RSSVšechny záznamy označené: "Turecko"

ISLÁM, DEMOKRACIE & SPOJENÉ STÁTY AMERICKÉ:

Cordoba Foundation

Abdullah Faliq

Intro ,


Navzdory tomu, že je to jak trvalá, tak složitá debata, Arches čtvrtletní reexamines od teologického a praktického základu, důležitá debata o vztahu a kompatibilitě mezi islámem a demokracií, jak se odráží v programu naděje a změny Baracka Obamy. Zatímco mnozí oslavují Obamův nástup do Oválné pracovny jako národní katarzi pro USA, jiní zůstávají méně optimističtí, pokud jde o posun v ideologii a přístupu na mezinárodní scéně. Zatímco velkou část napětí a nedůvěry mezi muslimským světem a USA lze přičíst přístupu prosazování demokracie, typicky upřednostňují diktatury a loutkové režimy, které naříkají na demokratické hodnoty a lidská práva, následný otřes 9/11 skutečně upevnil obavy prostřednictvím amerického postoje k politickému islámu. Vytvořila zeď negativity, jak ji objevil worldpublicopinion.org, podle kterého 67% Egypťanů věří, že globálně Amerika hraje „hlavně negativní“ roli.
Reakce Ameriky byla tedy výstižná. Volbou Obamy, mnoho lidí po celém světě vkládá své naděje do rozvoje méně agresivních, ale spravedlivější zahraniční politiku vůči muslimskému světu. Test pro Obamu, jak diskutujeme, je to, jak Amerika a její spojenci prosazují demokracii. Bude to usnadňující nebo vnucující?
navíc, může to důležité být čestný makléř v prodloužených zónách konfliktů? Získávání odborných znalostí a náhledu na prolifi
c učenci, akademiků, ostřílení novináři a politici, Arches Quarterly přibližuje vztah mezi islámem a demokracií a roli Ameriky – stejně jako změny, které přinesl Obama, při hledání společného základu. Anas Altikriti, generální ředitel Th e Cordoba Foundation poskytuje úvodní gamut této diskuse, kde reflektuje naděje a výzvy, které stojí na Obamově cestě. Po Altikriti, bývalý poradce prezidenta Nixona, Dr. Robert Crane nabízí důkladnou analýzu islámského principu práva na svobodu. Anwar Ibrahim, bývalý místopředseda vlády Malajsie, obohacuje diskusi o praktickou realitu zavádění demokracie v muslimských dominantních společnostech, a to, v Indonésii a Malajsii.
Máme také Dr Shireen Hunter, z Georgetownské univerzity, USA, který zkoumá muslimské země zaostávající v demokratizaci a modernizaci. To je doplněno spisovatelem terorismu, Vysvětlení Dr. Nafeeze Ahmeda o krizi postmoderny a
zánik demokracie. Dr. Daud Abdullah (Ředitel Middle East Media Monitor), Alan Hart (bývalý zpravodaj ITN a BBC Panorama; autor sionismu: Skutečný nepřítel Židů) a Asem Sondos (Redaktor egyptského týdeníku Sawt Al Omma) soustředit se na Obamu a jeho roli ve vztahu k podpoře demokracie v muslimském světě, stejně jako vztahy USA s Izraelem a Muslimským bratrstvem.
Ministr zahraničních věcí, Maledivy, Ahmed Shaheed spekuluje o budoucnosti islámu a demokracie; Cllr. Gerry Maclochlainn
– člen Sinn Féin, který vydržel čtyři roky ve vězení za aktivity irských republikánů a bojovník za Guildford 4 a Birminghamu 6, odráží svou nedávnou cestu do Gazy, kde byl svědkem dopadu brutality a nespravedlnosti páchané na Palestincích; doktorka Marie Breen-Smythová, Ředitel Centra pro studium radikalizace a současného politického násilí diskutuje o výzvách kritického výzkumu politického teroru; doktor Khalid al-Mubarak, spisovatel a dramatik, diskutuje o vyhlídkách na mír v Dárfúru; a konečně novinář a aktivista za lidská práva Ashur Shamis se kriticky dívá na demokratizaci a politizaci muslimů v současnosti.
Doufáme, že toto vše poslouží k obsáhlému čtení a zdroji pro úvahy o problémech, které se nás všech dotýkají v novém úsvitu naděje.
Děkuji

