Dear Alochok Ezajur ,
Greetings. before I go into your current discussion let me ask you a question in refer to your posting on August 31st of 2007 (#8329 of 8436) with Alochona forum.
Brother, I do not remember I ever posed as a neutral person, so what you discovered from my posting is not clear to me till today! Since I started writing in the net, I openly said I am a member of Bangladesh Awami League. You can search the net with my name and you will find in plentiful posting where I claimed my self as Awami worker, and I am proud of that.
I am not sure whether you will agree or not but I found it is interesting that predominance of Awami supporter are not covert but overt. On the other hand majority of Jamaat, BNP and present army back government are ashamed of their identity therefore do not want to disclose their political distinctiveness! May I hope you will come forward and let the netters know your political affiliation or you may choose to act same as those characters I mentioned above?
Anyway, let me come to your recent posting and present my two cents. I do agree with a hefty area of your thoughts. Yes indeed, it is shameless unquestionable defeat of morality of mainstream politics that triggered the rise of politics of religion based on falls perception not only in Bangladesh but in almost all countries of the world especially in Muslim majority country.
However, that dose not proves by any means that the standing of religion-based politics is right. It remains as one of the most inhuman unworthy system to try that failed miserably many moons ago. With all its shortcoming democracy remains most compassionate and trustworthy political system yet until we find something new and obviously better.
Politics based on theology and theocratic state is nothing new but a very old phenomenon, perhaps the oldest among all other school of politics. World has witnessed the rise and fall of theological political estate from east to west and north to south of our dear globe. Especially theocratic states based on Christianity and Islam become chunk of our medieval history.
Whether it is Christian or Islamic state, all of theology based statehood collapsed not by outsiders but insiders. Who saw it as blockade for human development and against the very essence of why God created his kingdom with different skin colors, difference of opinion, creed, linguistic barrier, physical differences and so many other significant dissimilarity to test how we coincide and coexist with each other and still do justice?
Theological state remains viable as long there was good leaders who evidently created state based on theology but ruled with justice of universality. But as time passed by morality of those leaders collapsed and it not only left a chilling effect on the society but also bankrupt the very base of religion it self. The very mathematics of ruling statehood changed. Theology for mankind replaced by rule of aristocracy of royals in the name of thology. Thus, the end of the morally of bankrupt theological state collapsed and usher the rise of state with collective leadership now what we call democracy.
If you look at the history of our Islamic statehood that started in the hand of the most noblemen, Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in Medina collapsed completely not long after his departure. However, there are many arguments whether we should call the statehood of Medina or it was a mere community hood in agreement.
In absence of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) Islamic state or community in agreement failed as able leaders of caliphate died or killed by insiders. After the disappearance of Caliphate a Rashidun.
Hazrat Abū Bakr (RA) nominated Hazrat Umar (RA) as his successor on his deathbed, and there was consensus in the Muslim community to his choice. His successor, Hazrat Uthman, was elected by a council of electors (Majlis), but was soon perceived by some to be ruling as a "king" rather than an elected leader. Hazrat Uthman was killed by members of a disaffected group. Hazrat Alī then took control, and although very popular, he was not universally accepted as caliph by the governors of Egypt, and later by some of his own guard. He had two major rebellions and was assassinated after a tumultuous rule of only five years. This period is known as the Fitna, or the first Islamic civil war.
Mu�wiyya, a relative of Uthman, and governor (Wali) of Syria became one of Hazrat Alī's (RA) challengers. After Hazrat Alī's (RA) death, Mu�wiyya managed to overcome other claimants to the Caliphate. Under Mu�wiyya, the caliphate became a hereditary office for the first time. He founded the Umayyad dynasty. We know the sad story of Karbala where Prophet Muhammad’s grandsons were killed in the hands of Umayyad who eventually formed the Umayyad dynasty.
From the time of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) the Umayyad, Abbasid, and finally Ottoman (sultans of Turkey) dynasties held successive caliphates. Caliphate ended when Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, as part of his reforms, constitutionally abolished the institution of the Caliphate in 1924.
Scattered attempts to revive the Caliphate elsewhere in the Muslim World were made in the years immediately following its abandonment by Turkey, but none were successful.
Hussein bin Ali, a former Ottoman governor of the Hejaz who aided the British during World War I and revolted against Istanbul, declared himself Caliph two days after Turkey relinquished the title. But his claim was largely ignored, and he was soon ousted and driven out of Arabia by the Saudis, a rival clan that had no interest in the Caliphate.
The last Ottoman Sultan Mehmed VI made a similar attempt to re-establish himself as Caliph in the Hejaz after leaving Turkey, but he was also unsuccessful. A summit was convened at Cairo in 1926 to discuss the revival of the Caliphate, but most Muslim countries did not participate and no action was taken to implement the summit's resolutions.
However, the King of Morocco adopted the title Ameer al-Mumineen and Mullah Mohammed Omar, former head of the now-defunct Taliban regime of Afghanistan, claimed neither any legal standing nor authority over Muslims outside the borders of their respective countries.
Brother Ezajur, the only reason why I explained (Lot of these are not mine but from facts copied from history) is only to explain one and one reason.
