Nota bene: Ayyuha‘l-Walad! Lesson Seven will follow shortly.

Monarchy after Capitalism

by Shaykh Dr. Abdalqadir as-Sufi - 27/04/2011

One of the evidentiary proofs of the end of capitalism will be the return of true monarchism.

Monarchy precisely means that executive power devolves on one man.

Absolute monarchy is a contradiction in terms. As such it is something else – dictatorship.

The irony of today’s utter inability to conduct open discourse on the subject, while both university and media are corporation controlled, is that monarchy is opposed to democratic presidency, the first being seen as totalitarian while the latter is seen as the will of the people.

Firstly, then, let us dispel the myth. In our time the ‘elected’ leaders of, say, the U.S.A., Britain, Germany and France have proved to be dictators, answerable to neither the people nor their senates and cabinets.

The mass of the people are known to be opposed to nuclear weaponry, yet their leaders force it on their nations with the known budgetary penalty.

Nobody wanted the Iraq War yet a demented English Premier and a stupid American President forced it on the world over the heads of populace and Parliament, States and Senate.

Political democracy as currently practised is itself dictatorship.

This is how structural dictatorships, like Russia, Assad’s Syria and China, can claim democracy, since the ballot does not affect the totalitarian outcome.

The Qur’an indicates that Allah has decreed monarchy while at the same time making clear that the power may not devolve as determined by men.

Thus monarchy is acceptable but dynastic merit may be swept aside. The dynastic principle is useful but not essential. It has two factors. The most important is upbringing. Dynastic rulers can teach their children how to have respect, courtesy and concern. This is the doctrine of Futuwwah, or high behaviour values in action, in other words pure Tasawwuf before it was esotericised by the hindus. The doctrine of Ma’rifa is its secret and not to be spoken of by the common. The other factor is taking advantage of the complex mathematic of inheritance, the D.N.A. transfer. The inheritance is in the hope that there is genetic transfer. This can give you Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius but it can also throw up Nero and Caligula.

This is why, personally, I would define myself as a pessimistic monarchist. By Deen and education, inside the parameters of the ‘Amal Ahl-al-Madinah, I am able to assess political affairs based on Tacitus, Shakespeare, Imam al-Qurtubi and Ibn Khaldun, and all illuminated by the Qur’an and the ash-Shifa’ of Qadi 'Iyad.

These comments come as the second in line to the British Crown is about to marry a commoner. The last time this happened the King abdicated, ostensibly because she was divorced. This was a delicious irony, since the monarchy was based on a divorce so powerful it liberated England from the Papacy.

Apart from a few hiccups by the Hanoverians, the last marriage of a King (Edward IV) to a woman deemed common (she was, in fact, gentry) led to the Wars of the Roses being doubled in their bloody duration.

The Windsor marriage is a matter of some concern to us because of our much loved Islamic Polity in the country. The Royal Family have been massively weakened by the domination of the political class. The last monarch to defend the rights of the institution was George V who took on the ghastly Lloyd George when he tried to elect dubious politicians to the peerage. Since his death the monarchy has been utterly reduced to ceremonial duties. It is a hollow crown. Power is vested elsewhere, and that, not in Parliament.

As for the current heir to the throne, he could not be more aware or informed on Islam. This is a huge benefit for the Muslim community. It must also be said that he knows the people far and beyond the scrappy briefing of the politicians. He has defended and supported organic farming from the time when he was mocked for this as eccentric up to now when it is crucial to the survival of rural Britain. When the financial system collapses as it will and must, Britain will be lucky if he is still alive.

In the meantime the body politic needs reviving and that will not happen by reducing the monarchic family to celebrity status. It is time to do for the Muslim community what certainly happened to British jews in the 20th century. They must be honoured and brought into the heart of the national ethos. The honours at present granted to important Muslims are disgraceful. This responsibility goes back to the monarchy.

Honours should be granted as follows:

Sir Anwar Pervez should be created an Earl.
Firoz Kassam should be granted a baronetcy.
Iqbal Ahmad should be granted a baronetcy.
Anwar and Yakub Patel should receive a knighthood.
Assem Allam should receive a knighthood.
Rashid Tayub should receive a knighthood.
Abdul Ali Mahomad should be honoured.
Adalat and Arshad Chaudhary should be honoured.
Younus Sheikh should be honoured.
Afzal and Akmal Khushi should be honoured.
Mo Chaudry should be honoured.
Ajaz Ahmed should receive a knighthood.
Lutfur Rahman of Tower Hamlets should be honoured.
Mehdi Hassan of the New Statesman should be granted a baronetcy.
Shaykh Babikir Ahmad Babikir should receive a knighthood.
Dr. Abdalhakim Murad of Cambridge should receive a knighthood.
Abdalhaqq Bewley should receive a life peerage for his translation of Qur’an and service abroad for British Islam.

This could be the first step to a new social structure for Britain to replace the ruined social order wrecked by World War II.

  *   *   *    *    *  

“ The Qur’an indicates that Allah has decreed monarchy while at the same time making clear that the power may not devolve as determined by men.”

Click here to download the PDF version of this article