Evidence based analysis

Ideology-Based Nations and Their Periods of Quick Rise

Nations or regimes driven primarily by a core ideology often experience rapid ascents due to unified mobilization, revolutionary fervor, or aggressive expansion. Below, I’ll outline prominent historical examples of such “ideology-based nations,” focusing on modern cases where a specific political or religious ideology was the foundational driver. These are drawn from well-documented historical patterns of ideological states. For each, I’ll specify the ideology, the nation/regime, and the timeframe of their quick rise (typically marked by consolidation of power, economic/military growth, or territorial expansion). Note that many of these also experienced dramatic falls, often due to overextension, internal contradictions, or external opposition, but the query emphasizes the rise aspect.

1. Soviet Union (Communism)
   The Soviet Union was founded on Marxist-Leninist communism, emphasizing class struggle, state ownership of production, and proletarian internationalism. Its quick rise occurred from 1917 (the Bolshevik Revolution) to the late 1920s/early 1930s, when under leaders like Lenin and then Stalin, it transformed from a war-torn empire into an industrialized superpower through five-year plans, collectivization, and rapid military buildup. 23 45 42 This period saw the USSR emerge as a global ideological counterweight to capitalism.
2. Nazi Germany (Nazism)
   Nazism, a far-right ideology blending extreme nationalism, racial supremacy (Aryanism), antisemitism, and militarism, propelled the Third Reich. The quick rise spanned 1933 (Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor) to 1939, marked by economic recovery via public works and rearmament, the remilitarization of the Rhineland, and annexations like Austria and Czechoslovakia, turning a depressed Weimar Republic into a dominant European power. 23 45 41
3. Fascist Italy (Fascism)
   Fascism under Benito Mussolini emphasized authoritarian nationalism, corporatism, anti-communism, and imperial revival. Italy’s rapid ascent happened from 1922 (Mussolini’s March on Rome and seizure of power) to the mid-1930s, with economic modernization, suppression of opposition, and conquests like Ethiopia (1935–1936), establishing Italy as a revisionist power in Europe. 23 45 30 41
4. Imperial Japan (Militarism/State Shinto)
   A blend of ultranationalism, emperor worship (State Shinto), and militaristic expansionism drove Japan’s regime. The quick rise took place from the late 1920s to the early 1930s, when militarists gained control, leading to invasions of Manchuria (1931), China (1937), and rapid industrialization, transforming Japan from an isolated island nation into an Asian empire and Axis power. 23 45
5. Islamic Republic of Iran (Islamism/Shia Theocracy)
   Rooted in Shia Islamic revivalism and anti-imperialism, as articulated by Ayatollah Khomeini, this ideology rejected Western secularism in favor of rule by Islamic jurisprudence (Velayat-e Faqih). Iran’s swift rise followed the 1979 Islamic Revolution, consolidating power by 1980–1981 through the establishment of theocratic institutions, export of revolutionary ideals, and regional influence amid the Iran-Iraq War, elevating it from a monarchy to a key Middle Eastern player. 4

These examples illustrate how ideologies can catalyze rapid national transformation by inspiring mass support and justifying bold actions. However, their falls—such as the Soviet Union’s dissolution in 1991, the Axis powers’ defeat in 1945, or ongoing challenges in Iran—often stem from ideological rigidity or geopolitical backlash. 31 39 Historical analyses show that while ideology fuels quick rises, sustainability depends on adaptability and external factors.

Democracy….

Rise of Nations That Adopted Democratic Ideologies

Nations adopting democratic ideologies—emphasizing representative government, rule of law, civil liberties, and electoral systems—have often experienced significant rises in economic prosperity, global influence, or stability. This “rise” can manifest as rapid GDP growth, technological advancement, military strength, or soft power. Below, I outline key historical examples, focusing on modern nations where democracy was adopted (via constitutions, revolutions, or transitions) and linked to subsequent ascents. These are drawn from waves of democratization: the first (late 18th–early 20th century), second (post-WWII), and third (1974–1990s). Periods refer to key adoption milestones, such as constitutional ratification or first free elections. Not all transitions led to immediate or sustained rises, but these cases highlight positive correlations with growth and influence.

