Global Islamic State

[ciyaal_warta]

i heard that ...the first thing that will happen is when the line of the first generation of royal families in KSA finish which is like two old man after king abdullah..there will be a fight of gets to be a king among second generation and they will divided the arabian peninsular into three parts Hijaz, Sharqiah and Najd....they will wage wars against each other during that time the islamic khalifah will rise and the Mahdi will arive


Khilafah Al islaameyah will be back soooooooooon inshallah

[IRONm@N]

Dr. Tariq Ramadan, a proff of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford University (Oriental Institute, St. Anthony’s College), provided inspirational insights to Muslims in his recent visit to Minneapolis Minnesota. he provided these points to Muslim Americans and Somalis in Minnesota.

1. Confidence: Muslims should overcome the identity struggles through education and self-knowledge. This awareness should develop a composed Muslim who is at peace with himself and others. Operating from a deficit model would not lead to being taken seriously and Muslims cannot afford to be in that weak position.

2. Consistency: Muslims should be witnesses (shahid plural shuhadd) to the message of Islam. Muslims should also be open to self-examination and criticism to improve the conditions on the ground. They should also have the courage to stand for what they believe.

3. Contribution: Muslims must reconcile their physical, mental, spiritual, and social being to be of added value to their communities. They must serve everyone – Muslim or otherwise with humility. This will help in overcoming the distracting “us” vs. “them” divide. A more inclusive “we” should be used in the discourse. Muslims excelling in the different fields with patriotism would help integration in positive ways.

4. Creativity: Dr. Ramadan reminded the audience that Muslims could not convincingly use pictures of the accomplishments of Islamic Civilization to argue for our place in history. Rather, we should develop creativity and risk-taking spirit. We must engage in the study of history, religion, philosophy, arts, ethics, etc with vigor and renewal.

5. Communication: Prof. Ramadan is acutely aware of the dangers arising from misunderstandings and misconceptions in contemporary dialogue. He therefore calls for developing common terminology and defining concepts with empathy. Communication is a two-way process and there must be keen listening on all sides.

6. Contestation: Muslims should be the first to oppose injustice and oppression anywhere in the world. The audience was reminded that they should display courage and let their voices be heard on local and international issues. Muslim immigrants in the West are in a good position to be bridge builders between their homelands and chosen lands.

7. Compassion: This is a very important Attribute of Allah and His Messenger. A Muslim must therefore display empathy, understanding, and forgiveness towards oneself and others.

Finally, Prof. Tariq Ramadan signed some of his books for the audience, including: What I Believe; Radical Reform, Islamic Ethics, and Liberation; In the Footsteps of the Prophet: Lessons from the Life of Muhammad; and The Quest for Meaning: Developing a Philosophy of Pluralism.

May Allah, (Exalted and Mighty) keep us steadfast in Islam and make us true messengers of our Faith.

[James Dahl]

Empires inevitably collapse in on their own weight, the maximum size of a functional centralized state is something like France or Egypt. Even Germany is a federation of states.

The Caliphate fell apart due to endless regional, ethnic and linguistic divisions, and Abbasid attempts to keep it unified caused more damage than just letting it fall apart would have done. The same happened to the Roman Empire, the Mongol Empire, and even the British and French Empires.

An EU-esque union would be the most that would be feasible or even desirable.

[gurey25]

James but you cannot deny the vitality and endurance of the Ottoman Empire.
The system created by bayazid in the early 1300's worked quite well for 600 years before it started to weaken
and it survived 700+ years thats more than Rome , The Khalifates or any Chinese Dynasty..

[James Dahl]

James but you cannot deny the vitality and endurance of the Ottoman Empire.
The system created by bayazid in the early 1300's worked quite well for 600 years before it started to weaken
and it survived 700+ years thats more than Rome , The Khalifates or any Chinese Dynasty..

The Ottoman Empire as people know it (an empire spanning the whole middle east and half of North Africa, Hungary, Serbia etc etc etc) only existed from about 1600-1800, and the Ottomans are a perfect example of my point. The Ottoman Empire got too big to manage and imploded on its own weight. The height of Ottoman power in 1520 was when they were relatively small and compact, limited to Anatolia and the Balkans, and the height of their weakness and decay was at their maximum size around 1800 when it quite literally fell apart.

[gurey25]

That they imploded on their own weight is not really accurate, its a lazy way of explaining what happened.

The administrative system created by bayazid worked very well, and so did the millitary system.

