Islamic Philosophy Is Not Only Democratic In Essence, But Had Also In Its Manifestation.

By Prof Dr. Sohail Ansari

Conceived and worded by Prof DR Sohail Ansari (originality of concepts and originality of words).

He believes that there can never be a zero scope for improvement and appreciates criticism if it is not for the sake of criticism.

‘In broad sense, all questions of political philosophy are related to fundamental issues of general philosophy, and secondly, that there can be no balanced understanding of group life without a penetrating grasp of the motivations, tensions, and anxieties of the individual. The contributions which philosophy can make to a better understanding of politics are immense. No study of the fundamental problems of political philosophy can be fruitful without the awareness that they are intimately related to the basic issue of general philosophy. Every theory of state and society, and of the position of the individual in them, derives__ more often unconsciously than consciously_ from a more comprehensive conception of the world and man’s place in it. In particular, the possibility of human knowledge, the pivotal challenge of all philosophical inquiry, has a direct bearing on primary political conceptions and attitudes. Though it may be difficult to argue that certain types of political outlook, a remarkable parallelism exists between basic philosophical and political conceptions, a parallelism which is partly psychological, and partly historical.(1)

Alexander (1941), one of America’s foremost psychoanalyst and psychiatrists in his “Defeatism Concerning Democracy” concludes that ‘two factors menace, above all, the prospects of democracy: the first is the latent regressive tendency toward dependence, and the second is economic insecurity. The first factor is subjective, emotional, and universal in the sense that every human being protests to some extent against growing up and wishes to continue the existence in which someone else takes care of him. As man grow up, he is expelled from his Garden of Eden, and is driven into the cold world where he must struggle for himself. This emotional tendency towards dependence is strengthened by an objective social phenomenon, economic insecurity: economic insecurity increase the flight from responsibility and independence and mobilize the latent longing (which everyone carries in himself) to go back to the Garden of Eden, to be cared by some earthly or heavenly father. Totalitarian systems demand obedience, but offer their citizens security and the comforts of not having to assume civic responsibility.

There is empirical evidence to show that feudal societies condition individuals toward the non- acceptance of democracy; uneasiness with democracy reflects in endorsing ‘strong’ personalities (feudal, generals) and that testifies to never growing up emotionally, and longing to return to infantile dependence and irresponsibility’. (2)

Desire to revert to authoritarianism is related to the conception of the world and man’s place in it. Totalitarianism owes its existence to the desire of submission and obedience. Muslim lived under monarchial rule but philosophy of Islam can make no contribution to understanding of Muslim politics. No parallelism about which William talks about exists between basic philosophical and political conception because ideal Islamic polity simply facilitates behavior in accordance with religious laws; favor individual freedoms and the capacity for religious choice; rulers and ruled are governed by the Sharia. The role of state as facilitator and submission by all to Sharia make Islamic polity democratic.   

Islamic philosophy is not only democratic in essence, but had also its manifestation in the time of Prophet and in the rule of the first four Caliphs_ periods that serve until today as the touch stone, a gauge to evaluate any government. ‘But by the late seventh century political practice was no longer in accord with Islamic political theory.

The office of Caliph had become a dynastic legacy’ (3). The aristocratic rule was the violation of the dictates of Islam but it was consistent with authority orientation of tribal system. Such system by its nature relies on military power which created a political role for itself and this role was legitimated over centuries in the absence of any other workable alternative.

1.            William Ebenstein ‘Modern political thought’ New York, Princeton University Press, 1960,  P ix-x

2.            Franz Alexander, ‘Defeatism concerning Democracy’, USA, MIT Press, 2000,  P118

3.            Donald Smith, ‘Religion and Political development’, Boston, Brown Press, 1970, P7