1. United States (Liberal Democracy)
   Adopted via the 1787 Constitution (ratified 1788–1789), establishing a federal republic with electoral systems and checks on power. The quick rise occurred in the 19th century, transforming from agrarian colonies into an industrial powerhouse through westward expansion, innovation, and immigration, culminating in global superpower status by the early 20th century. 21
2. France (Republican Democracy)
   Initial adoption during the 1789 French Revolution (Declaration of the Rights of Man), but stabilized as the Third Republic in 1870–1875. Rapid rise followed in the late 19th century, with industrialization, colonial expansion, and cultural dominance (Belle Époque), positioning France as a leading European power despite later setbacks. 16
3. Japan (Constitutional Democracy)
   Imposed post-WWII via the 1947 Constitution under U.S. occupation, shifting from militarism to parliamentary democracy with civil rights. The economic miracle (1950s–1970s) saw explosive GDP growth (averaging 10% annually), technological innovation, and export-led rise to the world’s second-largest economy by the 1980s. 0
4. West Germany (Federal Democracy)
   Adopted with the 1949 Basic Law, creating a parliamentary system after Nazi rule. The Wirtschaftswunder (economic miracle, 1950s–1960s) featured rapid reconstruction, industrial boom, and integration into NATO/EU, elevating it from ruins to Europe’s economic engine. 16
5. India (Parliamentary Democracy)
   Adopted via the 1950 Constitution post-independence (1947), emphasizing secularism and universal suffrage. Economic liberalization in 1991 accelerated rise, with GDP growth averaging 6–8% annually (1990s–2010s), tech sector boom, and emergence as a global player, lifting hundreds of millions from poverty. 22
6. South Korea (Presidential Democracy)
   Transitioned in 1987–1988 with direct elections and constitutional reforms ending military rule. Building on prior industrialization, the 1990s–2000s saw sustained high growth (Asian Tiger economy), tech giants like Samsung, and cultural influence (Hallyu wave), becoming a high-income OECD nation. 23
7. Taiwan (Multi-Party Democracy)
   Liberalized in the late 1980s–1990s, with martial law lifted in 1987 and first direct presidential election in 1996. Spectacular economic growth (1980s–2000s) through semiconductors and exports turned it into a high-tech hub, with GDP per capita rising from ~$2,000 in 1980 to over $30,000 by 2020. 23
8. Brazil (Federal Democracy)
   Redemocratized in 1985–1988 with civilian rule and a new constitution after military dictatorship. The 2000s boom under leaders like Lula featured 4–5% annual growth, commodity exports, and social programs reducing inequality, briefly making it a BRICS leader. 22 24
9. Indonesia (Presidential Democracy)
   Democratized post-1998 (Suharto’s fall), with reforms enabling free elections and decentralization. Economic takeoff in the 2000s–2010s included 5–6% growth, middle-class expansion, and G20 membership, transitioning from crisis to emerging market stability. 22
10. South Africa (Parliamentary Democracy)
    Adopted in 1994 with post-apartheid elections and a progressive constitution. The 1990s–2000s saw steady growth (3–5% annually), foreign investment, and global influence as Africa’s largest economy, though inequality persists. 22
11. Poland (Parliamentary Democracy)
    Transitioned in 1989–1990 with Solidarity-led reforms and free elections post-communism. EU accession in 2004 fueled a 4–6% growth surge (1990s–2010s), infrastructure modernization, and rise as Central Europe’s economic leader. 23 19

These examples show how democracy often correlates with rises by fostering stability, investment, and innovation, though external factors like aid or markets play roles. Challenges like backsliding (e.g., Turkey post-2002) highlight that adoption alone doesn’t guarantee sustained success. 11 22

Current status of democracy

Global Trends in Democracy: A Downward Trajectory

Based on comprehensive assessments from leading organizations tracking democratic indicators, democracy worldwide is experiencing a sustained decline rather than a rise. This trend, often termed “democratic backsliding” or “autocratization,” has been ongoing for nearly two decades, accelerating in recent years despite a record number of elections in 2024. While there are isolated pockets of progress—such as upgrades in democratic status for a few countries—the overall picture shows erosion in key democratic values like free and fair elections, civil liberties, political participation, rule of law, and pluralism. Below, I outline the evidence, drawing from 2024–2025 reports, and explain the factors contributing to this trend.

