Popular Sovereignty, Islam, and Democracy (2003)*

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Glenn E. Perry
{"title":"Popular Sovereignty, Islam, and Democracy (2003)*","authors":"Glenn E. Perry","doi":"10.35632/ajis.v41i1.3421","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the idea that Islam’s rejection of popularsovereignty makes it incompatible with democracy. I showinstead that sovereignty (“absolute despotic power,” popular orotherwise) is a sterile, pedantic, abstruse, formalistic, and legalisticconcept, and that democracy should be seen as involving“popular control” rather than “popular sovereignty.” Divinesovereignty would be inconsistent with democracy only if thatmeant unlike in Islam rule by persons claiming to be God orHis infallible representatives. A body of divine law that humanscannot change would be incompatible with democracy only if itwere so comprehensive as to leave no room for political decisions.\n*This article was first published in the American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 20, no. 3&4(2003): 125-139","PeriodicalId":34866,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Islam and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Islam and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35632/ajis.v41i1.3421","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the idea that Islam’s rejection of popularsovereignty makes it incompatible with democracy. I showinstead that sovereignty (“absolute despotic power,” popular orotherwise) is a sterile, pedantic, abstruse, formalistic, and legalisticconcept, and that democracy should be seen as involving“popular control” rather than “popular sovereignty.” Divinesovereignty would be inconsistent with democracy only if thatmeant unlike in Islam rule by persons claiming to be God orHis infallible representatives. A body of divine law that humanscannot change would be incompatible with democracy only if itwere so comprehensive as to leave no room for political decisions. *This article was first published in the American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 20, no. 3&4(2003): 125-139
人民主权、伊斯兰教和民主》(2003 年)*
本文探讨了伊斯兰教拒绝人民主权,因此与民主不相容的观点。相反,我认为主权("绝对专制的权力",不论是人民主权还是其他主权)是一个无趣、迂腐、深奥、形式主义和法律主义的概念,民主应被视为涉及 "人民控制 "而非 "人民主权"。只有当神权与伊斯兰教中自称是真主或真主无误代表的人的统治不同时,神权才会与民主相矛盾。人类无法改变的神法体系只有在其全面性使政治决策没有任何余地的情况下才与民主不相容。3&4(2003):125-139
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信