Social Justice 2011

Running Head: The Missing Puzzle in solving the Coexistence of Civilizations

Social Justice: The missing puzzle in solving the coexistence of civilizations

A discourse

Authors Hamzah Chorghay & Gulcan Chorghay

Page 1 of 21

Social Justice 2011

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 2. Clash of Civilizations: The theory and its implications. 3. Social Justice: The missing puzzle in solving the coexistence of civilizations 4. Freedom of conscience: A focal point of social Justice in Islam 5. Conclusion

3 4 11 18 21

Page 2 of 21

Social Justice 2011

Introduction The rollercoaster ride of Human Civilization as a whole and the cluster of Civilizations that form it are very amazing especially from the beginning of the 20th century. The greats achieved through the inventions of cars, planes, TV, telephone, internet and other means of communication, and sciences in particular have been enormous. Yet, Human Civilization has been witnessing great wars and destruction since the beginning of the 20th century.1 The loss of human life, property and honor has been enormous as well. The 21st century hasnt been much different either with the development of the social media revolution like facebook, twitter and the likes of it we have achieved greater heights again. Yet, we have tainted ourselves by continuing conflicts and loss of life, property and honor. The attack on the World Trade Center on September 11 2001, the subsequent wars waged by the Bush Government in Afghanistan and Iraq, the continual tension in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine; have put a huge dent, if not a trench, in achieving peace and harmony.2 Those who think and ponder might wonder, how do we achieve yet not accomplish? How do we advance yet not prosper? How do we fight to support freedom and justice yet suppress and destroy? This article is built on the same discourse, trying to analyze from the intellectual point of view and to solve the missing puzzle in our approach to issues today.

1 2

For a timeline version refer to http://history1900s.about.com/od/timelines/tp/timeline.htm For a timeline version refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_century

Page 3 of 21

Social Justice 2011

1. Clash of Civilizations: the theory and its implications To intellectually formulate our discourse on coexistence of civilizations, we must first understand the theory of Clash of Civilizations and its implications on Mankind. The two notable figures of the Clash of Civilizations theory are Samuel P. Huntington and Bernard Lewis. Samuel Phillips Huntington (April 18, 1927 December 24, 2008) was an influential American political scientist who wrote highly-regarded books in a half-dozen sub-fields of political science, starting in 1957. He gained wider prominence through his Clash of Civilizations (1993, 1996) thesis of a post-Cold War new world order. He was a Professor at Harvard University and co-edited and co-founded Foreign Policy magazine3, one of the leading magazines on international political affairs. Huntingtons book in 1996 The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order was the New York Times Bestseller4. Bernard Lewis, a British-American historian, scholar in Oriental studies, and political commentator and a frequent advisor to the George W. Bush administration was the first one to use the term Clash of Civilizations in an article titled The roots of Muslim rage in 1990. Lewis and Huntington both believe that in order for the West to define themselves they must have an other. In an article entitles The roots of Muslim Rage Lewis stated: It should by now be clear that we are facing a mood and a movement far transcending the level of issues and policies and the governments that pursue them. This is no less than a clash of civilizations the perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular

3 4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_P._Huntington http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clash_of_Civilizations_and_the_Remaking_of_World_Order

Page 4 of 21

Social Justice 2011

present, and the worldwide expansion of both. It is crucially important that we on our side should not be provoked into an equally historic but also equally irrational reaction against that rival.5 One can find the same words echoing in Huntingtons book: There can be no true friends without true enemies. Unless we hate what we are not, we cannot love what we are. These are the old truths we are painfully rediscovering Those who deny them deny their family, their heritage, their culture, their birthright, their very selves! They will not lightly be forgiven.6 What is peculiar about the clash of civilizations theory is that Huntington and Lewis assert that the relationship between Islamic and Western civilization has always been we and they relationship. Huntingtons approach throughout the book has been that of a Warner; like we see in the above abstract from his book, he warns those who deny hating their enemies by claiming that they deny their very selves. Huntington considers United States of America (USA) to be the torch bearers of Western civilization, especially after the fall of European colonialism and emphasizes the link of Western civilization, and implicitly of USA to Juedeo-Christian tradition. To justify the above, when he was talking about conflict amongst Core states he says The missing hegemonic war in Western history is that between Great Britain and the United States, and presumably the peaceful shift from the Pax Britannica to the

