Jahanshah Javid

JJJ 30 yrs journalism=15yrs Islam good+15yrs bad+1day democracy?

Everything is sacred.

JJ/Humility

JJ: I really loved your last comment! So true and so Intelligent. You got a +100.

Humility: I have nothing to add. You are absolutely right.

Mr. Anonymoses

Thanks for the History Lesson. The intent of my note was to bring up the fact Islam as whole is resistant to change! And we should not be surprise that the current Islamic practices as whole is backward, anti democracy & none-human and its true to Mohamadian Islam and true Islamic scripture. So having said that Islam as a whole needs change and Muslim psychology needs reformation. As Long as Islam as religion is given a blank check in the society without any questions we will have this Islamic inquisition time after time. De-Politicization of Islam must be the first step in Islam’s reformation, hence separation of mosque and state.

Also You Wrote:"Also note that the areas in which Islam expanded saw a great explosion in arts and sciences, which was carried over to Europe via the Ottoman conquests at a time that correlates with the European renaissance. These are not coincidences... they're history. "

I beg to differ, you are claiming if it wasn't for Islam the expansion in sciences and art would not have happened? I would answer that with a very simple words Humanity would have progressed with or without Islam!!! and this what the Islamists want you and I to believe and forced us from childhood to believe and accept!  Besides all the Islamic era scientists and artists have been none Arabs who were born and lived in Iran, Turkey and other parts of Islamic Empire other than the Arabia where Islam is originated from.

Jahanshah

For a developed people, the best form of government is indeed a Secular Democracy!

For a nation that has a lrage percentage of its population illiterate, it is somewhat difficult to institute a successful form of Secular Democracy - However, our beloved Iran does not fall into that category :)

As you know, close to 2/3 of the population of our beloved Iran is under 30 years of age - By and large, these people are educated, a good percentage of them with higher education!

The time is ripe for a Secular Democracy to get established in our beloved Iran - A government where Religion and Politics are completely and totally separate from oneanother! 

Let's hope for such a day to come soon,

Respectfully,

Humility

P.S. If you look around the world, by and large, all the developed and successful nations have one form or another of a Secular Democracy - Our beloved Iran should be no less!

Monopoly on power

David ET, Islam is a problem. A very big problem. But not THE biggest problem. Every religion by nature is undemocratic because it excludes those who do not believe in its particular set of beliefs.

And every state that relies on religion for its existence (be it the Islamic Republic in Iran or the the Holy Roman Empire or even Israel, where non-Jews are discriminated against) cannot be fully democratic.

Getting rid of Islam from Iran's power structure is not necessarily going to lead to democracy. We must avoid the monopolization of power by any group -- whether religious, or secular (under the guise of monarchy or military dictatorship).

Muslims can exist in a democratic society

I do not attack Muslims.... at least I try not to. Instead, you have to learn about the religions themselves and attack those. Jahanshah Javid is right that all of them are bloody and corrupt. That does not make it wrong to condemn them as faiths. 

Jahanshah is also right that there are those who are encouraging militant Islam around the world. Fertile grounds for fanaticism. Iran is a prime example. 

In  democracies, political

In  democracies, political legitimacy is located in the will of the people. However imperfect our elections as we had to witness in horror in 2000.

If  a government's legitimacy is imperiled if, for too long, or too significantly, it fails to reflect the will, ideally the informed will, expressed by the people.

In Islam political legitimacy resides not in the expressed will of the people, but in the will expressed by god Islam is a collectivist faith; the individual believer hardly matters. If you agree with this particular definition of Islam then you can't have democracy.

Democracy is a collective social/political contract that the majority have agreed upon and the constitution should reflect that.  

my 2 cents.

islam will be a part of Iran's GOVERNMENT for a long time

islam and islamic principles will be inside the government under any democracy. people who say otherwise just don't understand iran.

islam sells big in iran. look even now the major opposition comes from a position of islam. if there is any kind of parlimentary democracy, the largest party will be one that is mainly islamic. islamic groups will stick together in any circumstance like this.

the seculars and and anti islamists, from right or left or center, will have to cooporate 1000% in order to overrule the muslim block. this is hard to do and will probably not happen. so islam will be a major part of any true democracy in iran.

unless you want to make it illegal, which means you can't have a democracy, it will be there.

