Towards A Civic Democratic Islamic Discourse I I Islam State And Citizenship

Claim to be the first to probe the depths of ‘Civic Democratic Islam’ with political and academic protagonists, individuals, foundations and parties involved in what has become known as political Islam, and the first to try to establish an international coalition which bears that very name. This comes as a bid to respond – practically – to the questions which have worried both theologians and politicians, in the areas of inter-cultural, inter-civilizational and inter-religious dialogue.

Some argue that Muslims have no tradition of separation of church and state and therefore can't participate in secular, pluralist society. At the other extreme, some Muslims argue that it is the duty of all believers to resist western forms of government and to impose Islamic law. Andrew F. March demonstrates that there are very strong and authentically Islamic arguments for accepting the demands of citizenship in a liberal democracy, many of them found even in medieval works of Islamic jurisprudence. In fact, he shows, it is precisely the fact that Rawlsian political liberalism makes no claim.

Traces the genealogy of the Western philosophic concept of the civil state, how that concept was assimilated into Egyptian political thought, and how it affected the 2013 coup against President Mursi. How is the concept of the civil state understood in Arab countries? In The Battle over a Civil State, Limor Lavie examines how this important concept, which originated in Western philosophy, became incorporated into Arab discourse. The civil state as understood in Arab political discourse, Lavie argues, attempts to bridge Islamic history and culture with modernity. It is an attempt to forge a middle ground between a purely theocratic rule and a purely secular rule, and a solution for the tensions between a desire to catch up with global modernization and democratization processes and the desire to reject those same processes. In the political discourse of most of the Arab Spring countries, the concept of the civil state played a pivotal role. In the public debate over the character of Egypt, in particular, following the January 25, 2011 uprising, the demand to establish a civil state was shared by all the political currents. However, when these currents sought to set out basic guidelines for Egypt’s future, it soon became clear that they were far from reaching a consensus, and that the concept of the civil state was at the heart of the controversy between them. The struggle over Egypt's civil character in the post-Mubarak era was the main reason for the turbulence the country experienced on June 30, 2013—leading to the ouster of President Muhammad Mursi. Limor Lavie teaches at Bar Ilan University.

In the face of Islam's own internal struggles, it is not easy to see who we should support and how. This report provides detailed descriptions of subgroups, their stands on various issues, and what those stands may mean for the West. Since the outcomes can matter greatly to international community, that community might wish to influence them by providing support to appropriate actors. The author recommends a mixed approach of providing specific types of support to those who can influence the outcomes in desirable ways.

Islam's relationship to liberal-democratic politics has emerged as one of the most pressing and contentious issues in international affairs. In Islam, Secularism, and Liberal Democracy, Nader Hashemi challenges the widely held belief among social scientists that religious politics and liberal-democratic development are structurally incompatible. This book argues for a rethinking of democratic theory so that it incorporates the variable of religion in the development of liberal democracy. In the process, it proves that an indigenous theory of Muslim secularism is not only possible, but is a necessary requirement for the advancement of liberal democracy in Muslim societies.

Can islam and democracy exist side by side? Is Islam compatible with democracy? The text examines one of the most frequently-asked and yet misguided questions. Democratic ethos should not and cannot be deduced from some essence of religions supposedly inscribed in the scriptures. Rather, they are the outcome of political struggles that push Islam toward democratic or authoritarian directions. Asef Bayat offers a new approach to examine Islam and democracy arguing how the social struggles of diverse Muslim populations, those with different interests and orientation, render Islam to embrace democratic ideas or authoritarian disposition. "Islamism" and "post-Islamism" are discussed as representing two contrasting movements which have taken Islam into different, authoritarian and inclusive, political directions.