Islamonweb

Every single person in this world strongly prefers being completely free from every kind of dependence whether it is mental dependence or physical dependence. No one, even for a few moments, wants to be overruled or let other override his decisions. This is the intrinsic freedom he wants to possess throughout his life. Similarly, the entire mankind staunchly believes in the concept of liberty in the form of “I-Can-Do-Whatever-I-Want” which is universally called “individualism” or “individual liberty” that is the unavoidable part of ‘liberalism’. It is OK! To argue for individual pleasure, personal liberty and freedom of speech and religion but as long as it doesn’t harm others in line with the deep mindfulness to accept “Self-Censorship” too. Liberty is good and liberalism is better but only when they are applied with self-censorship. If a liberal is arguing for his liberty against the social norms, values and normative cults, then it is not liberalism intact instead it’s a dangerous form of lunacy.  Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion are strong tools to enhance the national growth and developmental projects. Liberals should use these tools to raise questions against administrative malpractices, governmental mismanagement, systematically rooted corruptions, capital monopoly, poverty, civil malnourishment, illegitimate hegemony of first world nations against the third world nations, instead of misusing these tools in spoiling “social apparatus” igniting the so-called questions of feminism, genderism, transgenderism, LGBTQism and more to name.  The concept of possessing these rights is appreciated in a limited context, but it gets problematic while the liberal demonstrators take it out of concept. Talking on a religious context, Islam believes in liberalism in line with feminism, and provides gender equality but with the concept of self-censorship which is unambiguously void in the general concept of Liberalism. [1]

Freedom of Speech and Controversial Literature against Islam

On the record of individual liberty, freedom of speech is the part and parcel of every community. A Press Community, A Religious Community, A Free-thinker Community, An Activism Community, The Depressed, Suppressed and Disadvantaged Community, all of them are to be provided the authority of freedom of speech at any cost so as they could raise the rational demands under the ambit of Social, Economic, Cultural and Political Deprivation aiming at benefitting the upliftment of social norms and values and benefitting themselves as well. Every liberal must keep in mind that as they are actively putting their thorough attempt and energy through the notion of Freedom of Speech to get their rights secured for them so as they couldn’t be harmed or hurt ever in the go. Similarly, the community other than them does also hold the rights to not get hurt by the so-called liberal form of Freedom of Speech, that they advocate through state-sponsored Cartoons, Magazines, Publishing Bureau and Books too.  Liberalism could prove well for them if it’s used for the common good for every community but it definitely turns evil when it’s used to attack another through the evil form of Cartoons, Magazines and Writings in the name of so-called Freedom of Speech.

For instance, the community of Muslims is being targeted and stereotyped by the community of non-Muslims across the world especially in the regions of Scandinavian, European and Western countries which are most liberal countries in a sentence, through weaponized notion of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Press. On the day back to 30 September 2005, a Danish newspaper (a newspaper published by Denmark)[2] named Jyllands-Posten, unhesitantly published the series of 12 malicious Cartoons featuring the persona of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) which resulted in crowded demonstrations and massive protests across the globe. Consequently, dozens of Muslim countries and its allies landed trade embargo and imports boycott against Danish goods. [3]

Likewise, two years later, the Swedish cartoons of Prophet (PBUH) in 2007 that portrayed the depictions of Islamic Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) “as a roundabout dog” (nauzu biLlah). This controversy drew global attention when the Orebro-based regional news-pamphlet Nerikes Allehanda shamelessly published one of these drawings on 16 August 2007 as part of an editorial page depending on the notion of “freedom of religion”. Sooner an intense debate sparked which was circulated and aired on Swedish Media featuring the theme of this act exhibition, “The Dog in Art” as a part of “Freedom of Expression”.[4] Moving on the similar way, Charlie Hebdo (which means ‘Charlie Weekly’) a French Satirical weekly publishing magazine that generally used to feature cartoons, reports, polemics and jokes and whose publications have been labelled and described anti-racist, skeptical , secular, libertarian and laying within the cult of left-wing radicalism, generally published articles about the far-right French National Front Party, religious Catholicism, Islam and Judaism and the notion of politics and culture.

