Baha'i Totalitarian Oligarchy?

[firedragon]

ISIS is a great example of the worst kind of theocracy. It has no element of democracy, is based on an interpretation of Sharia law that has no place in the modern world and imposes archaic laws on everyone. Basic human rights we all take for granted are completely discarded.

Its a good example Adrain, but you have not understood ISIS. Can you tell me how you have assessed their so called "interpretation of the Shariah"? And what is this "archaic law" that they are trying to impose?

I agree with you that their stance is an absolute violation of basic human rights, but can you explain your statements?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It is only as unthinkable as it is to think that a religion based on equality would exclude women from its highest leadership Adrian.

I see that as a misunderstanding of the system put in place by Baha'u'llah, that in no way excludes women from fulfilling their full potential.

As humanity further matures, we will find a balance in the wisdom of submission to God's Laws.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

If by provocative you mean, inflammatory or infuriating...no. But it was certainly intended to be eye-catching and stimulating. What I actually expected...well, hoped for... was a discussion from some Baha'i on the actual goals and practical plans of implementations of those goals.

You do know how ludicrous that sounds?

Like you enter the room, guns drawn, shooting from the hip and say Hi all I came for peaceful meaningful dialogue.

Maybe try another approach and the people in the room may not have to dive for cover.

Regards Tony

 

[ppp]

Like you enter the room, guns drawn, shooting from the hip and say Hi all I came for peaceful meaningful dialogue.

You think in such binary extremes, Tony. Never said a damned thing about peaceful, Tony. I said meaningful, not inflammatory. And by meaningful, I mean the ability to discuss the content of ones position over and above the mere quotation of dogma followed by an obligatory hollow and pompous rebuke.

The value of a belief is in one's understanding of that belief, and to communicate it clearly, and to synthesize action and hypothetical action from that belief. Beliefs that do nothing, are merely souvenirs.

You didn't have to dive for cover. You could have said that the OP is not the structure that we (Baha'i) are working toward. The social and political structure that would be our idea is [insert description here]. And yes, Tony, there would have been some examination and criticism of those plans. What the hell is wrong with that?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You didn't have to dive for cover. You could have said that the OP is not the structure that we (Baha'i) are working toward. The social and political structure that would be our idea is [insert description here]. And yes, Tony, there would have been some examination and criticism of those plans. What the hell is wrong with that?

I entered the conversation from this post.

Baha'i Totalitarian Oligarchy?

Your post included your ideas of posts that I had previously offered. I responded informing you of your mistake in that regard.

I have given replies to the original OP.

We can start again as it takes two to tango.

I think your OP is answerd though.

The future is not known, it is still being written, so future people will elect thier governments as they choose.

The Baha'i will elect their representatives as they so choose. If the two will become one, only those in the future will determine that.

So what is the purpose of the post? It is not hard to see that the first 5 or so initial responses, was most likely the intent.

Personally, I see that the future elected Government of the world, that administers the Lesser Peace, will also look for guidance from what Baha'u'llah offered and as such will ask the Universal House of Justice to provide advice. If what I see will become a reality, depends on what all others choose.

Regards Tony

 

[Dawnofhope]

It is only as unthinkable as it is to think that a religion based on equality would exclude women from its highest leadership Adrian.

We can't ignore potential exceptions to the basic principles when those exceptions may well be supported by the Baha'i teachings.

I wouldn't go so far as to say there is an exception in this case, but there could be based on logical deduction as follows;
1. Non Baha'i can't vote out members of Baha'i institutions
2. It hasn't been made clear whether Baha'i institutions will replace secular institutions, if the institutions do then automatically non-Baha'i will find themselves under a leadership they can not vote out.

To not make explicitly clear such an issue of pressing importance was clearly a sign of short-sightedness on behalf of the central figures of the faith, and imo a sure sign that none of them where omniscient

I think you are comparing apples with oranges.

I agree the Baha'i Faith leaves itself open to criticism having the equality of men and women as a central tenant and then having no women on our international governing body. Its completely fair and reasonable to point that out. The Universal House of Justice has been in existence since 1963. There are clearly no women as members, never have been members and a compelling narrative based on the statements of the Central figures to strongly indicate there won't be any members in the future. Further, no explanation is offered other than the reasons will be clear at a future time.