ISLÁM A PRÁVNÍ STÁT

Birgit Krawietz
Helmut Reifeld

V naší moderní západní společnosti, státem organizované právní systémy obvykle kreslí rozlišovací čáru, která odděluje náboženství a právo. Naopak, existuje řada islámských regionálních společností, kde jsou náboženství a zákony dnes stejně úzce propojeny a propojeny, jako tomu bylo před nástupem moderní doby. Ve stejnou dobu, poměr, ve kterém náboženské právo (šaría v arabštině) a veřejné právo (zákon) se liší od jedné země k druhé. Co je víc, status islámu a následně islámského práva se také liší. Vyplývá to z informací, které poskytla Organizace islámské konference (OIC), v současné době existují 57 Islámské státy po celém světě, definovány jako země, ve kterých je islám náboženstvím (1) stát, (2) většina populace, nebo (3) velká menšina. To vše ovlivňuje vývoj a podobu islámského práva.

Islámská politická kultura, Demokracie, a lidská práva

Daniel E. Cena

Tvrdilo se, že islám usnadňuje autoritářství, odporuje hodnotám západních společností, a významně ovlivňuje důležité politické výsledky v muslimských zemích. tudíž, učenci, komentátoři, a vládní úředníci často poukazují na „islámský fundamentalismus“ jako na další ideologickou hrozbu pro liberální demokracie. Tento pohled, nicméně, je založena především na analýze textů, Islámská politická teorie, a ad hoc studie jednotlivých zemí, které neberou v úvahu další faktory. Je to moje tvrzení, že texty a tradice islámu, jako u jiných náboženství, lze použít k podpoře různých politických systémů a politik. Specifické a deskriptivní studie pro jednotlivé země nám nepomohou najít vzorce, které nám pomohou vysvětlit různé vztahy mezi islámem a politikou napříč zeměmi muslimského světa.. Proto, nový přístup ke studiu
Požaduje se spojení mezi islámem a politikou.
navrhuji, přes přísné hodnocení vztahu mezi islámem, demokracie, a lidská práva na mezinárodní úrovni, že je kladen příliš velký důraz na moc islámu jako politické síly. Nejprve používám srovnávací případové studie, které se zaměřují na faktory související se souhrou mezi islámskými skupinami a režimy, ekonomické vlivy, etnické štěpení, a společenského rozvoje, vysvětlit rozdíly ve vlivu islámu na politiku napříč osmi národy. Tvrdím, že velká část moci
přisuzované islámu jako hybné síle politik a politických systémů v muslimských zemích lze lépe vysvětlit dříve zmíněnými faktory. také nacházím, proti běžnému přesvědčení, že rostoucí síla islámských politických skupin byla často spojována se skromnou pluralizací politických systémů.
Vytvořil jsem index islámské politické kultury, na základě toho, do jaké míry je islámské právo využíváno a zda a, pokud ano, jak,Západní myšlenky, institucí, a technologie jsou implementovány, testovat povahu vztahu mezi islámem a demokracií a islámem a lidskými právy. Tento ukazatel se používá ve statistické analýze, který zahrnuje vzorek 23 převážně muslimských zemí a kontrolní skupinu 23 nemuslimských rozvojových zemí. Kromě srovnání
Islámské národy k neislámským rozvojovým zemím, statistická analýza mi umožňuje kontrolovat vliv dalších proměnných, u kterých bylo zjištěno, že ovlivňují úroveň demokracie a ochranu práv jednotlivců. Výsledkem by měl být realističtější a přesnější obraz vlivu islámu na politiku a politiku.