Key Metrics Indicating Decline

1. Autocracies Outnumber Democracies: For the first time in over 20 years, autocracies (91 countries) surpass democracies (88 countries) as of 2024 data. 6 7 33 This shift reflects a “wave of autocratization” affecting 45 countries, compared to only 19 undergoing democratization. 1 7 Almost all aspects of democracy—electoral processes, civil liberties, and governance—are worsening in more countries than improving. 33
2. Global Freedom Scores: Freedom House reports that political rights and civil liberties deteriorated in 60 countries in 2024, marking the 19th consecutive year of global decline. 3 25 In 2025, challenges include armed conflicts, repression in authoritarian states, and emerging threats like misinformation and polarization. 3 Political freedom has hit its lowest point since 1999, declining steadily for 12 years across all regions. 10 29
3. Democracy Index Scores: The Economist Intelligence Unit’s (EIU) Democracy Index for 2024 shows the global average score dropping to 5.17 (out of 10), the lowest since the index began in 2006. 15 18 34 Only 7.8% of the world’s population lives in a “full democracy,” while 39% endure authoritarian rule and 15% live in “hybrid regimes” blending democratic and autocratic elements. 4 15 27 Despite two countries (e.g., Paraguay and Papua New Guinea) upgrading to “flawed democracies,” 68 countries saw declines, with stagnation in others. 4 19
4. Population-Weighted Measures: Nearly half the global population (45.4%) lives in some form of democracy, but this figure masks qualitative erosion. 27 19 Dissatisfaction with democracy is widespread, with satisfaction decreasing in countries like Israel, Japan, and South Korea since 2024. 28 Even established democracies like the U.S. are classified as “flawed” (score: 7.85), risking further downgrades amid polarization. 8 13 32

Factors Driving the Downward Trend

• Armed Conflicts and Geopolitical Tensions: Wars (e.g., in Ukraine and the Middle East) and rising violence have eroded freedoms, with conflicts reinforcing authoritarian tendencies. 3 19 The breakdown of postwar international order exacerbates this. 19
• Populism and Authoritarian Populism: Anti-incumbent backlashes in 2024 elections boosted populist insurgents, fueled by disaffection with democratic systems. 15 14 24 Seven flaws in modern democracies—such as polarization, low youth turnout, and misinformation—drive this discontent. 16 18
• Hybrid Regimes and Entrenched Authoritarianism: Many “hybrid regimes” struggle to democratize, while authoritarian states deepen repression. 19 31 Declines are concentrated in representation and rights, even in high-performing countries in Europe and the Americas. 23
• Election Credibility Issues: Despite 2024’s “super-cycle” of elections (involving 3.7 billion people across 72 countries), disputes over irregularities persist, undermining trust. 2 12 23 More elections do not equate to stronger democracy. 5 34

Signs of Resilience and Counterarguments

While the trend is downward, not all is bleak. Incumbents lost in several high-profile elections (e.g., in Asia and Africa), showing elections can still empower change. 12 23 Some view this as democracy’s adaptability, but experts argue it masks deeper erosion. 11 Optimistic voices, like those in Stanford’s analysis, highlight that 2024’s elections offered opportunities for renewal, yet data shows no net rebound. 2

Views differ: Progressive sources (e.g., Pew, Freedom House) emphasize systemic flaws and public dissatisfaction, while conservative-leaning analyses might frame declines as overreactions to conflicts or populism. 28 14 Media like Vox Ukraine notes “more elections, less democracy,” assuming bias in subjective reports but aligning with data trends. 34 X discussions echo concerns about authoritarian rises (e.g., links to Project 2025 or historical fascism), but no posts indicate a global uptick. 35 39 45 55

In summary, democratic values are on a downward trend worldwide, substantiated by quantitative indices and expert consensus. Reversing this requires addressing root causes like inequality, conflict, and misinformation. For a balanced view, consult full reports from V-Dem, EIU, or Freedom House.

