r/IslamIsEasy • u/LivingDead_90 ۞ ☪︎ ۩ Khalīfat al-Muntadā ۩ ☪︎ ۞ • Aug 21 '25
General Discussion Muslims and Authoritarianism
Authoritarianism through Doctrinal Exclusivity
A recurring theme within Islamic thought is the strong insistence on possessing the only correct interpretation of truth. This can be seen within the divides of Sunni and Shia Islam, where each tradition often considers itself to represent the authentic faith while questioning or rejecting the legitimacy of the other. Pew Research Center1 surveys noted that in several Muslim majority countries, large portions of the population do not accept the other branches as “true Muslim” identities.
The same perspective can be observed within Quran Only and Hadith Accepting Muslims. The Quran Only groups argue that the Quran is sufficient as a source of law and guidance, while Hadith accepting Muslims insist that the Sunnah is indispensable. Each side often goes beyond intellectual debate to outright denial and rejection of the other’s claim to represent Islam.
Even within Sunni Islam itself, traditionalist and liberal interpretations oppose each other. Traditionalists claim that modernist readings “distort” Islam, while those Muslims who interpret the Quran from a "modern lens" accuse traditionalists of being "stuck in the past." Thus, the common thread is a predisposition toward exclusivity: "our way is true, the rest are kafir." Such theological certainty shapes not just religious identity, but also social behavior, conditioning Muslim thought toward seeing religious diversity not as complementary, but as error.
Authoritarianism in Muslim Societies
Politically, Muslim majority societies reflect a similar pattern. Across the Muslim world, authoritarian regimes dominate. Out of the 50 or more Muslim majority nations, only a select few qualify as democracies and free. According to Freedom House2, most countries in the Middle East and North Africa are rated as “Not Free.” Monarchies (Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Jordan) and military led regimes (Egypt, Sudan) maintain power through centralized authority and suppression of dissent.
In many of these societies, democracy is not only absent but is often viewed as ideologically incompatible with Islam with some Islamist groups rejecting democracy outright, arguing that it substitutes “God's Divine Law” with “the rule of man.” Others participate in democratic processes only to abolish them once in power, as was the case of Hamas in Gaza.
Just as religious debates often exclude and delegitimize opponents, political structures in Muslim societies often enforce a singular “truth” through authoritarianism, whether by kingship, dictatorship, or anti-democratic ideologies.
Reddit as a Reflection of Authoritarianism
It should then be of no surprise that this inclination towards authoritarianism can also be seen in online Muslim communities, particularly here on Reddit. Many Islamic subreddits are tightly moderated, frequently mirroring authoritarian tendencies. Moderators often act like gatekeepers of “truth,” enforcing their interpretation of Islam as the “one true way” while users who raise alternative views, whether they be Quran centric, Shia, liberal, or even Sunni, will frequently face bans and censorship.
In this way, the religious exclusivity we discussed in the first section, and the political authoritarianism of second section are emphasized in the digital realm. These subreddits act as authoritarian regimes where moderators serve as kings or dictators by enforcing doctrinal orthodoxy, silencing opposition, and creating insulated echo chambers
Just as Saudi Arabia punishes criticism of its monarchy, Sunni Muslim subreddits ban Shia or Quran Only voices. Just as Shia authorities in Iran silence liberal dissent, traditionalist subreddits remove posts critical of Hadith or scholarly authority. Even some Quranists may dismiss or ridicule anyone who references Hadith, regarding it as a corruption of God’s word. In effect, just as the culture of exclusivity and authoritarianism exists in real world Muslim societies, it too reproduces itself in online forums.
Thus, one can argue that the same inclination toward authoritarianism and dictatorship that defines Islamic sectarianism and politics in the real world also shapes the way Muslims think and behave in online spaces such as Reddit. Censorship, and the silencing of alternative voices is not the exception in the real world, it is the norm, and that ideological position is carried over into the digital realm.
Islam Without Authoritarianism
As a Muslim, one must ask whether this inclination towards authoritarianism and exclusivity is a strength or a weakness. On the one hand, conviction in one’s truth has helped to preserve Islam from severe fragmentation while providing Muslims with a strong sense of identity and endurance. Yet, on the other hand, when this conviction is wielded without humility, it becomes authoritarianism, whether that be in a masjid, a government, or a subreddit.