5 6

See, Bernard Lewis, The Roots of Muslim Rage, The Atlantic Monthly, Vol 266, no3(September 1990), 47-60 Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, 20

Page 5 of 21

Social Justice 2011

Pax Americana was in large part due to the close cultural kinship of the two societies.7 Here, I sincerely feel the information on the peaceful shift can rather be challenged. The American Revolutionary War (17751783), the American War of Independence, or simply the Revolutionary War, began as a war between the Kingdom of Great Britain and thirteen British colonies in North America, and ended in a global war between several European great powers8. The army casualties number is roughly estimated to be 27,370 people and uncountable civilian deaths due to epidemic, some figures suggest it to be more than 130,000 people.9 As for the claim that USA has its link to Judeo-Christian tradition of Europe; Abdullah Ahsan rightly noted in his article titled Dialogue of Civilizations that the claim that US was founded on the Judeo-Christian tradition is not accurate. He notes that John Tyler, the American President (1841-1845) identified Jews along with Muslims and East Indians as strangers to America. And, Tyler wanted to grant all immigrants an abode among us. Lewis who quoted Tyler to demonstrate American Tolerance later himself insists that he and the state of Israel were a part of Western Civilization.10 Also, History scholars have traced the roots of Western civilization as we know it today to the Renaissance and the Enlightenment tradition as noted by Abdullah Ahsan, a few do consider it to be stemming from Graeco-Roman era with the influence of Christianity11, but that is the roots, however, the current western civilization is a product of Renaissance and the Enlightenment tradition. What is rather not acceptable is the claim that Western civilization has Judeo-Christian tradition.
Ibid.,209 Clearly and simply explained in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War 9 Ibid. 10 Ahsan, Abdullah. "Dialogue of Civilizations: Islamic and Western perceptions." Al-Shajarah, 2011: 163. 11 Refer, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_culture
7 8

Page 6 of 21

Social Justice 2011

The point that needs to be highlighted is that if the historians do not believe USA and the Western Civilization to be Judeo-Christian why do Huntington and Lewis reiterate on this. One view to this could be found in this thought provoking observation by the Edward Said who pointed out that Israels identification with Western civilization was done in the hope that more Americans and Europeans will see Israel as a victim of Islamic violence.12 Furthermore, Huntington claims that the ongoing conflict is not a transitory phenomena rather it flows from the nature of the two religions and the civilizations built upon it.13 Also, In his own words: Conflict was, on the one hand, a product of difference, particularly the Muslim concept of Islam as a way of life transcending and uniting religion and politics versus the Western Christian concept of the separate realms of God and Caesar. The conflict also stemmed, however, from their similarities. Both are monotheistic religions which see the world in dualistic, us-and-them terms. Both are universalistic Both are missionary14 It is very saddening that Huntington not only has misunderstood or rather misrepresented the two religions, which promote peace and harmony, equality and justice, as one of its basic teachings; but have also created grave implications on the minds of his audience. The implication that neither similarities nor differences amongst civilizations and its people can bring them to live in harmonious coexistence and henceforth are bound to a clash; psychologically creates an aura of insecurity and conflict whilst hampering any creative efforts of people to work towards building a world of mutual coexistence and peace.
Edward Said, Covering Islam, 2nd edn. (New York: Vintage, 1996),xxi for more insight read Ahsan, "Dialogue of Civilizations: Islamic and Western perceptions." Al-Shajarah, 2011 13 Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, 210 14 Ibid., 211
12

