Change you cannot believe in – the Obama plan
Will Obama bring change to US Foreign Policy? Is change really coming?
Change you cannot believe in – the Obama plan
May 7, 2009
Leave a Comment » | 
Critique of Democracy, Refutation of Nationalism, Western Secularist Imperialism | 
Permalink
Posted by Abdullah al Andalusi
Answering an Athiest’s critique on Islamic movements
February 28, 2009Response to an Atheist critique on Islamic Groups working for Khilafah
A Video Response to an atheist’s critique of Islamic Groups and the Islamic State (Khilafah). This video seeks to explain not only the cause of the group specifically mentioned: Hizb ul Tahrir, but all non-violent Islamic Groups in general who nobly work for the establishment of the Caliphate in the Muslim world. This work does not just represent the goals of these groups, but the aspirations of the enitre Muslim world for a better future, in this life and the next.
I strongly recommend all Muslims join and work with all (non-violent) Islamic groups working upon the method of the Prophet (saw), to re-establish the noble Khilafah and the Islamic world as an enlightened civilisation again.
Leave a Comment » | Critique of Democracy, Decline of the West, Refutation of Western Philosophy, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Abdullah al Andalusi
The failure of freedom
February 12, 2009
The image of children working in factories earning a pittance, having no education and in many cases having abusive parents has become synonymous with the third world. However an enquiry which took over three years to compile with the input of a number of independent experts turns this completely on his head and is a damning indictment of Britain.
The Good Childhood enquiry found that selfish adults damaged the lives of children and how family break-up, unprincipled advertising, too much competition in education and income inequality act as big contributory factors causing misery for children in Britain.
According to the panel, “excessive individualism” was to blame for many of the problems children faced, however the panellists then presented a set of shocking ineffectual policy proposals to improve he quality of family life experienced by children, they proposed:
a) a civil birth ceremony conducted by a registrar in which parents publicly accept the responsibilities of parenthood
b) free parenting classes available around the time of birth
c) free psychological and family support if relationships struggle
d) rules making it easier for parents to stay at home to rear their children
Britain is becoming a commonplace where mothers have left for holidays leaving children as young as 3 to fend for themselves. There have also been situation where mothers have gone to clubs or social events and have left young babies on their own, only for neighbours to have called the police due to the constant crying.
What sort of society has Britain turned into when the nations adults need civil birth ceremonies to ensure they accept their responsibilities as mothers and fathers.
Whilst Britain justified its part in the Iraq invasion of taking freedom to an oppressed people, the very same idea has created a scenario where adults view rearing children as an obstacle to enjoying a lifestyle which has become symbolised by excessive alcohol consumption, drugs and unrestricted sexual practices.
Britain has become a contradictory place. There is the scenario where more and more teens are having unplanned pregnancies making Britain the place with the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in Europe. Then you have the opposite scenario which has caused Britain’s acute population problem of an aging population where many adults delay marriage or having children (currently more and more are having no children at all) in order to pursue that career, owning their own property or having that regular annual holiday.
Anyone who looks at this issue with the seriousness it deserves will realise that parenting classes or birth ceremonies will do little to halt the meltdown of the family. In capitalism individual freedom supersedes values such as responsibilities, accountability and loyalty which are all critical in building strong families. Is it little wonder that childhood is full of misery?
Leave a Comment » | Critique of Democracy, Decline of the West, Refutation of Western Philosophy | Permalink
Posted by Abdullah al Andalusi
Can Muslims Participate in Democracy?
November 3, 2008
Leave a Comment » | Critique of Democracy, Refutation of Western Philosophy | Permalink
Posted by Abdullah al Andalusi
Shirk, Democracy and ‘Islamic Democracy’ – the ‘Muslim’ Secularist perplexion
September 10, 2008Some Secularised Muslims claim that though implementing Allah’s (swt) will is preferable, we have to use modern means to achieve it, and democracy is that means that we can use. Indeed, Secularist Muslims fanatically denounce anyone who explains to them that Democracy is a denial of Allah’s sovereignty, and that participating in it is Shirk. Their counter argument is usually (and in typical Muslim secularist fashion), that others are just expressing ‘their opinion’, and that it is not the only ‘opinion’ that Islam produces on the subject. Though, it should be noticed that Secularists refrain from commenting as to the strength of their opinion vis a vis others, and they even refrain from legal debates about the matter – they merely are content just to portray their ideas as legitimate Islamic opinions – which for anyone who believes they follow the strongest opinion, we should find, strangely conspicuous.