Why should we settle for anything less than a full democracy?

Hovakhshatare, we either have to accept the virtues of freedom and the necessity of democracy fully and completely, or we will be giving excuses to keep half-ass democracies like Egypt or "strong governments" in Morocco in power. And in Iran, we'll get rid of theocratic rule but settle for a mild secular dictatorship.

You say Morocco "is a moderate country with excellent relations with all and little internal strife." That's not enough. Either it's a democracy or it isn't. Why shouldn't Moroccans have the right to have free elections and political parties of all kind? Why shouldn't they have the right to challenge or criticize the king? Who is he anyway? Some bozo who inherited the country in a palace surrounded by tanks? And living royally off the meager revenues of a nation of largely poor people? Why shouldn't Moroccans have a free press? Should the people there be content just because they have a "benevolent" dictator and Islamists have been driven underground?

Now that we are discussing democracy in theory, why shouldn't we demand and strive for the best possible kind for ourselves and everybody else?

Democratic governments in Malaysia and Turkey are dealing with all sorts of problems, including fundamentalism. But they are dealing with it in a way that has not changed the democratic nature of their state. Neither of them need a military solution to ward off radical Islamists.

Wiretapping in Turkey? When did wiretapping become an "Islamic" vice? Need I remind everyone of Watergate? Politicians can be corrupt and power-hungry, whether they are Muslim or non-Muslim (should we review what kind of politicians ruled Turkey under the military regime of the 70's and 80's?). And the hejab in Turkey is a cultural issue, not one imposed by politicians. The great majority of women in Turkish cities do not wear the hejab, alcohol is sold everywhere, nightclubs are aplenty, and nude magazines and porn channels thrive. That's how "Islamic" the ruling party is.

No religion based parties can not be in secualr government

Yes! That is the most important thing that I am afraid so far has not been addressed enough.

In my unfinished draft of a constitution I addressed that specifically more than a year ago before the current events and when some were laughing at me thinking of new constitution when IR was standing strong: 

Article 8

The government of Iran is secular and there shall be no official religions or ideologies. The government of Iran shall remain independent of any religious institutions and influences. Government shall not promote any specific religions, ideologies or personal beliefs. In order to secure the Separation of religion and the state, the secular constitution of Iran strictly prohibits participation of any religious based groups and parties in all local, regional, provincial and national institutions of the government. This would also extend to anyone who holds a religious title or leadership, clergy and alike. Religion and religious groups will have freedom to practice their religion peacefully. Individuals within the government may have personal religious preferences but they can not enforce any religious laws and restrictions.

Article 9

Secular republic of Iran observes no official religions for the country. Secular in nature, everyone in Iran is treated the same, regardless of their religion or lack of it. All religions within the limits of the law and without limiting or violating the guaranteed individual and human rights within the constitution are free to perform their religious rights, and to act according to their own canon in matters of personal affairs. The individual and human rights as guaranteed by the constitution shall always prevail and take precedence over religious and ideological preferences and beliefs.

 //iranian.com/main/blog/david-et/3rd-draft-constitution-republic-iran

Annonymous

what is this notion of changing ones word , then questioning what was not even said? :-) I keep seeing it here done by different people again and again.

I said 3000 years demoractic "concept" "root". Did I say Glory? Did I say governments and always?

I even did say it kept flourishing back.

Now if someone wish to prove the Greek Word Democracy was rooted somewhere else or in Islam or something, show me!

Democarcy was a child that was born 3000 years ago and it has been growing and maturing and fighting for its survival everywhere on this planet ever since and hopefully someday will be the norm everywhere...

David ET and others: All you

David ET and others: All you give are words and personal 'feelings' whereas I am giving historical context and examples. In order to have a positive debate I suggest you do more than just share your feelings about how much Islam sucksss bwahhhh.

