West /Developed World Its Democracy As A Model For Pashtuns

[Badlun]

Some more explanatory notes in response to my Political Islamist friend

The reason I consider for all this is the lack of modern education and considering Islam as a complete way of life which entails in terrorism, religious extremism and fundamentalism. I wana change the situation where we are living in and this change will only be efefctive if we accept modern values like democracy and shun religious exremism and considering Islam as a complete system of life.

I dont like communism. Still the introduction of communism in Afghanistan brought enlightenment specially in Pashtuns. They became more nationalist and less religious fanatics. It was unfortunate that the West used Mujahideen against communists and now we are reaping the results of using religion in politics in the shape of Taliban and Alqaida and the lethal combination of religious extremism and Pashtuns.

I have very good intentions for this discussion and this you can note from my tone. I never desrespect you as a person and I understand that many like you have been brain washed by the religious pandits and the stooges of the arab imperialism. You are not the only one who consider Islam as a complete way of life and hate democracy. There are many like you. May be there are few like me among Muslims who consider Islam only as a religion and consider true democracy as a panacea for all the ills of Pashtuns specially and Muslims generally.

I wish our discussion should be impersonal and only dedicated to what is said not who says it. I am learning a lot from this discussion and I hope we ll reach a very good conclusion. We just make our minds open to new ideas and may be ready to break the idols already we have in our minds. You can first reply to all my answers to your questions an dthen may comment on my these posts as replies to your replies to my posts.


On the definition of religion, I would like to tell you that I have read lot of books on the comparative study of religions , theology and religion it self. But as like any other definition , you cant give a deifintion on which all agree. Defining some thing is the most difficult task in the academic world and always you have controversies. After reading all importnat definitions of the religion I have reached to the conclusion that almost all definitions include these 3 basic elements. FAITH+WORSHIP+MORALITY.

I also agree with both the definitions you have referred to, as well as your concept of religion which you consider as the sum of what Allah says and what the Prophet did. I agree that Quran have injunctions about beliefs, worship and all Ahkam what you have referred are basically moral or ethical. We dont find any constitutioon in Quran or a complete economic system like capitalism or communism in Quran nor in Hadith.

All the commandments are about moral aspects of life like adultry, drinking, usury(exploiting others by exorbitant interest) etc. I agree that Quran describe few economic aspects of life like inhhiretance, zakat(which is also moral being equivalent to charity) etc but all these are very rudimentary and have moral underpinnings and can never subtitute a complete economic , political, legal or cultural system and were never never applied in the 1400 years of muslims except few years when there was no other alternative as monorchy at that time.

If we separate religion from politics, economy, culture and society then the laws made will be only for these aspects of life while the religious institutions as church or mosque will look after the religious spheres. State or government will not interfere in those religious spheres and may support the religious institutions.

The problem arises when Muslims like you and religious people as Mullas, taliban etc start interfrerring in political and other non religious aspects of life. They want to make laws, implement laws and do every thing about each and every activity of life and the result is the chaos we see now a days in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Arabs and other Muslim countries except Somalia, Iran, Sudan are safe from this menace as they have separated religion from government and have relatively more peace and stability. I dont say that they are democracies but still they keep religion under political control and dont let the religious bandits to be at the helm of affairs. Pashtuns are specially suffering from this lethal combination of Religion and Politics.

Laws regarding secular spheres of life are to be made by parliament and religious aspects may be governed by Holy books etc.

Please explain it further as how it is absurd to claim that democracy and Islam cant co-exist???If democracy can function in the majority of the countries of the world why not in Muslim countries. And you may know that even in non arab Muslim countries democracy is funtioning including the REPUBLICS of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Presenting yourself as candidate for a post is something very normal and natural. The whole world go for interviews for jobs and present themselves. The same happens in political world. How can you say that its not good for Muslims?

Quran and hadith is for the religion not for the non religious speheres of life. How can you get injunctions from religious books about modern sciences, technology, politics, economy etc. these dont exist in Quran or Hadith. Whatever you refer to are moral injunctions or very fundamental concepts not a systematic description of laws regarding politics, economy etc.

