Of course it is 'highly very very important' and I am not trying to downplay it's significance, but, under Islam, it's still secondary and should be pursued to supplement the faith, it's cause (of humanity) and make it's progress possible don't you think , unlike modern capitalist states where economy determines everything from national interest to foreign and public policy and faith doesn't stand in its way :/.

That is the root, you can't build a free market economy while maintaining pure moral standards. A free market economy can only be built when there is very little meddling by the government for 'morality'. So in a free market economy 'zakah' is 'voluntary' not 'enforced'

Yup, and that is why there is every increasing Wealth gap. Today top 84 wealthiest people's wealth is equal to bottom 35% of the whole world's population. Do you think this is justified?

You are raising very interesting points brother. Anyways, Free market economy is a myth. Financial crisis proved that there is no such thing as "pidar madar azad" in Islam :P Citi bank recently got a 7 billion dollar fine because of their malpractices during financial crisis. You can imagine how big the malpractice would be considering the amount they were fined. Free market economy is like a conspiracy that the financial institutions want to achieve so the can suck more blood of the investors.

I don't think it is justified, but it is a natural outcome. Throughout history of civilization only a few possess power, and if power is vested in wealth than that's the outcome

Well 'failure' of free market doesn't make it a 'myth', I think it does exist. 'Madar pidar azad' just means 'azad' of moral bounds, not azad of individuals . And that's what I am pointing to, and you are also making contradictory statements (like giving importance to free market economy and suddenly taking control of it for morality ) that under Islamic teachings economy is 'secondary'

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.

Not in case of Islamic Caliphate. You see in Hazrat Umar's time, they achieved a state that no one was in need of money and none was accepting any zakat money after three cycles (years) of zakat distribution. You know Umar R.A ruled on significant geographical area in his time. No other system can claim to achieve such state of wealth equality.

I stated that at the start. I don't see any contradictions.. :/

I already pointed out collectivism destroys wealth , of course then there will be equality of 'wealth' if it is not being produced . For example I mostly 'help' my friends for free which gives me a degree of 'moral upperhand' with which i can produce 'political power' whereas with the same activity I can generate 'wealth' . That's the fundamental of Islam, help the needy . However it then creates another problem.

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.

Nah, it distributed wealth, not destroyed it. And by not needing zakat money means they were pushed enough to start earning for themselves. So everyone starting contributed in the economy. You are ignoring that zakat money stopped distributing after three years. There was no needy left. So it depends on how you are looking at it BTW zakat is 2.5% annually if you have surplus. Means you still retain 97.5% of you wealth. How many % taxes do the financial institutions go through on annual basis?

It’s pretty simply. Just give them what they want. Just produce all the rote-learned material churned out by text books (although from what I’ve heard, there is relatively, and only relatively, more space for critical thinking in CSS compared to ordinary university exams). Because if you will tell the complete truth as it is, you won’t pass the exam. Because in a world of hypocrites, the only crime is not to act like one. But in real life, never hesitate to voice the truth in face of blind ignorance and one-sheep-follows-another mentality. If we are not able to do even that, then I don’t see much difference between us and a beast of burden whose every step is guided with a whip on its behind.

What era is that? Muslims were ruling the world, so to speak, when Yazeed killed Imam Hussain. Muslims were still ruling the world when Umaiyyads and Abbasid “Caliphs” were digging up the bones of their dead opponents and burning them. Muslims were still far ahead of everyone else when wholesale persecution of jurists was the order of the day at the hands of the “Caliphs”. But they were still ruling the world, doesn’t the make them true Muslims? As a matter of fact, Muslims were at each other throats right after the death of Prophet (PBUH). And if sticking to Islam (with its medieval interpretations) is the one measure of success, how do you account for the unprecedented superiority of the West today?

No one is doing that. Although if by shoving down the throat you mean historical evidence and proper reference to back up the statements, I’m certainly guilty of that charge.

Of course, one should look for guidance to the elementary sources; that goes without saying. But the implementation of the same ways as they existed in the 7th century in today’s world will simply not work.

The societies that rule the world are also consumer societies. Asceticism might work in a monastery but not in the real world.

Because the concept of welfare state we borrow is outdated. It might have worked in the medieval ages, with far less complexities, but not in the modern world. We have to construct/evolve new systems that work in the modern world instead of trying to implement the old system verbatim.

Hmmm Hazrat Umar (RA) reigned during a period when Islamic empire was 'expanding' through military engagements, so the economy would be supporting the 'war effort' largely. During such times economies produce total employment and wealth doesn't have primary importance as it is highly controlled . Its a different economic scenario overall and can't be compared with normal economic competition.

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.

Total employment at war really? We are at war, what is the employment rate? U.S is at war, what is their employment rate? There have been many wars in history, I would like to know any other nation that had no needy during war, did not accept any charity and had full employment. And you ignored the question, compared to zakat, what percentage of tax financial institutions are paying right now?

It implies that you are making all these intelligent points, most of which I truly admire, just to convince everyone to follow the 'rulers' jk

So let's build a modern concept of welfare state. Remember Muslims vie for order, discipline and control and 'we' can't change nature

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.