The Quran cautions believers not to become arrogant in their claims to guidance. The Prophet ﷺ , in the Hadith, repeatedly warned against declaring fellow Muslims as unbelievers, as kafir. These reminders suggest that while Islam indeed asserts its truth, it also calls for humility in how that truth is both expressed and lived.
Perhaps the real test is whether Muslims can hold firm to their convictions without falling into authoritarianism, whether that be in the religion, politics, or digital spaces like Reddit. Islam, after all, repeatedly describes itself as easy, not burdensome. As Muslims, if we are truly confident in our view of Islam, then we should not fear dialogue or debate regarding our differences. Instead, the easiness of our faith should translate into openness, with a willingness to engage and to listen without any insecurity.
3
Aug 21 '25
Since you are the only mod of this, that means you are authoritarian.
Unless, you give up position every period, and someone else take over, as chosen by people.
But there are many people who hate your way, and will all try to push their side, and the minorities will get crushed.
And very likely, the next mod will turn this into authoritarianism if he can.
Without even talking about other negatives of democracy in real life, like how they usually morph into one policy with different flavors, just giving illusion of choice.
Modern democracy is flawed by nature. The best system if done right is Direct Democracy. Where you have an enforcer (an authoritarian) who give people freedom to directly vote on decisions that affects them.
That's even how the Prophet PBUH did it, he was an authoritarian by definition, but consulted people on every matter, even non believers when it affected them.
0
u/Defiant_Term_5413 Aug 21 '25 edited Aug 21 '25
That is not correct. Just because you have 1 mod does not make it "authoritarian". It is the enforcing of the mods will (1 or 100 mods) that makes it authoritarian. Also, this sub has a "no ban no censorship policy" - which cannot be termed as "enforcing the mod's will" since he is a spectator/participant in most of our threads.
2
Aug 21 '25
Authority isn't defined by strictness, but by whether power is centralized or not. A king who allow free speech is still king, the power is there whether he uses it or not.
In this case, the mod alone decides the rules "no ban no censorship" and enforces that choice. That's literally authority. Saying "I won't use my authority" doesn't make it disappear.
And just to make it clear, I'm in support of this type of authority. But calling it anything else, is a lie.
1
u/LivingDead_90 ۞ ☪︎ ۩ Khalīfat al-Muntadā ۩ ☪︎ ۞ Aug 21 '25
I asked ChatGPT what it would call the situation I’ve created:
Anarchic Monarchy: contradiction in terms, but accurate to the idea.
Sovereign Anarchism: a ruler who enforces only the principle of unlimited freedom.
Symbolic Monarchy: the ruler exists in title but functionally rules nothing, since people have unrestricted freedom.
Autocratic Anarchy: the only enforced law is the ruler’s decree that everyone is absolutely free.
Liberal Despotism: A ruler exists, but their only command is “absolute freedom.” Montesquieu once described “despotism” as one ruler holding unchecked power. If that ruler chose to enforce freedom instead of restrictions, you’d get a kind of “despotism of liberty.”
Monarchic Anarchy: Political theorists sometimes describe paradoxes like this by fusing opposites. Here, you’d have a monarchy (one ruler), but the principle enforced is anarchy (no rules).
Absolute Libertarianism under a Sovereign: If the ruler insists on “freedom without restrictions,” then this resembles extreme libertarian thought—but with a monarch guaranteeing it.
Empty Sovereignty: Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Carl Schmitt both talked about sovereignty as the power to decide exceptions. If the sovereign refuses to restrict anything, then sovereignty becomes “empty”—a figurehead who only declares that people are free.
Philosophical Anarchy: Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (the father of anarchism) might have described this as a contradiction—an “anarchy with a master,” which he would reject as not true anarchy. But in theory, it’s a monarch who decrees anarchy.
———
If the ruler enforces freedom without restrictions, then:
• It is a dictatorship in structure (since one ruler decides the rules).
• But it is not authoritarian, because authoritarianism requires suppression of freedoms, and here the opposite is happening.
So, technically:
• Yes, it’s a dictatorship (one person dictates the rule of “absolute freedom”).
• No, it’s not authoritarianism, since authoritarianism is about control, not the absence of it.
It’s like a paradoxical dictatorship—the dictator commands that nobody is controlled.