Charlie Hebdo has deliberately been prone to three consecutive attacks in 2011, 2015 and 2020 as a defensive assault over a cartoon published by Charlie Hebdo depicting prophet Muhammad “as a nude man on all fours with a star covering his anus” (Nauzu Bi Allah) while other shows “Prophet Muhammad bending over nakedly and begging” (Nauzu Bi Allah).[5]  On the other hand, Salman Rushdie, a British liberal writer and Nobel Laureate provoked the Islamic world and hurt the Muslims sentiments by getting his book “The Satanic Verse” published in 26 September 1988 which still causes him to suffer from several attacks by radical Muslim youths especially in London, U.K.[6] Moreover, even the Anti-Muslim Movement run by Hindu Mahasabha misused the doctrine of Freedom of Speech and added fuel to the fire ignited by British “Divide and Rule Policy” and supported the publishing of an Anti- Islamic book ‘Rangeela Rasool’, The Colorful Prophit’ written by Kar Sevak Mr. Pandit M.A Chamupati in 1924 which further fomented the communal violence and made it easy for Britishers to rule over India according to their “Divide and Rule” policies. [7]  

After witnessing all these aforementioned historical evidences of self-selectively disrupted freedom of speech, a liberal psyche should bolster his belief that Freedom of Speech under the aegis of Liberals is OK but only when it is or raising serious and solemn questions for humanitarian, social, economic and cultural upliftment nor to invalidate, devalue and denounce other community or other religion. The History screams and profoundly laments on the aforementioned tragedies of Danish, Swedish, and Charlie Hebdo Cartoons and Magazines devaluing and denouncing the Supreme Prophet of Islam which resulted diplomatic alienations between many western and eastern countries causing deaths of myriads publishers by far-right radicals. To fairly justify one can ask who is responsible? Are they these so-called liberals?

Liberalism and Its Lunacies

To an extent, every belief needs minimum a logical reasoning. If a belief is worshipped without the logical rationality of its existence, it is called “Blind faith”. At a point of time, when the astray messages of a Blindfaith are disseminated crazily and the fresh minds are indoctrinated and brainwashed, the general folks get trapped into it and this way the “Lunacies of an Ideology” are born. Similarly, the concept of Liberalism is believed without questioning its rationality. First, the Oxford Languages define the idea of Liberalism as “a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights (Individualism), civil liberties, democracy and enterprises free from state interventions”. On the other hand, the referenceable website of Wikipedia underlines that “Individualists promote realizing one’s goals and desires”, valuing independence and self-reliance, and advocating the clue that the ‘individual interest’ should gain precedence over the state or a social group, while opposing external interference upon one’s own interests by society or institutions such as the governmental”. The strong-holder of “Individualism”, Sir, Jeremy Bentham views it as “the individual – the basic social sphere – is an “atom” and there is no “self” or “individual” greater than the human individual”. [8]

On the philosophical records, the father and founder of Liberalism, Sir John Locke, in his book “Two Treatises of Government” published anonymously in 1689, argues for the notion of “social contract theory” that “we all born equal, we are all born free”. Through the personal records, he interestingly believed in one single god which obviously means he was a ‘Unitarian’. [9] Approximately one century later when the giant country, United States of America declared her independence from British colonialism days back to 4 July 1776, the American freedom fighters, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and John Adams the prominent figures of American freedom fighters wrote the Bill of Rights. Comprehensively, the American Bill of Rights is the first 10 series amendments to the Constitution which spells out bold the American mass’s rights before their government and the government should guarantee them the civil rights and liberties to the individual like “Freedom of Religion, Press and Speech”. Whereas the American Declaration of Independence (1776) reads as “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”. For kind information, all these words and deeds of ‘American Declaration of Independence’ have been derived from the script of “John Locke”. [10]

Similarly, the political philosopher and liberal, Sir John Stuart Mill (1861) introduced the notion of ‘Utilitarianism’. He promotes the view that “Utilitarianism is a system of ethics according to which actions are right in proportion as they tend to produce happiness, wrong as they to produce the reverse of happiness”. In a sentence, Mr. Mill defines the more amount of happiness for a greater number of people and furthers happiness as “Pleasure” and the “absence of pain”. [11]

After having casted cursory glance, one could easily and analytically understand that in all of the above-definitions of Liberalism, Individualism, Utilitarianism and Hedonistic Principles whether defined by John Locke, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, or John Stuart Mill, there lies a common factor and that is nothing but individual pleasure termed separately in various definitions. With an overview, all these definitions of Liberalism make it clear that an individual has authority to practice or reject all the stuff he needs as per his own interest-along with the notion of absence of interference and disturbance from the state or government. To be practical, according to the epistemological meaning of Liberalism, every single individual should be given access to his principle demands as long as these demands don’t hurt other individual. Therefore, if a person who is holding his biological gender as male can identify himself as female, a 60-year-old man can have right to recognize him as a “Five-Year-Old Girl”, a heavy-weight 30-year-old young man can make a “transgender surgery (gender transplantation)”, a groups of girls can have rights to dance naked on the outskirts of roads and public places if their individual desire directs them to do so, similarly a group of boys can propose to have intimate intercourse on the streets, a group of demonstrators for same-sex marriage could gain easy authority to march naked on the pathways and crowded stations. What the shiest concern is that the government strongly supports these causes and can’t help shut these nonsenses down.