"Yes we can and deserve demoraccy and that is only achieved by being able to express our views (muslim or not) without fear and by seperation of the government from Islam (religion) and seperation of Islam (religion) from government. (a problem that we must address in future constitution or we will have religious parties or leaders being elected in a secular government whom do not even wish to honor secularism due to their belief)." 

I am a fan of separation of religion from state, but some have argued that as soon as Iran is turned into a republic... religious parties will take over if that's what the people want. Do you suggest that future constitutions trample the desires of the people if it may be for a religious party in a secular government? How would you address this problem (It's the case now in Turkey)

History lesson

Khar-e aziz...

You do realize that it took until 1517, that is A THOUSAND & FIFTEEN HUNDRED YEARS from the birth of Christ for there to be a meaningful reformation in Western Christianity (Eastern Orthodoxy split pretty early on, but is nearly identical to Catholicism in its trajectory)... 

Islam not only split into factions right after the death of its founders, each of those factions split into a million other factions, and these groups were living in overlapping areas or in close proximity with each other. Whereas catholicism had no major challenges until the reformation. 

Also note that the areas in which Islam expanded saw a great explosion in arts and sciences, which was carried over to Europe via the Ottoman conquests at a time that correlates with the European renaissance. These are not coincidences... they're history.

Yes western root (but universal concept)

I did not say democracy is not possible in non-western states. I was referring to your blog that Islam has nothing to do with lack of democracy .

I said Islam by nature opposes democracy and only those (such as examples that you made) who seperate government from Islam had a chance to have some form of democracy.

You can not on one hand say you want seperation of religion and state and on the other hand write that Islam is not to blame at all for lack od democracy in these regions. If it is not , then why insist on not letting it part of the government.

In essance you are in a secular way whitewashing the religion just as those such as Ebadi and Ganji do in a different way by even giving the notion that an Islamic democracy (republic) can exist.

You may not see it but the thinking secular or religious is the same.

Yes we can and deserve demoraccy and that is only achieved by being able to express our views (muslim or not) without fear and by seperation of the government from Islam (religion) and seperation of Islam (religion) from government. (a problem that we must address in future constitution or we will have religious parties or leaders being elected in a secular government whom do not even wish to honor secularism due to their belief).

We must be open, frank about this or if we keep sweeping the problem under the rug again and again, the problems will pull the rug from under us sooner or later! 

Religion is the root of all evil

Not only Islam, but all of them and I mean ALL.  It is just that we (well me) are muslims and give ourselves the right to criticize it.  if I was a jew or a Christian I would have no doubt gone after those religions as vehemently and called their prophets, homos and child molestors.  Since I am Muslim and judging from all that I have heard in the family on the count of Abouzar then I can publicly declare that Mohamad was a Child Molestor, a murderer and whore house frequenter.

How is Islam

How is Islam practiced/interpreted in Indonisia, Malysia, Turkey, India (muslims constitute the second largest groups of muslisms  in the world) and so on? What are similarties and differences  between them?

3000 years of democratic glory?

David ET: You're forgetting some MAJOR hiccups in "Western democracies"... The majority of Greek city states were democratic? (Spartaaaaa) Roman Empire was democratic? The thousand year Papal rule was democratic? The first true democracies were established in the 18th-19th century, but even then non were really truly democratic. New Zealand was the first country to give women (that is 50% of the population) the right to vote and that was in 1893... about 120 years ago. The majority of Europe gained democracy in the 20th century, with the majority of Eastern Europe getting true democracies in the past 30 years or so. 

Religion as matter of personal beliefs is not a problem, BUT...

This is not the whole picture of religion especially Islam. Islam always has been a political religion by nature and also social way of life, not just a personal belief. Islam is ideological and with anything ideological it's none-democratic and repressive. Islam in its current form is The Problem! Unlike Christianity and to some extend Judaism, Islam has not gone through any reformation; it has resisted any attempt in modernization, democratization and humanization throughout the centuries. 