Their man-made laws, and poltical orientation is good for the non Muslims as well as for the Muslims including Pashtuns. Whatever is harmful we may rejcet but the practical implementation of these laws have made them developed and we may not remain behind by considering them not Islamic.

The Iraq, afghanistan wars by the West may be better understood if we think sincerely that how Arabs started from Makkah and Madina and conquered the whole world known at that time. Arabs not only invaded all those countries and civilizations but conquered them completely and made them part of the Arab kingdom of that time. USA may have their presence but still local pople are ruling these countries and USA has not made yet Afghanistan and Iraq as their states.

The questiuon of Israel can also be understood if we think impartially that Jews have conquered that part of the Middle east by power and design because they think it belongs to them as their promised land. Arabs inpite of their numerical strenght could not oust them. Every one of us have the right to expand and develop. Its all power politics , struggle for the balance of power and Realism.

[Badlun]

That's like the most pathetic thing I've ever seen. But since you are going to embarass yourself, people have the decency to copy-paste my reply to your nonssense.

I have copied some of my posts related to democracy and the West. I had replied to all your questions systematically but I failed to find any of your reply coherent or to the point. If you disgree with this then copy or once again try to criticize my replies to your questions again. In that topic of your questions you then engagaged in replying to other members posts and you forgot to comment on my replies to your questions except the first one or two which I also replied back.

What I wish here in this thread to present the model of democracy, liberalism, capitalism for Pashtuns and to criticize Political Islam and Communism as alternative models as I have done above.

[Badlun]

Looks like somebody is a citizen of "Dreamland"

Dont you the practical application of democracy in the whole world including some countries of Non Arab Muslims world too. How its a dreamsland. What alternative you have. The kingdom of Saudi, or the Taliban regime or teh dictatorship of Muslims like Umayyads, Abassids, Mughals in past 1400 years of the history of islam pr what......Democracy is the most concrete and achievable goal, How it can be a dream. I fail to understand.

[Badlun]

Democracy and capitalism has already showed us what its capable of doing hasnt it?

What it had showed...are you talking of the financial crisis in few countries. Its almost over except may be in Spain or Greece. And crises are common. problems come but are solved. You may know about the great depression of 30s in USA but now you see USA is the world super power but others like USSR and so called islamic kingdoms and Emarates of taliban hav ebeen crashed for ever.

[شمله ور خراساني]

I have copied some of my posts related to democracy and the West. I had replied to all your questions systematically but I failed to find any of your reply coherent or to the point. If you disgree with this then copy or once again try to criticize my replies to your questions again. In that topic of your questions you then engagaged in replying to other members posts and you forgot to comment on my replies to your questions except the first one or two which I also replied back.

What I wish here in this thread to present the model of democracy, liberalism, capitalism for Pashtuns and to criticize Political Islam and Communism as alternative models as I have done above.

liberalism means you allow your daughter to have multible boyfriends. You want that to mix with Pashtunwali? Are you on drugs?

[Abdali]

^That is not what it necessarily means.

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

liberalism means you allow your daughter to have multible boyfriends. You want that to mix with Pashtunwali? Are you on drugs?

Sangar my friend, I'm afraid you haven't the faintest idea what liberalism is. This is exactly the sort of mud our glorious malagaan (peace be upon them) spew to deter people from getting out of their grasps.

It's actually quite telling, you know... Like it shows where a Mullah's mind really is. He's thinking about sex and perverse things all the time. And when he's confronted with a new idea, he goes to his base instinctual emotions and says, "hey, your daughter will be with many men!". It's disgusting and despicable. But that's okay for molvi standards.

Here's what liberalism actually is.

Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis, "of freedom"[1]) is the belief in the importance of liberty and equality.[2][3] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but most liberals support such fundamental ideas as constitutions, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, free trade, secularism, and the market economy. These ideas are often accepted even among political groups that do not openly profess a liberal ideological orientation. Liberalism encompasses several intellectual trends and traditions, but the dominant variants are classical liberalism, which became popular in the 18th century, and social liberalism, which became popular in the 20th century.