However, it would be unfair to say the Baha'i community excludes women from consultation and decision making. There is a good balance of men and women on our local and national spiritual assemblies. There are no exclusion criteria from our other major institution guiding the Baha'í community, the institution of the counsellors.

While the absence of women on the Universal House of Justice is a known quantity the arrangements for a future Baha'i theocracy are largely unknown. We currently have Baha'is only on our institutions that govern the Baha'i community. Does that mean Baha'i inspired institutions that govern both Baha'is and non-Baha'is in a hypothetical future world civilization will be Baha'is only? We simply don't know and based on relevant documents such as the Universal House of Justice constitution and statements from the Guardian, it seems unlikely to me.

 

[ppp]

I think your OP is answerd though.

Thank you for your participation.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Its a good example Adrain, but you have not understood ISIS. Can you tell me how you have assessed their so called "interpretation of the Shariah"? And what is this "archaic law" that they are trying to impose?

I agree with you that their stance is an absolute violation of basic human rights, but can you explain your statements?

I have not studied ISIS in depth @firedragon

Its a huge area of discussion and off topic.

Do you think this wikipedia article is fair?

Ideology of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant - Wikipedia

Do you have any resources that would enable us to better understand the ideology and influences behind ISIS?

 

[Dawnofhope]

If by provocative you mean, inflammatory or infuriating...no. But it was certainly intended to be eye-catching and stimulating. What I actually expected...well, hoped for... was a discussion from some Baha'i on the actual goals and practical plans of implementations of those goals.

When I want to have a discussion with a group of people I know little about, I try to do balanced research and find a way to have a constructive dialogue. It may go badly through, even with the best of intentions.

If I wanted to discuss the goals of a group, I would first try to establish a rapport with members of that group and ask them specific questions about their goals and how they plan to achieve them.

Organizations that derrogate race or demean women may have different structures, ethics, or missions, but we still get to criticize them all based on that particular characteristic. I think that you are being 'lumped together' because you all discriminate against a group of people on the same basis. Albeit to different degrees.

I agree the Baha'is discriminate against LGBT. We do not endorse homosexual acts and consider such acts as contrary to the laws of God. However, that's a very different topic from the structure of a future Baha'i theocracy.

The specifics are not pure speculation. They are commonplace It's the observation of what repeatedly and observably happens when human nature, religious dogma and power are combined. The author is literally accusing Baha'is of being ordinary people from whom we can expect ordinary behaviors.

Sure. We can look at theocracies within Judaism, Christianity and Islam and make assumptions about what a Baha'i theocracy might look like. There are problems with those comparisons though.

In any theocracy, the laws are of the enforcement of that religion's tenets and doctrine upon the population. People who are not adherents of that religion are forced to adhere to the laws (doctrines and tenets) of that religion. People who are not adherents are barred from holding policy-making positions, because their policies would not be based in that religion. Theocracies cannot be systems of equality and justice.

I think it is worth noting that I am not singling out Baha'i. I am stating that I have no reason to expect any non-standard effects from a Bahai't theocracy's than from any other.

As pointed out, distinctions need to be made between laws that apply to a religious group and laws that apply to everyone.

We can only faintly imagine what a Baha'i theocracy will look like.

We can examine Western Civilization where the LGBT agenda has been most successfully promoted and implemented. Does Western Civilization promote equality and justice? How are we going enabling everyone having access to policy making decisions?

 

[danieldemol]

We simply don't know and based on relevant documents such as the Universal House of Justice constitution and statements from the Guardian, it seems unlikely to me.

Why should it be left to subjective unlikeliness in the opinion of an individual?

The Universal House of Justice has the power to unambiguously rule out a future Baha'i world in which non-Baha'i are denied a vote. What do they have to gain by leaving such an option open?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Why should it be left to subjective unlikeliness in the opinion of an individual?