Page 7 of 21

Social Justice 2011

Roman Herzog, president of Germany (1994-1999) during his speech at the Institute of Islamic Understanding [IKIM] in Malaysia in April 1997 reiterated his position in the strongest words towards the strife of a minimum degree of common civilization. The theme of todays event, namely the question as to whether a universal civilization is conceivable, plays a central role in efforts to achieve inter-cultural harmony. As we all know, Professor Huntington rejects this possibility out of hand. That is why his scenario is so dangerous. Does not civilization all over the world at the very least mean preserving peace, controlling aggression, seeking knowledge? Do we realize what we are unleashing if we abandon the idea of a minimum degree of common civilization? The next big conflict as Huntington suggests; after the end of cold war will be between Islam and the West and also between China and the West. In case of Islamic Civilization Huntington tries to justify the clash by claiming it to be a historical fact. Not only that, when talking about the causes of the clash he blames it on the very nature of the Christianity and Islam and the civilizations built on it as we have seen earlier, thereby giving no hope of mutual coexistence to the peace loving people of the world and creating a sense that hatred and eventually a clash of civilizations is highly probable, if not inevitable. One last observation on the Clash of Civilizations that I would like to make, although there are many more that we can discuss, is the strategy that Huntington proposes to the Western Civilization to preserve itself in the wake of declining power. He urges United States and European countries to 1. to achieve greater political, economic, and military integration and to coordinate their policies so as to preclude states from other civilization exploiting differences among them;
Page 8 of 21

Social Justice 2011

2. To incorporate Into the European Union and NATO the Western states of Central Europe that is, the Visegrad countries, the Baltic republics, Slovenia, and Croatia; 3. To encourage the Westernization of Latin America and, as far as possible, the close alignment of Latin American countries with the West; 4. To Restrain the development of the conventional and unconventional military power of Islamic and Sinic countries; 5. To slow the drift of Japan away from the West and toward accommodation with China; 6. To accept Russia as the core state of Orthodoxy and a major regional power with legitimate interests in the security of its southern borders; 7. To maintain Western technological and military superiority over the other civilizations; 8. And, most important, to recognize that Western intervention in the affairs of other civilizations is probably the single most dangerous source of instability and potential global conflict in a multicivilizational world.15 What is truly amazing in this strategy is what Huntington points out to be the most important point in which he states that the most dangerous source of instability and potential global conflict is Western intervention in the affairs of others. Why it is amazing is that the seven points he put forward before that require the Western civilization to do exactly that in some way or the other. For example, incorporating Central European states into NATO which will clearly ring the bells in Moscow and Tehran, creating mistrust and hostility. Also, Westernization of Latin America, meaning to say to force people or governments to adhere to the Western Worldview, again something which if people are not comfortable with can create hostility. Then, proposing to restrain the development of military power of Islamic and Sinic countries whilst having a major
15

Ibid., 312

Page 9 of 21

Social Justice 2011

military presence around these countries. Also, to maintain Western technological and military superiority over the other civilizations and forcing them directly or indirectly not to surpass the Western Civilization in technology and military superiority. How I look at it is simply what if we replaced the term Western to say Islamic or Sinic Civilizations, and we recommend the Islamic civilization to follow the exact strategy that Huntington proposes to the West. What would be the reaction? If it would be hostility, lack of trust, growing frustration amongst the masses against those who are trying to Islamicize them, and strategies taken by governments to build their military and economy independent of foreign intervention then either Huntington did not believe in the golden rule of like for your brother or neighbor what you like for yourself or having peaceful coexistence across all civilizations was not his goal anyways. Having said this, if one looks into how events have been unfolding over the past 10 years, especially since the attack on the 11th of September 2001, one would come to conclude that there is in reality a Clash of Civilizations. But, are we missing out something here, is it really the case that human civilization has always been in a state of conflict, and will always remain such. Many intellectuals have built solid arguments based on history and modern times that contrary to the claims of a few, there are masses that like to see and work towards peaceful coexistence and have done this throughout history. I feel that the very assumption of having a clash of civilizations is to claim that the human civilization as a whole is still not Civilized. The idea that we are heading to an inevitable clash of civilizations and for which we do not have any peaceful solution, or that we cannot find a peaceful solution; is by itself demeaning to the human civilization as a whole and to the cluster of civilizations that form it.