Liberalism first became a powerful force in the Age of Enlightenment, rejecting several foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as hereditary status, established religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings (or moulvis in our case).

[شمله ور خراساني]

Sangar my friend, I'm afraid you haven't the faintest idea what liberalism is. This is exactly the sort of mud our glorious malagaan (peace be upon them) spew to deter people from getting out of their grasps.

It's actually quite telling, you know... Like it shows where a Mullah's mind really is. He's thinking about sex and perverse things all the time. And when he's confronted with a new idea, he goes to his base instinctual emotions and says, "hey, your daughter will be with many men!". It's disgusting and despicable. But that's okay for molvi standards.

Here's what liberalism actually is.

Bachoo, I study John Stuart Mill, and you think you can come here and tell me what liberalism is? LOL

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

Bachoo, I study John Stuart Mill, and you think you can come here and tell me what liberalism is? LOL

Bachu, you're the one who made this post:

liberalism means you allow your daughter to have multible boyfriends. You want that to mix with Pashtunwali? Are you on drugs?

Perhaps you should devote more time and attention to Mr. Mill.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Bachu, you're the one who made this post:



Perhaps you should devote more time and attention to Mr. Mill.

I did. And I also paid close attention to Locke, Rousseau, Bentham, Foucualt etc etc.

And the conclusion I draw is that Liberalism is nothing but moral corrution, promotion of vice, gay parades, fornication, sexually transmitted diseases, fatherless children, social benefits being exploited by single moms, the elderly being locked up in old peoples houses and people constantly complaining about trivia.

In fact, I have experienced liberalism in Western Europe for the past 16 years.

So who are you to tell me what liberalism is?

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

I did. And I also paid close attention to Locke, Rousseau, Bentham, Foucualt etc etc.

And the conclusion I draw is that Liberalism is nothing but moral corrution, promotion of vice, gay parades, fornication, sexually transmitted diseases, fatherless children, social benefits being exploited by single moms, the elderly being locked up in old peoples houses and people constantly complaining about trivia.

In fact, I have experienced liberalism in Western Europe for the past 16 years.

So who are you to tell me what liberalism is?

Despite all those vices, I've been witnessing people here for 20 years who will sell their mothers to be fed to dogs so that they can go to the West.

By the way, STDs don't need a political system to be transmitted. With the right sort of contraception, they don't prosper. Of course, patience is the best way of prevention but no where does liberalism say that you must have unprotected sex with infected people.

Lastly, the 'vices' you've posted above are nothing compared to what we read in our local newspapers everyday - husband kills wife with axe, husband slaughters daughters then kills himself, father kills son, slaughtered woman found on the roadside, cousin kidnapped for ransom then murdered, uncle rapes niece, etc, etc... Should I start posting the daily Dawn Metropolitan and Daily Jang from today onwards so you can see what authoritarianism results in?

And there's nothing wrong with gay parades and single moms. Of course, it's preferable and recommended to have a full family but is it really a woman's fault if her husband leaves her? And the day a homosexual man forces you to go out with him is that day you can complain about homosexuality. Whatever they do to each other is their own business, not yours.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Despite all those vices, I've been witnessing people here for 20 years who will sell their mothers to be fed to dogs so that they can go to the West.

By the way, STDs don't need a political system to be transmitted. With the right sort of contraception, they don't prosper. Of course, patience is the best way of prevention but no where does liberalism say that you must have unprotected sex with infected people.

Lastly, the 'vices' you've posted above are nothing compared to what we read in our local newspapers everyday - husband kills wife with axe, husband slaughters daughters then kills himself, father kills son, slaughtered woman found on the roadside, cousin kidnapped for ransom then murdered, uncle rapes niece, etc, etc... Should I start posting the daily Dawn Metropolitan and Daily Jang from today onwards so you can see what authoritarianism results in?

What authoritarianism.

You must be joking. Pakistan is like a failed immitation of what UK is like. it is an immoral piece of junk. Who cares what dumb Pakistanis do to themselves?

As if I support filthy and corrupted Pakistani society and denounce Modern Western societies.

YOu make no sense what so ever.

All I am saying is the gospel of liberal democracy is not paradise. And for those dumb fools who would sell their mother to go to the west, who cares? They are stupid. It's their problem.

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

What authoritarianism.

You must be joking. Pakistan is like a failed immitation of what UK is like. it is an immoral piece of junk. Who cares what dumb Pakistanis do to themselves?

As if I support filthy and corrupted Pakistani society and denounce Modern Western societies.

YOu make no sense what so ever.

All I am saying is the gospel of liberal democracy is not paradise. And for those dumb fools who would sell their mother to go to the west, who cares? They are stupid. It's their problem.

Be it Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Indonesia or Iraq - they have the same social problems. And they're all authoritarian states with a tag of republic on them. They have no liberalism whatsoever except perhaps in very few circles.

And those dumb fools number in the tens of millions and they're from African and Asian Muslim countries and they're forcing themselves into places like Holland, where the native people want them out but our people STILL wanna go and live there.

What system do you propose then since you hate freedom of speech, the idea of constitutions, the idea of government by choice, the idea of self-rule, the idea of equality under the law, the ideas of elections and human rights, etc... you hate all these things because they will result in our daughters going out with multiple men. What do you propose then? An Islamic idealistic Utopia that never was and never will be?

[شمله ور خراساني]

Be it Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Indonesia or Iraq - they have the same social problems. And they're all authoritarian states with a tag of republic on them. They have no liberalism whatsoever except perhaps in very few circles.

And those dumb fools number in the tens of millions and they're from African and Asian Muslim countries and they're forcing themselves into places like Holland, where the native people want them out but our people STILL wanna go and live there.

What system do you propose then since you hate freedom of speech, the idea of constitutions, the idea of government by choice, the idea of self-rule, the idea of equality under the law, the ideas of elections and human rights, etc... you hate all these things because they will result in our daughters going out with multiple men. What do you propose then? An Islamic idealistic Utopia that never was and never will be?

Bachoo, you are being so silly I dont even want to reply to such silly posts.

But I will have to do it any since it is my own fault to reply to you in the first place.

First of all, there is no ideal Islamic utopian state. There are Islamic values and our own culture and tradition that give us an indication of who we are and what we are about.

On the other hand, we see the advanced economies and societies of the west where they have moral corruption and all other sorts of social problems.

What we as Muslims argue is that we should not import stuff and end up like a brothel that Pakistan is turned in to. But we must import only the useful and beneficial aspects of advanced socieites. Which is education, science, rule of law etc.

But somehow in your communist brain maybe due to the braindamage you have developed from drinking all that Maskovskaya Vodka, you keep re-interpreting everything I say into somethign silly and ridiculous.

[Badlun]

One Caliph to rule them all

The model is not caliphate

Whenever I hear yet another call for establishing an Islamic Caliphate that will govern the Muslim ummah from Indonesia to Morocco, I shake my head in wonder at such ignorance of the real world.


Consider: the Muslim world is divided as never before as Shias fight Sunnis; secular modernists battle fundamentalists; Deobandis blow up Barelvis; mainstream Muslims consider anyone with a slightly different belief to be a non-Muslim; and Arab Muslims regard other believers as their inferiors on racial grounds. How would one group possibly accept a Caliph from another?
If we can’t agree on the precise manner of praying, how could we be on the same page about who the Caliph should be? In an earlier and simpler tribal period, a handful of elders could choose their leader. But when over a billion and a half Muslims are spread across the globe, how is a consensus to be achieved? The sad truth is that Muslims are divided — not united — by their faith.


If you think I am exaggerating, just look at what is happening here in Pakistan, and across the Middle East and North Africa. In Tunisia, where the Arab Spring was first sparked off, Salafist extremists have almost paralysed a nascent democracy. An acute polarisation has built up between hard-line militants and secular Muslims in perhaps the most Westernised Arab country.


Libya is being torn apart due to tribal and sectarian tensions as allies of the Muslim Brotherhood seek to carve out an Islamic state based on the Sharia. Opposing them are the democrats who spearheaded the battle against Colonel Ghaddafi’s tyranny. Armed groups fight the shaky government for control over territory and petroleum revenues. Meanwhile, the country has virtually ground to a halt as anarchy and violence become the norm.
In Syria, a vicious civil war has now entered its third year as government forces fight jihadis, many of them foreigners, as well as democratic rebels. Simultaneously, the Islamists are battling secular groups who were the first to begin the struggle to topple the Assad regime. Alarmingly, the fighting is also increasingly between Alewites and Sunnis, with ethnic cleansing going on in areas either side controls.


Iraq is suffering from relentless terrorist attacks as an Al Qaeda affiliate, the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS), slaughters thousands across the country. According to a recent Time Magazine report, nearly 8,000 civilians have been killed in the country in 2013 alone. The report also quotes American officials who suggest that in two and a half years, Syria has drawn “as many fighters to its battlefields as Afghanistan did in two and a half decades of war”.


Egypt is split down the middle between the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters on the one hand, and the military and its liberal backers on the other. Although President Morsi was democratically elected, he alienated much of civil society by his crude attempts to Islamise a liberal Egypt overnight. The ongoing standoff between the two sides has eroded democratic values and given legitimacy to a military coup. The wounds inflicted on the Arab world’s most important country by its own people will take a long time to heal.


Despite a nominal end to its civil strife, Yemen remains a country at war with itself. Tribal rivalries and tensions between fundamentalists and military-backed modernisers have created large spaces that have been filled by Al Qaida in the Arab Peninsula (AQAP).
Several Sunni sheikdoms and Saudi Arabia on the Gulf have substantial Shia minorities that are oppressed and angry. In Bahrain, a Sunni ruling family has marginalised the majority Shia community. Months of unrest and rebellion have been quelled with Saudi assistance. How long the present uneasy status quo will last is unclear.


In Pakistan, we know only too well how Shias have been targeted by extremist Sunni groups, with Hazras being specially singled out because of their distinctive features. In Afghanistan, too, the Taliban killed hundreds of these unfortunate people because of their Shia belief.
While much of the tension dividing the Muslim world can be traced back to the original split between Islam’s two major communities, another factor has contributed to the recent flare-up in violence. This is the Wahabi/Salafi strain of Islam followed in Saudi Arabia. Since the country hit the jackpot following the oil embargo of 1973, it has deliberately exported its intolerant beliefs across the Muslim world by financing madressahs in poor countries, and mosques as well as chairs for Islamic studies in the West.


A generation later, its hard-line version of the faith has taken root in many Muslim countries, suppressing gentler, more tolerant strands of Islam. Sufi thought and traditions, centred around the shrines of revered saints from Libya to Mali to Pakistan, have been selectively targeted.
By dint of its money and its position as the custodian of Islam’s holiest sites, Saudi Arabia exerts great influence across the world of Sunni Islam. Sadly, it is also the most retrogressive Muslim state in the world, and over the last four decades, other Sunni countries have followed its example of intolerance and backwardness.


In a bid to neutralise Iranian influence, it is allegedly financing some of the most nasty jihadi groups fighting in Syria where many Saudi fighters are reported to have taken up arms to topple Assad. Money from the Gulf emirates and Saudi Arabia is reported to be financing Al Qaeda, the Taliban and sundry Salafi groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
One reason oil-rich Arab royal families are underwriting the global jihad is that they hope to export this poison out of their societies and placate their clerics. Thus, they seek to preserve their thrones and their perks while reshaping more progressive Muslim societies into their repressive mould.
If there is to be a Caliph, I have little doubt the Saudis would like to have their monarch appointed to the position. And petrodollars could go a long way in achieving this goal that is being pushed by many extremist groups.

One Caliph to rule them all - DAWN.COM