Post Islamism: the Democratic Islamism

The waves of modernity, which bring about changes within human’s life, pose a great challenge to the Islamic teaching derived from the scriptures that are revealed among Arab society in the 7th century. The questions whether Islam can face the challenge of changing times and adapt to the contemporary principles such as democracy and human rights often arise among non-Muslims as well as within the internal Muslim communities. In this regards, post-Islamism emerges as a new thought that attempts to show that Islam is congruent with the challenges of changing times.

This issue is discussed in the seminar entitled “Post-Islamism: the Democratic Islamism” held in the Auditorium Building I, the University of Indonesia (UI), Depok (14/11/2011). The speakers are Muhammad Ali (Religious Studies Department, University of California), Ulil Abshar Abdalla (Liberal Islam Network), and Naupal Asmawi (Islamic Philosophy Lecturer, Department of Philosophy UI).

Muhammad Ali stated that the Western phobia against Islam contributed to the emergence of post-Islamism. The Western phobias portrayed Islamism as incompatible with the principles of democracy, human rights, and science. Thus, Islamism emerged as a reaction toward the impact of modernization, which is perceived as the Western idea that fails to meet the interests of Islam. Islamism then emerged with the slogan: Islam is the answer to all problems faced by human beings (al-Islam huwa al-hall).

Ali observed that Islamism is an interesting trend for many Muslims because of several reasons. First, it is due to the crisis of Muslim identity in the face of changes generated by the modernity. Second, it is due to the prevailing perception that Muslims are victims of the Western imperialism. Third, it is due to the assumption that moral crisis occurs because Muslims abandoned their Islamic teachings. Fourth, it is due to the demographic changes in the form of growing rates of population coupled with the increasing urbanization from the village to the city that motivate people to search for a new identity. Fifth, it is due to the intellectual foundations that support the Islamists’ agenda such as the works of Sayyid Qutb etcetera.

Islamism becomes identical to the negative image of radical Islam, intolerance of pluralism, anti-democracy and unwillingness to adapt Islam with the changing times. Ali explained that post-Islamism has emerged as a semantic attempt to provide a new label for a trend of Islamism that is supportive toward the issues of democracy, human rights and freedom of choice. In addition, post-Islamism is actually an attempt to correct the prevailing image of Islamism associated with the anti-democracy stereotype.

Quoting Asef Bayat, Ulil described several characteristics of post-Islamism that distinguish it from Islamism. On the one hand, post-Islamists tend to reject secularism that is hostile toward religion; and on the other hand, post-Islamists refuse the idea of theocracy. The concept of old secularism that started in Europe tends to be anti-religion. However, a new variant of secularism that is friendly toward religion emerge in the West. Among them is the concept of twin-toleration wherein the position of the state is neutral and relatively supportive toward religions. Therefore, people can perform their religious activities freely, and in the same time, religion does not impose its principles upon the public. The concept of twin-toleration proposes that there is no antagonism between the state and religion, but cooperation between both instead.

Furthermore, Ulil explained that post-Islamism has the will to compromise with political realities and therefore it tends to be pragmatic. He gave the example of the emergence of moderate Islamic parties in various countries, including PKS in Indonesia and the AKP in Turkey, which show their Islamic identity and ability to compromise with the political realities. It can be seen through PKS’ decision in their National Conference II in Jakarta, which declared PKS as an open party and changed its direction from being an exclusive party to an inclusive one.

Ulil said that the pragmatism of the moderate Islamic parties is in conjunction with the fades of ideology in politics. Citing Daniel Bell’s work The End of Ideology, Ulil explained about recent developments wherein people are no longer concerned with the big narratives of ideology that fueled humans’ spirit but failed to solve their problems. The fades of ideology facilitate the party in switching its direction to adjust itself to the development of political conditions. The functioning democratic system in the governance invites the Islamic parties to join in the democratic political arena that necessitates them to follow and obey the democratic rules of game. Ulil argues that the emergence of post-Islamism provides a fresh air for Islam because it counters the accusations that Islam is incompatible with democracy.

Nevertheless, Naupal asserted that there is no need of labeling post-Islamism to Islam. Naupal argued that since the beginning, the Islamic principles are in accordance with the democratic principles. Naupal said that what is needed today is the contextualization of classical texts derived from the Qur’an and hadith in order to uphold the universal Islamic principles such as the message of justice, consultation, unity and others. The Muslims’ challenge now is to perform ijtihad to campaign the universal message of Islam based on the original sources of Islam: the Qur’an and hadith.

Naupal took the examples from hadith and verses of Quran, which messages are compatible with the principles of democracy and opposing tyranny. He quoted the prophet’s saying narrated by Tirmidhi and Al-Hakim in which Prophet Muhammad said: “The help of Allah is upon jama’ah (people), and devil will be with a person and stay away from two persons.” In another Hadith that is reported by Ahmad, the Prophet said: “If you both agree on a certain thing, I will not oppose the opinion of both of you”. In Quran surah Ali Imran verse 159: “So consult them in the matter and when you have decided, they rely upon Allah. Indeed Allah loves those who rely upon Him”.

Naupal explained that these religious texts entail the same message that the opinion of many people about the problems they face in the world must be prioritized than the opinion of few people, including the opinion of the Prophet Muhammad himself. Naupal also viewed that some claims of the Islamic parties that reject democratic system because it takes over the ruling power of God is not true. He argued that the system of governance, which is elected and controlled by people, aims to prevent tyranny of certain individuals or elite groups.

Based on the above verses of Quran and hadith, Naupal want to emphasize that the principles of Islam entail the spirit of democracy. He concluded that there is no substantive difference between the Islamic system of shura and democracy. The only difference is about the soul or spirit. Shura entails Devine spirit (rabbaniyah) while democracy is humane (insaniyah). Naupal said that these two spirits are not in opposition but they are mutually supporting each other. Therefore, according to him, the concept of post-Islamism is no longer necessary to prove that Islam is compatible with democracy, since the principle of Islam is not against the principle of democracy since the beginning.