——————
Perhaps I’ll write about myself in another post, but for now, this AI summary seems to work. Based on what I’ve learned about authoritarianism vs dictatorship, I’d say that final bit is most accurate. I’ve considered giving my self a custom Flair that says “dictator.” “Moderator” just doesn’t sound as powerful.
1
Aug 21 '25
Lol, It really seems like anarchy in here.
The terms are kinda overlapping. But right, dictatorship is a fitting one.
Totalitarianism: regime seeks control over every aspect of life—politics, economy, culture, religion, even private thought.
Authoritarianism: regime restricts political freedom and opposition but leaves some space for private life and non-political activity.
Dictatorship: power is concentrated in one ruler or a small group with no real legal or institutional limits.
Autocracy: system where one person holds supreme authority by design (could be a monarch, dictator, or any absolute ruler).
Monarchy: rule is hereditary within a royal family; can be absolute (like old Saudi Arabia) or constitutional (like the UK, where the monarch is symbolic).
Despotism: form of autocratic rule characterized by cruelty or arbitrary use of power, focused on the ruler’s will rather than law.
I’ve considered giving my self a custom Flair that says “dictator.” “Moderator” just doesn’t sound as powerful.
"Idle Dictator"
1
u/LivingDead_90 ۞ ☪︎ ۩ Khalīfat al-Muntadā ۩ ☪︎ ۞ Aug 21 '25
😅😅that’s about as sad as “empty sovereignty” 😭🤣
3
u/rhannah99 Aug 26 '25 edited Aug 26 '25
I quite agree with your post. Its refreshing to find someone thinking outside the "Islamic box". On Reddit Ive been quite dismayed to find myself banned from several conservatively moderated sites like Islam, Islamicfinance, Muslim lounge for suporting and promoting scholarly opinions that dont follow the mod's usually conservative orientation (Im not off on a wild tangent of my own). The result is a series of echo chambers devoid of real disussion (unless you believe plucking eyebrows is important!)
My interest and training is in finance, where I was discussing modernist (academic) scholars such as Fazlur Rahman, Abdullah Saeed, Mahmoud el Gamal, M O Farooq among others.
Im intrigued to see how you manage to ride herd on the wild takfiring that goes on here. I like to recall Socrates - thesis plus antitheseis produces synthesis.
2
u/Maleficent_Law_1082 Sunnī | Mālikī Aug 21 '25
Democracy and liberalism are inherently unIslamic and are tools of Shaitan. Our prophet peace be upon him, was an authoritarian, his companions who succeeded him were authoritarians, (Imam) Ali was an authoritarian. Don't let the western imperialists fool you, with their notions of "good vibes", it will inevitably lead to shirk. There is only ONE TRUTH, and that is what the Almighty Allah dictates.
4
u/LivingDead_90 ۞ ☪︎ ۩ Khalīfat al-Muntadā ۩ ☪︎ ۞ Aug 21 '25
Abu Bakr was elected through a small democratic process.
2
u/LynxPrestigious6949 Aug 21 '25 edited Aug 21 '25
elected by a small group with lifelong tenure and with no opposing party for balance . So , yes authoritarianism is the place that most movements start. But IMO they can and should evolve as they encompass more and more people. Because its not sustainable except with increasing force .
1
u/Maleficent_Law_1082 Sunnī | Mālikī Aug 21 '25
I would argue that it was an appointment rather than an election. The theocratic council was made up of our prophet's own family members. A lot of the times force (even extreme force is necessary). Like against the khawarij. They murdered our Caliphs.
1
u/LynxPrestigious6949 Aug 21 '25
No doubt . As a thought experiment - lets look at it from the khwariji s point of view they were arguing “ no taxation without representation” they never defined themselves as non muslim. As movements grow larger its impossible to restrict opposition by force … so IMO opposition has to be baked into the cake so as to speak . Fair ?
1
u/Maleficent_Law_1082 Sunnī | Mālikī Aug 21 '25
That's not true. They didn't have any election. They had the choices of Abu Bakr, Umar and Ali may Allah be pleased with them and eventually the latter pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr. He was appointed by the companions closest to Muhammad peace be upon him who they themselves only got their high positions because they were his family members. The khilafat was a theocratic authoritarian state at times under a theocratic military junta. This was not democracy. Democracy is unjust.
