Tag Archives: politics

Should Islam and politics mix or not?

I am a Muslim but my personal opinion is that politics and Islam shouldn’t mix. The living examples of this are Muslim countries. I am not saying by any means that democracy is better, God knows how many people have died in the name of secular democracy. Although I know that the original intention and purpose were to stop corruption but this has bred more corruption and ignorance and hate etc. I am not a modernist that think we need to re-interpret what Allah perfected for us nor am I putting(1)

myself in a position in which I think I know better than Allah SWT. I’m just saying that clerics are getting enormous money in KSA to issue their own made up fatwas that cause corruption,that they are following weak hadith on purpose and that they try to deprive certain people of their rights in society. The shia sunni conflict has been going on for centuries and arab-arab &muslim-muslim & government-civilian Muslim war still hasn’t ceased because of disagreement. (2)

(3) muslims still want a Muslim government, and so much blood has been spilt over this and no one uses their minds nor can they think critically. Whoever speaks up against this gets called an apostate. I don’t know really if apostaty is a muslim thing or not because( some muslim intellectuals have opposed this but scholars are pro- apostasy law) but it sounds like a political tool to keep the government still operating and under control. (3)

myself in a position in which I think I know better than Allah SWT. I’m just saying that clerics are getting enormous money in KSA to issue their own made up fatwas that cause corruption,that they are following weak hadith on purpose and that they try to deprive certain people of their rights in society. The shia sunni conflict has been going on for centuries and arab-arab &muslim-muslim & government-civilian Muslim war still hasn’t ceased because of disagreement. (2)

(3) muslims still want a Muslim government, and so much blood has been spilt over this and no one uses their minds nor can they think critically. Whoever speaks up against this gets called an apostate. I don’t know really if apostaty is a muslim thing or not because( some muslim intellectuals have opposed this but scholars are pro- apostasy law) but it sounds like a political tool to keep the government still operating and under control. (3)

I am against seeking power in the name of Islam the way Islamist political parties do. I explain the problems with political Islam in my essay The Last Mufti of Iranian Kurdistan (And a Critique of Political Islam).

A government is just a tool for ensuring the good of the people and the Quran does not provide any clear indications for what type of government is best or most “Islamic”. The most “Islamic” government is the one that best reflects the Quranic ideals of justice and mercy regardless of its structure (whether it is a good king in charge or a parliament).

This does not mean that Islam should have no role in government. Islam will always have a role, since its teachings will affect the thinking and behavior of Muslims who are involved with politics and law-making. The secular “morality” of American diplomacy allows the United States to spy on its closest allies and stab them in the back wherever it fits its interests. If more Muslims become involved with American politics, then their morality will affect American politics so that the government may start to act less like a barbarian savage and more like a civilized human who respects other humans.

In my view there is no conflict between Islam and democracy. If the majority of the people of the country are Muslim, they can democratically vote for the inclusion of more Islamic ideas into their politics and laws. This is what the Quran teaches, that the state of the government reflects the state of the people; if the people are greedy and selfish, their government will be like that too, and if the people are good and honorable, their government will be too. A large government like that of the United States needs the help of millions of its citizens to function. It is through the involvement of millions of ordinary Americans that the United States government gets away with destroying and bombing country after country. If these Americans had the moral courage of their ancestors, they would have refused to support their government and their politicians in these acts. But they would rather keep their comfortable jobs rather than take risks with their finances and lives. And in this way everyone’s moral cowardice is reflected in their government.

Now, since so many people hunger for power, there are Muslims who think that the best way to manage a country is for them to gain power in the name of Islam and force their ideas on everyone else. This is never going to work, Islam is not meant to be forced on people. These people think that “we will seize power then do good with it” while what Islam teaches is to do good right now and leave power to God. The Prophet ﷺ did not seize power, he was invited by the people of Medina to become their ruler and law-maker. He was very much democratically elected to become the ruler and he lived up to this role by managing and defending his new country.

I am not saying that Muslims should be docile sheep who let their governments do whatever they want. I fully support political activism by Muslims, such as through critiquing their governments and politicians. What I am against is seeking power in the name of Islam. One can do all kinds of political activism without seeking power. I am also not against individual Muslims being involved with politics, that’s their own personal business. What I am against is Muslims banding together to gain power in the name of Islam, this always leads to more evil than good, as I describe in the essay linked above.

American anti-Chinese propaganda

As someone who likes to keep track of Chinese news, not a day passes except I see multiple examples of American fear-mongering toward China. Every other day an expert says that the Chinese economy is right on the edge of collapse. And below is just another example of this all-too-American tripe that Americans swallow up by the millions.

“The world” “should” be wary of this fat Chinese man whose portrait for some reason has the color scheme of a wildfire. Be afraid. Be very afraid. Because we want you to.

It makes me wonder how this type of garbage can be considered respectable media by the people. I haven’t clicked a link to the New York Times or most other American media for years after recognizing them for the unprincipled propaganda tools that they are.

I would have liked to say that a person who takes the Economist and the rest of the West’s presstitute media serious deserves to be lied to for feeding this disgusting machine with their wallets and attention. But, sadly, this includes most of the population. Perhaps an IQ of 130 or more is needed to see through these tools, and such people are rare. This leads me to mention something I have had in mind for a while:

The political power of a demographic group increases by an order of magnitude for every standard deviation increase in IQ.

This means that Ashkenazi Jews, with their average IQ of around 115, have an order of magnitude more per capita political power compared to whites, with their average IQ of around 100. America’s Jewish population of around 7 million actually has the political power of around 70 million whites (at least), and the facts on the ground show this. In the same way, Indonesia’s 7-10 million Chinese, whose IQ is also about a standard deviation above that of the native Indonesians, have the potential to have the political power of 70-100 million Indonesians, although discriminatory measures against them have limited their power in the past decades.

The same law can be used to examine genetically homogeneous populations as well. In every country, the ruling class is always the same as the high-IQ class. It doesn’t matter whether the country is a monarchy or a democracy. In a monarchy, the high IQ population ends up becoming the aristocracy. In a democracy, the high IQ population ends up filling the top positions in media, academia and government, in this way creating its own aristocracy-by-any-other-name.

So what is the solution to this? There isn’t. Always, everywhere, the clever will have the power to deceive, hoodwink, mislead and defraud the less clever. A country in which the elite does not have principles is going to be ruled by a government, media and academia that does not have principles.

It is, therefore, the duty of the elite to have principles. If they did, this will affect the nature of their government, media and academia. If tens of thousands of high-status lawyers, architects and media personalities called out the Economist’s garbage journalism, they would be disgraced into reforming. But they do not, because they see nothing wrong, since if they were running the Economist, they would act the same as its present managers and writers.

Wherever you see a country whose government, media and academia is corrupt through and through, it is because the country’s elite is corrupt through and through. Therefore the solution to America’s troubles is for the present elite to either acquire principles, or for it to die out and be replaced by another elite that does have principles, and this is going to happen.

In 1850, America’s elite used to judge things by ideals and principles. Since 1950, they have found ideals and principles laughably unfashionable. This state of things is not going to last forever. Their fertility rates are already below-replacement, and they will be replaced by another elite that has ideals and principles, perhaps the signs of this trend will start showing around 2050.

Some mistakenly think that if the present system was dismantled, it could be replaced with a better one. In reality, what happens when you have a corrupt elite is that regardless of how many governments you replace, the nature of the country always remains the same. You cannot force the elite to stop being utterly corrupt, greedy and unprincipled. Latin America’s various failed revolutions are a good example of this.