Is Islamic Sharia compatible with Leftist ideologies?

[RedSquare]

Interested to get people's thoughts whether Sharia is compatible with the views of Leftist ideologies given all the controversy being generated in the UK by Anjem Choudary's upcoming declaration of "Sharia Controlled Zones" in London.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Sharia

[Mythbuster]

Well considering they kill apostates, allow 4 wives, abolish beer-drinking, pro-terrorism, pro-Imperialism and dietary restrictions; I say no.

[RedSquare]

Well considering they kill apostates, allow 4 wives, abolish beer-drinking, pro-terrorism, pro-Imperialism and dietary restrictions; I say no.
Fair enough.

You forgot under it they execute homosexuals, and even moderate Muslims I've spoken too strongly agree with that.

[Nox]

Also Sharia law recognises private property.


Islamic law recognizes private and community property

[LegendZ]

lolno

[Revolutionair]

In most interpretations of Sharia, conversion by Muslims to other religions or becoming non-religious, is strictly forbidden and is termed apostasy… Muslim theology equates apostasy to treason, and in most interpretations of Sharia, the penalty for apostasy is death
- Wikipedia, https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Sharia

I would guess: definitely not.

[RadioRaheem84]

One of the tenets of leftism is a firm stance on secularism, so no.

[Rafiq]

Fuck. No.

[JacobVardy]

Its a shame to see comrades parroting bourgeois islamophobia.

There is no such thing as 'sharia law'. There are 6 different competing codes of Sharīʿah. Nor were any a state legal system, they were more akin to canon or Talmudic law. Only a minority of Sharīʿah deals with criminal law. The majority covers civil law and private behaviour, like the correct way to pray. Fearing 'sharia law' is like fearing 'christian law' - on it's imposition each sect would attack every other, insisting that it's interpretation be imposed.

Pious Muslims would endow a Waqf, businesses or land held in trust, to support a school to train jurists. The graduates of these schools had no more authority than their own scholarship. Not until the 1950s, when the post-colonial regimes seized the Waqf, were Islamic jurists state employees. The current dominance of conservatism in Islam is a product the House of Saud's devil's bargin. Saudi oil wealth funds the most conservative of jurists, in exchange for no one criticising the royal family's very un-Islamic behaviour.

The feudal authorities of medieval Islam often drew upon the writings of Sharīʿah jurists, just a royalist authorities in Europe often drew upon Christian jurists. Even Iran, which had the most monolithic Islamic culture found it impossible to introduce 'sharia law' after the revolution. Islamic jurists stretch from Abdelwahab Meddeb, who likes to quote the Marquis de Sade in his writings to the ultra-conservative Salafi sponsored by the Saudi monarchy.

Vive y salud!

[Salabra]

Its a shame to see comrades parroting bourgeois islamophobia.

You’re obviously very new, Comrade.

I, for one, have dealt with this point many times (See the list of my posts). Many other comrades have also dealt with your silly charge of ‘parroting bourgeois islamophobia.’ Read, Comrade, READ!

The short answer is NO — NO set of ‘laws’ based on the inane babbling of someone’s invisible friend is compatible with Communist principles, IMO, for many good reasons, one of which is of especial significance to me. NO religion that has any substantial following in the C21 regards women (or gays) as the absolute social, political, economic and juridical equals of men (or straights).

If you want to get down to specifics in relation to islam, I would think that there is a fundamental incompatibility between the basic principle of unconditional gender equality that I imagine most would regard as integral to a communist worldview and Men have authority over women because allah has made the one superior to the other (Qu'ran, Sura 4, Verse 23).

No, Comrade, as another poster once said, “Religion is part of the muck of ages that is suppose[d] to be done away with.”

[Kamos]

Its a shame to see comrades parroting bourgeois islamophobia.

So thinking that Islamic law may not be compatible with communism, a very secular ideology, is bourgeois islamophobia? Do you mind if I call you a religious zealot, while we're at hyperboles?

[hatzel]

Well considering they [...] allow 4 wives, [...] I say no.

Quick question: do these 'Leftist ideologies' we speak of prohibit polygamy for some reason? Or why is the fact that Islam permits polygyny of any relevance to this discussion? (Hint: you'd have to go a bit further...)

[freepalestine]

You’re obviously very new, Comrade.

I, for one, have dealt with this point many times (See the list of my posts). Many other comrades have also dealt with your silly charge of ‘parroting bourgeois islamophobia.’ Read, Comrade, READ!

did he say he agreed with sharia.??
no.
as for reading your posts in my opinion some are borderline "islamophobic",bigotted and others at the least zionist..comrade..