Page 10 of 21

Social Justice 2011

2. Social Justice: The missing puzzle in solving the coexistence of civilizations All of us know the famous Newtons thirds law to every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction. As much as it is true when it comes to physics, human psychology can be a lot different and complicated. Before we address any problem we should look into the causes that create such a problem. After we have identified the right causes we can then try to address them to bring about the desired outcome. Just to put things in perspective, the problem that we have is the growing hostility, insecurity and conflicts in various parts of the world. The cause, according to Huntington is the global tribalism and competitive nature of civilizations and from his point of view there is no solution except to press for the superiority of the Western Civilization as according to him it is the best Civilization to exist on the face of this planet ever. We can take his pessimistic point of view and wait for it to become a self-fulfilling prophecy or we can attempt to relook at the problem with an unbiased approach and a clear objective to make this world a better place to live for the whole of Human Civilization, and not just clusters of it at the expense of the others. Hence, let us look into the problem again which we have defined as growing hostility, insecurity and conflicts in various parts of the world. Now, for the causes to these problems, which although is very debatable and highly subjective as to whose point of view we are looking from; can still be filtered through the lenses of promoting peaceful coexistence. Whenever in history a group of people have transgressed in their greed for power, wealth and land, you will find yourself reading through the chapters of war, destruction, loot and bloodshed. I do not intend to dig into scenarios of history and point blame, but to find a solution that we can use to move forward.
Page 11 of 21

Social Justice 2011

Let us look at something more recent and fresh in our memories, quoting Abdullah Ahsan in his article titled Dialogue of Civilizations: Islamic and western perception16 he said that if one looks at the current rise of terrorist activities and the stringent policies of US and a few of its European allies towards Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia one might think it is due to the clash of civilizations but he also mentioned that the fact that millions who show up on the streets in US and Europe opposing invasions in Iraq in 2003 and many others of like shows that they do not believe in the idea of clash of civilizations. Again, if we look back into recent history one can easily point out that those who seek their own interests have constantly manipulated public opinion, and it was possible due to lack of knowledge and awareness on the part of the masses. However, the situation on the ground is changing faster than ever. American and other Western human rights organizations have increasingly started fighting against the horrific human rights violations in Palestine which occur on a daily basis. Same is true in the Muslim world, where once extremists who were enjoying emotional support of the masses are losing their grounds as a more educated and well informed population is not buying into the rhetoric of hate and vengeance. Through Internet in general and social media in particular people are being exposed to different views on the same story, which is helping them to deduct their own conclusions and devise their own approach. Now, how is all this relevant to our discussion of finding the causes. Simply, because we can clearly see that as people become more educated and aware of the reality, they choose to fight against the deception. So the question remains what is the reality? Why are the Palestinians fighting for half a century? What gave rise to Al Qaeda and Taliban in Afghanistan? Did America really find Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq?
16

Ahsan, Abdullah. "Dialogue of Civilizations: Islamic and Western perceptions." Al-Shajarah, 2011: 173

Page 12 of 21

Social Justice 2011

The reality that the masses are now waking up to is the gross injustice that is happening at every corner of the globe. Whether it be in the name of having a right to exist like in case of Israel or to wage war on terror like the ones in Afghanistan and Iraq, or to defend our interest like the one in Kashmir where curfews have become a part of life. These are just a few recent and ongoing conflicts that we witness everyday through our TV sets or for those unfortunate to be a part of it, even closer. Injustice is the root to all evil and when the victims cannot find justice through peaceful means, they have no choice but to resort to all means available. The colonial powers did great injustice to the colonies robbing them of the resources whilst not distributing its benefits among its rightful beneficiaries; hence we saw the masses rising to the chants of freedom throughout the globe. The greed of colonial powers led humanity to two massive world wars and a dark period that we know as cold war. Today, we have in our societies, apart from the conflicts and wars, different faces of injustice. The very systems and institutions that are put in place to safeguard our interests have been hijacked by the elites to serve their own interests. We see the Occupy Wall Street protestors in New York demanding that economic justice be done to the 99% of the society. Our banking and monetary systems which are depreciating the value of the money we own by bailing out financial institutions during crisis by printing more money, Anti terror laws infringing our privacy and many more instances. The effect of this economic injustice can be seen from USA to Europe, where governments owe more than they own, where people are rewarded to consume more than they can pay.

