Opinion Jizya - The Occasional Non-Muslim Tax

[Shepard]

So I've been doing this research project and part of my thesis led me studying the founding of Islam. Part of its early spread included the use of Jizya - a tax in Islamic states on non-Muslims. This seems discriminatory and seems especially so from an American point of view. However, what does that make of the value of that non-Islamic religion?

Does that mean those willing to convert care more about money than their religion?

If one does not convert to Islam, continues to worship their religion, and is unaffected by (presumably not extremist) Muslims, then is the tax fine?

 

[Venom Adhamm]

I am 100% not an expert on this subject. Do not trust with absolute certainty what I am saying. Do not use what I am saying in your research project without validating it from trusted sources.

I would say that, no, the tax isn't unfair. It's pretty far from discriminatory for that time, considering that the alternative to being taxed as a non-Muslim in an Islam state was getting killed. Along with that, one of the pillars of Islam is zakat, or charity. Basically, zakat states that Muslims must give money to others to help ease people's financial hardships. Depending on how you look at it, this could be considered a tax for Muslims (which would balance out the tax on non-Muslims since technically everyone has to pay up money), though I'm unsure how much Islamic states in that time enforced paying the zakat.

 

[Windsock]

Y'know that realisticaly the muslim nations that follow that would still marginalize you, belittle you, molest your son, rape your daughter, beat your wife, beat your husband, kill your dog, and then still expect you to pay your regular taxes on top of a non-muslim tax? I'm pretty sure zakat only applies to fellow muslims.

 

[Shireling]

I think the Jizya is probably the least offensive manifestation of Islam in the political sphere. Typically, if people want to have an Islamic theocracy in their country I am not going to try to stop them, and if a special tax is the worst thing that religious minorities get in an Islamic nation, then that's acceptable to me in the grand scheme of things.

The Ottoman Empire is a good example of an Islamic nation that operated along such lines, especially given the number of Orthodox Christians in Turkey and their proximity to Imperial Russia. Although, there was often a gap between government policy towards dhimmis and actual actions taken by viziers and government officials.

 

[The Cheshire Cat]

So I've been doing this research project and part of my thesis led me studying the founding of Islam. Part of its early spread included the use of Jizya - a tax in Islamic states on non-Muslims. This seems discriminatory and seems especially so from an American point of view. However, what does that make of the value of that non-Islamic religion?

Does that mean those willing to convert care more about money than their religion?

If one does not convert to Islam, continues to worship their religion, and is unaffected by (presumably not extremist) Muslims, then is the tax fine?

You can't be unaffected by the Muslims if they're taxing you. That's an oxymoron