Sharh At-Takattul Al-Hizbi (Explanation of Party Structuring).
This is a translation from the explanation of the unique book by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani.
A fundamental principle for the success of any Takattul from the structural angle in its work to generate revival and reform is that it is necessary for the Takattul to be built upon a specific ideology. This has to be preceded by a correct understanding of this ideology in terms of its Fikrah (thought) and Tareeqah (method) and for the bond between the members of the Takattul to be a correct bond that brings them together. The joining and membership needs to be measured in accordance to the awareness of the member in regards to the party structure’s culture and his sincerity towards it. In addition the member so that he can become a member of person of responsibility must be capable of undertaking its responsibility and be prepared to make sacrifices.
By examining the Takattulaat (structures) that were established upon the associative basis, or upon the basis of a certain party name, we find that their failure was a natural outcome due to not being established upon a specific (or defined) ideology. Before their establishment they did not possess a correct understanding of this ideology in regards to its thought and method, and the grouping together of its individuals or the bond that connected them was not a correct bond.
On top of this, their failure resulted also from the angle of its individuals. The member was not looked at from the perspective of his suitability for undertaking the work. His membership was not based upon his firm and certain belief of the idea that the Takattul was established upon or his awareness of this thought, nor was it based upon his sincerity towards the work and his preparedness to sacrifice in its path. Rather the individual was chosen based upon his societal standing and due to the possibility of him being able to bring quicker benefits to the structure due to his presence within it. The member was chosen on the basis that he was prominent amongst his people, wealthy amongst his peers, a lawyer, a doctor or someone possessing standing and influence. This was regardless of whether he was suitable for this structure that he had been chosen for or not suitable for it. For this reason difference and fragmentation was dominant between the members of these structures in addition to a lack of harmony. A class aspect also dominated over them leading the members of the political party or association to secretly view and see themselves as being privileged and distinguished above the rest of the people. This was not due to their wealth or personal standings but this feeling also came from the fact that they were members in a certain association or political party. For this reason real interaction and the development of closeness between them and the people did not happen.
Therefore the selection of members upon this basis of social standing brought a great harm to these party structures and upon the societies that they existed in as well. As for the harm that was brought to the structure itself whether it was a political party or an association then fragmentation and lack of harmony between them was only natural and the possibility of members leaving it and moving to a another party or association was also a natural and obvious result. On many occasions his remaining within a certain association was dependent upon the satisfaction of his ego or in order for him to realise some ends or so that his personal or societal standing could be enhanced. I have seen within the political offices of some of these organisations twelve carriers of Doctorates (PHDs) whilst the head of the structure is virtually illiterate and when the benefit and use of their membership no longer remained they were quick to disperse. A head of another organisation once told me in plain and simple words: ‘Our funds today are one and a half million Lira and I know that they (the members of the political office of the bloc) have only come to attain material gains. So I wish for you to take this amount because if they were to take it then by Allah it would be a crime’.
This is the reality of the Takattulaat (party structures) and this is the danger of selecting members upon the basis of societal position and standing.
In regards to the danger that is brought upon the society, this is due to the society always pinning its hopes upon every ray of hope that appears upon the horizons and sees that the presence of any Takattul within the Ummah could possibly lead to its salvation and in the very least the improvement of their dire situation. When the Ummah then sees and comprehends the true reality of these structures and sees that their only concern is the benefits that they can gain or an increase in wealth and position, and particularly when they witness them held up in their offices and only meeting and contacting the people when they need something from them, like at the time of elections for example, or to collect donations and so forth... When the society comprehends this then they begin to do Takfeer (i.e. cast out) all of the party structures as a whole and then they do not allow for any structure to enter within it or to be sincere to her. This represents an insurmountable obstacle in the face of any correct structure that appears within the society. So in actuality these structures with their conduct and behaviour were not able to enter into the society and they were unable of interacting with it. Indeed closeness did not result them and the structures remained isolated from the society. Therefore this reality made the situation worse, it represented an extra weight that could not be lifted and it was a new distress and affliction added to an already obstinate disease.
We are therefore able to say after studying most of the Takattulaat and associations that were established in the entire Islamic world and after having acquired knowledge about the bases that they were established upon, the circumstances in which they came into being and the conditions which were accommodated between its individuals, an after contemplating the concepts that they were pushing, some of the thoughts that they led to its formation and the effects that they left behind. After studying most of these movements and following them from their birth through to their establishment and then their deaths or by studying its life if it still exists, and by studying all of the Islamic regions whilst seeing that they still suffer from the decline and backwardness and that colonialism still has complete control over them whether this control is cultural, economic or political. And there are no signs of glad tidings or revival or the presence of thoughts that are leading towards the revival or even capable of leading towards it. After this study and contemplation we are able to say with complete certainty that throughout the entirety of the last century not even one single correct structure or bloc emerged that led to the correct revival. And we can say that all of the structures and movements that arose failed and the evidence of this is the fact that the Ummah has remained upon its condition or we could even say that its condition has got worse day after day. And the reason for this is that these Takattaulaat and Harakaat (movements) were all established upon a false and incorrect basis.