The Modern National State Is Ambiguous in the Discourse of Political Islam
Editorial verification status: This claim atom has been extracted from an explanatory audiovisual source, and has now been linked to the closest books within Shahrur’s project at the book level. For precise academic citation, consult the original book and the original episode together.
Formulation of the claim
Shahrur says that concepts such as state, homeland, and loyalty were not properly understood within the discourse of political Islam, because they were applied with an old heritage to a modern reality.
Explanation
He notes that the national state and its concepts were not clearly formed in the consciousness of political Islam. He considers that transferring concepts such as the caliphate, emirate, and allegiance to the present produces ambiguity. The problem is not only in the texts, but in the mistaken conception of the state’s very form. Therefore, he insists on the need for a new definition of the state and its function.
Its place in the episode’s argument
This claim prepares the way for a critique of political Islam as incapable of understanding the structure of the modern state.
Scope of the claim
It does not deny the existence of an Islamic political history, but says that its tools do not automatically apply to the present.
Brief witness
“The concept of the national state is not clear at all… what is the state’s function, anyway?”
Close links
- Shahrur - The Civil State
- Shahrur - Those in Authority
- Book: State and Society