F socialism
Socialism for Somalia? Would You Support It?
- Thread starter Muslim?
- Start date
this is one of the weirdest things I have ever read. I know Cuba is one of the most famous examples but it isn't just Cuba- many, many Third World countries have tried the socialism thing. Yemen, Somalia, Zimbabwe, Nicaragua, Vietnam- I'm honestly not super familiar with the history of socialism in Africa but I know many African countries have tried socialism. It was very common back in the Cold War days for countries to do the thing where they preach this nationalist, anti-Western rhetoric and push for socialism. Cuba is a poster child but there's tons of Third World countries that have done it. People get real upset when they hear the name "Pinochet" but besides heroically throwing commies out of helicopters- Pinochet is also known for having done good things for Chile's economy. I've never heard of a Third World country that goes socialist and then it does good things for the countries economy.
Another thing is even for Venezuela socialism has been a disaster. And Venezuela is one of the most oil-rich countries in the world. If it went that badly for them, what would happen in a country that doesn't have the massive oil reserves like they do? I know people think it was the sanctions that are responsible but I think that is just propaganda:
"Our other, perhaps even more important finding is that, when analyzing several socio-economic outcomes in Venezuela across time, it becomes clear that the bulk of the deterioration in living standards occurred long before the sanctions were enacted in 2017. Relatedly, we find rapidly worsening trends across all of the socio-economic indicators we analyze well before the sanctions were imposed in August 2017. Therefore, in the presence of these strong pre-trends, it is impossible to attribute the current performance of these socio-economic indicators to the sanctions."
their economy was collapsing before the 2017 sanctions.
I think a lot of countries have health care. They're still third world
this idea that Third World countries are Third World because they're not socialist... it's very strange to me... there was a whole Cold War with the Soviet Union and with numerous countries getting on the socialist bandwagon.... where is the USSR now? and look at China- even they did the market reforms and it seems to be why they're as strong economically as they are now... I don't think they'd be anywhere near as strong economy-wise if they hadn't transitioned to a market economy
All these countries and examples you have listed have been fucked over by US imperialism and sanctions.
You are right though, these countries that follow ardent socialist policies have been failures. Chile on the other hand, is quite successful.
I am not pro-socialism though, I don’t want Africa to have Cuba like policies, I find communism detestable. I would prefer a mixed market economy but education and health is socialised.
My issue is with the free market which creates inequality and horrible socioeconomics.
also something I really despise and I've seen it here is- "no, no- what I'm talking about is DEMOCRATIC socialism" as though it magically becomes this good thing because you put "democratic" in front of it (democracy is kufr btw)
anyways, this "no, no- DEMOCRATIC socialism".... this is exactly what Hugo Chávez said in his Larry King interview.... Venezuela ended up where it's at through "democratic socialism"... same with the disaster that was Allende-era Chile.... "democratic socialism" is a disaster too
anyways, this "no, no- DEMOCRATIC socialism".... this is exactly what Hugo Chávez said in his Larry King interview.... Venezuela ended up where it's at through "democratic socialism"... same with the disaster that was Allende-era Chile.... "democratic socialism" is a disaster too
Isnt democracy just the populace voting for their leaders and or for specific bills/referendums.
Is having a choice itself Kufr?
I believe what Sheikh Muqbil says.
also I think it's crazy to call for democracy when the Quran specifically warns us against following the majority
Ive seen the video and I agree that democracy is a flawed system but I cant see it as Kufr and I have trouble tying it to a nullifier of faith (The sheikh was however speaking on yemen and I have no idea about that situation or time).
Democracy is spreading decisions out to a wider base it is not related to the decisions being made. I dont buy the argument it is a deen or shirk as some have stated before.
Abaq
VIP
Democracy as in an elected legislative body that has the power to make something legal (halal) or illegal (haram). This is knows as tashriic and is something only for Allah. It is from this angle that it becomes kufr. Just like the Western parliaments make sodomy legal for instance
He was talking about Yemen and in general. He was against it in Yemen and in general. He talked about it numerous times.
When he says democracy is kufr- is it somehow kufr in Yemen but then not kufr in another country? No, he means it in general, not just in Yemen.
As he explains- and he explains it much better than I can- it goes against ruling by the Kitab and the Sunnah. If someone doesn't understand how democracy goes against Islam, I think they need to deepen their understanding of Islam. This issue has already been discussed plenty. In Islam, you rule based on the sharia, based on Quran and Sunnah. The hukm belongs to Allah. Democracy- the hukm belongs to the majority. So if the majority says alcohol is legal, it's legalized. These are two completely different, incompatible systems. And Islam is already perfect, there's no need to try to change things to imitate the West.
There are whole books on this topic. The whole issue has already been thoroughly debunked. No real scholar promotes democracy, all the real scholars have opposed it and this is an issue where you can identify the real scholars teaching authentic Islam versus the watered-down Westernized types.
I want authentic Islam upon what the earliest and best generations of Muslims were upon. Very clearly they weren't upon this democracy thing which is an imitation of the West. I can't understand why anyone would want a Westernized Islam.
And if you have trouble with understanding why the scholars refuted democracy and with going against this Western ideology... I don't mean anything against you personally but I think we have to go with the scholars, not with what you or I think.