To say that participating in democracy- is shirk (setting up partners with God), is not a fatwa (Juristic ruling), it is merely a statement of fact. Just like the worshipping idols, it does not need a scholar to pronounce a fatwa to tell the general layman that participating in it, is shirk, rather, it is common sense that informs us. The formula is simple – anything that aspires, claims, appropriates or assumes any one of the rights left to Allah (swt) alone, is shirk.
Although some people point towards the apparent failure of the Islamic system (the khilafah) historically, as a proof that Islam cannot deal with societies or communities, they neglect to understand that it was that very same system that gave a backward, ignorant and unenlightened people – the keys to the wealth, knowledge and vast lands of the world. And it was under such a system, that they reached the dizzying heights of advanced civilisation, without which, they would have remained desert dwellers of no significance. It must also be pointed out, that without the intellectual developments of Islam, the European intellectual renaissance might never have happened! (and most certainly wouldn’t of happened for another 500 years).
As for why the Khilafah fell, well, this was due to our success. This is because the worst thing to ever happen to a civilisation, is to get want they want. Once the Muslims achieved cultural, economic, military and political supremacy over others – and eliminated major social problems from their midst, they did the one thing no civilisation should ever do, they relaxed and grew complacent. Over time, the intellectual and political laziness grew so dire, that the opportunities to explore the new world simply didn’t matter to the Muslims (who had become comfortable with what they had). It was a matter of time before the West surpassed the Muslims and then turned their attentions to colonisation.
The ultimate reason and fault for this multitude of ills that crept into the Uthmani Khilafah, was mainly due to the forgetting of Islam as a complete and dynamic way of life – and into a set of cultural traditions, merely requiring preservation (without need of understanding or application into new spheres of life). Thus the reason for the failure of the Islamic civilisation was not Islam, but the gradual erosion of that which had brought it success in the first place – Islam itself.
It is interesting to note, that the common conception of Americans, as being intellectually challenged and uncultured, comes from the same sociological principle. They were successful, and now they have become lethargic. I think the best example is like that of a rich child that grew up in a rich family. Rich (western) children tend to be spoilt, uncultured and intellectually unsophisticated. This is because they have no need to think too much to get what they want, they merely point and buy. This is why American society is decaying and this is why America and the West will fall (and at just the right time too, as the Muslim world is rising from its sleep and starting to engage its thoughts, ideas and relearning Islam).
Can ‘Islamic’ Democracy work?
A major assumption is that if we were to have a democracy in a majority Muslim country, that country will have to implement Islam because the people would demand it – and the Muslim people would never go against the will of Allah, would they? (note sarcasm).
Apart from the usual major fallacies of democracy e.g. non-representation, public unable to conceive of wider picture, hypocrisy of leaders and control by the wealthy – to name but a few; how would a ‘islamic’ democracy deliver morality and Islamic rights, when it is based upon self-interest?
Democracy works based upon self-interested people banding together and seeking to vote in someone who will represent those interests. Such a system is prone to factionalism, infighting, discontent on minorities and a general self-centred attitude to approaching politics in society. It matters not how good your morals are, because secularism WILL separate your morals from any real possibility of feasible practical implementation. That why people say, if you want to have a clean conscious, you don’t go into politics. Take Indonesia for example, there already exists factionalism and infighting in it – and that is because of democracy. Some minorities are so tired of having their interests ignored by the majority, they want to separate themselves so that they become a majority in their own country!
And finally, if we are actually concerned about establishing the will of God, in regards to politics, why not just establish the sharia law directly and not gamble on the hope that the self-interested groups in the population will do the right thing and not just the most convenient thing (which they usually tend to do, if left to themselves)?
In the end, the Western world is developed because they came to an agreement that it is in the common (self) interest to use technology to make life more enjoyable (and convenient). As Muslims, if we want to get as developed (if not more), we should rediscover our original motivation that caused us to develop – the worship of Allah (swt) and the never ending striving for the absolute perfection of His (swt) pleasure.