Page 13 of 21

Social Justice 2011

People are waking up to realize these various dimensions of injustice and are raising their voices against it. The concept that we have forgotten, the golden rule of like for your brother or neighbor what you like for yourself brings us to the need of Social Justice. The voices of the demonstrators in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and most of the Arab world shout out against injustice, so do the voices of the Occupy Wall Street protestors and even so do the protestors in Israel who are trying their best to voice out and show their opposition to the injustice done by their own government. Social justice generally refers to the idea of creating a society or institution that is based on the principles of equality and solidarity, that understands and values human rights, and that recognizes the dignity of every human being.17 The approach that Roman Herzog, ex-president of Germany, believes and promotes is that people & cultures must learn more about each other. Without this mutual knowledge there can be no mutual understanding; without mutual understanding there can be no mutual respect and no trust; and without trust there can be no peace but, indeed really only the risk of a clash.18 The aim he says should not be the clash of civilizations, but it should be building a common civilization based on mutual trust and cooperation between all inhabitants of this planet.19 One such example from the western world is that of Annemarie Schimmel, through her academic works on literature, and on ancient Islamic texts was awarded a Peace Prize by German Book Trade Association. Roman Herzog acknowledged and praised her works saying that it has helped the West understand Islamic culture, which in turn, makes the West realize that the terms such as inhumane penal law, religious intolerance, suppression of women, and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice Preventing the Clash of Civilizations: a peace strategy for the Twenty-First Century. Roman Herzog with comments by Amitai Etzioni . . . [et al.] edited by Henrik Schmiegelow. (1999). New York: St. Martins Press: 15 19 Ibid., 12
17 18

Page 14 of 21

Social Justice 2011

aggressive fundamentalism, which they commonly associate with Islam have no basis in the Quran.20 Hence, if we were to establish social justice through having a society built on the principle of equality that value human rights, we need to as a first step know more about the different Civilizations and cultures that exist and their values. After stating the first step i.e. to learn more about each other, we need to move to next stage towards peaceful coexistence which is to promote Inter-Cultural dialogue, as it is naturally the next stage in the learning ladder. Let us look into how we can develop a healthy Inter-Cultural dialogue from Roman Herzogs perspective. Firstly, Roman Herzog points out that the fundamental conceptual prerequisite for dialogue is Freedom of Speech, which means that no one has to fear imprisonment, torture, or murder for any comment he has made.21 Secondly, the choice of ethical relativism versus that of ethical plurality and tolerance. Roman Herzog believes that ethical relativism alone leads to a complete loss of standards, rather than tolerance.22 Hence in this scenario he has later hinted that the core human rights such as right to respect for human life; the prohibition of serfdom, slavery, and torture; protection from arbitrary deprivation of liberty; and the prohibition of discrimination based on racist, religious, or similar reasons; should be basis of any dialogue and no doubt should be given to their universal application. Thirdly, looking for a cross cultural ethical minimum should not confine us to those minimums, rather we should be constantly looking to further the possibilities for the attainment of peaceful coexistence. And, with tools like common economic interests in open markets, common knowledge
Ibid., 16 Pg 17 Preventing the Clash of Civilizations: a peace strategy for the Twenty-First Century. Roman Herzog with comments by Amitai Etzioni . . . [et al.] edited by Henrik Schmiegelow. (1999). New York: St. Martins Press. 22 Pg 19 Preventing the Clash of Civilizations: a peace strategy for the Twenty-First Century. Roman Herzog with comments by Amitai Etzioni . . . [et al.] edited by Henrik Schmiegelow. (1999). New York: St. Martins Press.
20 21

Page 15 of 21

Social Justice 2011

of sciences and the endless possibilities offered by the information age; it has become a far possible task to seek the greatest inter-cultural common denominator.23 Fourthly, we should acknowledge the differences and the fact that we are only genuinely interested to know more if and because our culture is different and can only understand the other culture through our understanding. The third step towards achieving a peaceful coexistence is using Human rights as a transcultural cause to achieve Social Justice. Roman Herzog points out certain issues, misconceptions and arguments against deploying Human rights as transcultural cause to achieve a harmony amongst the civilizations. Roman Herzog points out three categories or levels of Human Rights; first being core human rights; second, economic human rights; and thirdly freedom of thought. Core human rights include rights such as right to respect for human life; prohibition of serfdom, slavery, and torture; protection from arbitrary deprivation of liberty; and the prohibition of discrimination which is based on racist, religious, or similar reasons24. Economic human rights includes freedom to choose what work we do; the right to private property; the right to enter into contracts; the right to investment and consumption; equal access to employment, markets, and economic opportunities, including, to an extent, the right to do business wherever one wants25, which are the principles of free market society. Freedom of thought includes rights