Islám a demokracie: Text, Tradition, and History

Ahrar Ahmad

Popular stereotypes in the West tend to posit a progressive, rational, and free West against a backward, oppressive, and threatening Islam. Public opinion polls conducted in the United States during the 1990s revealed a consistent pattern of Americans labeling Muslims as “religious fanatics” and considering Islam’s ethos as fundamentally “anti-democratic.”1 These characterizations
and misgivings have, for obvious reasons, significantly worsened since the tragedy of 9/11. Nicméně, these perceptions are not reflected merely in the popular consciousness or crude media representations. Respected scholars also have contributed to this climate of opinion by writing about the supposedly irreconcilable differences between Islam and the West, the famous “clash of civilizations” that is supposed to be imminent and inevitable, and about the seeming incompatibility between Islam and democracy. Například, Professor Peter Rodman worries that “we are challenged from the outside by a militant atavistic force driven by hatred of all Western political thought harking back to age-old grievances against Christendom.” Dr. Daniel Pipes proclaims that the Muslims challenge the West more profoundly than the communists ever did, for “while the Communists disagree with our policies, the fundamentalist Muslims despise our whole way of life.” Professor Bernard Lewis warns darkly about “the historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo–Christian heritage, our secular present, and the expansion of both.” Professor Amos Perlmutter asks: “Is Islam, fundamentalist or otherwise, compatible with human-rights oriented Western style representative democracy? The answer is an emphatic NO.” And Professor Samuel Huntington suggests with a flourish that “the problem is not Islamic fundamentalism, but Islam itself.” It would be intellectually lazy and simple-minded to dismiss their positions as based merely on spite or prejudice. Ve skutečnosti, if one ignores some rhetorical overkill, some of their charges, though awkward for Muslims, are relevant to a discussion of the relationship between Islam and democracy in the modern world. Například, the position of women or sometimes non-Muslims in some Muslim countries is problematic in terms of the supposed legal equality of all people in a democracy. Podobně, the intolerance directed by some Muslims against writers (e.g., Salman Rushdie in the UK, Taslima Nasrin in Bangladesh, and Professor Nasr Abu Zaid in Egypt) ostensibly jeopardizes the principle of free speech, which is essential to a democracy.
It is also true that less than 10 of the more than 50 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference have institutionalized democratic principles or processes as understood in the West, and that too, only tentatively. Konečně, the kind of internal stability and external peace that is almost a prerequisite for a democracy to function is vitiated by the turbulence of internal implosion or external aggression evident in many Muslim countries today (e.g., Somálsko, Súdán, Indonésie, Pákistán, Irák, Afghánistán, Alžírsko, and Bosnia).

GLOBALIZATION AND POLITICAL ISLAM: THE SOCIAL BASES OF TURKEY’S WELFARE PARTY

Haldun Gulalp

Political Islam has gained heightened visibility in recent decades in Turkey. Large numbers of female students have begun to demonstrate their commitment by wearing the banned Islamic headdress on university campuses, and influential pro-Islamist TV
channels have proliferated. This paper focuses on the Welfare (Refah) Party as the foremost institutional representative of political Islam in Turkey.
The Welfare Party’s brief tenure in power as the leading coalition partner from mid-1996 to mid-1997 was the culmination of a decade of steady growth that was aided by other Islamist organizations and institutions. These organizations and institutions
included newspapers and publishing houses that attracted Islamist writers, numerous Islamic foundations, an Islamist labor-union confederation, and an Islamist businessmen’s association. These institutions worked in tandem with, and in support of, Welfare as the undisputed leader and representative of political Islam in Turkey, even though they had their own particularistic goals and ideals, which often diverged from Welfare’s political projects. Focusing on the Welfare Party, then, allows for an analysis of the wider social base upon which the Islamist political movement rose in Turkey. Since Welfare’s ouster from power and its eventual closure, the Islamist movement has been in disarray. Tento papír bude, proto, be confined to the Welfare Party period.
Welfare’s predecessor, the National Salvation Party, was active in the 1970s but was closed down by the military regime in 1980. Welfare was founded in 1983 and gained great popularity in the 1990s. Starting with a 4.4 percent vote in the municipal elections of 1984, the Welfare Party steadily increased its showing and multiplied its vote nearly five times in twelve years. It alarmed Turkey’s secular establishment first in the municipal elections of 1994, with 19 percent of all votes nationwide and the mayor’s seats in both Istanbul and Ankara, then in the general elections of 1995 when it won a plurality with 21.4 percent of the national vote. Nevertheless, the Welfare Party was only briefly able to lead a coalition government in partnership with the right-wing True Path Party of Tansu C¸ iller.

Islámská politická kultura, Demokracie, a lidská práva

Daniel E. Cena

Tvrdilo se, že islám usnadňuje autoritářství, odporuje

hodnoty západních společností, a významně ovlivňuje důležité politické výsledky
v muslimských národech. tudíž, učenci, komentátoři, a vláda
úředníci často poukazují na „islámský fundamentalismus“ jako další
ideologické ohrožení liberálních demokracií. Tento pohled, nicméně, je založena především
o analýze textů, Islámská politická teorie, a ad hoc studie
jednotlivých zemí, které neberou v úvahu další faktory. Je to můj argument
že texty a tradice islámu, jako u jiných náboženství,
lze použít k podpoře různých politických systémů a politik. Země
konkrétní a popisné studie nám nepomohou najít vzory, které pomohou
vysvětlujeme různé vztahy mezi islámem a politikou napříč celou zemí
zemí muslimského světa. Proto, nový přístup ke studiu
Požaduje se spojení mezi islámem a politikou.
navrhuji, přes přísné hodnocení vztahu mezi islámem,
demokracie, a lidská práva na mezinárodní úrovni, že příliš mnoho
důraz je kladen na moc islámu jako politické síly. já první
použít srovnávací případové studie, které se zaměřují na faktory související se souhrou
mezi islámskými skupinami a režimy, ekonomické vlivy, etnické štěpení,

a společenského rozvoje, vysvětlit rozdíl ve vlivu

Islám o politice napříč osmi národy.