1 Comment | Critique of Democracy | Tagged: democracy islam secularism quran western values republic muslims | Permalink
Posted by Abdullah al Andalusi
“Democracy is a system destined for definite failure” – Mohammed Baqir al Sadr
September 4, 2008
-Mohammed Baqir Al Sadr (in his book, ‘Ana falsafatuna’, page 26)
Mohammed Baqir ul Sadr was a grand Mujtahid of the Shia school of thought. He lived in Iraq and rose to great prominence and esteem at a young age via his works on rational thinking, philosophy and Jafiri jurisprudence. He became an acredited Mujtahid ul Mutlak (comprehensive Islamic jurisprudent) and campaigned politically for the removal of Saddam Hussein and the establishment of an Islamic state under a unified shia/sunni poopulation. He was executed by Saddam Husein in 1980 – and died a martyr for Islamic revial and unity of the Muslim Ummah (community) – all quotes used here are taken from his legendary book ‘ana falsafatuna’ (Our Philosophy).
The facts today with Iraq are; the Americans, along with their allies have invaded Iraq, they removed Saddam from power (a previous pro-American puppet that had displeased them by becoming uncontrollable) and are imposing the democratic system upon Iraq by force. But instead of taking these facts on face value, let us consider the reasons why they did this and if democracy itself is a good thing for Iraq.
IS DEMOCRACY THE ANSWER FOR IRAQ?
Although it is called democracy, when western leaders use this word for Iraq, they actually mean Capitalist Democracy. This is because Democracy is the method of ruling but the system is based upon secularism and ‘freedom’ and thus it advocates free and unrestricted ownership of wealth, regardless of the needs of others and regardless of the resources possessed. Thus Democracy in Iraq shall not work, nor bring stability, nor bring lasting peace or progress: Because it is a system based on self-benefit, such that competition and domination by the powerful become the end result of applying it; the fact that Iraq was a dictatorship under the title of ‘president’ is due to the fact that it actually came out of an attempted democratic system (in 1958).
‘Thus, in the last analysis, capitalistic democracy is reduced to rule by a privileged minority, and to power used by a number of individuals to protect their existence at the expense of others. This they do by means of the benefit mentality which they derive from capitalistic democratic thought.’ - Mohammed Baqir Al Sadr
This is because democratic systems are not representative, nor do they encourage it, rather they merely make the rulers lie and deceive the people in order to gain support, and then spend their appointed terms not fulfilling their election promises. It is really the rich and wealthy who are the ones represented, since the government’s political parties are funded by ‘donations’ (bribes), their objectives are bound to be linked to those who fund them (and affect the economy). Since the government runs the Economy, it doesn’t take a Scholar to work out whose interests they will prioritize the most.
‘For when economic freedom leads to the results that we have presented, it leads to the abominable division…Further, it would itself be in control of the situation and of the reins of power, and would overcome the political freedom confronting it. Thus, by virtue of its economic position regarding society, its capacity for utilizing every means of propaganda, and its ability to buy defenders and aids, the wealthy group has the upper hand over key positions in the nation.’- Mohammed Baqir Al Sadr
It is not a characteristic of Iraq that does not allow democracy to work, rather Democracy is just a method of ruling; and it does not discuss a basis or principle by which people can live other than self-interest. It allows majorities to dominate over minorities, where compromise (when neither party gets what it wants) is common and only leads to further division and strife. Democracy is only an attempt to make people solve their problems with demographic numbers, the defenders of it do not understand that the cause of the disputes has not been dealt with, merely the symptoms, so it is not surprising to find, that when democracy does work or fulfil all the ruler’s desires for power (in non-ideological states- like Arab countries), they compromise the system itself and use ‘extra means’ (usually force) to get what they want, claiming it to be ‘emergency powers’.
‘It is natural that under this system, the despotic rule continues as before, and the phenomena of manipulation and neglect of the rights and interests of others persist in the social atmosphere of this system as they did in the old social atmosphere’
- Mohammed Baqir Al Sadr
IS ISLAM THE ANSWER FOR IRAQ?
The REAL Solution for Iraq, is an ideology based upon ideas and principles upon which all can agree; the establishment of man’s purpose in life- in his life, not the separation of it (as Secularism believes in); a state whose purpose is to protect the ideals, morals, rights, needs and well being of its people, not because of it is beneficial (as benefit and self-interest are the root of and apathy and oppression in mankind), but rather because it is the pleasure Allah (the enlightened purpose of all human beings and societies). This Ideology is ISLAM.
Islam cannot realise its social, political and spiritual objectives without a state based purely on Islamic principles, purposes, methods, morals and objectives-and this cannot be done using Democracy, even if the population is muslim and/or practising Islam.
