temujin
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2010
- Messages
- 447
- Reaction score
- 0
I came across this video of Imran Khan in another thread on ‘Islamic Welfare State’ , a phrase that has recently entered the Pakistani political lexicon thanks largely to the efforts of the ex cricketer. From what I gather, much of IK’s electoral campaign hinges on the promise to establish such a system in Pakistan, along the lines of what ostensibly existed under Caliph Umar I.
YouTube
Towards the end of the video, IK makes the bold claim that the Western welfare model was essentially plagiarised from Islam and that the Swedes refer to their welfare system as ‘Umar’s law’ in recognition of the Caliph’s contribution to its creation.
Intrigued by the comments, I turned to good old Google to educate myself on this most remarkable achievement of early Islam that was all but lost to humanity but for the intervention of the Swedes and, latterly, IK himself.
To my astonishment, there appear to be very few references to ‘Umar’s law’ on the interweb which predate IK’s claims- in fact, there is one, essentially a rant by some half wit Arab on a Middle Eastern forum which, beyond inviting scorn and ridicule from his more sensible compatriots, does little to prove the existence of ‘Umar’s law’.
www.qatarliving.com/ node/ 506712 [...4;™: Swedish historian tells Imran Khan
More than the article itself, the accompanying reader’s comments reveal more about the motives and mindset that underlies PTI’s views on this matter. They suggest that this was not an isolated incident and many other PTI functionaries have repeatedly referred to 'Umar’s law' in public forums.
When an incensed reader contacted PTI’s top leadership to confront them about Imran’s comments, he received the following response from Arif Alvi, Secretary General, PTI-
Dr Arif Alvi's response to this article on the Socialist Pakistan News :
[two paragraphs excised]
...I think Khan meant it as an example of principles learned by modern societies through a chain of human intellect. I am not a scholar and I can understand when one 'socialist' states that he never heard of Umar's law. I will ask Mr Khan the context and origin of his claim.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Arif Alvi
Secretary General
Now I do not know how others would interpret this response but I would regard it as obfuscation and intellectual dishonesty. In the video, IK is heard making a specific claim about 'Omar's law' and is clearly not referring to a 'chain of human intellect' or whatever. Also note how Dr Alvi attacks Dr Blomqvist for being a 'socialist' whilst simultaneously laying claim to the welfare system, which is largely rooted in socialist and humanist values- ah, the irony...
There are several other articles examining Imran’s claims and videos of him repeating the myth about Umar’s law in Scandinavia.
Imran Khan Press Conference at the joining of Mufti Abdul Qavi (June 27, 2012) - YouTube
7 mins in
However, most of these articles are from blogs or forum discussions and mainstream Pakistani media appears to have ignored this issue altogether.
Story behind Imran Khan’s “Omar’s Law” – by Maisam Ali
Is Omar's law really unkown in Sweden? « PKPolitics Discuss
Still keen on giving IK the benefit of the doubt, I decided to cast the net wider and research the concept of the ‘Islamic Welfare State’ that we hear IK talking about so often with such passion. Once again, there are only two references to IWS in the whole of the Anglophone interweb, with one directly dealing with it turning out to be the handiwork of a certain Pakistani ‘Islamic Socialist’ who, through examination of Umar’s occasional acts of generosity in isolation from his authoritarian traits and appalling record on treatment of minorities, seeks to disingenuously argue that his reign somehow constituted a ‘welfare state’.
Given there is so little empirical evidence or scholarly opinion to support the existence of an ‘Islamic Welfare state’ in early Islam, there could be two possible explanations for IK’s bizarre comment about ‘Umar’s law’
1) It was a gaffe- IK was told this fable by some bearded clergy or read it in a madrassa leaflet and chose to parrot it in public without seeing the need to verify it. An innocent mistake but one that is nevertheless emblematic of the sort of self serving group think that pervades Muslim societies.
2) Given that IK is not your average semi literate politician and would be taking advise on things that form the basis of his electoral campaign, a more cynical mind might conclude that this is an attempt by IK and his party to concoct the myth of an ‘Islamic Welfare State’ in a bid to appeal to both liberal and reactionary segments of the Pakistani electorate, to confer a degree of divine legitimacy to his policies, to deliberately create a sense of continuity between the perceived glory of early Islam and IK’s promise of restoring it as well as cast IK himself in the image of the ‘benevolent strongman’- ‘the new age Caliph’
Now that democracy has been claimed for Islam- once again the Caliphs feature heavily in this argument, despite the fact that Muslims continue to fight and kill each other over a disputed Caliphate succession almost 1400 year ago- it would appea that IK and his ilk want to restore the welfare state to its rightful place among the long list of purported achievements of Early Islam. but this claim is particularly insidious since even a cursory reading of accounts from Umar’s 10 year reign as Caliph by neutral sources reveal that despite leading a frugal life and being described as just and fair, Umar would only appear to compares favourably to some of his contemporaries due to the latter’s extreme cruelty and indulgence rather than his own merit.
Since Islam was in its initial phase of consolidation at the time, many of Umar’s celebrated acts of generosity as caliph were in response to adverse events such as famine or war in his dominion. He did discourage disproportionate accrual of wealth but his views in this respect were shaped not just by faith but politically motivated in equal measure. Beyond his occasional kindness, Umar is known to have been authoritarian and also holds the dubious distinction of introducing systematic persecution on minorities in Islam, which endures to this day, through the ‘Covenant of Umar’.
In other words, there is no evidence to suggest that Umar was a socially enlightened individual who deliberately set out to establish a ‘Welfare state’ since many of actions which give this impression were influenced by his early experiences of persecution as well as the prevailing socio-economic context and, in any case, his reign was followed in short order by the Ummayyads who, as Muslims themselves will agree, were not renowned for their kindness or tolerance to their subjects.
I also find it baffling that IK has seen fit to follow the example of Umar, with his appalling record of persecuting minorities, when one of the stated aims of IK's campaign is to ensure fairness and equality for all minorities in Pakistan within 90 days or some such.
I suppose all this raises questions on the credibility of IK’s campaign and his ability to govern the country competently if elected. Knocking out a populist agenda would be the easiest part of fighting an election in a crisis ridden country like Pakistan (or India, for that matter). I am sure a quick read of the morning papers would allow anyone in the subcontinent to identify 10 things that they would like to immediately change about their country. I am sure IK realises this and is equally aware that being a party of protest would only get PTI so far. Given the fractured nature of the electorate and the tension between conservative and liberal elements in the country, IK realises that his campaign needs more broad based appeal and he may be concerned his inexperience, as well as the scale of the challenge that would confront him if elected, could potentially create a credibility gap in people’s minds about his party’s ability to deliver on its populist manifesto within the specified time frame.
By inventing the notion of an Islamic welfare state IK has, in a political masterstroke, couched his manifesto, which is highly ambitious but short on detail, in religious terms therefore placing it beyond criticism from opponents- since doing so would entail challenging the very foundations of Islam- as well as pander to both the clergy and liberals within Pakistani society.
For reasons that are beyond the scope of this thread, Islamic nations have historically enjoyed more than their fair share of autocratic regimes based on personality cults (Iraq, Iran, Syria, Jordan, Libya, Egypt etc etc) where the consequent lack of proper institutions leads to ‘infantilised societies’ with the associated tendency to place unquestioning faith in ‘leaders’ to solve country’s problems. Assuming that comments on this forum represent popular sentiment among the educated classes in Pakistan, I suspect we are seeing the emergence of an IK personality cult which, if left, unchallenged could have unpleasant consequences for Pakistan.
Having skim read his manifesto, I have to stress that IK stated objectives appear to be honourable but he has to come clean over this ‘Islamic Welfare System’ lark since basing his whole campaign, however well intentioned it might be, on a pack of lies does not reflect well on IK’s integrity and judgement and would render IK guilty of exactly the same things he accuses his opponents of.
YouTube
Towards the end of the video, IK makes the bold claim that the Western welfare model was essentially plagiarised from Islam and that the Swedes refer to their welfare system as ‘Umar’s law’ in recognition of the Caliph’s contribution to its creation.
Intrigued by the comments, I turned to good old Google to educate myself on this most remarkable achievement of early Islam that was all but lost to humanity but for the intervention of the Swedes and, latterly, IK himself.
To my astonishment, there appear to be very few references to ‘Umar’s law’ on the interweb which predate IK’s claims- in fact, there is one, essentially a rant by some half wit Arab on a Middle Eastern forum which, beyond inviting scorn and ridicule from his more sensible compatriots, does little to prove the existence of ‘Umar’s law’.
www.qatarliving.com/ node/ 506712 [...4;™: Swedish historian tells Imran Khan
More than the article itself, the accompanying reader’s comments reveal more about the motives and mindset that underlies PTI’s views on this matter. They suggest that this was not an isolated incident and many other PTI functionaries have repeatedly referred to 'Umar’s law' in public forums.
When an incensed reader contacted PTI’s top leadership to confront them about Imran’s comments, he received the following response from Arif Alvi, Secretary General, PTI-
Dr Arif Alvi's response to this article on the Socialist Pakistan News :
[two paragraphs excised]
...I think Khan meant it as an example of principles learned by modern societies through a chain of human intellect. I am not a scholar and I can understand when one 'socialist' states that he never heard of Umar's law. I will ask Mr Khan the context and origin of his claim.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Arif Alvi
Secretary General
Now I do not know how others would interpret this response but I would regard it as obfuscation and intellectual dishonesty. In the video, IK is heard making a specific claim about 'Omar's law' and is clearly not referring to a 'chain of human intellect' or whatever. Also note how Dr Alvi attacks Dr Blomqvist for being a 'socialist' whilst simultaneously laying claim to the welfare system, which is largely rooted in socialist and humanist values- ah, the irony...
There are several other articles examining Imran’s claims and videos of him repeating the myth about Umar’s law in Scandinavia.
Imran Khan Press Conference at the joining of Mufti Abdul Qavi (June 27, 2012) - YouTube
7 mins in
However, most of these articles are from blogs or forum discussions and mainstream Pakistani media appears to have ignored this issue altogether.
Story behind Imran Khan’s “Omar’s Law” – by Maisam Ali
Is Omar's law really unkown in Sweden? « PKPolitics Discuss
Still keen on giving IK the benefit of the doubt, I decided to cast the net wider and research the concept of the ‘Islamic Welfare State’ that we hear IK talking about so often with such passion. Once again, there are only two references to IWS in the whole of the Anglophone interweb, with one directly dealing with it turning out to be the handiwork of a certain Pakistani ‘Islamic Socialist’ who, through examination of Umar’s occasional acts of generosity in isolation from his authoritarian traits and appalling record on treatment of minorities, seeks to disingenuously argue that his reign somehow constituted a ‘welfare state’.
Given there is so little empirical evidence or scholarly opinion to support the existence of an ‘Islamic Welfare state’ in early Islam, there could be two possible explanations for IK’s bizarre comment about ‘Umar’s law’
1) It was a gaffe- IK was told this fable by some bearded clergy or read it in a madrassa leaflet and chose to parrot it in public without seeing the need to verify it. An innocent mistake but one that is nevertheless emblematic of the sort of self serving group think that pervades Muslim societies.
2) Given that IK is not your average semi literate politician and would be taking advise on things that form the basis of his electoral campaign, a more cynical mind might conclude that this is an attempt by IK and his party to concoct the myth of an ‘Islamic Welfare State’ in a bid to appeal to both liberal and reactionary segments of the Pakistani electorate, to confer a degree of divine legitimacy to his policies, to deliberately create a sense of continuity between the perceived glory of early Islam and IK’s promise of restoring it as well as cast IK himself in the image of the ‘benevolent strongman’- ‘the new age Caliph’
Now that democracy has been claimed for Islam- once again the Caliphs feature heavily in this argument, despite the fact that Muslims continue to fight and kill each other over a disputed Caliphate succession almost 1400 year ago- it would appea that IK and his ilk want to restore the welfare state to its rightful place among the long list of purported achievements of Early Islam. but this claim is particularly insidious since even a cursory reading of accounts from Umar’s 10 year reign as Caliph by neutral sources reveal that despite leading a frugal life and being described as just and fair, Umar would only appear to compares favourably to some of his contemporaries due to the latter’s extreme cruelty and indulgence rather than his own merit.
Since Islam was in its initial phase of consolidation at the time, many of Umar’s celebrated acts of generosity as caliph were in response to adverse events such as famine or war in his dominion. He did discourage disproportionate accrual of wealth but his views in this respect were shaped not just by faith but politically motivated in equal measure. Beyond his occasional kindness, Umar is known to have been authoritarian and also holds the dubious distinction of introducing systematic persecution on minorities in Islam, which endures to this day, through the ‘Covenant of Umar’.
In other words, there is no evidence to suggest that Umar was a socially enlightened individual who deliberately set out to establish a ‘Welfare state’ since many of actions which give this impression were influenced by his early experiences of persecution as well as the prevailing socio-economic context and, in any case, his reign was followed in short order by the Ummayyads who, as Muslims themselves will agree, were not renowned for their kindness or tolerance to their subjects.
I also find it baffling that IK has seen fit to follow the example of Umar, with his appalling record of persecuting minorities, when one of the stated aims of IK's campaign is to ensure fairness and equality for all minorities in Pakistan within 90 days or some such.
I suppose all this raises questions on the credibility of IK’s campaign and his ability to govern the country competently if elected. Knocking out a populist agenda would be the easiest part of fighting an election in a crisis ridden country like Pakistan (or India, for that matter). I am sure a quick read of the morning papers would allow anyone in the subcontinent to identify 10 things that they would like to immediately change about their country. I am sure IK realises this and is equally aware that being a party of protest would only get PTI so far. Given the fractured nature of the electorate and the tension between conservative and liberal elements in the country, IK realises that his campaign needs more broad based appeal and he may be concerned his inexperience, as well as the scale of the challenge that would confront him if elected, could potentially create a credibility gap in people’s minds about his party’s ability to deliver on its populist manifesto within the specified time frame.
By inventing the notion of an Islamic welfare state IK has, in a political masterstroke, couched his manifesto, which is highly ambitious but short on detail, in religious terms therefore placing it beyond criticism from opponents- since doing so would entail challenging the very foundations of Islam- as well as pander to both the clergy and liberals within Pakistani society.
For reasons that are beyond the scope of this thread, Islamic nations have historically enjoyed more than their fair share of autocratic regimes based on personality cults (Iraq, Iran, Syria, Jordan, Libya, Egypt etc etc) where the consequent lack of proper institutions leads to ‘infantilised societies’ with the associated tendency to place unquestioning faith in ‘leaders’ to solve country’s problems. Assuming that comments on this forum represent popular sentiment among the educated classes in Pakistan, I suspect we are seeing the emergence of an IK personality cult which, if left, unchallenged could have unpleasant consequences for Pakistan.
Having skim read his manifesto, I have to stress that IK stated objectives appear to be honourable but he has to come clean over this ‘Islamic Welfare System’ lark since basing his whole campaign, however well intentioned it might be, on a pack of lies does not reflect well on IK’s integrity and judgement and would render IK guilty of exactly the same things he accuses his opponents of.