Liberalism and It’s Context in Islam

Liberalism, for a particular community, is growing as a religion in these days. All the ideologies and premises on the basis of which the liberals frame their argument based on immoral pleasure. Liberals argue that the unsocial, shameless, and psychopathic ‘Pornography Industries’ are legitimate. Reasonably, one can see the repots approximately most of these inhumane industries are rejoicing their leisure on the soft laps of ‘Western European Scandinavian Liberal States’.[12] Most of the authors of the books spreading liberal notions and proponents of liberal ideologies like “Individualism”, “Feminism”, “LGBTQism”, “Genderism” is male by definition. Female pornography industry, concept of wearing revealing clothes, male and female sharing the same public accessibilities like Gym, Swimming Pool, Schools, Colleges, Universities and Bars are, I doubt, part of a “Targeted Women Objectification” ran by the irrational idea of Liberalism across the Western World. According to the quite reliable Sage Journal quotes “we conclude that Objectification has important consequences for how people view victims of sexual assault. Our findings reveal that sexual objectification can have serious consequences”. According to Fredrickson and Roberts the proponent of Objectification Theory (1997), “sexual objectification occurs when a women’s body, body parts, or sexual functions are isolated from her whole and complete being and treated as objects simply to be looked at, coveted or touched”. As so-called feminists argue that men always objectify female which is not completely true because the concept of Narcissism prevents us to believe in. To an extent, female is also responsible for the act of self-objectification just to satisfy their narcissistic desire which actually comes from self-pleasure and self-happiness which are promoted through the hyper-lobbying strategies of liberalism.

To bring a blanket ban on Hijab for French Muslim Women, President Emmanual Macron strongly supported a different form of secularism other than that is practiced by India an USA. Macron-backed form of secularism is called “Laicite” which is a form of French Secularism which staunchly believes in complete removal of religious values from the public domain and substitute them with their own secular values of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, the magic words of French Revolution (1789-1799).[13] Meanwhile, a contradictory hypocrisy of Liberalism emerges in this particular premise of a thesis banning Hijab that targets Muslim Women. And how it is a contradictory hypocrisy of Liberalism is “France is a highly renowned liberal country. It believes in Individualism, Utilitarianism, Freedom of Speech and Religion and civil liberty. Wearing Hijab and other religious or non-religious modest or non-modest clothes is the mainstream part of freedom of religion and hardcore civil liberty. It means no state, no government can force a citizen or a civilian to what to wear and what not to. As a final result, France, being a liberal nation, should provide feasible accessibility to freedom of religion and civil liberties. But the ironic joke is that Macron’s ‘Laicite Secularism’ carries ethnic cleansing to the right to equality, civil liberties, freedom of religion and freedom of speech void in the land of Liberalism, France.” To be serious, the idea of Liberalism is that much void of rationality that its worshipping nations get fooled by its lunacies while implementing it.

The entire world, including the liberals and non-liberals, believed that the Ancient Greek people blindly believed and practiced different gods like Athena, Zeus and Hercules without questioning or even doubting their rationality, reasoning and logical justification of their existence. Similarly, an ancient westerner believed these gods without questioning its rationality and logic of existence same as the modern westerner believed in the bogus ideology of Liberalism without questioning its rationality. There is no difference between an Ancient Greek and Modern Westerner because both have devised ‘Blindfaith’, ‘Irrationality’ while believing in Greek Gods and Liberalism with an only difference that one believed in religions Greek Gods and other believed in just the bogus ideology of Liberalism. Moreover, John Locke (in his book Two Treatises of Government) believes in two principles;

• Theological Principle: which stands for the concept that all human beings were endowed freedom and equality by God.
• The Hedonistic Principle: which means the ultimate morality is “Pain and Pleasure”.[14]

So, according to him, the ultimate good to you is what feels you the most pleasurable and desirable. While reading the famous philosopher, Jeremy Bentham, one should find his words quote “you have two gods; the god of pleasure and the god of pain”. Consequently, the rooted line of every single word and deed of these liberals are thoroughly based on their “self-satisfying desire and self-selective pleasure” which cause nothing but mental poverty and unhealthy rationality. Going through the Islamic context, Allah the Almighty says in his Holy Quran, in Surah Al-Jaathia, verse no. 23 “أفرأيتم من اتخذ إلهه هواه وأضله الله علي علم و ختم علي سمعه و قلبه وجعل علي بصره غشاوة فمن يهديه من بعد الله أفلا تذكرون” [15]