Degradation of morality not only happened in democratic politics today but also long before that we witnessed the similar or perhaps more cynical and dangerously sleeping down in politics based in religion.
Now let me come to my point, with above said it is clear that there is no consensus among Muslim since the end of Caliphate of Rashidun to reestablish the statehood in its true essence. What we see in the name of Islamic statehood is nothing but mockery of Islam and rather rule of dynasty instead of rule of collectiveness. A mad man like Mullah Mohammad Omar of Afghanistan can claimed to establish some sort of Caliphate. On the other hand, there is country like Bangladesh who created a façade of Islamic Republic, which is based on nothing but so-called utopian Islamic state. It character is such that drunk womanizer a dishonest man like Gen. Ershad has to give the legitimacy by his military sermon to declare Bangladesh a Islamic Republic.
Jamaat-E-Islami and most of Islamic political entity in Bangladesh (elsewhere too) wants to establish the state based on Islamic theology such as Caliphate is nothing but another travesty and a slap over our religion. Jamaat or no other Islamic leader in Bangladesh or else where has the moral authority to form such government.
Just think who are the people who lead this so-called Islamic party in Bangladesh, Golam Azam, Matiur Rahman Nizami self-proclaimed war criminals, master minder of thousands of Bengali during our liberation war are in the forefront of Jamaat-E-Islami of Bangladesh. Mr. Ezaj, please think and then tell me what morality you see on these traders of religion, murderers and thugs
It is sad that people with conscious mind are not uniting to start a movement not just to wipeout these religious traders for the sake of Bangladesh but for the sake of Islam as well. Just few days ago so called Islamic party in Bangladesh name Hizbut Tahrir which even does not believe in Bangladesh constitution (read their own statement from their website and speeches) carried out a rally under police protection violating emergency rule. In different time, government allowed these organizations to grow or at least sustain to carry their agenda.
Jamaat-E-Islami is the most undemocratic political organization in Bangladesh, it is not just my saying but there constitution reveals that. I will urge readers of this forum to collect Jamaat-E-Islam’s constitution to read and verify my claim.
I have intention to write about deception of Jamaat-E-Islam’s constitution from its cover page to its entirety in near future along with need of reform of all other political party including my own ideological platform Bangladesh Awami League.
For the betterment of Bangladesh and Islam, we ought to stand against Jamaat-E-Islami and all other traders of religion and must not be recognized them as a political or religious entity but a clandestine organization to create Fitna among Muslim just as the first Fitna or Islamic Civil War created during Caliphate of Hazrat Ali (RA).
Sincerely
Shamim Chowdhury
==========================================================
Dear Alochoks
I would just like to make the following comments â€"
It may be argued that governments should not be the custodians of morality. This is the case in the West. On the other hand, governments have many moral obligations and are required to pass, and enforce, laws that should not be immoral. Morality may ultimately be a personal matter, or a matter for organised religion. But morality is certainly, at whatever level, within the remit of governance.
It is the failure of morality in centre politics that drives people away towards extreme politics.
In Bangladesh there has been a total breakdown in morality in centre politics. There is no mention of morals, no expectation of morals and no claim of moral responsibility. This has pushed many people into the arms of radical Islam.
Until centre politics can prove that it is worthy of trust there is no chance at all of even negotiating with Islamic radicals.
All our brightest minds combined with all our liberal geniuses combined with all the logical minds in the world will not defeat radical Islam if they cannot prove that morality is at the heart of centre politics. In Bangladesh Khaleda and Hasina have destroyed morality in centre politics and thus radical Islam has grown stronger and stronger during their democratic governments.
It is hilarious to see that so many people across the board condemn Jamaati Islam as traitors and criminals â€" and Jamaati Islam just gets stronger day by day. In 1971 one would have been lynched for even suggesting that one day the men of Jamaati Islam could become ministers. And yet Mujib, Zia, Ershad, Khaleda and Hasina all compromised with Jamaat. Why?
It is because the political parties could never compete with Jamaat when it came to perceived morality. This is because morality was never an issue for political parties. Each of our leaders encouraged corruption â€" and therefore encouraged moral decay.
Even today some our most talented people, most educated people are attracted to Jamaati Islam.
If the cartoon is immoral then it sure isn’t going to be Awami League or BNP that are going to make a stand against it! Jamaat came out in force against the cartoons and there is nothing and nobody in Bangladesh that can do a thing about it. The courts may keep the cartoon in the paper â€" but they won’t stop Jamaat protesting emphatically!
As for the cartoon itself â€" I wasn’t offended. But I would be offended if the Danish cartoons were printed in Bangladesh! How does a cartoon depicting Prophet Mohammed as a dog sound? Liberal? Modern?
Looks like we’re half way to getting rid of Hasina and Khaleda. If and when that happens there can be true reform of centre politics in Bangladesh. If true reform happens then centre politics â€"where you and I belong â€" can take on the radicals.
Until then you just got to admire the confidence of Jamaat! The mad Mullahs sure don’t look worried!
Regards
Ezajur Rahman
Kuwait
Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy!