Turkey: Coup attempt makes Presidential System under Islamic Values Inevitable

[modern.fakir]

And who creates the constitution ?..Its people working for democracy. Democracy is governance by the people for the people. So now if people in a state by and large agree on an idea, be it whatever because what maybe bad to you maybe good for them. Just like at the individual level sometimes whats good for one may not be good for the other, the same principle applies to nation states as well.

So in this case if the people of Turkey are supporting a leader who wants a democratic system based on Islamic values then its their very right to do so. What you think or what i think does not matter in that case.

Secular extremists need to understand this that their point of view is not flawless, and that in the case of India you have just ratified what I said is that despite the constitution being secular and granting secular rights to people the laws are actually based on faith of the majority. So why this hypocrisy then ?

Why the hypocrisy in france ?..why the banning of the minaret in switzerland ??? Why is the Queen of England also the head of the Church of England and head of State of England, Canada, several caribbean islands etc ??

What erdogan is doing is not hypocritical. He is ATLEAST open about his intention.

The modern world is not only today but what will come in the future as well. If in the past their can be a Golden Islamic age then NO one can say for certain whats going to happen in the future as no one knows for sure BUT what one can do is to believe in what will work for them. Maybe is secularism for some, maybe it will be Islamism for the others.

But this debate is about the democratic right of the people and erdogan a democratically elected leader backed by the people of his country. What is appaling is why are the stallwarts of secular democracy exposing double standards against the WILL OF THE PEOPLE of TURKEY ??...WHY ??

Why are they intially seen supporting coups which are clearly UNdemocratic not to mention unconstitutional ONLY to threaten Turkey with consequences like eliminating their Nato membership why ??...Whats so constitutional about an illegal coup that they ALL forgot about values that they profess day in and day out ??

Lets have one sets of standards because as it is this secular democracy is fast losing its relevance because of its selective approach.

One point at a time.
Democracy: In democracy people are not supreme. Constitution is supreme. The role of constitution is to protect people from what is popular and dangerous. If majority want a bad idea like involving religion in state matters which never works out in any country. Then the constitution protects people from this. If majority wants to hang an innocent person then the constitution will protect him from this.

India: By quoting India you are actually supporting my point of view. Indian laws are not based on secularism, their laws are based on their religious faith. This is why I said it is stupidity to base laws on personal belief systems. Because personal belief systems are not based on evidence or facts, you can never prove them right or wrong you cannot base laws on them. This is the same Sh1t hole that Erdogan wants to drag Turkey into.

Dont lose your common sense because of your religious fanaticism. You are a child and do not understand how the world works. There is no modern developed state in the world that is functioning with religion. You can quote outliers like Malaysia and oil rich countries but the correlation between religiosity and prosperity seals the deal. Nations like France matured out of religion over time to become advanced powerful countries over hundreds of years. Just like children grow up and mature and stop believing in Gini's and Santa Claus.

 

[Vitamin_C]

Constitution: was made by the founding fathers ie Ataturk. Erdogan needs a super majority to amend constitution and he is far from it.
India: You can ask the Indians why they do not follow their constitution. Its not my area of concern whether or not they follow their constitution. My point is that making laws based on personal belief systems is very primitive and cannot work.
Royal Family of England: You are right on this one, but The Royal family is a historic legacy, its not a recent development but coming from hundreds of years ago when people were religious and the country had not matured. There is a new debate now that the monarchy may be abolished after death of Elizabeth, but people not discussing it for now out of respect for Queen Elizabeth. (google it). Since Secularism and modern democracy God has become irrelevant in matters of state therefore the British Royal family has no more authority to rule.
Others are doing wrong things therefore our wrong things are excused: I am not aware on what reasoning basis minarets are banned. I will do some research on it later. But suppose they do not have a good reason for it and they did a wrong thing. This does not excuse your wrong things its a logical fallacy, you cannot use the wrong doings of others to excuse yours.
Because Islamic Golden age happen before it will happen again: This is a fantasy of many Muslims, including a younger and less aware version of me. There are few things wrong with this:
1) Just because something happened before does not guarantee it will happen again. The world has changed since then in many different ways.
2) Islam may not be a the reason of prosperity during the golden age. It may just be the case that the golden age happened in a specific area over a specific time which had Islam as a religion. Saying that Islam was the reason for golden age is like Saying Mustache is a reason for mass murder because both Stalin and Hitler had one. The condition (Islam or having a mustache) may have nothing to do with the outcome (Prosperity or mass murder). Europe was in its dark ages and comparatively the East looked like it was very advanced, as well as the Islamic society in that time was very liberal and tolerant towards different religion and atheist/rationalist scientists were given freedom and protection to study science and share their ideas. This changed when the Islamic societies got more and more radicalized especially after Imam Ghazali. It is a very interesting topic and whole course on it in my university in Canada.