In the interpretation of this Ayah, ‘Imam Tabri’ said in ‘Tafsir Al-Tabri’ that the scholars of interpretation differed in explaining the verse (“Have you seen he who takes his desire as his god?”) Some say it means: Have you seen those who make their religion based on their desires, worshipping nothing but their own inclinations? Because they do not believe in Allah, nor prohibit what He prohibited, nor permit what He permitted; rather, their religion is whatever their souls incline towards. Narrated by Imam Ali, from Ibn Abbas, regarding the verse (“Have you seen he who takes his desire as his god?”) He said: That disbeliever has made his religion without guidance from Allah and without evidence. [16]

Liberalism and Depression

The community of liberal people who, at least once in a life, has enjoyed the products of Liberalism like gender transplantation (transgenderism, transwoman, transman), gender ageism, same-sax marriage, uncommitted live-in relationships and similar immoral liberal practices have fallen prey to the harsh disease of “Depression”. Consequently, a newly formed Concept of Revert-Trans or Revert-Transgender, Revert Transwoman, Revert Transman which significantly means that those community of highly liberal men or women or other gender-people who once had practiced the immoral act of “trans” (whether it is changing genders through surgery, or live-ins, or self-desired gender identification), now highly wants to revert to the gender they were before. Psychologically, they are doing so because they have countered hardcore depression and regretted their past biological decisions based on liberal ideas.

According to World Health Organization and Forbes Magazines, the top 20 developed nations from across the Scandinavian, European and Western Countries are the most liberal countries. And 19 out of these 20 developed liberal nations are the most depressed nations in the world. People in these countries coming out regretfully criticizing their liberal decisions based on their desires and individual pleasures ignoring the social and religious values. The American Psychiatrists’ Association explains that “Depression is a common and serious medical illness that negatively effects how you feel, the way you think and how you act. Fortunately, it is also treatable. Depression causes feelings of sadness and/or a loss of interest in activities you once enjoyed. It can lead to a variety of emotional and physical problems and can decrease your ability to function at work and home”. [17] [18]

Conclusion

For the final analysis, most of the liberal ideas fundamentally contradicts with the Islamic tenets and basic principles of Sharia Law. Middle Eastern population along with the Muslims living across the western countries like Muhammad Hijab, Yasser Qadhi, Hamza Yusuf, Haqiqatjou, defend Islamic Sharia Law and sharia principles challenging these baseless notions, thesis, and anti-thesis of Liberal faith. The Oxford University graduate Muhammad Hijab claims that modern western liberalism are the devices to make hyper-lobbying to divert and indoctrinate the modest common Muslims in the name of gender equality, women empowerment, racial justice, social justice while the West is the birthplace of these evil stuff and USA don’t have even a single woman President and France could succeed to appoint only one-woman president then how can they talk about woman empowerment?

Islam believes in Freedom of Speech but in a contextual margin with the idea of “self-censorship”. While being a Muslim, a Muslim can never think of scolding the gods and goddesses of other religious entities. It is actually bad for Muslims to see non-Muslims worshipping the frozen gods, bowing down before irrational justifications of half-naked and sometimes bare-naked gods and goddesses standing on the public places but besides every Muslim should tolerate this atmosphere and abstain from scolding them because Muslims believe in Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion as a reasonable tool to respect other’s opinion and venerate other’s religion. Almighty Allah has outspokenly advanced Freedom of Speech in the manner of “self-censorship” which means “the exercising of control over what one says and does, especially to avoid criticism”. Allah says in Surah Anaa’m, verse no. 108 “ولا تسبوا الذين يدعون من دون الله فيسبوا الله عدوا بغير علم”

“And do not insult (scold) those they call upon besides Allah, lest they insult Allah out of hostility and ignorance”

In another place Allah quotes in Surah Al-Israa, verse no, 23 “فلا تقل لهما أف ولا تنهرهما وقل لهما قولا كريما”  

“Say not to them [so much as] Uff and do not repel them but speak to them noble word”.

Therefore, for the final analysis, Islam strongly cherishes the concept of freedom of speech that is used to raise questions against injustice, oppressions, cruelty and inequality but in noble words with the sense of “self-censorship” not to suppress or denounce others which are adversely advanced by the so-called bogus ideology of Liberalism.

