Image BusinessWorld

 

Power versus Justice, a Peek into the Soul of Two Civilizations

By Dr Nazeer Ahmed
Concord, CA

Muslims have been at the receiving end of the stick. At least that is the perception among the Muslim rank and file. The belief has taken hold that for two hundred years the world of Islam has labored under the yoke of Western colonialism, imperialism, exploitation and outright military aggression. The recent history of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Bosnia, Kosovo, the Horn of Africa and now Gaza is offered as manifest proofs for this position.

In addition, Muslims are befuddled by the double standards of the West. They struggle to comprehend how Western nations talk of morality at home while inflicting the most painful punishment upon the people of Asia and Africa. How can they be so insensitive to the suffering of the people of Gaza?

To understand a civilization, one must look into its soul. What fundamental ideas govern the behavior of a nation? Who were the great personages who influenced their history and molded their communal ethos?

These are broad questions. In this brief essay, we will limit our observation to the United States of America.

The American Revolution was inspired by Enlightenment thinkers like Locke, Voltaire and Rousseau. Voltaire’s ideas of liberty, equality and individual rights appealed to the revolutionaries who were disillusioned with the arbitrary taxation by the ruling British. Rousseau’s ideas of social contract formed the foundation of the American Republic. Locke’s ideas of equality, liberty and the pursuit of happiness formed the preamble for the constitution.

However, these lofty principles did not prevent the new republic from continued slavery defining a black man as three fifths of a white man for political representation or the mass slaughter of the indigenous Indian tribes.

The same dichotomy in American policies persists to this day: those who are inside the tent experience a liberal governance while those outside the tent are treated as “the other” and subjected to a different set of rules. This was starkly manifest during the Vietnam war. While Lyndon Johnson’s presidency was noted for “Great Society” initiatives, including the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, Medicare and Medicaid, it was also noted for its devastating bombing of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.

To understand this dichotomy between internal and external politics in America, one must dive deeper into the impulses that drive its actions. While Locke, Voltaire and Rousseau provided the inspiration for the American Revolution, the actions of the new-found republic were driven by Machiavellian impulses for power and aggrandizement. While freedom, liberty and the common good, overlaid on a thin veneer of Christian ethics, governed the evolving American internal civil society, the raw exercise of power governed its behavior with “the other”. This is as true today as it was at the founding of the Republic.

Machiavelli (d 1527) was a Florentine priest who lived at a convulsive time when Italy was divided between warring city states. The threat of external aggression from France, Spain or the Holy Roman Empire was ever-present. Machiavelli was employed for a while as a civil servant in the Florentine court but lost it in a power shuffle in 1512 and spent the rest of his life banished from the court. It was during these years of desperation that he composed his masterpiece The Prince which summarizes his political philosophy.

To Machiavelli the end justifies the means. He wrote: “In politics and leadership, success justifies the means…. People forget the method if the results work in their favor…use both force and strategy, like the lion and the fox, power lies in combining strength and intelligence”. On cruelty: “Cruelty is acceptable if it fosters the correct perception ……. It should be inflicted all at once so that the shock is less resented. Benefits should be granted gradually so that people savor them more”. On war:” War is the foundation of political power…. Control the balance of power. Delaying war only benefits your enemy….”. Deceptive reporting: “Control morale through narrative”. No fidelity to your friends: “Replace those who brought you to power with your own power.”. On leadership: “Leadership is not about being perfect. It is about being effective. Sticking rigidly to virtue can be dangerous in a world full of opportunities. It is better to be thought as bad and stay in power than to be praised and lose everything.”

These selected quotes speak for themselves. Muslims have a hard time coming to terms with the seemingly hypocritical behavior of the West because they walk into the domain of politics from a different framework. The Muslims framework is one of justice, as it was practiced by Omar ibn al Khattab and imbibed by sultans and emperors through the centuries. Rulership is considered a trust and the ruler a “shadow of God on earth” whose function it is to establish the divine patterns of justice on earth. One of the masterpieces of Islamic approach to politics is the Siasat Nama, written by Nizam ul Mulk in 1092 at the height of Seljuk power. He writes: “Justice is the glory of the faith and the power of the government; in it lies the prosperity of the nobility and the commons. It is the measure of all good things as God said: “He raised up the heavens and has established the balance”. He offers Naushirvan, a Persian prince of antiquity as an example of a just king: “He was a youth whose nature had been infused with justice from infancy; he recognized evil things as evil and he knew what was good…. He commanded that a chain should be set up with bells attached to it within the reach of even a seven year old so that any complainant who came to the court would not need to see a chamberlain; he would pull the chain and the bells would ring; Naushirvan would hear the bells, summon the person, hear the case, and give justice.” About the bad qualities that a ruler should avoid, Nizamul Mulk writes: “They are….hatred, envy, pride, anger, lust, greed, desire, spite, mendacity, avarice, ill temper, cruelty, selfishness, hastiness, ingratitude and frivolity.”

The modern world is much more complex than the worlds in which Machiavelli and Nisam ul Mulk wrote. The modern world revolves around economic power backed up by military power. Statecraft, foreign relations, education, the media, indeed religion itself is beholden to economic power. In addition, the spread of authoritarianism around the globe has blurred the distinction between internal politics for the “common good” and external politics for “the other”.

Power versus justice. Two different paradigms. Two different civilizations. When people express their horror at the slaughter in Gaza, they are looking for justice. They forget that the governing paradigm for the West (and now the accepted paradigm for states the world over) is Machiavellian self-interest and power. Events are happening not because of neglect; they happen by design. In a rational discourse on current events the first dictum is: know yourself and know your adversary.

(The author is Director, World Organization for Resource Development and Education, Washington, DC; Director, American Institute of Islamic History and Culture, CA; Member, State Knowledge Commission, Bangalore; and Chairman, Delixus Group)