Political freedom as an Islamic value

Abstract

The esteemed scholar Michael Cook has recently argued that political freedom is "not an Islamic value" but is in tension with Islam. This paper contends that Cook is mistaken. It moves in four steps. First, I consider the very idea of an "Islamic value," sketching a nonessentialist way of conceiving such a thing. Next, I show that the particular "liberal" notion of political freedom that Cook rightly claims is absent is but one of three distinct conceptions of political freedom: He neglects to consider the possible presence of an alternate "republican" conception. Then, taking some of the very evidence Cook cites along with the case of al-Ghazälä, I show that this republican conception figures in Islamic thought and practice. I conclude by considering some broader interpretive issues that bear on this matter and have wider significance. Political freedom, it turns out, is an Islamic value after all.