[Reznov]

Fuck no. We are fighters for humanity.

Why do I see so many leftist wanting to try to combine feudal fundamental Islamic ideals with leftism? Is it because it seems like they are fighting against
"U.S. imperialism"?

[Die Rote Fahne]

Yeah man...apostasy is some bulllll shit. Should kill those who commit it...

:rolleyes:

[freepalestine]

to answer the op'squestion.?

NO..
but that doesnt excuse anti-muslim bigotry

[JacobVardy]

To imagine that there is a single 'Islamic law' that might be imposed on an unwilling population, is to sucome to religious bigotry. Just as Christians vary from revolutionary to reactionary, from revolutionary Marxist Jesuits to the fasicist Opus Dei, so to are there wildly divergent strands of Islam. There are strong tendencies towards misogyny, homophobia, religious bigotry, et cetera... within a number of tendencies within Islam, and they should be attacked as such. Some communists have been homophobic, should all communism stand condemned? It is a logical error, moral folly, and a strategic mistake to attack all Muslims on the basis of the practices of the few.

Some bits of Sharīʿah are compatible with communism, some bits are not, and some bit are complimentary. For example, how is refraining from eating pork incompatible with communism? A lot of the objections that have been raised so far in this thread are held mainly by the lunatics so beloved by the bourgeoisie media.

"Kill apostates"
The Qur'an itself does not prescribe any earthly punishment for apostasy; Islamic scholarship differs on its punishment, ranging from execution - on an interpretation of certain hadiths — to no punishment at all as long as they "do not work against the Muslim society or nation." (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4850080.stm) Those hadith that do proscribe the death penalty come from the period when Muslims were a small persecuted minority, and some 'Muslims' would change sides in the middle of a battle.

"4 wives"
This was a restriction to prevent 6thC Arabic raiders from taking scores of women prisoners as sex slaves. Not a great improvement but better than nothing. As the same Sura requires all 4 wives to be treated equally, the vast majority of modern Muslims interpret this as a back handed banning of polygamy.

"abolish beer-drinking"
This one is contravsersial. Some Muslims think all alcohol is banned, some think it is spirits, some public drunkeness, and other being drunk while at prayers. Many sufis were famous for their alcohol fuelled orgies. Beer is certainly wide spread in Indonesia.

"pro-terrorism"
Just plain bullshit. A very small minority of Muslims think terrorism is a valid anti-imperialist tactic. The vast majority of Muslims, who tend to be the victims of said terrorism, strongly object to terrorism.

"pro-Imperialism"
This claim is probably the closest to being legitimate. The harshly reactionary interpretation of Islam that is backed by the Saudis is increasingly coming to dominate Islam. The Salafi focus on personal purity rather than public good, does tend to give the collaborationist governments a free pass.

"dietary restrictions"
What the hell do dietary restrictions have to do with communism?

"execute homosexuals"
Some do. Most don't. There is a strong tradition of publicly recognised homosexuality in a lot of Muslim countries, especially Afghanistan and Lebanon.

"Sharia law recognises private property"
I've no idea about that. Any sources?

Vive y salud!

[La Comédie Noire]

You know, probably not, but people won't just give up one world view for another in a 1:1 transition. The more likely scenario is that as Muslim societies become more secular, the more extreme parts of the religion will fall out of practice.

It happened to Christianity after all.

[Devrim]

There is no such thing as 'sharia law'. There are 6 different competing codes of Sharīʿah.

This is a bit like saying there is no such thing as capital punishment as the state has different methods of murdering people.


"Sharia law recognises private property"
I've no idea about that. Any sources?

Try the Quran, which is full of statements about how to conduct business, and inheritance laws. As you yourself said:


The majority covers civil law and private behaviour,

The whole idea of Zakat (alms), which is one of the five pillars of Islam is deeply antithetical to communist ideas.


"abolish beer-drinking"
This one is contravsersial. Some Muslims think all alcohol is banned, some think it is spirits, some public drunkeness, and other being drunk while at prayers. Many sufis were famous for their alcohol fuelled orgies. Beer is certainly wide spread in Indonesia.

This isn't antithetical to communism, but is just untrue. The vast overwhelming majority of Muslims know that alcohol is forbidden by Islam.

Alcohol is certainly widespread in this country too. Most people I know are Muslims and most of them drink. They know it is forbidden by the Quran though.

Devrim

[Adil3tr]

As a Muslim, I think it was remarkably progressive in its original form for its original time, like many thinks like Hammurabi's code. But you have to be ridiculous to want it now. Muslim muntzers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_M%C3%BCntzer) would be great, but I stick to communism.