Imperialist nations

Current Imperialist Nations and Their Trajectories

Imperialism in the modern context refers to the extension of a nation’s power through military intervention, economic dominance, territorial expansion, or cultural influence—often termed “neo-imperialism.” Based on contemporary analyses from 2024–2025, the primary nations accused of imperialist behaviors include the United States, China, Russia, and Iran, with remnants in former colonial powers like the UK and France. These assessments draw from geopolitical actions, such as military incursions, resource control, and influence operations. Views vary by source: Western media often highlight Russia and China as aggressors, while non-Western and leftist outlets emphasize U.S. dominance in decline. Below, I list key examples, explain their imperialist characteristics, and assess if they are rising (gaining influence) or declining (losing ground), substantiated by recent trends.

1. United States (Economic and Military Hegemony)
   The U.S. is frequently described as the leading imperialist power, maintaining global influence through military bases (over 800 worldwide), interventions (e.g., in the Middle East), sanctions, and economic tools like dollar dominance. 24 25 39 It supports proxy conflicts and alliances (e.g., NATO, Israel) to counter rivals. 35 However, it is declining: Economic challenges (debt, de-dollarization via BRICS), failed withdrawals (Afghanistan), and rising multipolarity (challenges from China/Russia) signal erosion. 0 1 3 9 15 40 Productivity declines and internal polarization (e.g., Project 2025 debates) exacerbate this. 30 38 42
2. China (Economic Expansionism and Territorial Claims)
   China’s imperialism manifests in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) for infrastructure dominance in Africa/Asia, territorial assertions in the South China Sea/Taiwan, and economic leverage (e.g., debt traps in developing nations). 20 21 45 It challenges U.S. hegemony via alliances with Russia/Iran and tech/military buildup. 6 12 15 41 46 47 It is rising: Despite slowdowns (e.g., real estate issues), its GDP growth, semiconductor independence, and multipolar advocacy (BRICS) outpace rivals, displacing Western influence. 2 42 48 50 Some sources note a recent standstill, but overall trajectory is upward. 49
3. Russia (Military Revisionism and Resource Control)
   Russia pursues imperialism via territorial annexations (Ukraine, Crimea), influence in Africa (e.g., Wagner Group in Mali, CAR), and energy leverage. 20 21 41 45 It challenges the “unipolar” order through alliances with China/Iran. 12 17 47 It is rising: Sanctions evasion, military gains in Ukraine, and African expansions signal resurgence, filling voids left by Western retreats. 0 3 41 44 46 48
4. Iran (Regional Proxy Networks and Ideological Export)
   Iran extends influence through proxies (e.g., Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Iraq/Syria), challenging U.S./Israeli dominance, and exporting Shia Islamism. 45 47 It is rising: Defiance against sanctions, alliances with Russia/China, and gains in the Middle East (e.g., via Hamas/Houthis) enhance its position, despite economic strains. 41 44 46 47 Relative to 2020, its allies are stronger militarily. 49
5. United Kingdom and France (Post-Colonial Remnants)
   These maintain imperialist legacies through overseas territories (e.g., UK’s Falklands, France’s African influence) and military interventions (e.g., in Africa). 27 33 41 They are declining: Ousted from African spheres (e.g., France from Mali), economic stagnation, and reduced global clout amid multipolarity. 7 8 13 19 43

Overall, Western imperialism (led by the U.S./Europe) is declining due to multipolar challenges, internal decay, and overextension, while non-Western powers (China, Russia, Iran) are rising by exploiting these gaps. 6 7 12 13 20 21 32 45 This shift risks escalation, including potential conflicts or a “new age of imperialism.” 20 21 These claims, while politically charged, are backed by diverse sources assuming media biases.

