Whose Liberalism? Which Islam? Leonard Binder's “Islamic Liberalism”

For many students of contemporary Arab politics, the most pressing question is whether Islam will become democratic. One need only point to the case of Algeria to find ready evidence that Islamic movements have already become highly democratic, although frustrated in their electoral objective. Leonard Binder (1989), however, asks a far more pressing question: Will Islam become liberal? As Tocqueville shows, democracy or the love of equality comes easily to citizens of modernity. The love of liberty, however, is a far more difficult love to cultivate. Yet, without this love of liberty, modern democracy comes to embody arguably the most oppressive tyranny in the history of the human race, the tyranny of the majority. In the aristocratic past, such an extraordinarily powerful and omnipresent tyranny was not possible. Thus, it becomes apparent just how pressing is Binder's question about the prospects for Islamic liberalism. Although Binder's answer to this question could hardly be characterized as overly optimistic, Binder does harbor some hope for Islamic liberalism. He proposes a synthesis of Fazlur Rahman's Gadamerian version of Islam and the pragmatic liberalism of Richard Rorty. Although it is not difficult to show an affinity between Gadamer and Rorty, it is difficult to show that Islam is tending in the direction of acquiring Rahman's understanding of it. It is even more difficult to show that pragmatism is truly liberal. Although Binder points the way to an “Islamic pragmatism,” I hope to show that he fails to point the way to an “Islamic liberalism.” Binder's pragmatism cannot avoid the tyranny of the majority that Tocqueville warns us can be fought only with the love of liberty.