islamistické strany : účast bez moci

Malika Zeghal

Over the last two decades, social and political movements grounding their ideologies in references to Islam have sought to become legal political parties in many countries of the Middle East and North Africa. Some of these Islamist movements have been authorized to take part lawfully in electoral competition. Among the best known is Turkey’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), which won a parliamentary majority in 2002 and has led the government ever since. Morocco’s own Party of Justice and Development (PJD) has been legal since the mid- 1990s and commands a significant bloc of seats in Parliament. V Egyptě, Muslimské bratrstvo (MB) has never been authorized to form a political party, but in spite of state repression it has successfully run candidates as nominal independents in both national and local elections.
Since the early 1990s, this trend has gone hand-in-hand with official policies of limited political liberalization. Together, the two trends have occasioned a debate about whether these movements are committed to “democracy.” A vast literature has sprung up to underline the paradoxes as well as the possible risks and benefits of including Islamist parties in the electoral process. The main paradigm found in this body of writing focuses on the consequences that might ensue when Islamists use democratic instruments, and seeks to divine the “true” intentions that Islamists will manifest if they come to power.

ISLAMIST RADICALISATION

PREFACE
RICHARD YOUNGS
MICHAEL EMERSON

Issues relating to political Islam continue to present challenges to European foreign policies in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). As EU policy has sought to come to terms with such challenges during the last decade or so political Islam itself has evolved. Experts point to the growing complexity and variety of trends within political Islam. Some Islamist organisations have strengthened their commitment to democratic norms and engaged fully in peaceable, mainstream national politics. Others remain wedded to violent means. And still others have drifted towards a more quietist form of Islam, disengaged from political activity. Political Islam in the MENA region presents no uniform trend to European policymakers. Analytical debate has grown around the concept of ‘radicalisation’. This in turn has spawned research on the factors driving ‘de-radicalisation’, and conversely, ‘re-radicalisation’. Much of the complexity derives from the widely held view that all three of these phenomena are occurring at the same time. Even the terms themselves are contested. It has often been pointed out that the moderate–radical dichotomy fails fully to capture the nuances of trends within political Islam. Some analysts also complain that talk of ‘radicalism’ is ideologically loaded. At the level of terminology, we understand radicalisation to be associated with extremism, but views differ over the centrality of its religious–fundamentalist versus political content, and over whether the willingness to resort to violence is implied or not.

Such differences are reflected in the views held by the Islamists themselves, as well as in the perceptions of outsiders.

Counter Transformations in the Center and Periphery of Turkish Society and the Rise of the Justice and Development Party

Ramin Ahmadov

The election results on November 3, 2002, which brought the Justice and Development Party into power, shocked many, but for varying reasons. Afterwards, some became more hopeful about future of their country, while others became even more doubtful and anxious, since for them the “republican regime” came under threat. These opposing responses, along with the perceptions that fueled them, neatly describe the two very different worlds that currently exist within Turkish society, and so it is important to think through many of the contested issues that have arisen as a result of these shifting political winds.
The winning Justice and Development Party (JDP) was established in 2001 by a group of politicians under the leadership of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, many of whom split from the religio-political movement of Necmetiin Erbakan, the National Outlook Movement, and the Welfare Party. Interestingly, in less than two years after its establishment, and at the first general election it participated in, the JDP received 34.29 % of the vote when all other established parties fell under the 10 % threshold. The only exception to this was the Republican People’s Party (19.38 %). The JDP captured 365 mimo 550 seats in the parliament and therefore was given the opportunity of establishing the government alone, which is exactly what happened. Two years later, in the 2004 local elections, the JDP increased its votes to 41.46 %, while the RPP slightly decreased to 18.27 %, and the Nationalist Action Party increased to 10.10 % (from 8.35 % v 2002). Konečně, in the most recent general elections in Turkey in 2007, which was marked by intense debate over presidential elections and an online military note, the JDP won nearly half of all votes, 46.58 %, and began its second term in power.