Chickens have come home to roost for Islam and it has come full circle, “Pure Mohammadian Islam” which is preached these days by Akhonds in Iran or by Wahabi's in Arabia or others around the world, is just that, words of Mohammad! and it is what is in Quran since the inception of Islam. In pages after pages of Quran Islam instigates hate and violence, it even provide manual on how to kill none believers, verbatim. So don’t think for a moment the interpretation or misusing of Islam/Quran is the problem, the Islamic scripture is the problem.

So by coloring it a different shade is not going to change. Islam needs reformation and that is the solution, it must be dissected and its practices must be fiercely countered and questioned without any hesitation. As long as we have Islam in it current form it will be used against Democracy, Freedom and Humanity in the name of God!

Recomended viewing:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XggTTnXfSI

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRbxymXVdp0

Western?

David ET, you say "the reason we don't see democracy in Islamic societies because it is foreign to its culture while it was rooted in the western culture for 3000 years."

You are implying that democracy is only possible in Western, Judao-Christian societies. Reality says that's not true.

Why does Malaysia have a democracy? Why does Indonesia? Why does Turkey? Those are countries with Muslim majorities.

And there are many non-Western, non-Judao-Christian countries who have democracies. India, Japan, South Korea, and probably China in a couple of decades.

No one has a monopoly on freedom.

The current regime is

The current regime is islam/islamist/shi'tist and we have seen what it has done.

It's a twelver shi'ist, with roots in religious schools of Qom, and an elite group of clerics with absolutist tendencies. 

Notice that's a tiny bit more specific than just IT'S ISLAMICCCC WAHHH.

Demo-Cracy = People-Power not Allah--Power (allah-o-Akbar)

JJ!

Let's not forget that Democracy (Power to the People) was not a Middle Eastern or Islamic concept but it goes back to the root of Western Culture and Athens.

Concept of democracy predated Christianity by 500 years and Church tried to so much to block it and it kept flourishing back until now that secularism is a norm in the western governments.

All definitions of democracy share: EQUALITY and FREEDOM, Neither of which are existent in Islam despite its claim.

A simple review of Quran shows that a Non-Muslim or Kafir does not have equal rights as a Muslim (they were even taxed differently) , a woman does not have equal rights as a man and so on.

same goes with Freedom: Blasphemy, leaving Islam, etc etc are not free... and even punished by death.

The point is that, the reason we don't see democracy in Islamic societies is also because it is foreign to its culture while it was rooted in the western culture for 3000 years and only those who insulated themselves from Islam (eg : Ataturk) were able to taste some of it.

Of course we Iranians and some others had our version of human  rights 2500 years but that again predated Islam ...

There never can be an Islamic REPUBLIC, because the two words are in foreign to one another.

Nice, just to add

Democracy and religion, specially democracy and the current world religions are not inherently incompatible (I mean heck even India, with the prevailing caste system which puts human beings on different levels from birth has a relatively successful democracy)

Democracy and fundamentalism are however largely incompatible. Fundamentalism can be religious, areligious (see: USSR, Maoist China, the path EU is heading) or any system of belief that completely banishes diversity in opinion. Islam might be viewed as a narrow religion from the outside, however, inside the religion there has been constant debate and opposing forces for the past 1400s. Whereas in a cult, or fundamentalist and ABSOLUTIST interpretations of religion, there is no room for debate, there is no room for compromise, and compromise is the KEY to DEMOCRACY. 

jj, you are attributing things that my statement did not say

or imply. I was not implying a mindset or judgement. Morocco as many other Muslim countries fanned islamism with the encouragement of the west as a countermeasure to Communism. Ekhvan-ol-moslemin and islamism is something Moroccans themselves are afraid of. Note that a large number of those in 911, Madrid bombings, Morocco itself an so on were Moroccans even though it is a moderate country with excellent relations with all and little internal strife. No one is arguing that dictatorships brings about radicalism of sorts but lets not equate all dictatorships and 'strong' governments. once democratically elected Islamic parties (including moderate ones like Tukey) tend to force their ideologies. In Turkey specifically over the past several years, there have been trouble over hejab, witch hunts in the Armed forces, massive wiretaps unprecendented in Turkish history, and islamization of the society in general to the shigrind of those who vote for them in the context of economic improvement and loss of Turkish culture. It has not yet gone further because Turkish constitution and military make sure they can't. hence, the current witch hunt of military to set the table.