23Pg

20 Preventing the Clash of Civilizations: a peace strategy for the Twenty-First Century. Roman Herzog with comments by Amitai Etzioni . . . [et al.] edited by Henrik Schmiegelow. (1999). New York: St. Martins Press. 24 Pg29 Preventing the Clash of Civilizations: a peace strategy for the Twenty-First Century. Roman Herzog with comments by Amitai Etzioni . . . [et al.] edited by Henrik Schmiegelow. (1999). New York: St. Martins Press. 25 Pg32 Preventing the Clash of Civilizations: a peace strategy for the Twenty-First Century. Roman Herzog with comments by Amitai Etzioni . . . [et al.] edited by Henrik Schmiegelow. (1999). New York: St. Martins Press.

Page 16 of 21

Social Justice 2011

such as freedom of the media, freedom of learning, and freedom of artistic expression26, which one would say are the underlying principles of democracy. Roman Herzog states in his essay, which appeared in Die Zeit in 1996, that the question Whether human rights are worthy of support is not the discussion, rather it is How they are to be achieved. Although, the above represents the state of mind of Roman Herzog, I believe there is a sizable majority in the non Western civilization that would still think otherwise. For example, the common perception on the ground level in the Islamic civilization is that Human rights, along with, the package of democracy and free market economy that it promotes, is a modern day replacement of colonialism. One cannot deny that such an opinion has rightfully developed as a consequence of the wars and conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia to name a few, where notions of democracy and terrorism have been used as the justification to infringe upon those countries sovereignty and indeed it is far from achieving the objectives of peaceful coexistence and has rather fueled sensitivities across cultures. Again, the way I look at it is to ask myself objectively, are the ideals of human rights, democracy or free market society to be questioned or their very implementation. We should always understand and be conscious of the fact that any human endeavor runs at the risk of being incomplete and fallible. Therefore, as Roman Herzog puts it in his article that a person who understands the very nature of human endeavor will take several parallel and pragmatic steps to achieve the dimensions of human rights. Hence, the Western and Islamic civilizations have to look at their very ideals and core principles, and as Roman Herzog proposes, have to find a common denominator to build a

26

Pg33 Preventing the Clash of Civilizations: a peace strategy for the Twenty-First Century. Roman Herzog with comments by Amitai Etzioni . . . [et al.] edited by Henrik Schmiegelow. (1999). New York: St. Martins Press.

Page 17 of 21

Social Justice 2011

universal civilization of mutual trust and cooperation. The pragmatic tools, he proposes are as mentioned earlier, the twin tools of democracy and free market economy. One might again question the validity and completeness of these tools to achieve human rights, as they are being used today. With economic failures and lack of proper distribution of wealth, the very concept of free market economy, or at least the current method of implementing it has failed to create economic justice and is highly debated across the globe. 3. Freedom of conscience: A focal point of social Justice in Islam The reason I want to brief on the aspect of social Justice in Islam is to shed light on a very unique method of social justice, which when it was followed brought about harmony and coexistence across races, religions, cultures and civilizations. Also, another reason is that contrary to the belief of many in the West that religion is the opium of masses27; Islam which derives its rulings from the Quran which is considered by Muslims as the literary word of God and the Sunnah roughly translated as the sayings or traditions of the Prophet Muhammad, has addressed the issue of Social Justice in a very profound and complete manner. Hence, Religion in the case of Islam is not a product of Man, rather guidance from creator, who is not biased and unjust to any of his creations. Prophet Muhammad was born in Arabia in 570 CE, and when he died at the age of 63, the whole of the Arabian Peninsula had changes from paganism and idol worship to the worship of One God; from tribal quarrels and wars to national solidarity and cohesion; from drunkenness and debauchery to sobriety and piety; from lawlessness and anarchy to disciplined living; from

27

Initially appeared In the thoughts of Karl Marx, see more on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_of_the_people

