Well, that does not mean I support blind consumerism. I am only pointing out the flaw in the argument that if we let go of consumerism, we would somehow become a developed nation. That argument ignores all the important parameters at work.

I'm all for evolving workable systems, keeping in consideration the basic guidelines provided by Islam, in today's world. I'm only against the strict adherence to medieval interpretations of Islam which will not work in today's world. I'm also aware of the problems of modern capitalism and will always consent to betters solutions, but the kind of solutions put forward by conservative and rigid thinking will only make the situation worse.

Read the economic history of countries during major wars. The nazis were able to generate total employment through war time economy. The United States economy came out of recession during major wars. Soviet Union, albeit destroyed, built-up major industry during war which helped it rise as a superpower etc there are numerous examples. Read some history of wartime economies . Wartime economies are largely collective effort based not competition based, so they don't produce that much 'wealth' but 'taxes remain high'. And today's warfare that we and the United States are engaged in is not conventional wars that require large scale mobilization of millions of men so.... . On the political side, if a war is 'totally justified' before the people they put all their efforts and sacrifice to make their side win. It results in a lot of economic activity which is not competitive in nature.

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

Half of this can be explained by revolution and counter revolution. Others, Islam did faced internal disputes during and after Prophet Muhammad S.A.W's time. And I can't comment on certain things since I don't know the context. But one can not ignore did Islam did proper at their time.
They are superior because they are implementing the wrong things, in the right way. It is not sustainable. We will surpass when we will implement the right things, the right way.

Again, subjective opinion.

One can only conclude that when we actually implement it and then it crumbles down.

You got it wrong, I meant that we have consumers and believe that all we have to do is to give vote to the leader we like and rest is up to him to change things.

How many military men are mobilized outside U.S after 9/11 ? :/
And again my question is left unanswered.

Ahh man you know I really hate it when the discussion looses it's course and goes on a path of unnecessary justifications

Ok I ask you what were the primary economic activities of arabs during Hazrat Umar (RA)'s times??? And were people becoming rich during that time??? Was it resulting in a rising middle class??? I can tell you Hazrat Umar (RA) banned Muslim soldiers from occupying lands in conquered territories for personal agricultural use, and Hazrat Uthman (RA) continued the ban. So those lands remained in hands of 'previous owners' who were not yet 'Muslims'.

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

I am sorry I really don't know about number of military mobility after 9/11. You seem to be more knowledgeable in that regard.
About the zakat, I assume you got my point.
Nah, I don't know again. My source of information is an international muslim scholar Dr. Hussain Hamed Hassan who delivered a speech on Islamic economics. He is one of the most prominent figure in promoting Islamic economics. He claimed that Hazrat Umar's time is the best example of islamic economics success.

Well I don't know myself brother , but I am sure it can't be compared with massive historical wars and nature of modern warfare is very different than the historic wars.

Well I by no means am knowledgeable, I am just trying to raise points. As far as I can assess Hazrat Uthman ( RA ) was the pioneer of Muslim economy (as he issued coins and allowed drawing loans from bait al maal which Hazrat Umar ( RA ) didn't), but I can't contradict a scholar. And I haven't studied economics at all, so I am highly ignorant of fundamental economic principles and working of economies

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

Well still you do know a lot Masha Allah. I have a background in economics and planning to do MS in Health economics in the future. Anyways, I have to go. It was nice talking to you and Gypsified.

The question is not about internal disputes, revolutions, and counter-revolutions. The question is, were they acting like “true Muslims” (one of the vaguest terms ever)? If they were not, how does this explain the fact that they were still ruling the world? Because according to what we like to believe, if we become “true Muslims” (whatever that means), only then we will be able to lead the world. Please explain this contradiction to me.

If someone backs up his statements with historical evidence and proper references, does that still mean subjective opinion? Please tell me then, what does objective opinion/fact mean and how to do we come to know it?

Now this is what I’d say a subjective opinion is, if it can be called anything at all. Implementing wrong things in right ways? What does that even mean? And not sustainable? They have sustained it for several centuries now, my good man, and there are no signs of it failing in foreseeable future. Further, the emerging economies (India, China etc) are also following the same mechanism. How is it not sustainable? Just because we believe so?

And obviously, we refuse to move forward from the 7th century. This only goes to show how accurate the findings of the Justice Munir Report were. =)

That's totally right, dogma and superstition have no room in modern scientific era so reason must prevail. We can learn a lot deal from our history, moreover there is a grand natural scheme working behind things as well which is why systems arise and fall and recur and this cycle continue to happen. The problem with 'caliphate' is it relies upon men of strength, courage, conscience, wisdom, honest determination and god fearing to remain in power and a single bad turn of events distracts it from it's defined destiny and makes it a lot 'bloody'. Whereas democracy creates lust seeking societies where a core group of elites who enjoy all the luxury and power at the cost of all others struggle eventually destroy the very essence of community living in pursuit of their greedy desires. So there is problem everywhere and there seems to be no lasting solutions, may Allah (swt) help mankind amd have mercy upon us

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

I agree. Humans beings have proven to be selfish by nature. And so every system will have its own flaws, and expecting any system to be perfect is futile. The best way, however, it seems is not to let power concentrate in few hands and work toward making this possible. The reason I prefer democracy over other systems is that, comparatively, it deals with this problem of the concentration of power. Now of course, it is far from perfect and it is only hit and trial through which we can learn and improve the system bit by bit.