by Ali-Asad
When historians sit down to write the history of this decade, they will pay great attention to the global financial crisis of 2008. The prosperity of the preceding decades came to naught. Fuelled by debt, excess risk-taking and greed, unfettered global capitalism died the day Lehman Brothers fell and we all came to bear the immense burden of over-borrowing and greedy risk-taking. However, one aspect of finance stands alone claiming victory amidst the rubble. Based on the now saintly principles of shared risk and avoiding debt, Islamic finance is now yelling ‘I told you so!’, to all those left to listen. But Islamic finance seeks a fundamental shift in the way we do business; it wants to make banking and finance interest-free.
The Abrahamic religions hold usury as immoral and as an especially heinous kind of sin. While usury is usually defined as excessive interest, Islamic finance seeks to completely eradicate the concept of interest from finance. In this effort, religious scholars have compiled a set of compelling arguments that appeal to both disillusioned financiers and anti-corporatism intellectuals. According to Paul Mills, author of Islamic Finance: Theory & Practice, Islamic theorists have attacked interest-rate theory from legal, ethical and economic standpoints.
Line of Attack
Ethically, Islamic writers argued that interest inherently favors those who have already have more money and allows the more well off to increase their wealth at the expense of interest-paying borrowers who tend to be poorer and more in need of financing. In economic terms, interest is the price of money. But Islamic writers find it paradoxical for money to have a price of its own. If money primarily serves to facilitate the exchange of goods & services, how can it have its own price? Would that not harm its ability to be a reliable facilitator of exchange?
But perhaps the most potent line of argument Islamic thinkers make is their attack on the liquidity preference theory. Liquidity preference holds that people will always prefer to hold and use money now rather than in the future. And so, if someone lends their money for some time, they deserve to be compensated for abstaining from consumption, and hence they get interest. So, preferring to hold and consume money right now (i.e. positive liquidity preference) underpins the entire interest-rate theory – like a huge gigantic skyscraper supported by one single solitary pillar. And we do not even question how strong that pillar is. As Mills notes,
"…the generalized preference for present, as opposed to future satisfaction [liquidity preference theory] is attacked for universalizing a preference that does not apply to all people in all circumstances: positive time preference is neither a principle of rationality nor an empirically established predominant tendency among consumers. It is simply one of three patterns of intertemporal choice (the other two being zero and negative time preference), each of which is rational and observable under its own conditions."
This last section is key. If we do not prefer consuming in the present, than the whole system of interest rates falls apart. Interest rewards you for not consuming in the present, but why need that be the case?
And so Islamic writers conclude that interest-rate theory is simply just baseless; that shiny skyscraper supported with a pillar that is really a mirage.
"Interest exists because it is there; it is still held up by its own theoretical bootstraps. The failure of mainstream economics to explain adequately the existence of interest betrays the fact that it is merely a theoretical concept with no true basis in reality. It is a figment of our collective imaginations."
However, Islamic finance has been more successful at critiquing modern interest-rate theory than in practically applying its principles.
In Practice Fail
Islamic finance is philosophically based on two ideas: money serves as a means to consume not hoard, and those with a surplus of wealth are obligated to help those with lesser means. In practice, these principles involved the concept of shared risk taking by means of common insurance (takaful) where banks and financial institutions put some money away in a pot, which will then be accessed when one of the members in trouble. Additionally, and importantly, Islamic finance shuns the use of debt. So, Islamic finance has come up with various instruments that avoid debt and interest. These instruments include bank loans to entrepreneurs and businesses where the bank becomes part (sleeping) owner in a company (musharaka), and the bank will profit if the company succeeds and lose if the company fails. Also, car leases are financed with the (ijara) facility, where the leaser is has to pay a fee above the principal instead of interest.
An important aspect of Islamic finance includes the Islamic bond (sukuk). Bonds are debt instruments and while Islamic finance avoids debt, it recognizes the possible necessity of relying on debt. But in keeping with the principal of risk sharing, and differentiating itself from conventional bonds, sukuks pay out a ‘profit’ rate, which corresponds to the profitability of the assets that were obtained from the money borrowed. So, if you issued a bond to set up a lemonade stands, you’d pay me back a variable ‘profit’ rate, depending on how successful your lemonade stand is, rather than a fixed interest rate as do conventional bonds. And, if your lemonade stand fails, I have a claim on your lemonade stand.
But with all these advantages, the world of Islamic finance has still suffered considerable losses and slow-downs in business. The reason for this is simple and saddening; in practice, Islamic finance has evolved into a mirror image of modern banking with Arabic names affixed. Dr. El-Gamel , author of Islamic Finance: Law, Economics & Practice, describes Islamic finance practitioners as having mimicked modern finance by using a “form above substance juristic approach”. He describes how finance professionals and lawyers join forces with religious scholars in order to Islamicize modern financial methods, with the scholars providing the necessary ‘Islamic’ certification and the financiers and lawyers doing the necessary legwork, along with Islamic governments who directly promote Islamic finance as the moral way to go. Dr. el-Gamal advocates reconstructing Islamic finance based on community development, social and ethical responsible investing and microfinance, which would embody the Islamic principles of risk sharing and reducing wealth inequality.
Dr. Tariq Yousef, former World Bank and IMF economist and current Dean of the Dubai School of Government echoes this sentiment - “Unfortunately, what we see in most Islamic banking practices at present is a reliance on instruments and modes of financing that resemble debt”.
In Sentences, Two
Islamic finance provides compelling critiques of modern interest rate theory and presents an alternate finance structure. But in practice, Islamic finance has failed to live up to its principles.
And that's jus' the tip.






