The Caliphate and the Trend Towards the Civilization State

[AMusee]

Since the 1990s, many have noticed that there is a global trend away from conventional models of the “nation state” towards an emerging model of the “civilization state.”

The nation state model is based on the idea of a linguistically distinct people located in a limited territory (e.g., Germany, France, Britain, Italy). Such a people may have come together fairly recently (e.g., past 50-200 years).

A civilization is broader. It is based on deeper cultural, racial, and/or religious bonds that extend back many centuries or millennia. It often encompasses many linguistically distinct peoples, and often extends over a large territory. For instance, Europe (or the West) is a civilization which encompasses the peoples of Germany, France, Britain, as well as the US, Canada, etc.

A civilizational state is a state (or integrated political-economic-military organization) which seeks to preserve a civilization and advance its interests. The European Union can be seen as a quasi-civilization state; and the same is true of NATO (to a lesser extent). These are organizations for preserving and advancing the interests of Western civilization.

China, Israel, and India are gradually redefining themselves as civilization states – i.e., as representative of ancient Chinese-Confucian, Jewish, and Hindu civilizations. Russia is doing likewise, while seeking to integrate Ukraine and Belarus (i.e., an Orthodox Slavic civilization).

The major exception to this trend is Islam. Muslim peoples (e.g., Arab, Turkish, Berber, Indian, West African, Malay) have a strong civilizational consciousness. But they are prevented from establishing a civilization state or a quasi-civilization state (e.g., EU/NATO type alliance).

RELATED: The Logical Necessity of the Caliphate

The underlying motivation from the West to keep Muslims weak and divided was indicated by Samuel Huntington:

“The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power. The problem for Islam is not the CIA or the US department of Defence. It is the West, a different civilisation whose people are convinced of the universality of their culture and believe that their superior, if declining, power imposes on them the obligation to extend that culture throughout the world. These are the basic ingredients that fuel conflict between Islam and the West.”
Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1996) p. 217.

For geopolitical reasons, the West seeks to weaken Muslims and split them apart by driving them further in the direction of the nation state model (e.g., be a proud Kuwaiti, Malian, or Bangladeshi). It foments constant conflict between Muslim peoples/countries (e.g., Sunni-Shiite conflict in the Middle East). Western intelligence agencies also use terrorist organizations (e.g., ISIS) to stigmatize the notion of an Islamic state and, more broadly, an Islamic civilizational state (i.e., a “Caliphate”).

The West has decreed that the notion of an Islamic civilization state (i.e., “Caliphate”) is geopolitically unacceptable. Whereas Westerners, Chinese, Jews, Hindus, and Russians openly organize to build and strengthen civilization states, Muslims who do likewise are stigmatized as ISIS-style terrorists/extremists.

Western intelligence agencies amplify this message through networks of Muslims religious scholars they control. Thus, they use liberal Muslims imams (i.e., RAND’s “moderate Muslim networks”). They also use Madkhalis. These Muslim scholars propagate the message that anyone who calls for an Islamic state (especially a civilization state) is a terrorist/extremist (e.g., khariji) who must be surveilled, imprisoned, tortured, or killed.

RELATED: A Response to Supposed “Islamic” Objections Against Khilafah

For a good article further discussing the civilization state, see here.

https://muslimskeptic.com/2023/04/20/caliphate-civilization-state/

 

[AMusee]

The Logical Necessity of the Caliphate​

The necessity of khilafa can be understood from the Quran, Sunnah, and Islamic tradition, but it can also be understood on the basis of clear logic and knowledge of our present reality and recent history.

If you care about preserving Islam as a religion and preserving Muslim life, this can only be achieved if Muslims have political independence.

At the end of the day, ethnic-based nations operate to preserve the interests of their nation. If helping Muslims escape from genocide negatively impacts the interests of the nation, then the nation takes priority. Only a multi ethnic/racial khilafa would have the mandate to prioritize the lives of Muslims globally. If you don’t believe this, simply reflect on the situation of Palestinians and Uighurs today and willingness of Muslim ethnic nations to, not only overlook the genocide, but actually ally with the non-Muslim oppressors. Other examples are countless.

RELATED: Mustafa Kemal Ataturk: The Man Who Tried to Destroy Islam

To preserve Islam, political independence is also needed. Consider the following. Preserving Islamic teachings requires institutions that are not controlled by partisan groups. National governments will always bend institutions to teach a state-approved Islam, which, again, prioritize the interests of the nation. Furthermore, liberal hegemony actively seeks to destroy authentic traditional Islam because they see it as a threat to their power.

