Of Kings, Politicians and Politics
By Professor Nazeer Ahmed
Concord, CA
Rajakiya is a beautiful and powerful word in the Sanskrit language. It connotes the art of rulership. Kings and monarchs learn this art from birth, and are trained in the skills, the processes, the limits and the pitfalls of rulership. Those who practice Rajakiya are the Rajas, the rulers, as opposed to the Riyaya, the ruled.
Rajakiya is a secular term. It connotes ownership, power and authority. A Raja has the power to own and dispose of the resources in his kingdom and has an absolute sway over his people. Rajakiya is not the same as politics.
There is no corresponding word in the Islamic political lexicon to Rajakiya. The word Milkiyat which is sometimes used in translations has a different meaning. The dichotomy arises from the doctrinal mapping of rulership from Arabic to secular languages. In the Islamic lexicon ownership belongs to God, and to God alone. Only God is the Malik and the Melik. His is the Milkiyat.
This dichotomy between Rajakiya and Milkiyat is a source of tension in the Muslim body politic and renders a meaningful internal dialogue about politics and political affairs difficult. Politics is a secular art. The art of politics may or may not lead to Rajakiya but it certainly does not lead to Milkiyat because Milkiyat is a Divine privilege.
This is a fundamental and basic insight that must be understood by Muslim intellectuals who discuss “Islamic rule”, “Muslim rule”, “Islamic state”, “Muslim state”, “Muslim majority countries”, “Shariah law” etc, but the concomitant processes that they discuss are all secular and political in nature. Conceptually, the discussion is a non-starter. It is like discussing the distance between the earth and the moon using a thermometer as a metric.
In a secular world dominated by a cultural hegemony couched in the language of politics, democracy and rule by the majority, even the kings and monarchs shy away from describing themselves as kings and monarchs. They wrap themselves up in the mantles of “Amirs” and “Sardars”. The kings are naked for all to see except to themselves.
Yes, I was close to Rajakiya at one time. When I was in the Legislative Assembly in Bangalore in 1978, I had a long discussion one morning about the art of rulership with Chief Minister Devraj Urs, one of the most consummate politicians on the Indian scene at that time until he fell out of favor with Indira Gandhi and lost out. “You must be willing to spend money in Rajakiya”, he admonished me in the manner of an old master teaching his student. “Rajakiya is not about kings as in bygone ages. It is about the control of resources and the exercise of power that comes with it”.
How true it is! And how apt is this insight for modern day politics in America!
I am often asked how Muslims can have some influence in American politics. For a small minority, caught in the gristmill of rampant and overt Islamophobia, this is a very legitimate question. In sorting out answers to this question, it is important to maintain a clarity of vision and a clarity of the terminology that is used to describe that vision. One must be clear here that what is being discussed is politics not Rajakiya. While Rajakiya connotes authority and power, politics is a process that may or may not lead to power.
American politics has multiple layers and is coalesced around multiple poles. There is the politics of the local school boards and there is the politics of electing a president of the United States. The degree to which the process is responsive to the will of the people varies from one level to the other. While a city councilman may be attuned to the needs of his/her neighborhood, a congressman or senator may or may not be. The closer one is to the seat of power in Washington, DC the greater the influence of money and the less the influence of the people, namely, the electorate. Votes speak only once in two or four years; money speaks all the time. And when mega-bucks are on the line, it speaks very loud indeed.
There is wide consensus that decision making at the higher levels in Washington, DC is dominated by five major interest groups: the military-industrial complex; the banking industry; the big corporations; the American-Israeli lobby and the Right Wing Christian lobby. These are the Big Five. In addition, there is a host of interest groups that seek to influence the legislative and executive branches of the government. Rajakiya in Washington is the Rajakiya of the Big Five. It is the Rajakiya of big money!
Several terms have been used to describe the power structure in America, all of which are approximations. Is it an oligarchy? Is it a plutocracy? Is it a closed, elitist system? It is possible to defend or oppose each of these positions.
So, what does it mean for a small, diverse, disparate and highly individualistic community such as the American Muslims to have a say in the process? There will always be exceptional men and women who bend history to their will. But for the community as a whole the goals must perforce be more modest. Is it the American Rajakiya that is the goal? If so, that is a pie in the sky. American Rajakiya is closed to ninety nine percent of the people and is a privilege only of the elite among the remaining few. But if it is politics that is being discussed, yes, there is room in the process, however, marginal it may be.
Even a marginal impact in politics requires sustained engagement. There is no mystery here. The three cardinal rules of political engagement are: (1) register to vote, (2) build coalitions with like-minded groups, and (3) vote. The American political spectrum is finely balanced. It is astonishing how even a small minority can have a large impact on the political process. In at least three percent of the congressional districts of the United States, Muslims constitute at least three percent of the voters. This is sufficient to tilt three percent of the congressional elections one way or the other. That would be a good beginning.
In summary, the Muslim community may not as yet have the sinews to participate in American Rajakiya. But it does have the ability to have a marginal impact on politics, both local and national. While engaging in this process, it would behoove the community to shun confrontations with the entrenched power blocs. The focus should be on influencing the process so that politics becomes more ethical, transparent and responsive to the common good. Even this limited vision requires that Muslims register to vote, reach out and build coalitions, participate in electing delegates, develop and put forth their own candidates and most importantly, exercise their right to vote. The path is steep and the dice loaded with rampant Islamophobia but can our children and grandchildren do any less?