Turecko a EU: Průzkum o vizi tureckých poslanců v EU

Moc bulbulčík

Even though Turkey’s dream for being a member of European Union (EU) dates back to late 1950s, it can be said that this process has gained its momentum since the governing period of Justice and Development Party, which is shortly called AK party or AKP in Turkish. When compared with earlier periods, the enormous accomplishments during the AK party’s rule are recognized by domestic and European authorities alike. In the parallel of gigantic steps towardsthe European membership, which is now a real possibility for Turkey, there have been increasingdebates about this process. While some European authorities generate policies over Cyprus issueagainst Turkey’s membership, some others mainly lead by German Christian Democrats proposea privileged status rather than full membership. Turkish authorities do not stay silent over thesearguments, and probably first time the Turkish foreign minister can articulate that “should they(the EU) propose anything short of full membership, or any new conditions, we will walk away.And this time it will be for good” (The Economist 2005 30-31) After October third, Even though Mr. Abdullah Gül, who is the foreign minister of the AK party govenrment, persistentlyemphasizes that there is no such a concept so-called “privileged partnership” in the framework document, (Milliyet, 2005) the prime minister of France puts forward that this option is actually one of the possible alternatives.

Islám a Západ

Preface

John J. DeGioia

The remarkable feeling of proximity between people and nations is the unmistakable reality of our globalized world. Encounters with other peoples’ ways oflife, current affairs, politika, welfare and faithsare more frequent than ever. We are not onlyable to see other cultures more clearly, butalso to see our differences more sharply. The information intensity of modern life has madethis diversity of nations part of our every dayconsciousness and has led to the centrality ofculture in discerning our individual and collectiveviews of the world.Our challenges have also become global.The destinies of nations have become deeply interconnected. No matter where in the world we live, we are touched by the successes and failures of today’s global order. Yet our responses to global problems remain vastly different, not only as a result of rivalry and competing interests,but largely because our cultural difference is the lens through which we see these global challenges.Cultural diversity is not necessarily a source of clashes and conflict. Ve skutečnosti, the proximity and cross-cultural encounters very often bring about creative change – a change that is made possible by well-organized social collaboration.Collaboration across borders is growing primarily in the area of business and economic activity. Collaborative networks for innovation,production and distribution are emerging as the single most powerful shaper of the global economy.

horliví demokraté : ISLAMISMUS A DEMOKRACIE V EGYPTĚ, INDONÉSIE A TURECKO

Anthony Bubalo
Greg Fealy
Svatodušní Mason

The fear of Islamists coming to power through elections has long been an obstacle to democratisation in authoritarian states of the Muslim world. Islamists have been, and continue to be, the best organised and most credible opposition movements in many of these countries.

They are also commonly, if not always correctly, assumed to be in the best position to capitalise on any democratic opening of their political systems. Ve stejnou dobu, the commitment of Islamists to democracy is often questioned. Vskutku, when it comes to democracy, Islamism’s intellectual heritage and historical record (in terms of the few examples of Islamist-led states, such as Sudan and Iran) have not been reassuring. The apparent strength of Islamist movements, combined with suspicions about Islamism’s democratic compatibility, has been used by authoritarian governments as an argument to defl ect both domestic and international calls for political reform and democratisation.

Domestically, secular liberals have preferred to settle for nominally secular dictatorships over potentially religious ones. Internationally, Western governments have preferred friendly autocrats to democratically elected, but potentially hostile, Islamist-led governments.

The goal of this paper is to re-examine some of the assumptions about the risks of democratisation in authoritarian countries of the Muslim world (and not just in the Middle East) where strong Islamist movements or parties exist.

Muslimská občanská společnost v městských veřejných prostranstvích: Globalizace, Diskurzivní posuny, a sociální hnutí

Pavel M. Lubeck
Bryana Britt
Cities are processes, not products. The three Islamic elements that set in motion the processes that give rise to Islamic cities were: a distinction between the members of the Umma and the outsiders, which led to juridical and spatial distinction by neighborhoods; the segregation of the sexes which gave rise to a particular solution to the question of spatial organization; and a legal system which, rather than imposing general regulations over land uses of various types in various places, left to the litigation of the neighbors the detailed adjudication of mutual rights over space and use. (Janet Abu Lughod 1987: 173)
Framing: Muslim Movements in Urban Situations We live in an intellectual moment when the complexity of the global Islamic
revival renders it difficult to generalize about Muslim institutions, social movements, and discursive practices. While diversity and locality remain paramount features of Muslim cities, globalization has inadvertently nurtured transnational Muslim networks from the homeland of Islam and extended them into the web of interconnected world cities. Quite opportunistically, urban-based
Muslim networks and insurrectionist movements now thrive in the interstitial spaces created by the new global communication and transportation infrastructures. What, then, are the long-term patterns for Muslims in cities? Since the last millennium, as Janet Abu-Lughod reminds us, “the Islamic cityhas been the primary site for: defining power relations between ruler and subject, specifying the rights and identities of spatial communities, and regulating urban social relations between genders. Today’s Muslim city remains the epicenter of a burgeoning public sphere in which informed publics debate highly contested Islamic discourses regarding social justice,