Military ruled states

Military-Ruled States and Their Economic Standing

As of August 2025, several countries remain under military rule, primarily through juntas established via recent coups. These are concentrated in Africa, with Myanmar as a notable exception in Asia. Military rule often stems from coups citing corruption, insecurity, or economic failures, but it frequently exacerbates instability. Economic standing is assessed using key indicators like GDP per capita (PPP or nominal where available, in international or US dollars), real GDP growth projections for 2025 (from IMF sources), and contextual factors such as poverty rates, resource dependence, and challenges. Data is drawn from 2025 projections; most of these nations rank among the world’s poorer economies, with growth hampered by conflict, sanctions, and governance issues. Below is a curated list based on current reports.

1. Myanmar (Military Junta since February 2021)
   The State Administration Council (SAC) under General Min Aung Hlaing seized power, citing electoral fraud, and has faced ongoing civil war and international sanctions. Elections are slated for late 2025/early 2026 but are widely viewed as a facade to legitimize rule. 0 3 10
   Economic Standing: Low-income economy reliant on agriculture, garments, and natural gas. GDP per capita (PPP): ~$6,500 (2024 estimate; 2025 data limited). Real GDP growth: 1.9% projected for 2025. Challenges include hyperinflation, currency devaluation, and poverty affecting over 50% of the population, worsened by conflict and sanctions; standing is poor, with declining foreign investment. 49
2. Mali (Military Junta since May 2021)
   Led by Colonel Assimi Goïta, the junta (initially post-2020 coup) has delayed elections indefinitely, suspended political parties, and allied with Russia/Wagner for security amid jihadist threats. 0 1 14 45
   Economic Standing: Low-income, gold and cotton-dependent economy. GDP per capita (PPP): $2,934 (2025). Real GDP growth: 4.9% projected for 2025. Poverty rate ~47%; vulnerable to commodity shocks and insecurity; part of Alliance of Sahel States (AES) with Burkina Faso and Niger, boosting regional trade but facing ECOWAS withdrawal impacts. Overall standing: Weak, with moderate growth from mining but high inequality. 18 19 21 47 49
3. Burkina Faso (Military Junta since September 2022)
   Captain Ibrahim Traoré’s regime followed a 2022 coup, focusing on anti-jihadist efforts with Russian support; no firm election timeline, amid regional AES alliance. 0 1 6 45
   Economic Standing: Low-income, agriculture and gold-based. GDP per capita (PPP): $2,978 (2025). Real GDP growth: 4.3% projected for 2025 (up from 4.9% in 2024). Extreme poverty ~40%; resilient growth from mining but hindered by insecurity displacing millions; standing: Fragile, below pre-2010s averages but improving slightly. 18 20 23 27 47 49
4. Guinea (Military Junta since September 2021)
   Colonel Mamady Doumbouya’s National Committee leads a transition, with delayed elections planned for 2025 amid protests and repression. 0 1 12 45
   Economic Standing: Low-income, bauxite-rich. GDP per capita (nominal): $1,900 (2025). Real GDP growth: 7.1% projected for 2025. Poverty ~40%; strong growth from mining exports but uneven distribution and inflation; standing: Improving but vulnerable to global commodity prices. 29 47 49
5. Sudan (Military Rule since October 2021)
   General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan’s Sovereignty Council holds power amid civil war between army and Rapid Support Forces, derailing transitions. 0 13 44 45
   Economic Standing: Low-income, oil and agriculture-dependent. GDP per capita (PPP): ~$4,000 (2024; limited 2025 data). Real GDP growth: -0.4% projected for 2025. Poverty >60%, with famine risks in Darfur; war has collapsed economy, causing hyperinflation and displacement; standing: Severely deteriorated, among world’s poorest. 22 25 49
6. Chad (Military Transitional Council since April 2021)
   Mahamat Déby’s council rules post his father’s death (called a “dynastic coup”); elections delayed, with strong military grip. 0 39 44 45
   Economic Standing: Low-income, oil-exporting. GDP per capita

Countries who practice democratic values >with best to worst

Countries Ranked by Democratic Values Practiced (Best to Worst)

Democratic values—such as free and fair elections, civil liberties, political pluralism, rule of law, and government accountability—are assessed through indices like the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) Democracy Index, V-Dem Liberal Democracy Index (LDI), and Freedom House’s Freedom in the World scores. These provide a spectrum from best-practiced (high scores, full democracies) to worst (low scores, authoritarian regimes). For 2024-2025 data, global democracy is declining, with fewer than 8% of people in full democracies per EIU.

