Book Review Making Islam Democratic: Social Movements and the Post-Islamist Turn

This continued to exacerbate the gap between the social classes of Iran. The main reason for the Shah’s confidence in bringing his people prosperity was the mass amount of revenue Iran was generating from Oil. The nationalization of Iran’s oil in the fifties meant increased profits for the nation. Iran’s economy was growing exponentially; its GDP was five times higher in 1976 than it was in 1960 (Clawson, p.15). Islamic modernists, such as Marxist Mujaheddin-e-Khalq, opposed the Shah’s capitalist economic policies (Diller 1991, p.152). There were several other groups that were not pleased with the Shah’s growing focus on economic growth, including the ulemas (councils composed of local Mullahs or respected religious leaders) (Sanders 1990, p.66). These ulemas possessed considerable local influence, as they were in charge of the educational systems and had influence over the urban poor and bazaar merchants (Diller 1991, p.152). In the midst of all that was going on in Iran, Khomeini lived in exile in Paris. The Ayatollah however, was well informed, and managed to sneak tapes into the country to his supporters and the local ulemas. These tapes spread the word of Islamic fundamentalism to these groups that opposed that Shah, and gave them a binding power that eventually would be the revolution of February 1979. Not long, Khomeini had

In the Middle East, each country has it’s own form of government. These forms of governments have been consistently changing throughout time. Throughout all the revolutions and overthrows, the national identity of the Middle East has slowly changed, some parts more than others. Over many years, overthrows in countries such as Egypt and Libya have led to a more democratic government. However, many other countries such as Iran and Iraq have remained more oppressive. The Middle East is still changing to this day. For example, Egypt recently overthrew their president Hosni Mubarak. There are also many protests currently going on in Libya.

When the Iranian Revolution succeeded in 1979, Iran wanted to gain the admiration and the support of Arab countries, benefiting in particular from the support by the Shah of Iran and his relationship with Israel before the collapse of his regime. On this very first day of the victory of the revolution, Iran was keen to extend its bonds with the Islamic world, and when this was not possible in most cases, because of many complex causes of the revolution, Iran began to look for «organizations» instead of «regime’s or countries», in order to continue its role in Islamic issues. Iran was keen to show that this role was one of the foundations of the revolution and its beliefs, in

Chapter 14 in the book Traditions and Encounters: A Global Perspective of the Past by Herrry H. Bentley and Herbert F. Ziegler is mainly about Muhammad, the prophet, and his world, the expansion of Islam, economy and society of the early Islamic world, and its values and cultural exchanges.

Luca argues that the shah ‘promoted western values and culture, whilst gaining control of the customary sectors of the Iranian society. This included religion, education and the bazaars’ . This is backed up by Kamran Matin, who states that he attempted to liberalize Iran through his attempt to ‘modernize the bazaars, irritating merchants of the bazaars with his policies such as obligatory membership and dues. He also interfered in the political, economical and religious concerns of the Iranians ’. Trenta further extends the argument and argues that this ‘westoxication of Iran culture and society angered religious leaders. The bazaaris also resented the impositions such as price controls and having to make room for western size malls’ . Trenta further extends her argument and highlights that ‘the Iranian opposition groups viewed and interpreted the interest and intention of liberalizing Iran as a response to the election of President Jimmy Carter in November 1976 as Human Rights was his ‘corner stone’ in foreign policy’ . Due to this coincidence, the Iranian people began to build resentment towards the Shah and his regime. The opposition grew as the Iranians viewed the Shah as a ‘puppet of the united states’ . Trenta argues that the election of ‘Jimmy carter and his rhetoric of Human Rights was merely a coincidence’ .

For example, during the Islamic revolution, the political landscape was largely defined by suppression, violence, and conflict between fundamentalists and protesters. The authority used religion to justify the edicts and restrictions they established to expunge the moral and cultural “decadence” from society, which in turn suppressed the people and infringed upon their individual rights (4). In response, the people used violence to either support or protest the revolution, depending on the person.