And no, normal Muslims don't want to kill gay people, and if anyone does, they're a fucking idiot, whether Muslim, Jewish, or christian.

[Adil3tr]

The prophet and the proletariat (http://www.marxists.de/religion/harman/)

Chris Harman

[Salabra]

as for reading your posts in my opinion some are borderline "islamophobic",bigotted and others at the least zionist..comrade..

I guess I’ll put it in terms you can understand (adapting the final words of Ben Kingsley in Gandhi) — Yes, I am an ‘islamophobe’ … and a ‘hinduphobe’ … and a ‘christianophobe’ … and a ‘judaeophobe’ … and a ‘galaxian-ultra-orthodox-ophobe’! I will have no truck with any religion — I am a communist, which means that I am an uncompromising, even militant, atheist. I cannot, and will not, pretend that religion is ‘progressive’ — even if it sits in the toolbox of the ‘anti-imperialist struggle.’

I am also an internationalist. I have repeatedly damned zionism, both secular and religious, but I have no time for petty-bourgeois Palestinian nationalism either, especially when its conception of ‘liberation’ involves me marching at the back of the parade in a stifling black tent waving a sign that reads “god is great” — or worse, fighting for ‘freedom’ and then being told to go back to the haram by a bunch of bearded-bricks-with-dangly-bits who think that their invisible friend has made them ‘superior’ to me.

The proper response to the Palestinian situation (which is obviously the cause which most concerns you — I challenge islam and you redirect the argument by calling me a zionist) is to form a secular, multi-ethnic communist party that will fight for a Socialist Republic of the Middle East. Socialize your productive resources, plan your economies, produce for use not profit, declare absolute equality for all members of society, regardless of gender, sexuality, age, ability, “race,” ethnicity, skin colour or any other criterion— and hang from the lamp-posts any imam, rabbi or priest who puts religious ‘law’ before the laws of the proletarian state!

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

I am a communist, which means that I am an uncompromising, even militant, atheist. I cannot, and will not, pretend that religion is ‘progressive’ — even if it sits in the toolbox of the ‘anti-imperialist struggle.’


You don't have to be a militant atheist to be a Communist. Communist ideology, like any socioeconomic order is based on materialist principles (and is therefore non-theistic) and makes no metaphysical claims. There is no reason why one cannot accept the socioeconomic material component of Communism while still believing, personally or within a small social community, in some particular metaphysical system.

Granted, a sizable portion of the international Communist community is atheist going back to the secular socialist thinkers like Engels and Marx, but not all are. If a Muslim claims to be a socialist I'm not going to tell them that they are not "real" socialists based on their metaphysical beliefs.

In fact, going back to Marx there has been a recognition of religious communists. Consider primitive communism; the notion would be a fundamental contradiction if communists were necessarily atheists. All primitive Communist societies that we're aware of had or have rich folklores and mythologies.


No matter what you think about religion though religious law is antithetical to the modern Communist society we should be trying to build.

[Desperado]

Well considering they kill apostates, [...] pro-dietary restrictions; I say no.

Vegetarianism is hereby incompatible with communism!

[Kosakk]

Why do I see so many leftist wanting to try to combine feudal fundamental Islamic ideals with leftism? Is it because it seems like they are fighting against
"U.S. imperialism"?

Sadly, yes. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Not a very good idea, imo.

And on topic. I prefer secularism. As it doesn't favour any religions, but threat both the religion and the believers equally. (Instead of favouring one, and one only)

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

Let me bite a back (wink, I'll fast harder tomorrow) and say Choudray (while humerous at some points and not by his own doing) is a twit. This thread, also disappoints me in people's (mis)understanding of Islam and Islamic jurisprudence. I should also point out that Choudray describes himself as a Salafi. Considering this is the same person who like to call Kate Middleton a 'whore' and wants to see the numbers on Big Ben replaced with Arabic numbers, why anyone takes him seriously or as a valid spokesman for the Muslim community in general is beyond me.

[CHE with an AK]

Muhammad was fairly progressive for his time and society and would have probably been considered on the "left" if such a binary (left/right) notion existed at that time ...

Now could parts of Sharia be on the general larger non-secular "left"? Possibly.

Could Sharia be part of a revolutionary, communist, Marxism, left? No. Not in my view.

[Arabian-revolutionist]

to answer the op'squestion.?

NO..
but that doesnt excuse anti-muslim bigotry

the man asked for an answer guys not for your opinion in Islam or any other religion.