বাংলাদেশ চিন্তা - ফেব্রুয়ারি ২০২৫

 The Moderate Muslim Dilemma

I recently noticed something among “moderate” Muslims in Bangladesh. Many were wary to call out “extremist” members of the religion in fear of being tagged nastik, shahbagi etc. In particular, when asked “do you not want Bangladesh to be an Islamic country?”, some falter.

This is somewhat weird to me, because growing up, I saw “moderacy” as the norm. No one would be called out for “not being a good Muslim” if they only went to pray for the Jummah. Or being attuned to the Bengali cultural identities was appreciated (I’m sure everyone had at least a couple of friends who learned Rabindra sangeet and Nazrul geeti since they were 5 years old). 

And that got me thinking. Many Muslims in Bangladesh probably have a strict preference for a moderate environment. While that was the norm, it was fine and everything was in equilibrium. But when a group of people are actively asking to establish an “Islamic” country, is it fine to express that preference? Or will it be considered un-Islamic? Will said Muslim person themselves feel guilty about it, thinking they’re betraying their faith? This is what I’m calling the moderate Muslim dilemma.

However, I do think there’s a rather simple framing of this dilemma that will let Deshi Muslims bypass this “guilt of betraying their faith”. No one’s actions really belong in a vacuum. Everyone has their own actions, but unfortunately (or fortunately) the outcome depends on the collective action of the mass. Now, maybe a moderate’s possible actions are “support an Islamic nation”, or “support a pluralist or even secular nation, via democracy”. My argument is that your framing doesn’t decide your commitment (or lack thereof) to your faith, rather the outcome does.

Now, let’s think of the outcomes. Many of the people who want an Islamic nation have their own reasons for doing so, and will probably love a fascistic nation, as long as it was their own fascists ruling. Would that be good? Are we guaranteed a great Islamic leader? Or do we get a group who’ll abuse Islamic ideas to keep everyone under their feet? I think the hope for a great Islamic leader is rather naive. Think of our greatest generation. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was followed by the four great caliphs. What followed them was chaos. And we think Bangladeshi islamists will do better than that? 

On the other hand, the outcome for supporting democracy might be a return to what we had “back in the day”. You will have your freedom of following your faith, to whatever extent you like. You don’t have to worry about yelling “that’s not a sohih Muslim, we don’t condone violence, we are the religion of peace” every two weeks. If you think about this, might this outcome not be better suited for your faith? If you think about the outcome, the best strategy for most moderates seems clear, right?