An Ottoman philosopher figured it out hundreds of years before Ataturk: Ibrahim Mutaferikka an Ottoman Clerik, had a question. Why the Christian nations that were so weak before, have become so strong and conquered so much land, and even defeat the once invincible Ottoman armies?
He answered his own question and said because they have laws based on Reason.

The Ottomans were reluctant to even adopt new technologies such as the printing press which had huge impact of spread of knowledge in the West because of their backward religious scholars protests against it.
The ottomans destroyed Taqiuddin's observatory around 1500AD because the Islamic scholars believed that it is a sin to look into gods eyes.
Do you know what Ataturk did first when he founded the modern Turkish State? He build an observatory on the same spot where Taqqiuddin first made his observatory with the ambition of progressing the Muslim world in science that was ordered to be burnt down by Ottomans.

Can there be another Islamic Golden Age?: Ofcourse. Look at South Korea, a country that 20 years ago was one of the poorest in the world. Today it has population less than that of Sindh and a gdp bigger than a country like India. The secrets of success of nations is not a secret, its already know what to do to make a prosperous country and the model can be copied and applied anywhere. There are certain rules. But problem is certain countries do not want to mature or change or let go of obsolete systems. Among other things at the least bit the countries laws must be based on logic and reason rather than holy books. People must have a freedom of speech and freedom of religion so they can share various ideas and advance scientifically. The Mutazilas from the last Islamic golden age call themselves Muslims but they did not believe in Quran being the word of God, they believed the word of God is in the nature around them which they can study and advance science. If such people existed today they would be lynched by mobs.

Following is map of countries according to how important religion is in their society and their prosperity. The statistics are pretty decisive.

And who creates the constitution ?..Its people working for democracy. Democracy is governance by the people for the people. So now if people in a state by and large agree on an idea, be it whatever because what maybe bad to you maybe good for them. Just like at the individual level sometimes whats good for one may not be good for the other, the same principle applies to nation states as well.

So in this case if the people of Turkey are supporting a leader who wants a democratic system based on Islamic values then its their very right to do so. What you think or what i think does not matter in that case.

Secular extremists need to understand this that their point of view is not flawless, and that in the case of India you have just ratified what I said is that despite the constitution being secular and granting secular rights to people the laws are actually based on faith of the majority. So why this hypocrisy then ?

Why the hypocrisy in france ?..why the banning of the minaret in switzerland ??? Why is the Queen of England also the head of the Church of England and head of State of England, Canada, several caribbean islands etc ??

What erdogan is doing is not hypocritical. He is ATLEAST open about his intention.

The modern world is not only today but what will come in the future as well. If in the past their can be a Golden Islamic age then NO one can say for certain whats going to happen in the future as no one knows for sure BUT what one can do is to believe in what will work for them. Maybe is secularism for some, maybe it will be Islamism for the others.

But this debate is about the democratic right of the people and erdogan a democratically elected leader backed by the people of his country. What is appaling is why are the stallwarts of secular democracy exposing double standards against the WILL OF THE PEOPLE of TURKEY ??...WHY ??

Why are they intially seen supporting coups which are clearly UNdemocratic not to mention unconstitutional ONLY to threaten Turkey with consequences like eliminating their Nato membership why ??...Whats so constitutional about an illegal coup that they ALL forgot about values that they profess day in and day out ??

Lets have one sets of standards because as it is this secular democracy is fast losing its relevance because of its selective approach.