The Ottoman system was designed to be expansionist... when they stopped the expansion and started to enjoy peace and prosperity they fell behind millitarliy and technologically and for the first time started losing territory..

There was little wrong with this system, they just had to maintain the expansion at least in one direction, either Europe, or Iran.. They didnt and fell behind..

[James Dahl]

Man every guy who has romantic ideas about the great empires will always say "if only they had done X or Y"

In reality what they could have done is stop expanding once they had taken over those areas economically and politically united with Rome/Baghdad/Istanbul/etc, which had been achieved by 1520 or so. Bayezid's system worked well for a wealthy medium sized state without domestic problems, and that describes the Ottoman Empire in 1520 or so, but does not describe the Ottoman Empire of 1750. The same system of decentralized administration that worked as long as the Sultan could oversee everyone stopped working once the empire got so big that regional Pashas were virtually kings of their domains.

The same system that may work in one circumstance will actually cause problems if that circumstance changes. There is no such thing as a good or bad system of government, it's situational. Direct democracy will work well for a village, but it's impossible for a huge state like Russia for instance.

[gurey25]

I dont have romantic notions about empires, they all had their faults none of them were perfect or could be perfect..
I do however have an interest in debunking myths about the Ottoman empire and correct inaccurate protrayals..

You are right such a decentralized becomes more difficult to rule and local rulers progressively see their power increase over the years...

but this is actually increased if the borders remain stationary...

You are right the sultanate in1520 was different to that of 1750..
but you ignore the 200 years of stagnation and change, the period of relative decline in expansion between the death of Sulieman the magnificent and 1750?
The Period called the Sultanate of Women?

If you look carefully at the period between the death of Sulieman and the last siege of viena you will notice that in those 90~ years the administrative system created by bayazid were halfway towards being undone..

Ironically increased centralization, and Peace and the stopping of Expansion Coincided with an increase in corruption
and an overall weakening of the Sultanniya..

even Devshirme was undermined..

meaning the Jannisarries of the 1520's were nothing like the Jannisarries of the 1700's.

[James Dahl]

If you look at the measures that were necessary to keep the Caliphate and Ottoman Empire together, horrific repression, totalitarian government, and massive corruption. Development and economic growth stagnated under the iron fist of the Khalifa and later the Sultan, so there is also the issue of whether a unified state is even desirable.

[Mckuus]

No.

A Global Islamic State will only wipe out all the unique cultures. Everyone will be stuck with a bland Arabian culture. Many languages will also die out and will be replaced by Arabic.

Oh and I can't stand Arabs.

[grandpakhalif]

Yes, I fully believe in this and it is a divine promise that it will return.

[Enlightened~Sista]

utopic....it will not happen, it cannot happen. I think those who believe in this are a bit cuckoo.

[NoAngst]

As many have already mentioned, so-called Islamic State or united Caliphate never existed in history. Even at the height of Islamic power -- when territory and after territory fell to the sword of Islam -- the Caliphate was bitterly divided; and internecine violence among Muslims was common place. That said, there are still other strong arguments against the restitution of Islamic Caliphate.

1. By modern standards, historical examples of Islamic governance are inherently autocratic. As the Arab Uprising has shown, there is little apetite for autocratic government. Even among those (arabs) who were branded as innately undemocratic and incapable of challenging dictators. This is not to say that all autocratic regimes are alike; obviously some are/were better than others. Nevertheless, autocratic regimes are simply out of fashion nowadays.

2. Morals have changed. And yet advocates of the Caliphate are asking us to go back to a time when people (of various ethnicities) were routinely enslaved. Muslims (especially Arab Muslims) were the biggest enslavers of black Africans. Although some Europeans have shown contrition for the transatlantic slave trade (i.e. Britian's apology for slavery), many of the Muslims who enslaved black Africans are not only unrepentant but also make apologies for slavery.

... I got more for later.

[melo]

The reality of the matter, is that Nabi Saws said the caliphate would be re-established before the day of judgement. You can hate it on it all you want, buts inevitable. To those who doubt, please go study the words of the greatest of creation, Muhammad saws.

[waryaa]

I disagree for the simple fact that Muslims today are divided along interpretation lines. What if that state is Shia or Taliban or Sufis - or so called moderate.... You will always alienate the majority of Muslims.

imho, every nation should keep its affairs to itself....

So what are your thoughts of having a global Islamic state, that encompasses all Muslim lands? Are you in favor of it, are you against it? Do you think its a good idea, bad idea? Do you think a global Islamic state will happen ever again in our lifetime? Discuss