Pan-Islamism Would Be Dreadful In Application

RebuttalYour first assumption is that you can use history to justify modern claims, which is certainly not the case. As technology, social structures, economic theories, and overall human life progresses, so does governemntal structure. A theocracy is clearly not a working and plausible government structure in which human needs are met and liberty is fought for. The civilized world has largely agreed that a nation that represents its people rather than becoming a technocracy or theocracy will ultimately prevail past nations that do the opposite.Part 1:It is inarguable that Muslim nations, representing either a Muslim majority population or a Islamic theocratic government rank high on the corruption index and the human rights violation index. All previously mentioned nations rank high on the corruption, human rights violation, and restricted freedoms list. They all rank low on ease of doing business, fair and legal business practices, etc. (By stating "high" I am referring to being ranked a large number, i.e 150/180, which refers to that specific nation being the 150th out of 180 nations, which is not good, depending on the subject.) (Stating low, in this case, would be the same as stating high previously. For example, France ranks higher on the ease of doing business scale when competing with these aforementioned nations.) Part 2:Your main argument revolves around historical evidence to back up your argument in which a Muslim Caliphate of large proportions would be able to exist. What you forget to take into account is advacement. Need I remind you that all these previous Caliphates have been destroyed, taken over, or dissolved. There are no longer any Muslim empires, but there are quite a lot of nations and groups that seek to change that fact. "Yet the Ummayyad Caliphate lasted form 661 AD to 750 AD" This is historically accurate, but I think the fact that this Caliphate could not even last 100 years speaks volumes for this argument. Additionally, the Rashidun Caliphate lasted from 632 Ad to 661 AD. 29 years for an empire is not a significant amount. Muslim nations have had rulers for longer, let alone having lasted for such a short period of time. Part 3:If you look at historical context, you can see that all Muslim Caliphates have been opposed not only by outside sources, but many of their own people. A strict Muslim rule does not speak volumes to many moderate people. Religion for the most part is a natural suppressor, which is why it is important to use human nature for many motives rather than religion. Part 4: World RankingsI have comprised a list of sources that state rankings for many of the major nations (economic, population, military, or land) that will eventually be part of this so called "Muslim Caliphate".Out of all nations, Afghanistan ranks 2nd in terms of how bad life is there. The only nation that is higher is North Korea, which is to be expected. [1]Pakistan is ranked 4th, Iraq is ranked 5th, Syria is ranked 6th, Sudan is ranked 7th, etc. Other nations that have a large Muslim population are also ranked, (Somalia is ranked 3rd) but I will not use them to argue as they are not going to be part of this proposed Muslim Caliphate.Part 5: Muslim Text In order to have a Muslim Caliphate, the laws need to be influenced from or be directly from Islamic law, which is called "Sharia Law". Under Sharia Law, interest rates are banned. Banning interest rates effectively wipes all baking practices from this Caliphate, and will also ban loans from other nations. Evidently, the Caliphate will need to be either self reliant or have expert economic management, as they will not be able to get loans from other nations or go into debt. If they do get loans with interest, which is something that most loans are attached with, then they will violate their Islamic law, and the Caliphate will officially be disquialified from the list of Muslim theocracies. For the sake of this debate, we will assume that this Caliphate will follow Islamic Law to its fullest. "I am a Pakistani, and this is the first time I've been here. I came here seven months ago and honestly everyday I just want to kill myself. It's 46 degrees in Lahore the electricity goes out nearly 12 hours a day. The people are unlettered, bigoted and ill-mannered and have the mentality of probably the 18th century. Extremely belligerent. The news is unbearable, people dying everywhere in blasts, killing, beatings, burnings. And don't even get me started on the religious extremism. THIS COUNTRY IS [-expletive-] ON EARTH!" (I refuse to write any swear words on this site, therefore I will cut that part out. In case you are wondering, the word starts with an H and ends with an L.) [1] Rebuttal, Part 2:You have failed in rebutting my claim about Nationalism, which we have seen from history to be a very risky practice, one that often leads to war and violation of personal freedom. First, let me state that there is a clear difference between Patriotism and Nationalism. Empires such as Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy had great forms of Nationalism, in which the needs and rights of individual were diminished and downplayed when compared to the needs and rights of the overbearing, all powerful state. You also seem to confuse Nationalism for Sharia Law, which is different. Both are very unsafe for practice with humans, and are certain not mulutally exlusive. Rebuttal Part 3:One factor that goes into a nation is diplomatic relation as well as survivability, which is always attuned to diplomatic relation. A Muslim Caliphate with no banking practices will eventually grow into extreme poverty, which we can already see with these current nations. Not only will poverty exist, but there will be extreme unwillingness for other nations to provide help to this Caliphate. Going by ranking, North Korea desires lots of outside help in terms of food to combat its hunger problems, even though it has a much smaller population than the proposed Caliphate. We can hopefully only assume that this Caliphate with its theocratic government will not have good relations with other nations that would be rich enough or willing enough to provide food and help to the ones in need. Rebuttal Part 4:And to move on to a part that will be inarguable, and that is current issues. A Muslim Caliphate cannot just spring up from the ashes, it has to be built or put together by these people. When the Caliphate is born, it will have to inherit all the problems of these nations, ranging from crime, economic issues, unemployment, population control, and poverty. You have yet to propose any real evidence as to how this Caliphate will combat these issues.Conclusion:Please understand that I am not talking about this Caliphate lasting for a couple of years, which it of course will, as a nation of this size cannot be dissolved so quickly. I am referring to the Caliphate lasting for centuries upon centuries, for hundreds of years. My argument states that this cannot occur, as these problems would overtake it and its thecratic government will not have enough funds or the ability to do anything about it. Sources:[1]http://www.thetoptens.com...;