I don’t have any idea which books those peo­ple read about Democ­racy but I am very curi­ous. You will read three quotes from three cler­ics on the issue “Democracy”

Zar­qawi: Democ­racy Is the Very Essence of Heresy, Poly­the­ism, and Error

1– Democ­racy is based on the prin­ci­ple that the peo­ple are the source of all author­ity, includ­ing the leg­isla­tive (author­ity). This is car­ried out by choos­ing rep­re­sen­ta­tives who act as prox­ies for the peo­ple in the task of leg­is­lat­ing and mak­ing laws. In other words, the leg­is­la­tor who must be obeyed in a democ­racy is man, and not Allah. That means that the one who is wor­shiped and obeyed and dei­fied, from the point of view of leg­is­lat­ing and pro­hibit­ing, is man, the cre­ated, and not Allah. That is the very essence of heresy and poly­the­ism and error, as it con­tra­dicts the bases of the faith [of Islam] and monothe­ism, and because it makes the weak, igno­rant man Allah’s part­ner in His most cen­tral divine pre­rog­a­tive — namely, rul­ing and leg­is­lat­ing. Allah said: ‘Sov­er­eignty is Allah’s alone. He has com­manded you to wor­ship none but Him’ [Koran 12:40]. ‘He allows none to share His sov­er­eignty’ [Koran 18:26]…

2– Democ­racy is based on the prin­ci­ple of free­dom of reli­gion and belief. Under democ­racy, a man can believe any­thing he wants and choose any reli­gion he wants and con­vert to any reli­gion when­ever he wants, even if this apos­tasy means aban­don­ing the reli­gion of Allah.…This is a mat­ter which is patently per­verse and false and con­tra­dicts many spe­cific [Mus­lim] legal texts, since accord­ing to Islam, if a Mus­lim apo­s­ta­tizes from Islam to heresy, he should be killed, as stated in the Hadith reported by Al-Bukhari and oth­ers: ‘Who­ever changes his reli­gion, kill him.’ It does not say ‘leave him alone.’

“One may not make a [peace] treaty with an apos­tate, nor grant him safe pas­sage or pro­tec­tion. Accord­ing to Allah’s reli­gion, he has only one choice: ‘Repent or be killed.’

3– Democ­racy is based on con­sid­er­ing the peo­ple to be the sole sov­er­eign, to whom all juridi­cal mat­ters and con­flicts should be referred, and if there is any con­tro­versy or con­flict between gov­er­nor and gov­erned, each of them threat­ens the other to refer to the will of the peo­ple and its choice, so that the peo­ple should decide on the mat­ter on which is dis­agreed. This con­flicts with and is con­tra­dic­tory to the prin­ci­ples of monothe­ism, which deter­mines that the arbiter, decid­ing by His judg­ment in mat­ters of dis­cord, is Allah and none else. Allah said [Koran 42:10]: ’ And in what­ever thing you dis­agree, the judg­ment thereof belongs to Allah.’ Democ­racy, on the other hand, says: ‘And in what­ever things you dis­agree, the judg­ment thereof belongs to the peo­ple and to none beside the people…’

4– Democ­racy is based on the prin­ci­pal of ‘free­dom of expres­sion,’ no mat­ter what the expres­sion might be, even if it means hurt­ing and revil­ing the Divine Being [i.e. Allah] and the laws of Islam, because in democ­racy noth­ing is so sacred that one can­not be inso­lent or use vile lan­guage about it.

5– Democ­racy is based on the prin­ci­ple of sep­a­ra­tion between reli­gion and state, pol­i­tics, and life; what is Allah’s is ren­dered unto Allah, which is just wor­ship in the places designed for it. All other aspects of life — polit­i­cal, eco­nomic, social, etc. — are the people’s prerogative…

6– Democ­racy is based on the prin­ci­ple of free­dom of asso­ci­a­tion and of form­ing polit­i­cal par­ties and the like, no mat­ter what the creed, ideas, and ethics of these par­ties may be. This prin­ci­ple is null and void accord­ing to [Islamic] law for a num­ber of rea­sons… One of them is that vol­un­tary recog­ni­tion of the legal­ity of hereti­cal par­ties implies acqui­es­cence in heresy… Acqui­es­cence in heresy is heresy.…

7– Democ­racy is based on the prin­ci­ple of con­sid­er­ing the posi­tion of the major­ity and adopt­ing what is agreed upon by the major­ity, even if they agree upon false­hood, error, and bla­tant heresy… This prin­ci­ple is totally wrong and void because truth accord­ing to Islam is that which is in accor­dance with the Koran and the Sunna [i.e., the tra­di­tion of the Prophet], whether its sup­port­ers are few or many; and that which con­tra­dicts the Koran and the Sunna is false even if all the peo­ple of the world agree on it…
“It is both note­wor­thy and sur­pris­ing that despite the fact that demo­c­ra­tic exper­i­ments have had dam­ag­ing con­se­quences for the Mus­lims, caus­ing weak­ness, con­tro­versy, divi­sion, and con­flict … despite all this, many peo­ple con­tinue to admire democ­racy and defend it as though they were its own­ers and cre­ators; their hearts are imbued with the love of democ­racy as the Chil­dren of Israel were imbued with the love of the [golden] calf… Allah has decided this mat­ter: ‘I do not wor­ship what you wor­ship, nor do you wor­ship what I wor­ship’ [Koran 109:1], and at the end of the same chap­ter [He says]: ‘You have your reli­gion and I have mine’ [109:6]. The mat­ter, then, is a mat­ter of prin­ci­ple; it is non-negotiable, and there can be no con­ces­sion regard­ing it what­so­ever… It is a mat­ter relat­ing to the prin­ci­ples of our creed — nay, it is the very essence of our creed.“

Abu Muham­mad Al-Maqdisi: Democ­racy Is a Reli­gion of Heresy

First, [democ­racy] is leg­is­lated by the masses or the regime of tyrants, and it is not the rule of Allah the Exalted. Allah com­manded his Prophet to act accord­ing to the law that He sent down to him, and for­bade him from fol­low­ing the desires of the nation or the masses and warned him that they would divert him from some of the [pre­cepts] sent down by Allah: ‘Judge between them by that which Allah has sent down, and do not fol­low their wishes to devi­ate from it’ [Koran 5:49]…
“As for the reli­gion of democ­racy and poly­the­ism, those who wor­ship it say: ‘Judge between them by that which the peo­ple wish; be wary of devi­at­ing from what they want, desire, and leg­is­late…’ This is what they say, and this is what democ­racy instructs, there­fore, democ­racy is heresy and part­ner­ship [with Allah] if it is implemented…

“Sec­ond, the rule of the masses or the tyrant is in accor­dance with the con­sti­tu­tion, and not in accor­dance with the law of Allah. This is what is stated in their con­sti­tu­tions and their books, which they sanc­tify over the Koran. Evi­dence of this is that the law [of the con­sti­tu­tions and books] is pre­ferred to the law [of the Koran], and the law [of the con­sti­tu­tions and books] is higher [to them] than [the Koran’s] laws… Accord­ing to the reli­gion of democ­racy, the masses do not accept the judg­ments and laws … unless they are based on the pre­cepts and arti­cles of the con­sti­tu­tion, because they see it as the father of the laws and the holy book. In the reli­gion of democ­racy, there is no con­sid­er­a­tion of the Koranic verses or the Hadiths of the Prophet, and laws can­not be leg­is­lated in accor­dance with them unless they are com­pat­i­ble with the pre­cepts of their holy book, the constitution…

“Third, democ­racy is the vile fruit and ille­git­i­mate daugh­ter of sec­u­lar­ism, because sec­u­lar­ism is a hereti­cal school of thought that aspires to iso­late reli­gion from life or sep­a­rate reli­gion from state and law, and democ­racy is the rule of the peo­ple or the rule of the tyrant. But in any event, it is not the rule of Allah the Exalted, and it does not take the unswerv­ing leg­is­la­tion of Allah into account at all unless it is first com­pat­i­ble with all the arti­cles of the con­sti­tu­tion, and then with the desires of the peo­ple, and even before that with the desires of the tyrant or the masses.

“There­fore, if the entire peo­ple was to tell the tyrant or the lords of democ­racy: ‘We want to act accord­ing to the law sent down by Allah, and then no one — not the peo­ple, not the MPs, and not the ruler — will have the right to leg­is­late laws. We want to imple­ment the law of Allah regard­ing the apos­tate [ Mur­tadd ], the adul­terer, the thief, the wine-drinker. We want to require the woman to wear a veil [ Hijab ], to act mod­estly, and [we want] to pre­vent [her] from adorn­ing her­self. [We want to pre­vent] obscen­ity, cor­rup­tion, adul­tery, sodomy, and other abom­i­na­tions.’ [If the entire peo­ple was to tell the tyrant this,] the tyrant would imme­di­ately tell [those demand­ing it] that these demands are against the reli­gion of democ­racy and demo­c­ra­tic free­doms.“

The Mufti of the Jihad Fight­ers in Chech­nya: Democ­racy [in Iraq] is a Vic­tory for the Crusaders

“Your Jihad against the Cru­saders is defense of Islam, whose ene­mies are aim­ing to remove it from the hearts and lives of the Mus­lims. In this crime of democ­racy, the ones aid­ing them [the Allied forces] are mem­bers of our peo­ple and those who speak in their name, who call their apos­tasy and cor­rup­tion ‘reform’…

“Democ­racy [in Iraq] is a vic­tory for the Cru­saders, even if they retreat from Iraq and leave their agents to guard the idol of democ­racy that has become the god wor­shipped besides Allah.

“Accord­ingly, the Jihad war­riors must wage Jihad against the sol­diers of the idol of democ­racy, whether these [sol­diers] be Cru­saders or their demo­c­ra­tic agents who are apos­tates from Islam [ Murtaddoun ]…

“The ene­mies of Allah, the Cru­saders, and the apos­tate groups have closed ranks and agreed to estab­lish an infi­del demo­c­ra­tic gov­ern­ment in Iraq, despite dif­fer­ences in their schools of thought and trends. In con­trast, the Jihad war­riors have no united lead­er­ship, and no gen­eral imam to whom they have sworn allegiance…

“The arrival of democ­racy to the Mus­lim coun­tries will con­sti­tute great cor­rup­tion. There­fore, the Jihad war­riors in Iraq must close ranks and swear alle­giance to a gen­eral imam of the Mus­lims in Iraq to whom the rules of the Imama [ima­mate] apply, and who will be cho­sen by the Shura mem­bers, the Jihad war­rior com­man­ders, and the Ulema of the Muslims.

“But it is for­bid­den to hold gen­eral elec­tions to choose the gen­eral imam or [to choose] mem­bers of the Shura coun­cil even in a coun­try ruled by the laws of Islam, because these are the meth­ods and ways of the infi­del demo­c­ra­tic regime, and [these meth­ods] must not be asso­ci­ated with Islam.

“The evi­dence for the ban on hold­ing gen­eral elec­tions is:

“1. The regime, accord­ing to Islam, [must] be Allah’s, not the people’s or any­one else’s. The peo­ple must obey the order of Allah and his laws…

“2. Annulling the Shari’a con­di­tions that must be met by the imam or the Shura mem­bers, and also annulling the Shari’a method for choos­ing the imam, and replac­ing [the Shari’a method with] demo­c­ra­tic elec­tions means accept­ing the rule of the idols instead of the rule of Allah.…

“3. The aim of the Imama is to apply Allah’s Shari’a in all areas of life, to impose jus­tice, and to pro­mote virtue and pro­hibit vice. In order to real­ize the goal of the Imama, Shari’a has set con­di­tions that must be found in the imam, such as jus­tice and hon­esty, [reli­gious] knowl­edge, courage, and other conditions.

“But gen­eral elec­tions rely on the caprices and impulses of peo­ple, and most peo­ple vote for who­ever meets their desires, regard­less of the con­di­tions of the Imama…

“4. Allah cre­ated Djinn s and peo­ple so that they would wor­ship Him… The con­di­tions of the Imama, accord­ing to Shari’a, are aimed at real­iz­ing this goal. But gen­eral demo­c­ra­tic elec­tions annul these con­di­tions, since elect­ing [a leader] is done accord­ing to the caprices and desires of peo­ple. This con­tra­dicts the accep­tance of His com­mand and sub­mis­sion to Him.

“5. Allah showed that most peo­ple do not obey Him, and are not inter­ested in His Shari’a and in His rule, but are inter­ested in Jahiliyya [pre-Islamic] law.… How, then, can the fate of the estab­lish­ment of the rule of Allah on earth be depen­dent on this major­ity that desires Jahiliyya law and dis­tances itself from the law of Allah?

“6. Islam does not treat equally — either in this world or in the world to come — the wise and the igno­rant, the Mus­lim and the infi­del, the pious and the sin­ner. But the elected demo­c­ra­tic regime treats all these as equal in the elections…

“7. The prin­ci­ple of gen­eral elec­tions is per­ceived by many to be legit­i­mate. Many think that legit­i­macy is obtained by a major­ity of peo­ple, and not from the Book of Allah [i.e., the Koran] and the Sunna of His Messenger…”