I’ll primarily use the EIU Democracy Index 2024 (scores 0-10) for rankings, as it’s comprehensive and directly measures democracy. It categorizes regimes as:

• Full Democracies (8-10): Strong values in all areas.
• Flawed Democracies (6-8): Elections are fair, but issues like governance or liberties persist.
• Hybrid Regimes (4-6): Elections have irregularities; corruption and pressure on opposition are common.
• Authoritarian Regimes (0-4): Little to no democratic practice; suppression dominates.

Due to 167 countries, I’ll list top 20 best (highest scores) and bottom 20 worst (lowest scores), with summaries for middle categories. Cross-referenced with V-Dem (LDI 0-1, top: Denmark 0.88; bottom: Eritrea/North Korea ~0.01) and Freedom House (0-100, top: Finland 100; bottom: Tibet 0), which show similar patterns (e.g., Nordics top, autocracies bottom), though V-Dem emphasizes liberal aspects and Freedom House civil/political rights. 60 61 63 62

Top 20 Best (Highest Democratic Values)

These excel in electoral fairness, liberties, and participation (all Full Democracies per EIU).

1. Norway (9.81)
2. New Zealand (9.61)
3. Sweden (9.39)
4. Iceland (9.38)
5. Switzerland (9.32)
6. Finland (9.30)
7. Denmark (9.28)
8. Ireland (9.19)
9. Netherlands (9.00)
10. Luxembourg (8.88)
11. Australia (8.85)
12. Taiwan (8.78)
13. Germany (8.73)
14. Canada (8.69)
15. Uruguay (8.67)
16. Japan (8.48)
17. United Kingdom (8.34)
18. Costa Rica (8.29)
19. Austria (8.28)
20. Mauritius (8.23)

Flawed Democracies (Mid-High: Scores 6-8)

Countries like Estonia/Spain (8.13) to Indonesia (6.44) practice democratic values but with flaws (e.g., media bias, corruption). Examples: USA (7.85), Chile (7.83), India (7.29), Brazil (6.49). About 45 countries; values are present but inconsistent.

Hybrid Regimes (Mid-Low: Scores 4-6)

Elections occur but are flawed; values like free speech are limited. Examples: Colombia (6.35) to Gambia (4.47). Around 35 countries; democratic practices are partial and eroding in many.

Bottom 20 Worst (Lowest Democratic Values)

These authoritarian regimes suppress values through censorship, rigged elections, and repression (all Authoritarian per EIU unless noted; aligns with V-Dem/Freedom House lows like North Korea, Syria).

148. Uzbekistan (2.12)
149. Kazakhstan (2.11)
150. Ethiopia (2.10)
151. Vietnam (2.04)
152. Laos (1.96)
153. Saudi Arabia (1.92)
154. Yemen (1.88)
155. Iran (1.85)
156. China (1.83)
157. Cuba (1.81)
158. Equatorial Guinea (1.80)
159. Eritrea (1.76)
160. Turkmenistan (1.66)
161. Tajikistan (1.65)
162. Central African Republic (1.55)
163. Syria (1.43)
164. Chad (1.31)
165. Myanmar (0.85)
166. Afghanistan (0.32)
167. North Korea (0.00)

This ranking substantiates a global downward trend, with autocracies outnumbering democracies per V-Dem. Subjective biases in indices (e.g., Western focus) are noted, but data from diverse sources converges on these patterns. 60 61 63 62

Muslim majority countries and how many are ruled by sharia

Muslim-Majority Countries and Their Governance Systems

Muslim-majority countries are those where Muslims make up more than 50% of the population, based on recent demographic data (e.g., from Pew Research, CIA World Factbook, and Wikipedia compilations as of 2025). There are approximately 47 such sovereign states (excluding disputed territories like Palestine and Western Sahara for clarity, though they are often included; Bosnia and Herzegovina is added as it meets the threshold at ~51%). The list below is alphabetical, with approximate Muslim population percentages for context.

