Reply to https://icanhazkhilafah.wordpress.com/2015/02/01/i-can-haz-khilafah-no-not-even-in-your-dreams/
Firstly, I am not associated with Harry’s Place. I don’t blog for them and I rarely read their posts so most of the accusations that appear to be directed towards me including the ad hominems are entirely misplaced with absolutely no merit, and are more reflective on LenCat’s state of mind than any semblance of reality. My opinions represent no one other than myself, and I love all my brothers and sisters, even the ones who I consider misguided.
Secondly, there is no coherence in the idea of a democracy punishing people simply for thinking unethical thoughts, or for talking about those thoughts to others. This is a straw-man. However, in a democracy, when such views are expressed in public that does not mean a ‘free pass’ as civic engagement is the most basic principle of a democracy.
LenCat supports the idea of a Khalifah. She openly states that “I support a Khilafah in Muslim lands” but at the same time, she also claims her idea of a Khalifah is “not relevant to UK, except as a thought crime.” This is false. She’s welcome to hold whatever views she wishes to hold but when such views are actively disseminated by her and other dedicated individuals feeding into young impressionable Muslims in the UK and beyond, they are not only relevant but they are also pernicious.
This is because hundreds of individuals who also “dream of restoring the Khalifah” went onto join ISIS- a nascent self-declared Khalifah trying to establish itself in Muslim lands. Yes, there are many paths to radicalisation, not one as some would have us believe, but it doesn’t take a genius to work out that if such views had been robustly challenged then perhaps hundreds of British Muslim mothers would still be with their sons and daughters today instead of the wretched lives they now have to live with. Eitherway, for an individual to argue this is not relevant to the UK, and to try and obfuscate issues by claiming “thought-crime” victimhood, is deeply disingenuous.
Thirdly, she claims she’s being asked to defend an assertion she has not made. This is again false. She favours the ‘Khalifah’ so this falls under the most basic rule of theological argumentation: “hatu burhanakum in kuntum sadiqeen” – produce your proof, if you should be truthful (Q27.64). This is why I have asked several times what the Quran says on governance. The fact I have not received an answer to a simple question despite a whole blog full of intellectual somersaults, shows who is not being truthful.
Finally, ‘Khalifah’. In Classical Islamic theology, ‘Khalifah’ never implied the imposition of a Caliphate or a structure of political authority, and the Quran itself says nothing on governance beyond vague and subjective references. Imam Malik REFUSED to make his theological school the “official” school of the Caliphate. This carries the implication that the state should NOT claim divine authority but rather there should be a separation of powers held to account by universal standards which are common to the Islamic tradition.
What LenCat and her ilk are peddling is not religion qua religion i.e. Islam. It is a post-Muhammad (pbuh) man-made political construct based on a resurrection of an Imperial Islam where the tyranny of the fallible is made EVEN MORE acute, as disillusioned Jihadis returning back to the UK have discovered for themselves.
To oppose this is not ‘Islamophobic’. In fact, it’s the very opposite as Maajid Nawaz also discovered much to his horror when British Muslims, yes BRITISH MUSLIMS including their imam literally chased him and his Caliphate out of town in his Hizb ut Tahrir days-something he doesn’t like to mention in the divisive-narrative he peddles.
MrTickle: 