Islam, Capitalism and Free Trade

[shaheen]

For capitalism/socialism to flourish most western countries have had to adopt some form social welfare system, my question is within the islamic system what is the role of the state in providing welfare for the needy and are there any governable social justice principles inherent in the islamic system? or is it assumed that if someone is a good muslim they should be able to self regulate?

[Caydid]

Shaheen, Social welfare is one of the elements that have been borrowed from islam. The zakat (alms) is a sort of tax on assets that are meant to allocate resources to the poor. In an ideal islamic state, the capitalist (those who own resources) are mandated to give a percentage of his resources to the poor. The islamic state is conditioned upon an islamic society (honesty, trust and fear of Allah are the cornerstones. So, there would be no cheating. The state's role is to give the resources to the needy.

[DamallaXagare]

Caydiid


This is a good threed.

[shaheen]

Caydid,
can you give me an example of an islamic country which currently has a good social welfare system? when it comes to social policy analysis no muslim nations are ever used or considred to have a good model, is this just the biases of a western education system?

[shaheen]

Dhuusa,
the question of whether capitalism has failed or not depends on whether you live on the winners or losers side of the capitalist contest. because capitalism is essentially a ruthless competetion for control and ownership of limited resources.

[gurey25]

[quote="shaheen"]For capitalism/socialism to flourish most western countries have had to adopt some form social welfare system, my question is within the islamic system what is the role of the state in providing welfare for the needy and are there any governable social justice principles inherent in the islamic system? or is it assumed that if someone is a good muslim they should be able to self regulate?[/quote]

Good point Shaaheen.

What most people dont realise is that the Purpose behind zakat was not getting money from the rich to give to the poor.
Zakat was aimed at preventing hoarding of currency and other wealth by those who have it, and forcing them to continue investing thier wealth into the economy making thier money work and create jobs.
Money gained from zakat was a bonus that was used to meet the bare minimum of social security for the people.
The main benefit was the contiued injection and circulation of money that kept everyone employed and created growth.


This is opposed to the current system in which there is the opposite`compulsion to Hoard your money as it is more beneficial under the fractional rexerve interest based system.
A person with wealth does not have to risk his money all he has to do is keep it in a bank and let it gather interest.
This way the Rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

this is why a zakat rate on money of only 2.5 % worked wonders
and benefited the poor more than other taxes like income tax.

[Viking]

dhuusa-dheer,
As Caydiid suggested, you need to go back to basics because you don't seem to understand the whole thing about Capitalism. I would suggest you read "Globalisation and its Discontents" by Joseph Stiglitz. He is a Nobel Prize winner for economics in 2001. He worked for the WB and is one of the biggest critics of "globalisation" and the way capitalism has been shoved down the throats of poor nations and condemned them to massive poverty.

Another good read would be "The Age of Consent" By George Monbiott and "Rulers of the New World" by John Pilger. These three books would give you a very good insight in what capitalism, globalisation and IMF is all about. Good luck!

DamallaXagare,
I agree with what you said. The avdnet of Literalism on the Islamic thought coincides with the time intellectual rigour regressed among Muslims. Some blame Imam Ghazzali out-right for limiting Islamic thought after he rebuked the works of Ibn Sina, Al Farabi, Al-Razi etc. I don't think he is soleley responsible but think that his ways have been adopted by Muslims and this was the end of speculative philosophy which has had a negative effect on other sciences.

[Caydid]

Shaheen, I can't give you an example but there are some countries that have tried alternative systems (Iran being one of them). The problem is that progress in the muslim world is not reported. We are bombarded with bad things that happen in those countries.

[Mowhawk]

Caydiid

In my humble opinion, there are no examples of a Muslim welfare state simply because there is not a state that meets the minimal requirements of an Islamic economic system, it would be an aspect of an Islamic society within an Islamic state neither of which exist today. We have Muslim nation-states, but not an Islamic State.

[Caydid]

Mowhak, very true brother.

But how can an islamic state be achieved when the western world is bent on sabotaging every move to create one. Algeria, Iran, Sudan and now palestine.

There is nothing wrong with an islamic state. Many western nations have christian parties- but they still function in the realm of what is right.

[gurey25]

I believe its not the West that is only to blame.
Muslims have chosen to ignore the mechanics of creating a muslim state.
the nitty gritty details, like focusing on imposing huduud laws while completly ignoring the economy, and contiuing use of the Kafir model
while prclaiming themselves Islamic state.

[Steeler [Crawler2]]

Viking
Pilger's positions on all issues are completely tainted. Monbiot, who I know, is also not intellectally honest. Stick to the mainstream.

[avowedly-agnostic]

[quote]Pilger's positions on all issues are completely tainted. Monbiot, who I know, is also not intellectally honest. Stick to the mainstream.[/quote]

Hands off John Pilger! He's a most distinguished and decorated journalist who's won numerous awards for his objective and brilliant investigative journalism. He's got many years of experience as an excellent war correspondent from Vietnam, Bangladesh, Egypt, to East Timor and India. His work has even recieved praise from Noam Chomsky (for the retarded ones amonst us, Chomsky is an influential American scholar, and is widely acknowledged as being the leading intellectual in the present day)!

[Viking]

avowedly-agnostic,
Have you met Mad Mac? He is against anything leftist and is an adamant supporter of American hegemony. In other words, the two of you find each other on opposite sides of the scale.

Mad Mac,
Pilger's book is based on facts and the situation of people he has encountered. Is there anything he said in that book that you are against? Or is it the usual..."I've met him and didn't like him"?

Good to see you by the way, seems you are not the super-heavyweight around here anymore, I seen someone with over 20k posts.

[dhuusa_deer]

[quote="shaheen"]Dhuusa,
the question of whether capitalism has failed or not depends on whether you live on the winners or losers side of the capitalist contest. [quote]


And what system doesn't engender losers and winners? Communism? Islamism? Fascism?

There will always be winners and losers in every human enterprise but a system must be judged by its overall contribution to the embetterment of humanity. Capitalism has lifted more ppl out of extreme poverty than any other system. It has earned all the praise its getting from me and others. Unfortunately some are limited in their scope and restricted by dogmas as to give capitalism fair hearing and its earned praise. I'm only judging capitalism purely on utilitarian grounds... if you're fair minded and use that measuring yard stick, the only conclusion you can reach is capitalism is the best thing we have. Why fix what's not broken.



[quote]because capitalism is essentially a ruthless competetion for control and ownership of limited resources. [/quote]

You're right but left out that it IS HUMANS that are greedy and competitive. Its part of human nature and WE CAN'T AFFORD TO DENY WHAT'S PART OF OUR MAKEUP. Capitalism FULLY accepts this and tries to channel it down suitable venues instead of deny that ppl are greedy. Unlike communism.