Judah wrote:If you are looking at Middle Eastern countries where the dominant religion is Islam, then except for Turkey (which is a different case entirely) government by democratic principles is really not possible.
Islam dictates rule by theocracy - from Allah downwards to the people.
The various forms of democracy are rule from the people upwards, at least in principle where we have elections to select our representatives who have some kind of declared agenda (to make certain laws) which we choose with the majority decision granted.
Islam does not allow a separation of church (read mosque) and state.
Allah will not allow a choice - you, the people, must follow his dictates as set out in the Qur'an, that is, Shar'iah law.
In the western world, our Judeo-Christian heritage supports choice - God allows you free will so you are able to decide whatever.
This is one of the factors that is making it difficult, if not impossible, for democracy to be put in place in Iraq at present. The various Islamic groups vigorously oppose democracy, insisting on Shar'iah law instead.
On the basis of this, one can question the sense of any of our troops being deployed there to bring about a democratic government. If Iraq is hoping for something like what is working in Turkey, then they need to secularize their state - remove the control from islamic clerics - as did Attaturk through his reforms following WW2. If the clerics will not give up power, then democracy is not a compatible option for their citizens.
I'm not sure who you are meaning when you reference Christians and liberals together. The term "liberal" when applied to Christianity usually refers to a form of revisionism that subjects traditional/orthodox Biblical Christianity to the new ideas of postmodernism - ideas such as moral relativism, multiculturalism, pragmatism, utopianism, etc.
Christianity becomes re-defined to suit modern opinion, the supernatural components removed because they couldn't possibly be true "according to science" and therefore should be regarded as myth.
This revisionism is ripping through all mainstream denominations of Christianity at present causing a lot of strife and division. Through the effect of postmodernist philosophies our Christian heritage is being deconstructed in a deliberate attempt to destroy it.
Economic marxism has given away to cultural marxism whereby pluralism, supported by relativism, is favoured.
How do these ideas fit with what you are reading, Michelle?
I am not a political scientist, but these ideas interest me inasmuch as I see what harm they are doing to Christianity, to our culture, and to the lives of people generally.
I also see them as creating the cultural vacuum into which Islam may be sucked without sufficent opposition to stop it engulfing us in time. And that really scares me.
Sorry about my last post not answering properly. I was enjoying (being tempted you might say) a delicious bowl of flavoured ice cream. It is quite a warm night here. So these posts may be quite brief. Mmm choc mint, boysenberry, I cant make up my mind.
Oh yeah, getting back to what you posted. Mmm that ice-cream!
Alright then, first the Middle East view democracy in a different context than we do in the West. They believe it is from Allah down to the people. In other words it is direct opposition to its application in the West. The Shar' iah (comprised of Quran Hadith and Ijma) is quite interesting in that it is interpreted both speculatively and definitively. Speculation and defining law. We in the West may not realise it, but that is exactly what we do when we interpret our common laws. Democracy is still a very real possibility for the Middle East. It would have to be applied differently than we have it in the West.
Also as for Ataturk, he began his reforms prior to WW2 in March 1924 after forming the Republican Peoples Party in 1923. He based his reforms on Swiss civil code, the Italian penal code and the German Commercial code.
Probably why there is much difficulty for the Middle East in democratizing in a similar fashion to the secularized West is because apart from the situation with the religious side of things there is also the economic as well. In the West we seem to be concerned with neo-liberalism. Which is quite interesting in itself because it is a shift away Keynesian economics which was very popular with the West for many years. Actually despite losing favour with economists during the Thatcher years (and a few years after) Keynes theories are once again becoming in fashion! In the Middle East historically trade has always existed, however any economic benefits were first past to the monarchy down to the people just as has been the case with Shar' iah law down from Allah. This must be noted, occurs because they are seen as being divine.
If the issue of the economic situation could be addressed then I dent see any real problem of them having a democracy. They (like many Asian countries) view the West with suspicion. And they have very good reason to as well. Our track record is deplorable. The British, and later the United States are examples of our historical economic endeavours with the Middle East. So it is no wonder they are sometimes suspicious of the West trying to democratize it at times. Terrorism is another issue. The various groups oppose democracy because they have seen what it has done to the West. They see problems with it because they view many of the things we do as being insulting to Allah. The economic global greed of the mainly democratic West, the style of sometimes provocative clothing they frown upon. Unfortunately some of these fundemental extremists have much influence on their fellow country men. Again terrorism!
Once again there is the theoretical possibility of a theocracy and democracy combined. The Shar' iah could be the main law however the people could democratically elect who they want to have govern them. I often discuss this with my associates who are more expert in both economics and international relations than I am. One of my associates (professor of international relations and politics) and I often have debates on how this could be achieved.
Oh yeah, almost forgot, I view everything in the political sense. As for what is occurring to Christianity I don't really see any real problem here in Australia where I am. We need to remember that even in Jesus time the same problems existed whereby some people tried to twist around and change his teachings and that of the Jewish preceding him. A person can become paranoid about Islam coming to take over the West. I live in a city with more than one-hundred and forty-five cultural groups (and that is the official government statistic) and we dont have any problems. In my street we have Muslims, Christians, Hindus (and they normally despise Muslims), and atheists. And we all get on like a house on fire!
