide these rights.
  • Respect for Democratic Procedures: individuals or groups who have grievances against the system should operate within it, seeking to change the law through legal means.

I am curious to know which of these features were present or even possible in Rashidun or any other caliphate. The article makes some of the strangest ever claims about caliphates. Swingoswingo (talk) 18:33, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This may be a definition of a modern democracy that exists in some source, but it's not a definition adopted by all historians or other authors who use it in various contexts. E.g., slavery under the Athenian or early American democracy obviously doesn't pass the muster of current UN norms. If you're dubious that the cited sources make the claims attributed to them in this article, please verify the sources. If you feel that alternative viewpoints found in RSs are not adequately reflected here, you're welcome to find additional RSs and summarize them. Beyond that, this line of objection is WP:OR. Ref 18 seems to be reliable for what it's cited for, i.e., the views expressed at a conference. Eperoton (talk) 21:38, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible source

[edit]

In Political Islam: Religion and Politics in the Arab World By Nazih Ayubi[1] I found (start missing, page not in GBooks) "differences between the fundamentalist Islamism of Sayyid Qutb and the Jihadists, the liberalnationalist Islamism of M. Khalafalla and M. ‘Imara, the culturalhistoricist Islamism of Tariq al-Bishri and ‘Adil Husain, and the Islamism claimed by owners of the so-called Islamic Investment Companies. On an intellectual level, liberal-nationalist Islamism, culturalhistoricist Islamism, and the broader circle of discourse revolving around the issue of authenticity (asala) may eventually translate themselves into a movement for cultural nationalism that is nativist, ‘specifist’, if not particularly secularist." Doug Weller talk 13:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose for adding a new section of Sufi-salafi division

[edit]

I request to add here a new section named Sufi-salafi division. 43.245.122.17 (talk) 12:35, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2022

[edit]

Add it at the end of the first para: After the early caliphs, including Rashidun Caliph, starting with Muawiya II, various Muslim kings and emperors ruled Muslim majority populations or conquered territories. Due to the prevalence of various modern political ideologies in modern times, they have acquired varying degrees of hybridity under the influence and combination of Islam in various Muslim majority regions. Islamic scholars claim that only Khilafah and Muslim Monarchy are the legitimate Islamic political systems,[1] and while they call the rest of the political systems haram,[2] they judge their use as legitimate as a way for Muslims to gain power to establish Islamic rule.[3][4][5] 103.230.105.12 (talk) 14:55, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. You'll need actual academic sources to assert this. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:04, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Monarchy in Qur'an and Hadith". www.livingislam.org. Retrieved 4 August 2022.
  2. ^ "Concept of democracy in Islam - Islam Question & Answer". islamqa.info. 22 January 2015. Retrieved 4 August 2022.
  3. ^ "Scholars Urge Western Muslims to Vote: Saudi Arabia | MWJ". Muslim World Journal. 4 May 2015. Retrieved 4 August 2022.
  4. ^ "Ruling on democracy and elections and participating in that system - Islam Question & Answer". islamqa.info. Retrieved 4 August 2022.
  5. ^ "Ruling on democracy and elections". en.islamway.net. 21 December 2012. Retrieved 4 August 2022.

Are this article, Islamism and Political Islam sufficiently different?

[edit]

At the top it says "This article is about the issue of politics in the religion of Islam. For the movement of "Political Islam", see Political Islam."

At the top of Political Islam it says "This article is about a term. For the history of the movement, see Islamism." (correct to some extent but very short and has a section I don't think belongs)

At the top of Islamism is says "This article is about an Islamic political ideology and political movement."

Not sure if I should post the question at the other articles. Doug Weller talk 14:30, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: I think you were dead on the money here. I'm wondering exactly the same thing. This seems to all just be about Islamism, but with different names. We for sure don't need both this page AND the stub that is Political Islam, even if there is a broader "Political Islam/its aspects" deemed distinct from "Islamism". Iskandar323 (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iskandar323 so where do we go from here? Merge request? Doug Weller talk 18:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, looking at the range of different entries at Political Islam#Definitions, it does look like "Political Islam" might be a term for largely modern developments, whereas if you delve backwards into the history of Islam and politics, titles such as Political Thought in Medieval Islam emerge instead. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:03, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iskandar323 so do nothing? Doug Weller talk 20:43, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, new thought: leave this page out of it, as this seems to be more the broad sweep of historical thought and practice in Islam, and propose a merge of Islamism and political Islam, both of which are already one on, for example, Britannica. That was actually my initial hunch before I got confused by this page. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iskandar323 Yes, that makes sense. Will you do it? Doug Weller talk 15:39, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Political_aspects_of_Islam&oldid=1208795786"