• Afghanistan (99.7%)
• Algeria (99%)
• Azerbaijan (97.3%)
• Bahrain (74%)
• Bangladesh (91%)
• Bosnia and Herzegovina (51%)
• Brunei (82.1%)
• Burkina Faso (63.8%)
• Chad (58%)
• Comoros (98.3%)
• Djibouti (99.4%)
• Egypt (90–95%)
• Gambia (96.4%)
• Guinea (89.1%)
• Indonesia (87%)
• Iran (99.8%)
• Iraq (95–98%)
• Jordan (97.2%)
• Kazakhstan (70.2%)
• Kuwait (74.6%)
• Kyrgyzstan (80–90%)
• Lebanon (67.8%)
• Libya (97%)
• Malaysia (63.5%)
• Maldives (100%)
• Mali (96.2%)
• Mauritania (99.9%)
• Morocco (99%)
• Niger (98.3%)
• Oman (86%)
• Pakistan (96.5%)
• Qatar (77.5%)
• Saudi Arabia (96.2%)
• Senegal (97.2%)
• Sierra Leone (78.6%)
• Somalia (99.8%)
• Sudan (96%)
• Syria (87%)
• Tajikistan (97.9%)
• Tunisia (97.8%)
• Turkey (91–98%)
• Turkmenistan (93.7%)
• United Arab Emirates (72%)
• Uzbekistan (88.7%)
• Yemen (97.2%)

Countries Ruled by Sharia Law

“Ruled by Sharia” refers to countries where Sharia (Islamic law) forms the primary basis of the legal system, often including application to criminal, civil, and personal matters, as per constitutional declarations or practice. This is drawn from analyses like Wikipedia’s “Application of Sharia by Country” and reports from sources such as World Population Review and CFR. Not all Muslim-majority countries apply Sharia fully; many use it only for personal/family law (e.g., marriage, inheritance) or in mixed systems with secular elements.

There are 10 such countries with full or predominant Sharia governance (including criminal penalties like hudud):

• Afghanistan (full Sharia under Taliban rule)
• Brunei (full implementation, including criminal code)
• Iran (theocratic system based on Shia Sharia)
• Maldives (Sharia-integrated penal code)
• Mauritania (Sharia for criminal and personal law)
• Qatar (Sharia as main source, applied to criminal cases)
• Saudi Arabia (uncodified Sharia as national law)
• Sudan (Sharia-based legal system)
• United Arab Emirates (Sharia for criminal and family law)
• Yemen (Sharia as constitutional basis, applied variably due to conflict) 0 1 2 58

Many others (e.g., Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Pakistan) apply Sharia partially, mainly for personal/family matters, but are not “ruled” by it as the overarching system.

Countries That Follow Democracy and Its Values

“Follow democracy and its values” is interpreted based on the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) Democracy Index 2024, which measures electoral process, civil liberties, government functioning, political participation, and culture on a 0–10 scale. Regime types:

• Full Democracies (8+): Strong adherence.
• Flawed Democracies (6–7.9): Democratic but with weaknesses (e.g., governance issues).
• Hybrid Regimes (4–5.9): Elections occur but with irregularities; limited liberties.
• Authoritarian Regimes (<4): Minimal democratic practices.

Among the 45 scored Muslim-majority countries (Brunei ~3.08/authoritarian, Maldives ~4.86/hybrid, Somalia ~2.27/authoritarian per estimates), none are full democracies. However, 10 follow democratic values to a notable extent (flawed or hybrid regimes, where elections, pluralism, and some liberties exist, though imperfectly). The remaining 35 are authoritarian, with little to no democratic practice.