The Universal House of Justice has the power to unambiguously rule out a future Baha'i world in which non-Baha'i are denied a vote. What do they have to gain by leaving such an option open?

A future Baha’i state is not even remotely on the horizon for any country let alone the world. The conditions in the world for this to happen would most likely be very different from what they are now. It seems premature to elaborate on any details of what a Baha’i state or commonwealth would look like beyond the very broad principles outlined.

 

[danieldemol]

A future Baha’i state is not even remotely on the horizon for any country let alone the world. The conditions in the world for this to happen would most likely be very different from what they are now. It seems premature to elaborate on any details of what a Baha’i state or commonwealth would look like beyond the very broad principles outlined.

Premature? So we should just leave it till (hypothetically) Baha'i are a majority and hope for the best that such evident oppression won't come to pass?

If Baha'i aren't empathetic enough to rule out such oppression now while they are in a minority it is almost certain they won't be empathetic enough to do it as a majority.

The time is ripe for action now, there is nothing premature about it.

Fortunately I think and hope humanity is collectively learning from the failures of past models which denied classes of people the right to vote that Baha'i will never become that popular without the necessary changes being made.

 

[ppp]

If I wanted to discuss the goals of a group, I would first try to establish a rapport with members of that group and ask them specific questions about their goals and how they plan to achieve them.

Understood.

I agree the Baha'is discriminate against LGBT. We do not endorse homosexual acts and consider such acts as contrary to the laws of God. However, that's a very different topic from the structure of a future Baha'i theocracy.

I don't agree. The actions and beliefs that a person adopts when they are twenty informs the type of person that they will be at forty; when they run a family, or a company, or a country. While a person can and and may change dramatically over the course of their life, that is the exception, not the rule. And organizations, being solely comprised of people, follow the same model. What we see from Baha'i in the here and now of early adulthood is what we would expect to see even more deeply ingrained in its middle-age, or its seniority.

Sure. We can look at theocracies within Judaism, Christianity and Islam and make assumptions about what a Baha'i theocracy might look like. There are problems with those comparisons though.

What sort of problems?

As pointed out, distinctions need to be made between laws that apply to a religious group and laws that apply to everyone.

We can only faintly imagine what a Baha'i theocracy will look like.

I do not know why you keep saying that. In a theocracy of any type, only adherents can hold policy-making positions. And those policy-makers are constrained to laws that conform to the theocratic doctrine. That alone makes it an unequal and unjust society.

We can examine Western Civilization where the LGBT agenda has been most successfully promoted and implemented. Does Western Civilization promote equality and justice?

To a limited and precarious extent. Yesterday's passing of Ginsberg has a lot of people worried about SCOTUS and if all of that promotion and implementation is going to be reversed over the coming years.

How are we going enabling everyone having access to policy making decisions?

Thru the abolition of de jure and de facto laws and policies that are based on religious doctrines or cultural traditions. By normalizing marginalized communities. By educating people to be more literate in reason, statistics, and large numbers. Not advanced math or philosophy. Practically literate, so as to help people avoid predation through those avenues.

 

[ppp]

Premature? So we should just leave it till (hypothetically) Baha'i are a majority and hope for the best that such evident oppression won't come to pass?

If Baha'i aren't empathetic enough to rule out such oppression now while they are in a minority it is almost certain they won't be empathetic enough to do it as a majority.

Better than I said it!

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Premature? So we should just leave it till (hypothetically) Baha'i are a majority and hope for the best that such evident oppression won't come to pass?

If Baha'i aren't empathetic enough to rule out such oppression now while they are in a minority it is almost certain they won't be empathetic enough to do it as a majority.

The time is ripe for action now, there is nothing premature about it.

Fortunately I think and hope humanity is collectively learning from the failures of past models which denied classes of people the right to vote that Baha'i will never become that popular without the necessary changes being made.

Yes I see it is very premature to predict how the Nation's will reconcile. Baha'u'llah gave a great insight into these times, as individuals in Governments try to put bandaid solutions onto to world issues, issues that really needing amputation.