‘Supporters of capitalistic democracy may defend this system’s perspective on the individual and his personal interests by saying that the individual’s aim is in itself a fulfilment of the social interest, and the results that morality achieves by its spiritual principles are achieved in a capitalistic democratic society, yet not by way of morality, but by way of having and serving individual motives…. This defense is closer to vivid imagination than to evidence. Imagine for yourself if the practical criterion in life for every individual in the nation were the fulfillment, on the largest scale and for the longest term, of his benefits and personal interests, and if the state provided the individual with freedom, glorified him without reservation or limit, how would these individuals define social action?’ – Mohammed Baqir Al Sadr
The people of Iraq are overwhelmingly Muslim, they believe in an ideology upon which a great and historic civilisation lived. Although most people in the west perceive Islam as being a system only for medieval times; this would be as silly a perceiving democracy a system only for the ancient Greek times! The fact is that Islam is a principle and idea upon which an ideological state and society can be built. And represents the best hope of Iraqi’s actually realizing real peace , progress and prosperity.
The Islamic civilization had the first accountable government, the first right for women to participate in politics (including voting/bayah), the first rights for citizens with the aim of granting them a peaceful and fulfilling existence. A state where the non-muslim minorities were granted their own laws for themselves (which country today can claim this!?).
This is not a mythical state, but an Islamic state. It is a real political entity where man can progress in life, in technology, research, discovery and enlightened action; An Islamic State (whether Sunni model:Khilafah or shia model: Imarah/sultaniyya/Wilayat ul Shariah).
An Islamic state is not just a state with restrictions; it is the implementation of a way of life that prevents crime and injustice by eliminating the social causes and mentalities. It is a state based upon ideals which people can live by and interact with each other for the common good (regardless of the various interpretation of Islam). It is a system which addresses human problems and human nature in such a manner that the crime is not just prevented from fear of government wrath, but rather the mentality and viewpoint to life which the state is based on and propagates eliminates the multitude of social ills so very common in western society.
Islam establishes truly accountable government with full inviolable rights for all citizens, where difference of opinion enriches society not divides it, a responsible economic system that distributes wealth based upon fairness to human needs but at the same time allowing value as an incentive for improvement and motivation in economic spheres (which Communism/socialism lacks), a fair justice system upon which no-one is above the law-not even the ruler; And a fully participatory political system where all citizens may express their opinions (even if it involves criticism of the government’s decisions).
‘This it Islam, expressed in the briefest and most beautiful statement. It is a spiritual and a moral doctrine from which a complete system for mankind proceeds, sketching for them their clear and well-defined advance, setting up for them the highest goal of this advance, and making known to them their gains from that goal.’ – Mohammed Baqir Al Sadr
This is the system of Islam, the example of the state the Prophet (saw) established in Madinah, the Khilafah of Ali (ra) and the system, who’s integrity, Husayn (ra) died on the very soil of Iraq to protect.
WHY DID THE COALITION FORCES INVADE?
They invaded because they desired two things, this we can see by their current actions:
1) Control of the oil and Iraqi resources:
“On September 19, Bremer enacted the now infamous Order 39. It announced that 200 Iraqi state companies would be privatised; decreed that foreign firms can retain 100% ownership of Iraqi banks, mines and factories; and allowed these firms to move 100% of their profits out of Iraq.” The Guardian. November 7, 2003
2) Prevention of the rise of an Islamic state in the region- which would damage their greedy political and economical interests in the region, and unify Shia’s and Sunni’s of Iraq:
Donald Rumsfeld said: “Iraq would serve as the base of a new Islamic caliphate [Khilafah] to extend throughout the Middle East, and which would threaten legitimate governments in Europe, Africa and Asia. This is their plan. They have said so. We make a terrible mistake if we fail to listen and learn.”
The objective for Muslims now must be unity and resisting the occupiers in our lands, their ideas and their followers- because if we do not choose for ourselves our own political future; the west and their followers will; a continuingly bleak future of exploitation, poverty, repression and humiliation. Islam only, will provide us with this solution and future; an enlightened future of stability, progress, rights, honour, justice and international respect under Allah’s (swt) law.