Page 18 of 21

Social Justice 2011

utter moral bankruptcy to the highest standards of moral excellence. Human history has never known such a complete transformation of a people or a place before or since.28 Bernard Shaw said, "if Muhammad (pbuh) were alive today, he would succeed in solving all those problems which threaten to destroy human civilization in our times." Thomas Carlysle was amazed as to how one man, single-handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades. One good write up on social Justice in Islam is by Sayyid Qutb titled in English social Justice in Islam which is a translation form the Arabic text titled Al-Adalah al-ijtimaiyah fi lIslam In this book Sayyid Qutb has elaborately discussed the foundations on which Islam establishes Justice. The following are according to Sayyid Qutb the foundations of social justice in Islam: 1. Absolute freedom of conscience 2. The complete equality of all men. 3. The firm mutual responsibility of society. Absolute freedom of conscience We shall just elaborate on freedom of conscience as this is something which stands out in the Islamic concept of social justice which is lacking in our civilizations today. In Sayyid Qutbs words Complete social justice cannot be assured, nor can its efficiency and permanence be guaranteed, unless it arises from an inner conviction of the spirit; it must be claimed by the individual, it must be needed by society; there must be a belief that it will serve the highest purposes of mankind No man will claim justice by law unless he has first claimed it by instinct.29
28

http://www.islam101.com/dawah/must_Muhammad.html

29

Qutb, Sayyid. Social Justice in Islam. Islamic Publications International, 2000. 53 Page 19 of 21

Social Justice 2011

Conscience is defined as an aptitude, faculty, intuition or judgment of the intellect that distinguishes right from wrong30. Today our conscience has been corrupted by ideologies that promote greed and success without responsibility. When we talk about conscience we are talking about people like you and me, how we think? How we judge? How we distinguish right from wrong? We have been corrupted by our own whims and materialistic values that make us ignore the reality even if we know it. Islam began by freeing the human conscience from servitude to anyone except Allah and from submission to any except him. What effect this had is that when Man is no more a subservient to anyone except his Lord and that he relies on Him for everything, from life to livelihood and security; he has a self belief and satisfaction which leads him to seek his rights and preserve justice. In the words of Sayyid Qutb In the case where there is freedom of conscience, there is no reason for any man to be oppressed by anxiety about his livelihood, for his provision is in the hand of Allah and in His hand alone; and not one of His created servants has the power to cut off any mans provision or to withhold from him any part of that provision. This belief certainly does not rule out causality and transactions, but it does strengthen the human heart and empower the human conscience; it sets the poor man who is anxious over his livelihood on a level with the man who thinks that his provision is in his own hand, to be won with all his own strength and resource. It frees him from the chains of his fears and allows him not to be misused.31

30 31

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscience Qutb, Sayyid. Social Justice in Islam. Islamic Publications International, 2000.

Page 20 of 21

Social Justice 2011

4. Conclusion To conclude I would like to present to you Prophet Muhammads charter to the Christians of Najran. In it we can learn from history how in reality Man lived in coexistence and practiced their faiths without any hindrance and with responsible freedom. The Charter of Najran To the Christians of Najran and the neighboring territories, the security of God and the pledge of his Prophet are extended for their lives, their religion and their property-to the present as well as the absent and others besides; there shall be no interference with (the practice of) their faith or their observances; nor any change in their rights or privileges; no bishop shall be removed from his bishopric; nor any monk form his monastery; nor any priest from his priesthood, and they shall continue to enjoy everything great and small as heretofore; no image or cross shall be destroyed; they shall not oppress or be oppressed; they shall not practice the right of blood vengeance as in the Days of Ignorance; no tithes shall be levied from them nor shall they be required to furnish provisions for the troops.32 It is for us now to desire a deep rooted change beginning with ourselves and our own personal ideals which will translate our societies upholding Social Justice across civilizations not by force but by choice. If we were to attain the peaceful coexistence like the one we saw above in the charter by the Prophet, we need to have a leader like the Prophet Muhammad, a society like that of Madinah and belief in upholding Social Justice like that of the early Muslims. Let us strive as humans to achieve just that

32

Source: Ahmed Zaki Safwat, Jamhara Khutab al-Arab fi Usur al-Arabiyya al-zahira, 3 vols. (Beirut: n.d.) 1:180.

Page 21 of 21