That Morocco or Tunisia suppress islamist is not becuase someone tells them, they have learned the lessons of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan....and doing quite well. With islamist in power, I assure you they would have been failed states. And even now, neither country supresses religious practice just religious activism and politics.

I'm a little surprised at the strength of your response given what we have seen in Iran. The current regime is islam/islamist/shi'tist and we have seen what it has done. It rode the back of a democratic movement and had every opportunity to create whatever form of govenment it wanted to create. look what it did. Now, lets not argue that this is not islam and islamism but these are bunch of corrupt people using islam. This is what happens when religion comes into public arena.

What has the democratically elected hamas done to its own people (aside fromwhat israel does)?

And while I agree people are people, people like me (and possibly you) and many who were not raised in an 'islamic' context are very different and infinitely more open, tolerant and accepting than those who were raised, moslems, christians or jews, because I do not have the limitations of some mumbo jumbo dictating key conduct and aspects of my life, or prompting me to take action if my 'belief' is offended. I think anonymous 8 by referenced talked about U.S. for example. Look what happened to us and our adopted country over the past years when the born again christians became dominant. Democratically elected and playing within the rules supposedly. Religion (not spirituality) and advancement of life are incompatible. Did Rennaisance not prove that, or luther in religious context ....

Or do you forget that the democracy you speak of essentially came into existence only a few humdred years ago after religion in power for thousands of years was thrown out of public life?

Democracy?

Everybody Loves Somebody, by now we all know what a democracy is. If you don't know, google it.

Are Iranians ready for a democracy? Of course. Americans established a democracy 200 years ago, when they were far less educated and civilized than today. But thanks to a democratic constitution and a Bill of Rights, Americans got rid of slavery, gave women the right to vote and equal rights and built a great country by consensus. America is fast losing its super-power status, but that's ok. The British Empire went belly up too, but it's still a strong democracy.

My favorite democracy is India. A vast number of its people are poor and illiterate. And there there are hundreds of religions and dialects. But for the past 50 years, its key to success has been tolerance and respect for all faiths and the complete separation of religion and state.

Are Iranians less prepared or deserving of democracy than Indians, Turks, Malaysians, Brazilians, Mexicans...?

Non-sense.

Those who prefer a military state or a secular dictatorship in Iran instead of full democracy are just stripping the Islamic banner and preserving an oppressive state.

Talking of Bertrand Russel

I love that phrase of Bertrand Russel, thanks for mentioning it here.

Actually I like to suggest his excellent book on this subject "The Power"

I read it when I was 15 and believe it or not its impact remained on my views until today. Also, I used its content at the exam at emtehan nahaee, and got 19/20 in Redaction (ensha) :)

He was a great secular philosopher.

Great Observation Shazdeh

Indeed it is our duty as secular born-Muslims to break this TABOO and not give in to this Hush Hush attitude, have no fear of Cartoons until it comes to the global awareness of Muslim society that cartoons, films, discussions, questions etc. can not deter their religion if it's logic is strong enough to stand it all and if not then the truth shall win.

That secularism and freedom of speech is not against religion and in fact is the only way that people can freely practice their beliefs.

That Muslims have as much human rights as Infidels as Bahai and as Athiests and even as much as a criminal does have human rights.

If there is a God, s/he created us all in all shapes, forms, cultures and even capacities!

We must be able to even learn to mock and laugh at ourselves before we can grow .

In fact we should stop taking ourselves and our beliefs so seriously.

