Our discussion of Islam, Sharia, and communism grinds to a halt due to the complexity of the problem: my perspective is a kind of global survey of the potential for neo-communism in multiple contexts.
The point I as making will tend to fall on death ears given the traditionalists and the legacy marxists who will broke no compromise with religion. But the marxist histomat, and secular humanism can’t even compete with the past, and is not even a good exemplar of modernity. The Moslem past includes at its height the religious domain of sufism. Such sufis would simply laugh in the face of historical materialists. Sufism is also part of the problem as it tends toward a popular movement controlled by reactionaries, the real sufis a distant memory, replace by the occult mafia visible in figures like Gurdjieff.
The question of replacing sharia with communism is likely to be so tricky it will end in confusion. So here is my basic point: secularists will insist on a secular resolution of Islam, and communists will tend to adopt that perspective.
There is a problem here that secularists have lost the ability to define modernity.
And the decline of the modern conception has been so drastic that to preach its imitation is about like Fagin teaching his disciples in crime.
So there is a narrow launch window for redefining a version of cultural Islam, sharia, in modern terms that could surpass the failed modernism of the imperialists.
I doubt if it will work, to be honest. My macro model is tricky and even western thinkers can’t grasp it.
But the challenge remains to do all this anyway: one hardly has a choice.
One catch to what I have said is the obvious fact that socialist movements and thinking have long been present in the Middle East: who am I to kibbitz this. In fact much of it is really bad quality and got fingered by Stalinism, mauled by imperialism and Israeli aggression, and wiped out by neoliberalism. Under what grounds could a second edition replay be of value?
So the basic issue or proposal is a revised project to counter imperialism, partially bypass capitalism with a streamlined communism or communist transition that can move to a larger stage than the national. It would be secular in a new sense that would both appeal to the religious legacy by proposing, not a compromise with tradition, but a general matrix that supports the value domain in the context of science. There are a dozen dozen squared ways to do this. Something that can critique marxism, but realize, mediate religious legacies without turning into a monstrosity like the Moslem Brotherhood.
Even this much is difficult, but it shows the way to the only method to withstand Western imperialism and the Israeli juggernaut.
Study modernity, and not from scientists only: it is a complex universe far larger that science, atheist humanism, and capitalist economics. In principle it would be easy to recast a modernity framework in the context of a critical Reformation of Islam. That framework can unify beyond nationalism, reckon with the reality that the Middle East is not even getting is share of capitalist globalization, and is being cheated out of the immense riches in the oil era that could have lead to a robust modernity, the seeds of which were present in the nineteenth century.