‘Thus, in the last analysis, capitalistic democracy is reduced to rule by a privileged minority, and to power used by a number of individuals to protect their existence at the expense of others. This they do by means of the benefit mentality which they derive from capitalistic democratic thought.’ – Mohammed Baqir Al Sadr
For more information go to www.khilafah.net , www.al-waie.org (Arabic), www.khilafah.com (English)
Leave a Comment » | Critique of Democracy | Tagged: mohammed baqir al sadr democracy secularism islam iraq america oil dictatorship | Permalink
Posted by Abdullah al Andalusi
Public Talk – Democracy and Islam
September 1, 2008
The video features an public Islamic Talk given in a Southall community centre on 21st December 2007.
A Talk given in West London concerning a critique of Democracy and an elaboration of Islam as an alternative system to resolve Man’s problems.
Leave a Comment » | Critique of Democracy | Tagged: democracy islam secularism quran western values republic muslims | Permalink
Posted by Abdullah al Andalusi
Can Muslims Trust Obama?
August 18, 2008The followinf article was written in response to, and as a leaflet that was handed out at, the talk ‘Can Muslims trust Obama?’ hosted by UK government funded – The Radical Middle Way organisation on the 16th April at Abrar House.
Can Muslims trust Obama?
“Democracy is being allowed to vote for the candidate you dislike least.” Robert Byrne
“Democracy consists of choosing your dictators, after they’ve told you what it is you want to hear.”
-Alan Coren (English humourist and writer)
“Can Muslims Trust Barack Obama?” Can Muslims trust John McCain? Every election year, ‘American’ Muslims debate as to which electoral candidate will win the US presidential elections. And every election without fail, they mistakenly participate in elections based upon wishful thinking that somehow the next American President they choose will NOT champion aggressive foreign (and domestic) policy which results in Muslims being persecuted, bombed or killed.
During the Al Gore vs George Bush elections, ‘American’ Muslims, wary of Al Gore’s pro-Zionist running mate, decided that the wisest course was to vote for George Bush. Ironically (and sadly), George Bush proved to be the most pro-Zionist aggressive ‘war president’ that America has ever known, with hundreds of thousands of Muslim dead being the result of his presidency. The question arises, are the Muslims partly to blame for voting for George Bush?
Do those who voted bare the responsibility for the sin of a man who ‘represents’ the will of ALL his voters? Whether they should be accountable for using a system of ruling that is inimical to the Islamic belief is another question which many Muslims also try to avoid asking.
Undoubtedly, many Muslims who partook in George Bush’s rise to power will defend their actions saying ‘’we never knew, nor agreed with his actions”, but then they have to come to terms with the ugly reality of democracy – it is not representative.
Muslims need to refocus their attempts on influencing Western society with political activism NOT political participation- There is a difference. One takes a stand, the other condones and legitimises. Is it not the case that when a political party in a more blatantly sham democracy withdraws from elections under protest, this acts to de-legitimise not only the validity of the elections but also the subsequent incoming government?
Muslims should make a better contribution to the dawah to Islam and adopt a non-participation policy towards the democratic process. This will not only serve to distance ourselves, and absolve us of blame from the inevitable selfish driven bloodletting that almost every single American administration to date, has been involved in, it will also serve as a powerful statement as to who is the true sovereign over the affairs of man (Allah [swt]) – this is not disengagement, this is conscientious objection.
America, like every other capitalist nation, has permanent interests, no matter who is in charge; this is why the large corporations (with vested interests) FUND ALL parties. The only difference between one candidate and another is political acumen, but the major policies that pursue American interests internationally and domestically remain unchanged.
Muslims must demonstrate that Islam is a superior way of life, governed by the ideal that all human affairs revolve around the divine purpose of man – the worship of Allah (swt). We must show that only Islam can render a truly just system of law and political accountability, one which is motivated by purely altruistic interests that will have to be pursued no matter who is it’s Caliph.
This is the system of Khilafah, and upon this, let us strive and upon this let us put our trust in Allah (swt), the best resolver of affairs.
“And so judge among them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they turn you far away from some of that which Allah has sent down to you. And if they turn away, then know that Allah’s Will is to punish them for some sins of theirs. And truly, most of men are Faasiqoon (rebellious and disobedient to Allah). (Quran 5:49)
Leave a Comment » | 'Muslim' Secularist agendas, Critique of Democracy | Tagged: obama muslims ceomcracy islam secularism citycircle radicalmiddleway | Permalink
Posted by Abdullah al Andalusi
