Democracy, Radical Islam and International Cooperation

Introduction

Radical Islamism is neither a war of civilizations or a religious war but a war against democracy. The radical Islamist movement has of course as a starting point of religious fundamentalism, but it eventually mutate into totalitarianism. This means that the way chosen by radical Islam to win now imports more than the end itself, which is usually religion. Islamism is not dangerous because he chooses to promote Islam, but because religion really is not his main concern. His main concern is to spread terror and lawless totalitarian or boundary.

Democracy is the least bad system because it is not an ideology, but rather a landscape area or ideologies can express themselves, to confront and even compete on the occasion.Democracy does not say that all men are alike, but that all men have equal rights. This principle is crucial to the functioning of any modern society.

Discussion

Democracy obviously has weaknesses, because you may be skeptical about the ability of the masses to be smart or have good heart. The fact that it is the majority endorsing a policy does not account for his virtue. We are after all in a world of men who choose to favor one worldview over another based on their diversity, their living conditions and also the chance to some extent (Bale). However what makes democracy valuable is that it allows for regime change when it is not in line with expectations. It is this possibility of change, and it alone, which that democracy is the best system.

The most important political consequence for our day is the rise of the Ash'ari, first of all, the fact that democracy has become impossible for believers. It is not so much because the Sharia is the law of God but because the prerequisite of democracy is the respectability of reason. "Otherwise," Reilly asked, "So what would be its source of legitimacy?" (Rogan). The syllogism that uses Thomistic Reilly is blunt: without the possibility that there are secondary causes, there can be no natural law, and without the natural law there can be no constitutional political order through which human beings, using reason, create laws to govern themselves and act freely.

By freeing the divine omnipotence by the laws of causality, even God had been freed from rationality. A typical example of policy-making on this line would be the theological paradox: the use of seat belts is an affront ...