".... We behold it, in this day, at the mercy of rulers so drunk with pride that they cannot discern clearly their own best advantage, much less recognize a Revelation so bewildering and challenging as this. And whenever any one of them hath striven to improve its condition, his motive hath been his own gain, whether confessedly so or not; and the unworthiness of this motive hath limited his power to heal or cure.... "

As such I see the Baha'i are being progressive in adopting the Administrative Order covenanted by Baha'u'llah.

Faith tells me that God knows best and who am I to offer that man will find a better way. Has man, when they let go of what God offers and gone it alone, ever found a peaceful world encompassing Government.

Yet the Baha'i Model is global and builds a unity that all participants offer, that it was the most humbling, wonderful Communion of souls they have ever felt.

To which after the passage quoted above, Baha'u'llah offered the following,

".. That which the Lord hath ordained as the sovereign remedy and mightiest instrument for the healing of all the world is the union of all its peoples in one universal Cause, one common Faith. This can in no wise be achieved except through the power of a skilled, an all-powerful and inspired Physician. This, verily, is the truth, and all else naught but error.... "

The action the world needs is not turning away from the model Administrative Order given by Baha'u'llah through the Covernant, but by adopting many of the progressive ideals that are enshrined within.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

And organizations, being solely comprised of people, follow the same model. What we see from Baha'i in the here and now of early adulthood is what we would expect to see even more deeply ingrained in its middle-age, or its seniority.

That is true, because the Laws of the Baha'i Faith cannot be changed since they were written by Baha'u'llah.

The Kitáb-i-Aqdas is Bahá'u'lláh's book of laws, written in Arabic around 1873 while He was still imprisoned within the city of 'Akká. It is considered the Most Holy Book of the Baha’i Faith. As I recall, it was translated into English in 1982.

So the only thing that can change are the Baha'is. Their attitudes towards homosexuality as well as how Baha'is treat homosexuals can change. I sure hope they do because I do not approve of looking down upon anyone and I certainly do not approve of judging anyone for their sexual preferences.

 

[firedragon]

I have not studied ISIS in depth @firedragon

Its a huge area of discussion and off topic.

Do you think this wikipedia article is fair?

Ideology of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant - Wikipedia

Do you have any resources that would enable us to better understand the ideology and influences behind ISIS?

The only real source is Baghdadis sermon. It as on YouTube. Take a listen. All other sources are not primary and most of all statements people make are pure conjecture.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I do not know why you keep saying that. In a theocracy of any type, only adherents can hold policy-making positions. And those policy-makers are constrained to laws that conform to the theocratic doctrine. That alone makes it an unequal and unjust society.

That is true, because the Laws of the Baha'i Faith cannot be changed since they were written by Baha'u'llah.

The Kitáb-i-Aqdas is Bahá'u'lláh's book of laws, written in Arabic around 1873 while He was still imprisoned within the city of 'Akká. It is considered the Most Holy Book of the Baha’i Faith. As I recall, it was translated into English in 1982.

So the only thing that can change are the Baha'is. Their attitudes towards homosexuality as well as how Baha'is treat homosexuals can change. I sure hope they do because I do not approve of looking down upon anyone and I certainly do not approve of judging anyone for their sexual preferences.

What is important to note is that many Laws are yet to have the details decided.

So Baha'u'llah may have given a law, given a manimum penalty, but left the further details up to the Universal House of Justice. Arson is such a law.

That is also why the Universal House of Justice can enact laws that are not explicitly given and detailed in the Book and as time changes, repeal and renew this laws.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

That is also why the Universal House of Justice can enact laws that are not explicitly given and detailed in the Book and as time changes, repeal and renew this laws.

Regards Tony

So the UHJ could repeal the law concerning homosexuality?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So the UHJ could repeal the law concerning homosexuality?

No, as that has been given explicit interpretation, which cannot be changed.

So anything said by Baha'u'llah, Abdu'lbaha and Shoghi Effendi on that subject, form the authorised material that the Universal House of Justice can use to offer guidance.

Anything on the subject that has not got an explanation, then the Universal House of Justice can offer guidance, and that guidance then becomes binding.

Such things have been offered, like on the topic of artificial insemination.

Regards Tony