Doesnt a dictator have the same ability to legalize what is haram does that make it kufr for the dictator?
You see how this can apply to any structure of government. I find a strong conflation between democracy/voting and “freedom first” western liberalism in muslim discourse.
I didnt deny or contradict ‘the scholars’ that is not a weapon for any man to wield. Not that you are doing that. I also agree and dont want a westernized islam I already pointed out democracy is flawed.
Lets form this without the word democracy is an ameer keeping an oath that he must accept his shuras decision haram? If not what is the size constraint on that shura? If choosing a leader based on the votes of the ahlul hali wal aqd is binding what is the size limit on that pool? Is the exact structure of government of the Khulafah rashidun binding or can people innovate new structures to fit there culture and place i.e checks and balances?
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
I will not entertain any system that operates on the social ownership of the means of production(socialism in a nutshell). Only the naive and bitter losers advocate for that defunct economic system.
However debate on what is the ultimate goal of the government is much more fruitful and entertaining.
Few examples:
-Government that aims to maximize economic growth in other words aims to create wealth. Since GDP growth is the goal then ultra capitalism is essential for this type of governance. {China}
-Government that seeks to maximize the freedom of its citizens. The individual rights triumph over everything else and capitalism is a byproduct in this case(Everyone has their right to private property, freedom of speech etc.) {USA}
-Government's ultimate goal is to maximize the wellbeing of it's citizens thus they provide public services(free Schools, frew Health care, social security(cayr to the poor) etc.) and improve the lives of average citizens as much as possible. Creating an enviroment where the individual has a savety net from birth to death. In this system capitalism is just a means to achieve that goal not the goal itself. {Sweden}.
I'd personally go with the Swedish model, we should increase our human capital and the wellbeing of the average joe. Everything else should be in service of that goal not the goal itself. Empty gdp growth is worth dog shit if we end up like Brazilia full of slums where greate poverty and even greater wealth are side by side.
However debate on what is the ultimate goal of the government is much more fruitful and entertaining.
Few examples:
-Government that aims to maximize economic growth in other words aims to create wealth. Since GDP growth is the goal then ultra capitalism is essential for this type of governance. {China}
-Government that seeks to maximize the freedom of its citizens. The individual rights triumph over everything else and capitalism is a byproduct in this case(Everyone has their right to private property, freedom of speech etc.) {USA}
-Government's ultimate goal is to maximize the wellbeing of it's citizens thus they provide public services(free Schools, frew Health care, social security(cayr to the poor) etc.) and improve the lives of average citizens as much as possible. Creating an enviroment where the individual has a savety net from birth to death. In this system capitalism is just a means to achieve that goal not the goal itself. {Sweden}.
I'd personally go with the Swedish model, we should increase our human capital and the wellbeing of the average joe. Everything else should be in service of that goal not the goal itself. Empty gdp growth is worth dog shit if we end up like Brazilia full of slums where greate poverty and even greater wealth are side by side.
There is no pro-democracy Salafi. You say you follow "Salafi tradition"- well what Salafi scholar is with you on this?
Ibn Baz, Uthaymeen, Sheikh Muqbil, Sheikh Rabee Madkhali, Sheikh Fawzan, all of them agree on democracy being opposed to Islam.
You can try to make arguments in favor of democracy but it isn't really a debate- all the big scholars are against democracy, none of them are for it and it's blatantly obvious how democracy opposes sharia.
You conveniently refuse to mention that most of the best economies (in terms of GDP per capita) in the world are welfare states.
this kind of ideology- the US Freedom ideology is an evil that should be stamped out. all the sodom and gomorrah filth that is taking over the West is a direct result of that ideology and is a huge menace.
of course I'm not against all freedom or whatever but this extreme view where Freedom is taken as though it's the ultimate value- it's wrong and decadent.
One thing we can agree on is that ultimate freedom is stupid because the people can make stupid decisions.
This is why the most stable countries are monarchies or constitutional monarchies.
I think that's correct that a lot of the richest countries are welfare states. But I was talking about socialism and I don't think those are socialist countries. I think those are rich capitalist countries with social services programs. The socialist countries are places like Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea.
There were no nation states at the time of the salaf and voting was ‘restricted’ to the ahl hali wal aqd. It’s interesting that you remain with the word democracy instead of answering the questions. You clearly have no answer past essentially being a muqallid for a paticular thought group.
Are you claiming Ijma? None of those names were that of the messenger Peace Be Upon Him so do not bring them as an evidence. They are far too weak for this purpose.
Not in favor just not Kufr you keep trying to push me towards something you say is Kufr. There is a label for people like that
far too weak for... not adopting Western ideology? Western ideology is something sacred and holy? imitating Europeans is in the Quran?
I mean... I cited a whole list of scholars- including major scholars. That's who is with me. You cited zero scholars and that's who is with you.
Not in favor just not Kufr you keep trying to push me towards something you say is Kufr. There is a label for people like that
I'm khawarij cuz I'm just saying what Sheikh Muqbil said? I don't believe so. He was a great and very well-respected scholar and he isn't even the only one who has said that democracy is kufr.