Success of Turkey’s AK Party must not dilute worries over Arab Islamists

Mona Eltahawy

It has been unsurprising that since Abdullah Gul became president of Turkey on 27 August that much misguided analyses has been wasted on howIslamistscan pass the democracy test. His victory was bound to be described as the “islamista” routing of Turkish politics. And Arab Islamistsin the form of the Muslim Brotherhood, their supporters and defenderswere always going to point to Turkey and tell us that we’ve been wrong all along to worry about the Arab Islamistalleged flirtation with democracy. “It worked in Turkey, it can work in the Arab world,” they would try to assure us.Wrong. Wrong. And wrong.Firstly, Gul is not an Islamist. His wife’s headscarf might be the red cloth to the bull of the secular nationalists in Turkey, but neither Gul nor the AK Party which swept parliamentary elections in Turkey in June, can be called Islamists. Ve skutečnosti, so little does the AK Party share with the Muslim Brotherhoodaside from the common faith of its membersthat it’s absurd to use its success in Turkish politics as a reason to reduce fears over the Mus-lim Brotherhood’s role in Arab politics.The three litmus tests of Islamism will prove my point: women and sex, a “Západ”, and Israel.As a secular Muslim who has vowed never to live in Egypt should Islamists ever take power, I never take lightly any attempt to blend religion with politics. So it has been with a more than skeptical eye that I’ve followed Turkish politics over the past few years.

Islám a demokracie

Dalia Mogahed

Islam in politics has been asserted in many countries in the Muslim world through democratic elections. Islamist parties have gained varying degreesof political power in Turkey, Egypt, Libanon, and the occupied Palestinian territories, and have widespread influence in Morocco and Jordan. Nyní, more than ever, západní vlády, alarmed by this outcome, have raised the perennial question: Is Islam compatible with democracy?A recent in-depth Gallup survey in 10 predominantly Muslim countries,representing more than 80% of the global Muslim population, shows that whenasked what they admire most about the West, Muslims frequently mention political freedom, liberty, fair judicial systems, and freedom of speech. When asked to critique their own societies, extremism and inadequate adherence to Islamic teachings were their top grievances.However, while Muslims say they admire freedom and an open political system,Gallup surveys suggest that they do not believe they must choose between Islam and democracy, but rather, that the two can co-exist inside one functional government.

To Be A Muslim

Fathi Yakan

All praises to Allah, and blessings and peace to His Messenger.This book is divided into two parts. The first part focuses on the characteristics that every single Muslim should portray in order to fulfill the conditions of being a Muslim in both belief and practice. Many people are Muslim by identity,because they were ”born Muslim” from Muslim parents. Theymay not know what Islam really means or its requirements, an dso may lead a very secular life. The purpose of this first partis to explain the responsibility of every Muslim to become aknowledgeable and true believer in Islam.The second part of this book discusses the responsibility to become an activist for Islam and participate in the Islamic Movement. It explains the nature of this movement and its goals, philosophy, strategy, and tactics, as well as the desirable characteristics of it members.The failure of various movements in the Islamic world, and especially in the Arab countries, result from a spiritual emptiness in these movements as well as in society generally. In sucha situation the principles and institutions of Islam are forgotten.The westernized leaders and movements collapse when they encounter serious challenges. These leaders and movements and the systems of government and economics they try to imposehave fallen because they lacked a solid base. They fell becausethey were artificial constructs copied from alien cultures anddid not represent the Muslim community. Therefore they wererejected by it. This situation is comparable to a kidney transplantin a human body. Although the body is able to tolerate it painfully for a short period of time, eventually the kidney willbe rejected and die.When the sickness of the Muslim Ummah became acute few Muslims thought of building a new society on Islamic principles.Instead many tried to import man made systems and principles, which looked good but really were grossly defectiveand so could be easily toppled and crushed.