For this reason, they have been involved with covertly and overtly undermining authentic Islamic institutions of learning for the past 220 years and replacing it with liberalized Islam that is more conformant with liberal secular values and interests with the goal of eventually dissolving Islam completely.

Islamic political Independence is the only way to even attempt to counter this.

A simple example can demonstrate this.

Many Muslims, noticing the amount of censorship happening on the internet, have called for a Muslim-controlled social media platform. They mistakenly believe that such a platform would provide Muslim protection from censorship, allowing authentic Islam to be represented and taught.

But this is mistaken. Liberal power could easily force internet service providers and hosting services to shut down the platform if it is deemed to be too popular and, therefore, too influential and, therefore, too much of a threat.

Perhaps the Muslim platform can be hosted in a powerful country that is independent from the liberal order, like Russia or China. Do you think Russia or China will allow anything contrary to their national interests to be expressed on the platform?

Ok, then maybe a smaller, poorer country which has no concern with Islam. Maybe the platform could be hosted there. But again, if the platform becomes too popular and unites too many Muslims, it will be deemed a “national security threat” to liberal nations or even labeled a “terror network,” and sanctions or military action would be taken to coerce the hosting country to shut it down.

RELATED: Is Wanting a Return of the Caliphate Misplaced Idealism?

Only an independent Muslim political power could resist this censorship. Only an independent Muslim political power could provide the true prerequisite for the preservation of Islamic teaching and the preservation of Muslim lives. There is simply no alternative.

And this is exactly why the liberal world hegemony has fought tooth and nail to prevent it from happening. Hindus can have a state based on Hindu identity. Chinese can have a state based on Chinese identity. French can have a state based on French identity. Jews can have a state based on Jewish identity. But Muslims cannot have a state based on Muslim identity.

Any Muslim who doesn’t recognize that this is happening, namely that Muslims are under the boot of an oppressive tyrannical force that wants to erase Islam from the world, and doesn’t desire the solution, namely khilafa, to escape this situation to preserve Islam and Muslim life, is either massively ignorant or a munafiq.

https://muslimskeptic.com/2022/09/08/logical-necessity-caliphate/

 

[Farax bin Cabdi bin Bakri]

Before the caliphate can be established first tawheed needs to be properly established in the heart of Muslims.

 

[AMusee]

Because Madkhalis are run by state intelligence agencies for propaganda purposes, they are only concerned with politics, and have reduced the entire religion of Islam to politics.

How have they reduced Islam to politics? In two ways.

First, Madkhalis teach that the most important Aqida issue is the difference between Ahl al-Sunna and the Kharijis. Madkhalis claim that anyone who verbally criticizes liberal government policies is a kharij deviant/apostate who must be surveilled, imprisoned or killed. By contrast, traditional Sunni works on Aqida do not make such claims. Moreover, while such works reject kharijism, they do not focus on it as a key Aqida issue.

Second, Madkhalis promote the study of Aqida as a way to promote secularism. Madkhalis hold that Muslims should devote themselves exclusively to the study of technical aqida issues (e.g., what is the precise meaning of "istawa ala al-'arsh"?). Madkhalis teach that Muslims must not work for Sharia in state and society, until all are agreed upon these technical aqida issues. Madkhalis assume that this will take a long undefined period (possibly forever). During this period, Muslims should passively allow governments to implement liberal secularizing policies which remove Islam from state and society.

Notice that while the Madkhali Ahl al-Bida pretend that they are concerned with Aqida, they have a bizarre unprecedented understanding of Aqida. For Madkhalis, the essence of proper Aqida is refraining from verbally criticizing liberal government policies, and passively cooperating in the removal of religion from state and society.

Rather than reducing Islam to politics and liberal political propaganda, Madkhalis should study genuine Aqida, genuine Akhlaq, and genuine Sharia. Until they do so, they should be regarded as Ahl al-Bid'a who are at war with Ahl al-Sunna.

 

[AMusee]

Why the Madkhalis Are Ahl al-Bid'a Deviants

The Madkhali movement was created in the 1990s by authoritarian governments in the Muslim Middle East - many of which seek to enact liberal policies. The movement is run by intelligence agencies, and has a large online component. The goal of the movement is to religiously justify the repression of Muslims who oppose liberal policies. Madkhalis create new teachings (i.e., bid'as) with this goal in mind. Madkhalis pretend to be Salafis, although genuine Salafis hate and revile them.

