The Moroccan thinker Ali Omlil believes that, in the absence of political thought in our ancient philosophical heritage, it is necessary to call for the establishment of modern Arab political thought, based on a newer philosophy that is consistent with its heritage and consistent with its era. Pointing out that today's intellectuals who "want to modernize politics" will not find the political philosophy of our ancient philosophers useful, just as the legacy of the jurists will not, of course, help them, and they must establish modern Arab thought.
Omlil attributed the marketing of modern European ideas to the passengers of power and control through the European invasion of the countries of the East, which made the eastern recipient convinced that these ideas were what enabled the West to achieve military, political and economic supremacy.
He pointed out that Western supremacy does not escape a dominant colonial tendency, which prompted the Easterners to question Western culture, and presenting heritage in exchange for it produced attitudes towards heritage and Western culture at the same time, among the Arabs as well as among the Orientals (the Japanese and the Chinese).
He explained that the essentiality of the Arab reformist thought is related to the religious issue, while the reformist thought of the Japanese and Chinese centers around civilization more than religion. Therefore, they see civilization as a distinguishing mark between a civilized person and a barbarian, and not between a believer and an unbeliever, which made China and Japan achieve tremendous economic progress, but on the other hand, they did not produce great culture and ideas. As is the case in the West, the cultures of commodity production control them more than the production of knowledge and the creativity of ideas.
The concept of the individual in inherited Arab culture has less value than the concept of the group, whether it is a tribe, sect or nation, since the common meaning of the individual and individualism is negative, as it means isolation, selfishness and narrow personal benefit. “The individual is the title of political modernity, as he is the basis of culture on the social and political system, and he is the owner of civil and political rights, and the principle of equality in citizenship is equality between individual citizens regardless of their different religions, sects, sects, and races.”
Omlil defined the relationship of the Arab intellectual with the thought of the lights in the dichotomy of (progress – backwardness), which directed the Arab renaissance thought towards reducing thinking about reform to the state institution and its military apparatus mainly, and not to its structure and structure, since progress as an immigrant idea among the thinkers of the Renaissance was neither assimilated nor linked to its conceptual sisters. Such as democracy, freedom and equality, as the founding concepts of the Enlightenment thought.
He emphasized that the absence of an integrated vision for the thought of the lights among the Arab reformers prompted them to absent the radical critical stance on the religious issue, and the most they went to was ridding religion of superstition, trying to reconcile science and religion, and calling for the abolition of intermediaries between the text and its commentators and its old officials, with the intention of opening the door of ijtihad to restore Reading the text and absorbing the calamities of the age, while the vision of the lights of thought is based on subjecting everything to criticism, including religious thought.
Umlil distinguishes between the reform of the traditional Salafis and the reform of the modernists, as the concept of reform revolved around religious thought, "specifically the relationship of the Muslim community to Islam"; Therefore, the concept of reform did not exceed the threshold of the righteous predecessors, which is linked to the past and not the future, which is controlled by the positions of the dead in the future of the living.
He held the absence of economic thought in the Arab reform movement responsible for the shackled traditionalism, while Japan built a gigantic economy based on the central slogan of the “Meiji” reform: “a strong army and a rich country.” The reformist state led the process of economic modernization. As priority was given to changing the economic structure, the proof of national identity was achieved by building a national national economy. He concluded that the reformists in Japan and China have bypassed the idea of invoking the heritage, while their counterparts in the Arab and Islamic world depended on the dominance of the traditional heritage positions. Thus, clinging to the religion of instinct appeared and the distance from taking a critical position on religion, as it represents a collective identity defensive against the other.
Presented by: Ali Al-Rubai @Al_ARobai