Message #15258

[N. Truth Seeker]

In my opinion, the culture and practice of free speech is not suited for the media which has turned into the most forceful weapon to inculcate the masses in the modern world.  Instead, only the people and the counsels (who vote or represent the voters in a parliament or its equivalent) must be granted such freedom to be used with respect and all seriousness, to speak on governmental policies - both its shortcomings as well as its achievements - and its impact on the society.  This will establish a steady flow of interaction between the government and the masses with productive and valuable assessments coming from both sides.  It must never be viewed as a pathway to create hostilities or trading diatribes.

 

Socrates prioritized his approach incorrectly and thus failed. His move primarily involved displeasure and rebellion which was not the invention of a system.  The Quran, on the other hand, while mentioning of "mutual consultation" constructs the system of democracy itself.  Revolt can be justified (which can be interpreted from the Verse of "Amr bin al Maruf" - 3:104) after all parleys have failed.

Precisely .. this is the essence of the difference between the Quranic concept and the approach of Socrates.  When we talk about peoples' governance, it implies laying the cornerstone of a system.  If the leaders start abusing that system then confrontation can be a later consequence, if all negotiations fail.  While the Noble Quran lays the foundation of that system, Socrates starts his ideology with confrontation which isn't the same as introducing a system.  That way there may have been more people prior to him who complained and rebelled against their corrupt rulers and met a similar fate.  But they cannot be viewed as architects of a political axiom.   Application of mutual consultation, followed by the conceptualization of protest and revolt (if consultation does not succeed) is very briefly summarized in the simple diagram below.

(Image not available unfortunately.  Photobucket has lost it).

Approximately half a million people lived in Athens when Greece was at its zenith in 350 plus BC.  Half of those inhabitants were slaves with no voting rights. Women had no voting rights either. This was nothing exceptional in those times.  All societies were the same, and there came many rebels like Socrates from time to time.  But the ideological structure to resolve such a problem was first announced by the Quran.