The following represents a modest effort to explain an anarchist/libertarian view of the Islamic faith as opposed to these modern puritanical/statist expressions which have unfortunately come to dominate the discourse. But I am not equating the two, as the basis of Islam is ruhani and that of anarchism/libertarianism is ideological. My effort is solely to be viewed within the context of method and not belief….

I find that Islam is the natural culmination of anarchist/libertarian socialist ideas. There is no concept called “Islamic” State, despite the claims of modern puritans who promote this aberation. Our belief is a personal matter between ourselves and Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala). There is no compulsion in Islam, but rather every act or belief must come from the free-will of the individual.

Islam promotes an authentic free market, without any monopolies or intervention. One hadith condemns the State Socialist/Capitalist concept of price-fixing or other forms of State intervention. Everyone is free to produce, trade or sell their goods in a free market. Proudhon described the two-faceted nature of private property, a potential problem remedied by the Islamic concept of the Awqaf. We are stewards of the earth and cannot take possession of that which belongs to all, except as the product of our labor.

“Governance without State, Trade without Usury”

I am a convert (or revert) to Islam, from a Catholic background. One of the things which drew me to Islam is the fact that it has no religious hierarchies. Everyone is free in the sight of Islam, with no special privileges. These unnatural and coercive hierarchies have no place in an Islam which realizes this perfect balance of individual liberty and social equality within a higher spiritual realm.

All social interactions under Islam derive from the free-will of the individual. The only “hiearchies” that are recognized are the natural ones such as family and that which is based on knowledge and abilities. One hadith describes the believers as one body, each supporting and complementing the other. This is the society of free individuals, the jamaat whose strength is derived from cooperation and whose members are connected to each other by their hearts, rather than unnatural coercive authorities such as those founded on legislation, force or wealth.

Zakat is synonymous with the mutual aid of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the charity envisioned by early anarchist William Godwin. It is not collected by the State (a concept foreign to Islam) but rather by a larger system of amirs which is not monopolistic. The Qur’an emphasizes the charity which is given freely by the individual, who sees it as his or her natural duty to help the less fortunate in society.

Islam has much to say about the current Capitalist State which derives its authority from the twin pillars of taxation and usury, and perpetuates the interests of Corporate and banking interests and a professional class of charlatans known as “politicians”.

Tasawwuf emphasizes the struggle against the self as paramount. This is a natural complement to the anarchist doctrine of non-violent means to achieve objectives. The Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) always chose the option that would minimize bloodshed. Da’wa means peaceful arguments and setting an example.

There are many misconceptions about Shari’a, but certainly the coercive enforcement of Shari’a is not in keeping with Islamic ideals. This is where social cooperation and mutual aid comes into play, not some type of “Islamic state” as the puritans assert. The early Islamic society at Madina used social pressures to regulate behavior rather than coercion. Exile was often a punishment, which is in keeping with anarchist concepts of separate free communities.

There is a remarkable distinction of sins committed in public and private, and the respect to privacy was paramount inside one’s home. It is also true that the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) only instituted hadd punishments whenever people came to him and confessed of their free-will, since they wanted to be released of the burden of their own sins and lessen its effects in Akhira.

“In the unanimous view of our Fuqaha, what has been declared Haram is Haram and what is Halal is Halal. Now the Deen of Islam is not actually based on that set of judgments which could result in a decision of either punishment or pardon, or equally a reward of financial payment. While this is rarely understood by the kuffar, it must be understood by the Muslims – the Shari’at and its judgments are sustained by an underlying social nexus of what is agreed among us embodying what is praiseworthy behaviour and unworthy behaviour. The primary inhibition to wrong action is not the threatening law of punishment but the disapproval and social rejection of our peers. This whole web of social disapproval and social approval results in a pattern of social behaviour that is harmonious, fair and courteous. This is what we call Sunna. The Sunnan are pegged in place by the Fara’id, or the obligatory.” – Shaykh Dr. Abdalqadir as-Sufi

The fact that Islam is based on the four madhahib and distinct practices of the various Tariqas, but that each are considered valid no matter which one the individual Muslim chooses to accept. This is very different from the notion that religion is about embracing one doctrine and ensuring conformity with its practices.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=14952944340

Second, I have since found many inconsistencies within the writings of Rothbard and his support for usury and interest receives nothing but my opposition. Likewise, I reject firmly the very concept of “Anarcho”-Capitalism. The free-market which I have nothing but the fullest support for is not the same thing as capitalism which has from its inception been State intervention in the markets to benefit certain financial and corporate interests.

I have since studied the writings of Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner. And my discovery of Kevin Carson’s Studies in Mutualist Political Economy has refined my understanding in this regard. I still think the Austrian economists made many valid points, but I have far more affinity with the Left-Libertarian movement, with the Market Anarchist and Mutualist trends than with the “mainstream” libertarian movement.

As I study Sufism in much greater detail, its close parallel with anarchist ideals has only become more apparent to me. I only skirted the issue whereas I could have been drowning in a living testament to libertarian/anarchist ideals within a spiritual framework. The wisdom of the Sufi teachers and their practices is very close to the ideas cherished by anarchists.