The title says it all - can democracy coexist in an islamic based society?
What I know of the fundamental beliefs of Islam suggests that no secular form of government that does not accept the inherently non-democratic stance of the church could ever exist.
I am very interested in others opinions regarding this question.
I will have to go with yes becuase the largest Islamic country is a democracy. Perhaps you’ve heard of it? Indonesia
Even if there were no examples of it in the world now, I’d say yes. Islam doesn’t seem to be moving the Middle East toward democracy, but it’s not the reason there is so little of it there in the first place. At best it’s a contributing factor.
Wouldn’t it suck for Muslims that lived in a country where 25% of the people believed in Islam to oppose democracy?
Absolutely. There are Sunni sects that do NOT advocate mixing religion with politics. Shiites believe the Imam (ruler) is infallible, the Sunnis do not. I don’t have my list on me right now, but there’s a specific Shiite sect that openly advocates dictatorship by any means, including violence.
But to echo what was said, Islam extends beyond the Middle East. There are many Muslims in Southeast Asia.
I had inadvertantly failed to limit the topic to the Middle East. You are right about Indonesia but the politics and religious intolerances that exist in the Middle East seem to work against democracy.
What is it that prevents any sort of willingness to recognize other sects within countries like Iraq, Iran, etc? Is it history there that perhaps is the driving force (an unwillingness, due to political or other reasons, to get along)?
Ask the Protestants who think Catholics are not “real” Christians.
Is it the fact that we as Americans are more “religiously homogenized” than other countries the reason that democracy can exist here but not elsewhere?
Put another way, Americans have been able to exist as a democracy despite our religious differences whereas elsewhere it just seems to get in the way and particularly so in the Middle East.
Nah, it’s because the United States government separates theology from governance – the whole “separation of church and state” thing.
Which makes the folks who want to tear down that wall very dangerous, IMO…
We’re what?
Democracy exists in America but not elsewhere?
Malaysia may or may not be considered a democratic parlimentary system. It is a muslim country. Pakistan flirts with democracy inbetween military rule. Indonesia was mentioned in the first reply.
VW Naipaul has some interesting books on specifically Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan and Iran, eg countries where Islam is an import.
Isn’t it ultimately an import just about everywhere? 
[quote]
What I know of the fundamental beliefs of Islam suggests that no secular form of government that does not accept the inherently non-democratic stance of the church could ever exist.
Because most factions of Islam recognise no single, central religious authority, there is technically more room for debate than in a Catholic country, where it’s the Pope’s word or nothing.
Democracy can and does exist here. The issue is not Islam - at least in the Gulf - but patriarchal tribalism. However this structure is now being transformed into a monarchic system in most states, with increasing amounts of debate and democratic process. Many countries have simply not been ready for full democracy because education and literacy rates have been low.
That is why the “gentle patriarch” system has worked so well in the UAE, Oman and Qatar: a philanthropic, generous autocrat invests in his people’s wellbeing and development, until they become empowered enough to share in his authority.
The issue now is the amount of sharing power that goes on. At the moment most rulers here are 100% hands-on - they are not figureheads. I think it is unlikely that their roles will be diminished for some time: most are still loved and wanted by their people. There are also plenty of examples of an inappropriate ruler being removed: witness the frequent “bloodless” coups. But this needs to happen from within the tribal system, not from external pressures.
Bangladesh is another example of a Muslim-dominated democracy.
Turkey’s certainly had its problems, but it’s full of Muslims and it’s a democracy. In fact, there’s an Islamist (ie they believe that Islam should be part of government) party in power right now, the AKP.
India would have perhaps the second largest Muslim population in the world (~100 million, after Indonesia’s 200 million), and it’s a democracy.
I think the problem in Iraq is that the US wants to keep religion out of it, which is a bit dictatorial if you ask me. I completely agree that it shouldn’t be an oppressive government, but their religion is part of their heritage and to try to deny them that strikes me as awfully harsh. I think the separation of church and state works in America because we have a very diverse religious population. If America was 97% Christian, I don’t think it would work quite as well.
I personally think allowing them to reflect their religious heritage (and boy is it a long one!) in their government, while keeping controls to make sure they don’t oppress others, would make a more SUCCESSFUL democracy. I think a lot of Iraqis resent the US coming in and doing away with traditions, even the ones who hated Saddam.
Perhaps you know more about it than I do, but I don’t think they’ve kept religion totally out of the government. Not that I would complain much if they did.
Yep. Turkey has it’s problems, for sure, but it’s a real democracy in a real Islamic country. I don’t know why so many people seem to forget this when they talk about the incompatibility of demcracy with Islam.