The Madkhalis disseminate many bid'as. Four of the most notable Madkhali bid'as are the following:

First, the Madkhalis hold that anyone who verbally criticizes liberal government policies (e.g., secularism, atheism, feminism, LGBT) is a "khariji" deviant/apostate who should be surveilled, imprisoned, or killed. Such measures apply even if the critic explicitly rejects rebellion, terrorism, or disobedience vis-a-vis the government. This is an unprecedented view, meant to repress criticism of liberal government policies.

Second, the Madkhalis hold that all Muslims must focus on teaching technical issues of Aqida. On the Madkhali view, it is only after all Muslims accept proper Aqida (in all technical details), that they should begin working for the implementation of Sharia norms at the level of state and society. The aim of this Madkhali argument is to convince Muslims to simply focus on Aqida matters (i.e., private belief) for some long undefined period, while neglecting implementation of Sharia norms at the level of state and society. During the period in question, Muslims must not oppose liberal government policies of secularization. This Madkhali view is unprecedented. The correct traditional Islamic view is that Muslims must focus on teaching Aqida, while also (at the same time) working for the implementation of Sharia norms at the level of state and society.

Third, the Madkhalis hold that scholars only have religious legitimacy if they are approved by governments or approved by other scholars who are controlled by governments. Madkhalis encourage close relationships between scholars and governments. Madkhalis also claim that it is praiseworthy for scholars to work as government spies and propagandists. This is an unprecedented view. The correct traditional Islamic view is that a scholar's religious legitimacy does not depend on the approval of governments or other scholars controlled by governments. Moreover, scholars should keep their distance from governments, lest they be pressured into propagating false views that support government policies.

Fourth, the Madkhalis hold that Muslims are not allowed to criticize rulers who openly denigrate Islamic teachings, by appearing on television on a daily basis and publicly performing sins like fornicating and drinking alcohol or even raping others' wives and torturing their children. According to Madkhalis, the Muslim masses who see this must not criticize such behavior as forbidden but should instead praise the ruler and call people to support him. This is once again an unprecedented view, and one opposed to the basic principle of al-amr bil-ma'ruf wa-nahi 'an al-munkar.

 

[Farax bin Cabdi bin Bakri]

I'm convinced you're just a Haqiqatjou bot at this point, do you have any original thoughts/reponses in relation to my initial statement? Do you get paid to push muslim skeptic content?

Madkhalis promote the study of Aqida as a way to promote secularism

I mean what even is this? Are you serious? Anyone who downplays the study of aqeedah this indicates severe problems in their understanding in Islam, same goes for the downplaying of tawheed which is connected. I suggest you learn aqeedah yourself becoming coming up with such ridiculous statements, won't even bother going through the rest of this nonsense.

 

[AMusee]

I'm convinced you're just a Haqiqatjou bot at this point, do you have any original thoughts/reponses in relation to my initial statement? Do you get paid to push muslim skeptic content?

Madkhalis promote the study of Aqida as a way to promote secularism

I mean what even is this? Are you serious? Anyone who downplays the study of aqeedah this indicates severe problems in their understanding in Islam, same goes for the downplaying of tawheed which is connected. I suggest you learn aqeedah yourself becoming coming up with such ridiculous statements, won't even bother going through the rest of this nonsense.

You should respond when you finish reading as the explanation follows the statement you picked out. Madkhalis in essence exist to promote liberalism and try to secularize Muslims. Your post history is a great example of it, you are only on here to shill for a deranged liberal dictator.

 

[Farax bin Cabdi bin Bakri]

Daniel and those who think like him do no good for the ummah, you belittle the faith of Islam and instead seek to denounce and protest and revolt like the liberals of america do, and you say we're are the ones promoting liberalism. According to you every known scholar of ahlul sunnah is a Madkhali (even those who proceed Sheikh Rabee, isn't that amazing!).

Just so you know, the position of obeying a Muslim ruler is not new to any Salafi in fact this was the position of the righteous predecessors (those who you claim to follow, will you call them Madkhalis now).

Only someone with such little knowledge of islam would undermine the study of aqeedah and tawheed, for what basis is this khalifa if not the first two aspects. I hope you realize tawheed especially proceeds all form of khalifa, the Prophet ﷺ spent how many years in Mecca preaching tawheed before any sort of statehood was formed?

This does not suprise me that you seek to insult the scholars of Salafiyyah, all of whom speak high of Sheikh Rabee, and like Sheikh Rabee do not seek to revolt against the Muslim ruler nor create public distain for him, you clearly have a lot of wisdom to pick up on in this regard. The only ones seeking to push liberalism seems to be the like of Daniel who wants protests in the streets of Riyadh and for it to share the same fate as Libya, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, etc. One nation after the other.

 

[AMusee]

 

[AMusee]