Introduction: In the Western world, people often assume that Iran is an exceedingly religious society. Many Americans still view the country through biases formed after the Iranian Hostage Crisis of 1979. To them, Iran is a country where religion dominates social, political, and economic life. Iran’s infamous Shi’a led government has been the target for ethnocentric and racist rhetoric by American politician. While it has been easy for the United States’ people and government to pigeonhole Iranians as devout Muslims who base their decisions on Shi’a tenets, Honeymoon in Tehran by Azadeh Moaveni reveals an entirely different reality. Rather than complying with a theocratic system of rule, Iranians have found methods to defy their government

Iran has always, it seems, been the breeding ground for some kind of political upheaval or another. In recent times, back in 1979, there was a major revolution which was, in some ways, similar to the revolution we are seeing today. The people were angry and they were tired of being controlled by the government that was in power. They had concrete ideals and were incredibly passionate about their revolution. The revolution Iran is experiencing today does not appear to be quite as passionate and does not appear to maintain a belief in any real solid political system. They just know they want something different. In the following paper we present an illustration of the current revolution that is taking

The term “Arab Spring” has emerged in academic literature as well as in the general media from about early 2011. It refers to the “awakening” of some Arab nations and the movements to replace authoritarian regimes with democratic ones. The theme of “spring” and “awakening” seems to have been borrowed from the 1989 reform movements in the former Eastern-block nations, such as in the former German Democratic Republic or Hungary. However, this comparison has been criticised by some analysts since both the circumstances which have led to these movements as well as the outcome of these reform efforts seem to differ quite a lot. Yet, the Arab Spring term seems to be still widely used and even found an extension in the creation of the term Arab Winter which refers to events that happened in 2012 in some Arab countries during which these reform movements seemed to have “cooled-off” and particular nations, such as Egypt, attempted to go back to the status-quo of the pre-2011 era.

An examination of the Arab Spring reveals the role that Islamic discourse played in inspiring, motivating, and sustaining activists. Activists gathered in mosques and the Islamic factions mobilized networks and resources as they all belonged to a tight knit group that shared ideological ideals. Knowing that religious group are often the most-tight knit groups, the Islamic people all came together, forgetting their differences in class and status. After prayer services at mosques, the activists used the platform in order to gain new supporters for their cause and spread the message. The impressionable people listened to the religious leaders and maintained belief in the

In the west, the possibility of a successful democracy in the Islamic world is still in question. This is due in part to the significant revolutions that have and are still taking place in many Muslim lead countries. These concerns stem from the possibility that a true democracy in Islamic lands may lead to Islamic democrats seeking reconciliation of human rights and civil liberties under strict Islamic ruling. Needless to say, an Islamic democracy is perceived as a threat; with good reason. Decades of anti-Islam aggravation succeeded in corrupting the image of Islam in many western countries, depicting Islam as authoritarian and anti-democratic.

In recent months we have seen political unrest in Tunisia, Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries. In each of these countries the political leadership had amassed immense power and was using these powers to restrain and limit their countrymen from development. The ruling class clearly had formed a political structure with a clear agenda to inhibit the growth of their fellow citizens. In the past few decades, people from these countries have endured structural violence due to political hegemony. Exposure to western media has made the people realize the advantage of distributed power. Hence these countries are witnessing a surge of protest, with people fighting against the system. Parsons emphasizes on the distribution of political power and its effects throughout his

In his article: Who Wears Hijab with the President: Constructing a Modern Islam in Tunisia, Simon Hawkins suggests, “the category of modernity is notoriously varied and contentious, with an overabundance of both folk and academic definitions” (Hawkins, 46). In this case, it is best to look at modernity in various contexts to better understand the term. This essay will closely investigate approaches of modernization adopted by Tunisia, Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon and Egypt and challenge how they’ve justified certain actions for – what they’ve labeled as – the creation of a progressive society.

The Arab Spring has been a life changing phenomena, not only for the people who are attempting to overthrow their governments but for political scientists everywhere. The events originating in the North African country of Tunisia have led to the snowballing of several other Middle Eastern, predominantly Muslim, nation states. The figurative breaking point might have finally been reached as the oppressed peoples of the Middle East have risen up to overthrow long-standing dictatorial governments in hopes of revolutionary change; change that is subject to the will of the people.

Over the last century, the Middle East has been the location of ethnic rivalry, political and economic instability, religious conflict, territorial dispute and war. Much of this tension in the Middle East comes from the various interpretations of Islam and how the religion should be applied to politics and society. Over the last ten years, the United States and their allies have pushed to promote democracy in the Middle East. However, they too have many obstacles they must overcome. They face problems such as the compatibility of Islamic law and democracy, the issue of women’s rights, and there is always the problem of how to go about implementing a democratic reform in these countries. Many initially would assume that it is only the