References:

• John Kekes. Cornell University Press (2018). “Against Liberalism”. Phil papers ISBN 9781501721878   0801484006   0801433614   1501721879.
• Our Foreign Staff. 04 May 2015. “Prophet Mohammad Cartoons Controversy: Timeline”. The Telegraph
• Jytte Klausen. Yale University Press (2009). “The Cartoons That Shook the World”. JSTR.
• “Why Does Depicting the Prophet Muhammad Cause Offence”. 04 October 2021. BBC News.
• Cassandra Vinograd, Alastair Jamieson, Florence Vialaand Alexander Smith. 07 January 2015. “Charlie Hebdo Shooting: 12 Killed at Muhammad Cartoons Magazine in Paris”. NBC NEWS.
• Andrew Anthony. 11 January 2009. “How One Book Ignited a Culture War”. The Guardian.
• Avatans Kumar. 25 October 2019. “The Ghost of Rangeela Rasool”. TOI, Times of India.
• William Sweet. “Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)”. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• Philosopher John Locke. December 1689. Work “Two Treatises of Government”
• Jeffrey Rosen and David Rubenstein. Essay on “The Declaration, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights”. National Constitution Center, USA.
• John Stuart Mill. Originally published in Fraser’s Magazine (1861) and Batoche Books (Kitchener in 2001). Essay “Utilitarianism”. Batoche Books Limited.
• Chaitra Anand. 10 August 2021. “15 Countries that Supply Maximum Pornography Much Does India Contribute?”. Yahoo Finance.
• Radhika Santhanam. 05 September 2023. “Understanding Laicite, the French Principle of Secularism”. The Hindu
• Philosopher John Locke. December 1689. Work “Two Treatises of Government”
• Surah Al-Jaathia: 23.
• Tafseer Al-Tabri, by Imam Tabri and His Commentary on Surah Al-Jaathia.
• Depression and Other Common Mental Disorders-Global Health Estimates. “Depression Rates by Country 2023”. World Population Review.
• “7.2% of People in the EU Suffer from Chronic Depression”. 10 September 2021. European Commission.

Endnotes

[1] John Kekes. Cornell University Press (2018). “Against Liberalism”. Phil papers ISBN 9781501721878   0801484006   0801433614   1501721879.

[2] Our Foreign Staff. 04 May 2015. “Prophet Mohammad Cartoons Controversy: Timeline”. The Telegraph

[3] Jytte Klausen. Yale University Press (2009). “The Cartoons That Shook the World”. JSTR.

[4] “Why Does Depicting the Prophet Muhammad Cause Offence”. 04 October 2021. BBC News.

[5] Cassandra Vinograd, Alastair Jamieson, Florence Viala and Alexander Smith. 07 January 2015. “Charlie Hebdo Shooting: 12 Killed at Muhammad Cartoons Magazine in Paris”. NBC NEWS.

[6] Andrew Anthony. 11 January 2009. “How One Book Ignited a Culture War”. The Guardian.

[7] Avatans Kumar. 25 October 2019. “The Ghost of Rangeela Rasool”. TOI, Times of India.

[8] William Sweet. “Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)”. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

[9] Philosopher John Locke. December 1689. Work “Two Treatises of Government”

[10] Jeffrey Rosen and David Rubenstein.  Essay on “The Declaration, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights”. National Constitution Center, USA.

[11] John Stuart Mill. Originally published in Fraser’s Magazine (1861) and Batoche Books (Kitchener in 2001). Essay “Utilitarianism”. Batoche Books Limited.

[12] Chaitra Anand. 10 August 2021. “15 Countries that Supply Maximum Pornography Much Does India Contribute?”. Yahoo Finance.

[13] Radhika Santhanam. 05 September 2023. “Understanding Laicite, the French Principle of Secularism”. The Hindu

[14] Philosopher John Locke. December 1689. Work “Two Treatises of Government”

[15] Surah Al-Jaathia: 23.

[16] Tafseer Al-Tabri, by Imam Tabri and His Commentary on Surah Al-Jaathia.

[17] Depression and Other Common Mental Disorders-Global Health Estimates. “Depression Rates by Country 2023”. World Population Review.

[18] “7.2% of People in the EU Suffer from Chronic Depression”. 10 September 2021. European Commission.

About the author

Nairul SK is a PG research scholar at Darul Huda Islamic University, (Dept. of Islamic Economics and Finance), Kerala, India, and B.A Political Science Hons Student at IGNOU. His research areas include Islamic Economics and Finance, Political Science, Islamic Studies, the Study of Human Behavior, and Islamic Psychology.