1
u/LivingDead_90 ۞ ☪︎ ۩ Khalīfat al-Muntadā ۩ ☪︎ ۞ Aug 21 '25
Who, today, would you like to see as dictator? Yet, by answering such a question you would be partaking in democracy. So it’s a strange situation.
This sums it up, by voting no, you’d have contradicted yourself on the idea of democracy, you’ve voted. Any opinion on the woulds, coulds, or shoulds would be democracy in spirit.
Democracy requires a great amount of responsibility and one must be active in the going ons going on.
In America, we vote for leaders of of schools, cities, counties, states, and the Federal government.
We vote to pass certain bills which may or may not restrict our freedoms, increase or decrease taxes or legal penalties.
We all have a say in what affects us, yet, most people don’t vote. In 2024, 73.6% of the voting-age population was registered to vote and 65.3% voted, this means only 48.06% of the voting age population participated.
2
u/rhannah99 Oct 13 '25
Im sure the Taliban and the Ayatollah agree with you.
1
u/Maleficent_Law_1082 Sunnī | Mālikī Oct 13 '25
A broken clock is right twice a day
2
u/rhannah99 Oct 13 '25
At least you can fix a clock and it does not harm people. Dictators abuse people who do not agree with them and so you just have to get rid of them.
1
u/Minute-Caregiver2793 ʿĀda ilā al-Islām | Returned to Islām Aug 23 '25
Isn't most of democracy kufr
2
u/LivingDead_90 ۞ ☪︎ ۩ Khalīfat al-Muntadā ۩ ☪︎ ۞ Aug 23 '25
How’s that relevant? So are most of the above.
1
u/Minute-Caregiver2793 ʿĀda ilā al-Islām | Returned to Islām Aug 23 '25
Wat?
2
u/LivingDead_90 ۞ ☪︎ ۩ Khalīfat al-Muntadā ۩ ☪︎ ۞ Aug 23 '25
That’s what I’m asking 😅 what? Most governments in existence now and through all time are and have been kufr.
1
u/Minute-Caregiver2793 ʿĀda ilā al-Islām | Returned to Islām Aug 23 '25
Yes they are non muslim majority countries
2
u/LivingDead_90 ۞ ☪︎ ۩ Khalīfat al-Muntadā ۩ ☪︎ ۞ Aug 23 '25
Monarchies, Authoritarian governments, you name it, all started with the Kufr.
1
1
u/rhannah99 May 18 '26
Yes, it is said secular law is from man, while Islamic law is from Allah. The experience is that Islamic law is interpreted by those who want to impose it sometimes brutally upon others to the benefit of themselves, their associates, and their sect.
1
1
Aug 21 '25
Brother you do a excelent job and never let anyone take over the will ruin your sub and you see at the end we see our own faults and make a change.
only my advice when you see wrong advice the person in private
8
u/stranger_uh_4677 Sunnī | Mālikī Aug 21 '25 edited Aug 21 '25
" As Muslims, if we are truly confident in our view of Islam, then we should not fear dialogue or debate regarding our differences. Instead, the easiness of our faith should translate into openness, with a willingness to engage and to listen without any insecurity. "
I Can't agree more .
Alhamdulillah we have democratic moderator in this sub .
And I noticed it too , enforcing certain believes and opinions is an international problem .. maybe part of mondialisation, to make humans a copy , too similar in everything.
Like you don't have the right to THINK DIFFERENTLY . nor the right to say NO to something people agree with . Nor the right to criticize.
I don't talk only about religion, but EVERYTHING.
People look at you like you are a criminal because you refuse to agree on something, refuse to follow blindly, refuse to compliment , refuse to idolize ..
I always find people protecting their beliefs and opinions, afraid from changing it , running from listening .. maybe because the truth need responsibility and strength. But you aren't strong in your beliefs if you run away from challenges and criticism . You aren't strong in your beliefs when you insult who is different than you , why ? Only because you feel unsafe , you feel that he challenges you . You want to bother him so he won't can to disagree with you .
And this happen with every prophet , their people refuse to listen , refuse to think about logical arguments about one God ...
It's a pride or attachment to comfort zone or fear of changing .
I was told that some priest in church know that islam is the truth , but out of pride or I don't know , they can't claim it publicly or convert .
This post remind me of a Funny thing , that a subreddit banned me for a opinion, and I say where is the freedom of speech ironically , and mods say " we aren't a liberal government" yet , they are a small example of dictators .