The biggest problem with Islam is that it promotes Jihad and Martyrdom with promise of heaven . On the other hand:

"I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."                                            Bertrand Russell

Dear JJ,

Could you please indulge me for a moment and explain what constitutes a democracy?
What are the components of a democratic system?
What are the rules and protocols that the members and leaders of a democratic system must exercise and follow in order for that system to be successful?
In your opinion, do you consider Iranian.com (I.C) a democratic system in its very limited scale?
Are the members of I.C community prepared and qualified to live in a democratic system?
Are Iranians ready for a democratic system?
Thank you Sir.
PS-- I remember the trial of Khosrow Golesorkhi circa 74-75 where he stated that, if I may paraphrase, he learned socialism from Molla Ali and Molla Hossain? Was he delusional?
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=buTlBLGdUfo

Hovack ... in response to your points

Pakistan was a disaster from the day it was created because of the very nature of its foundation being islam.

Damn right it is a disaster.

But the basis for the foundation of Pakistan was British rule in India. Before leaving, they insisted on partitioning the country. This was a regular imperialist tactic, which they also used in Ireland, and the French used in IndoChina. It ALWAYS seems to lead to long-running wars and conflicts. 

Afghanistan, well, we all know about Afghanistan.

We do, yes. It is one of those places with a history. Although powerful nations don't seem to know enough about Afghanistan to stay out of it. Oddly, the nature of Afghanistan does not seem to have changed much since it became Islamic. They are the same goat herding, opium growing, warring, mountain dwelling tribes-people as ever they were. When looking at nations with a long hisory of inter-communal violence, such as the Congo, Afghanistan, it helps to look at the long time line of history. The fact that one is Catholic and the other Islamic might not be the decisive factor.

Turkey is a democracy and has been on ascendance since Ata Turk created a secular country, made sure islamists are put in their place, and Latinized the written language which efectively separated Turkey from Islamic cultural influence

And he also arranged the genocide of the Armenians. Many of whom fled to Iran, and their families are still there, making a good contribution to the culture. Many Armenians also went to Jerusalem, but the current govt is concentrating on pushing them out ... why?

it's not that simple, Jahanshah

in Turkey, Islam was weakest when the country was a military dictatorship. islam has increased influence there under more democracy and it is gtting bigger.

same with iraq and palestine and lebanon and pakistan.

most people say the same will happen the minute arab nations become the least bit democratic.

even the usa has become more religious in the past 25 years. russia definitly has.

Democracy and religion

Hovakhshatereh, you say "Tunisia & Morocco are both 'benevolent dictaorships' and would be in serious trouble if their islamic forces & tendencies were not under tight control."

Wrong.

That is the kind of thinking, especially in the west, that says secular dictators should be supported in order to keep Islamists at bay.

People are people. Whether they are Muslim, Christian or whatever. People deserve democracy no matter what they believe in in their personal life. If you brand an entire nation as backward, ignorant and undeserving of democracy, you will pay dearly in the long run.

In Morocco, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and all other Muslim countries where democracy is non-existent, Islamists thrive because moderate and secular forces are suppressed or have become part of the corrupt power structure.

If dictatorships are bad for the U.S., Europe and other western countries, they are bad for everyone. To say that Moroccans, Tunisians and other Muslim nations don't deserve democracy because Islamists will take over, is an insult to those populations and a blank check to ruthless despots.

Algeria because a military state and a victim of Islamic terrorism after a moderate Islamic party won parliamentary elections and was subsequently thrown out of the non-violent political arena. By contrast, the Jordanian monarchy has been much more stable because moderate Islamists have been allowed to form parties and have often won large number of seats in parliament as well as appointments to cabinet posts. This has made them loyal participants rather than radical outcasts.

Pakistan has also lost much of its democratic character after a succession of military dictatorships. And who has filled the void? Radical Islamists who are exploiting the people's loss of faith in the corrupt secular establishment.

You say in Turkey "what little problem they have faced in internal political arena has been mostly in the past 10 years or so since the Islamist party took power." What are those problems exactly? Please specify.

Turkey today is more democratic than at ANYTIME in its history. The "Islamic" party that holds majority in parliament is nothing like radical Islamic groups we know in other countries. Turkey's Muslim politicians have not turned the country into an Islamic state or implemented the sharia. They are hardly any different than Christian conservative parties in Western countries.

As for Iran, events since the June elections have shown that secular and democratic ideas are so strong and prevalent among the people that they have become the biggest threat to the regime.