I don't think I'm really all that qualified here. These are big questions.You are one authentic interesting fellow.
Can you give me a quick summary on the differences between the liberal values and a system governed by the Quran and Sunnah? For some reason i always thought they coincided to some degree. Isn't the enlightenment a by-product of the scholarly work done from the middleeast in the middle ages? And does the Quran and Sunnah create a firm barrier into what type of system should be put in place? Or can different types of systems be implemented under some guiding rules? My question is, do we even have a real functunal system to use in reality, or do we need to go back and redraw eveything based on the Quran and Sunnah if we wanted to use it today?
Sorry for all these questions, but i got curious.
Interesting. I disagree with some things, but it is good to know others views too. I personally don't believe democracy is a perfect system. It is the best of all the other bad systems, but it is still bad. I don't really like Ann Coulter at all.I don't think I'm really all that qualified here. These are big questions.
So I can try to give my take, insha'Allah but I don't think it is the ultimate take.
Liberalism as I see it was a militant movement which sought to get rid of monarchies and undermine religion- it had an agenda to get rid of religion imo.
For example, in France they beheaded priests. In France- and this was directly influenced by "Enlightenment" philosophy- they murdered if I remember correctly hundreds of priests. This was in the French Revolution.
They proclaimed "liberty, equality, fraternity". All these were just vapid slogans.
They beheaded many, many people. The word "terrorism" actually was derived from the French Revolution. Either you went along with the French Revolution or they would try to kill you or use those aforementioned killings to terrorize you into submission.
This was obviously led by godless psychopaths imo. They went so far as to murder priests!
Look at Stalin for example. Or Lenin.
Or even look at the liberals of today. They have all this angelic-sounding rhetoric. But beneath that rhetoric is- "go along with us or we will terrorize you into submission.".
The word "terrorism" itself is historically derived from liberalism. All that "liberty, equality, fraternity" stuff and its modern equivalents- all of it is just propaganda phrases meant to sucker people in.
If you've read 1984, you're familiar with "Newspeak".
The terms "left" and "right" derived from the French Revolution. The leftists were for it, the right opposed it.
They wanted to make France godless and they were willing to murder priests to do it
We shouldn't take their slogans or their rhetoric at face value. All those slogans and rhetoric are meant to do is get you to support them so they can obtain political power. They're just an instrument to obtain political power- they won't actually follow what they claim. Where was the "liberty" for the priests who were murdered?
Look at Alex Jones and how they banned him. Jones is pro-Israel. I'm no Alex Jones fan.
But if you don't kowtow to their ideology- you'll be in their crosshairs. And if you uphold the Quran and Sunnah- you'll be in their crosshairs. They will try to dictate our theology to us. Who are kaffirs to do so?
Apple CEO Tim Cook Says “It’s a Sin” Not to Ban Hate from Online Platforms
And what is "hate"? If you don't go along with their nonsense- you'll be labelled as "hate". And a lot that's in the Quran and the Sunnah would be "hate" according to them.
So we have to pick a side. We can be for Islam or we can be for liberalism (whether of today or yesterday) but I don't think we can be for both.
As far as their rhetoric.... their rhetoric is just a bunch of mumbo-jumbo meant to pull you in so they can obtain political power.
Rather than try to figure out whether Islam is compatible with their mumbo-jumbo- we should not accept their mumbo-jumbo or care about their mumbo-jumbo in the first place.
Only the bottom level leftists really believe in that mumbo jumbo. The ones at the top (Soros, for example or the leaders of the French Revolution) don't really believe in it.
You look at France, for example... the people behind the French Revolution knew their agenda was to get rid of religion... all the "liberty, equality, fraternity" stuff of today and of yesterday is and was just a bunch of slogans to sucker in the masses and that's all it ever was
we shouldn't take the stuff at face value- anymore than we believe such-and-such place has the "world's best pizza" just because an ad said so... it's all just advertising
we don't need foreign ideologies.... we have Islam....
as far as Democracy, IslamQA has a good answer on it: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/107...nd-elections-and-participating-in-that-system
I really recommend The Crowd by Gustave Le Bon and (some of) Revolt of the Masses by José Ortega y Gassett...
if it is hard for you to accept a negative view of democracy.... once you read those books, I think you'll very easily lose any belief in democracy....
I have a book by Ann Coulter on the French Revolution called Demonic.... I think it's a very funny and interesting book (she very wittily compares today's leftists to those of then).... however, her thing is she denounces the French Revolution and praises the US revolution......
she actually doesn't go far enough.... the US revolution was wrong too
(there is music, so anyone watching- watch on mute- the text is written so you won't miss anything anyway)
history is written by the victors as they say
(more info on the barbaric US revolution http://www.redcoat.me.uk/)
Bro I have never sided with neocons.Interesting. I disagree with some things, but it is good to know others views too. I personally don't believe democracy is a perfect system. It is the best of all the other bad systems, but it is still bad. I don't really like Ann Coulter at all.
I also believe that muslims should separate themselves with other western conservatives also. Just because you are anti-liberal doesn't mean you should side with the neocons. Just a thought.