Not only is Islam compatible with libertarian principles, it is conducive to them. No act of faith, without freedom. No faith, without freedom. There is an organization dedicated to educating Islamic religious and community leaders in economics and in the fact that liberty is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition for the achievement of a good society: Minaret of Freedom Institute.

I recommend all of you to check out the Minaret of Freedom Institute website at http://www.minaret.org/ or feel free to email any questions to mfi@minaret.org.

So long as coercion, i.e. the state, is not used to enforce proper behavior then rules about behavior would not be inherently anti-libertarian. Excommunication among the Catholics and shunning among the Amish, for example, are not really in conflict with Libertarianism. Libertarianism is not the same as libertinism. It’s certainly possible for very traditional Christians to be libertarians, see Lew Rockwell/ Thomas Woods/ Laurence Vance etc, so this whole idea that not wanting the government involved to regulate private acts means you approve of those private acts is wrong.

Re: The Ideal Libertarian State:

The ideal libertarian state would be no state at all. That’s the logical result if you take libertarianism far enough down the line. Everything would be provided for by the private market, including security.

The second best thing would be radical decentralization and an extremely limited system of government. Imagine a world filled with little Monacos or Luxembourgs.

“First and foremost, we have not seen it because pure Libertarianism is impossible. We are social animals; we work in groups, in clans. Our evolutionary path is much like other apes. Alone we ARE prey. We are hard-wired work in groups with other people. We are even hard wired to feel others pain. Even in the mostly egalitarian setting of the hunter-gatherers individuals must make concessions to the group to survive.”

You making the mistake of confusing ones local community with the state. It’s like confusing the US with the government of the US. Working in groups does not require government intrusion.

“(T)he gulf coast of the richest country in the world would have devolved into an underdeveloped landscape indistinguishable from Bangladesh.”

There have been other parts of the US that have been flooded and that have received much less attention and federal dollars and have recovered much quicker. There were worse hurricanes and floods before and people recovered and the affected areas did not end up looking like Bangladesh for years to come. And I doubt the Louisiana state government would have been to quick to mismanage levee funds if they thought the Feds weren’t going to help them.

“There’re two konds of liberatrianism, James: social and economic and- theoretically, at least- they need not be connected. ”

You can only separate libertarian into two camps and believe that the two can remain separate if you reject the notion that the axiom of non-aggression is the basis of libertarianism. That’s all libertarianism is; it’s immoral for an individual or a state to initiate violence and violence is only acceptable in defense. The people who got in libertarianism simply because they want to smoke pot or because they want to be accepted for having lifestyle choices that deviate from the norm don’t have a firm grasp on the matter.

On numerous matters, Libertarian ideas come close to the conclusions which had already been made by Islam over 1400 years ago. These include:

The inviolability of private property, which is totally accepted as natural under Islamic Law.

A true commodity currency based on the Gold Dinar and Silver Dirham, which avoids the inflation caused by Fiat paper-money.

Trade is regarded as the central practice in the economy. Indeed, it is mentioned throughout the Qur’an and played a pivotal role in early Islamic history.

Zakat is based on a charitable donation from the individual, so it is not coerced like taxation. Even the Jizya was often returned to the non-Muslim, as occurs in a famous story during the rule of Umar ibn al-Khattab (radiallahu anhu).

Rather than imposing a coercive moral or social standard on the individual, isolation (hijra) and social ostracism was often the preferable method, such as what occurs in the story about the three Sahaba who stayed home from the battle.

The rights of the religious minorities were accepted as inviolable. The Hadd punishments were only implemented upon those whose behavior was public. Slander is regarded as one of the major sins and there are strict rules that one must produce a certain number of witnesses.

The early Islamic state in Madina, followed by the righteous Khilafah of the Khulafa ar-Rashidun (Rightly-Guided Khalifas), was de-centralized and its primary function was to collect the Zakat and to defend or expand the boundaries of Dar al-Islam.

So there was much power given to the local communities, such that the profits from resources were given back to the local area.

Islam bestows much privacy to the individual. Allah (Subhanahu wa-Ta’ala) makes distinction between sins committed in private or in public.

There was no historical precedence for the secret police or Mukhabarat in Khilafa, as the authorities did not invade the privacy of individuals to see if they were violating the Shari’a.

Wa Allahu A’lam.

think about some islamic issues:
*money earned legitimately / permissible => you have to earn through your own work to get something permissible (not with goverment’s money distribution policies through taxing)
stealing is one of the most unforgivable sin.
*offering / zekat = it is 1/40th of your annual income (not 1/2) its earler form of taxing in first islamic state.
*sin =it is personal, you cant share your sin with others or receive other peoples sins.

sorry about my english

I think the reason we don’t see many Muslim libertarians is simply because we as a collective whole as Muslims in the West don’t properly understand our current situation. We are confused.

At this moment, to even survive in this country, we need libertarian ideals which will protect and honor the First Amendment guarantees.

On the other hand, many Muslims who have not come to terms with this basic reality side with social conservatives because they agree with many of Islam’s stances on issues such as gay marriage and abortion.

However, I think we can compromise. In my opinion, as a Muslim, I don’t agree at all with homosexuality or abortion as a common practice ; BUT I differ in my application of that belief. If it were an Islamic state, things would be a lot different, but in a democratic society such as the US, everyone is free to do what they want so there is no room to stop anyone from doing what they want.

But after libertarianism and the ideas of individualism/natural rights are protected, then I think education and discussion is the best way to teach others about our ideas.

Finally, I must point out after reading some comments that I don’t see any contradiction between human sociability and libertarianism.

Libertarianism seeks to minimalize central power and hegemony while promoting the “WE” through state communities. Thus, people CAN and of course WILL be social, and libertarianism doesn’t say people can’t be.

Quick questions to you, or any one else who wants to answer them:

From a Muslim / Libertarian prospective what is to be done when someone violates core values of the faith?
If a Muslim gets drunk, or if they commit adultery? If they commit a homosexual act? Munch down on a lovely piece of pork Barbecue?

Is there such a thing from a Muslim perspective as a “victimless crime?”

What would be the position of religious minorities in Muslim Majority / Libertarian Amiristan?

What would be done with “apostates?”

Finally Amir, will you be a term-limited elected executive or dictator-for-life?