• Flawed Democracies (2 countries): Indonesia (6.44), Malaysia (7.11)
• Hybrid Regimes (8 countries): Bangladesh (4.44), Bosnia and Herzegovina (5.06), Gambia (4.47), Morocco (4.97), Senegal (5.93), Sierra Leone (4.32), Tunisia (4.71), Turkey (4.26) 61 65 71 14 16 17

Note overlaps: Some democratic-leaning countries (e.g., Indonesia, Malaysia) incorporate Sharia for personal law but maintain secular democratic frameworks. In contrast, most Sharia-ruled countries are authoritarian (e.g., Afghanistan 0.25, Iran 1.96). Global trends show democracy declining in many Muslim-majority states due to conflicts, coups, and authoritarianism. 19 29

Countries where faiths based laws are practiced

Of course. It’s important to note that very few countries operate under a purely religious legal system. Most modern nations have a mixed system, where secular civil or common law exists alongside religious courts that have jurisdiction over specific areas, most commonly family law (marriage, divorce, inheritance) and personal status matters.

Here is a breakdown of countries where faith-based laws play a significant or official role, categorized by the primary religion influencing the legal system.

1. Islamic Law (Sharia)

Sharia is the most common form of religious law incorporated into national legal systems today. Its application varies dramatically from country to country.

• Full Application as the National Law:
  • Saudi Arabia: The Quran is the constitution of the country, and Sharia is the foundation of all law.
  • Iran: Founded as an Islamic Republic after the 1979 revolution, its legal system is based on Shia Islamic principles.
  • Afghanistan (under Taliban rule): The Taliban government enforces its strict interpretation of Sharia as the supreme law of the land.
• Mixed Systems with Strong Sharia Influence:
  • Pakistan: The constitution declares Islam the state religion and laws must be consistent with Islamic injunctions. It has a parallel court system for certain matters.
  • Nigeria: Several northern states have implemented Sharia courts for civil and criminal matters for Muslim citizens, alongside the secular state system.
  • Brunei: Operates under a dual legal system of English common law and Sharia, with the latter having a growing influence, including a strict penal code.
  • Sudan: Sharia is a source of legislation, and it influences the legal system, particularly in the north.
  • Yemen: Laws are ultimately rooted in Sharia.
  • Mauritania: The legal system is a mix of French civil law and Sharia.
  • Malaysia: Has a dual court system; secular laws and courts for all citizens, and Sharia courts that handle family and religious matters for Muslims.
• Significant Application in Personal/Family Law:
  • Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Oman: These nations have primarily civil law systems, but Sharia courts or principles have exclusive or significant jurisdiction over personal status matters (marriage, divorce, inheritance) for Muslim citizens.

2. Canon Law (Catholic Church)

The influence of Canon Law is almost entirely limited to the internal governance of the Catholic Church and its members. Only one sovereign state uses it as its primary legal system.

• Vatican City: As the headquarters of the Catholic Church, its legal system is fundamentally based on Canon Law.
• Influence on State Law: In countries like Malta, Ireland (historically), and the Philippines (the only majority-Christian country in Asia), Catholic doctrine has significantly influenced the development of laws, particularly concerning divorce, abortion, and family life, though these are secular state laws, not direct applications of Canon Law.

3. Jewish Law (Halakha)

Halakha governs the religious life of Jewish people but is not the law of the land in Israel. Its application is specific and limited.

• Israel: Israel does not have a constitution and operates largely on a system of secular law inherited from the British Mandate and Ottoman Empire. However, it grants exclusive jurisdiction to rabbinical courts (run by the state) over marriage and divorce for Jewish citizens. This means there is no civil marriage for Jews within Israel. Other areas of law are secular.

4. Hindu Law (Dharmaśāstra)

Historically, Hindu legal texts were used across the Indian subcontinent. Today, its application is codified and limited.

• India, Nepal: These countries have secular legal systems. However, they have separate “personal laws” for different religious communities. Hindu personal law (a modern, codified version of traditional law) governs issues like marriage, divorce, adoption, and inheritance for Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. Muslims and Christians have their own personal laws.

5. Buddhist Law

Traditional Buddhist law, derived from the Vinaya Pitaka, governs monastic life. Its influence on modern state law is indirect.

• Bhutan and Sri Lanka: The legal systems of these countries are secular. However, Buddhist principles have a strong cultural and social influence on the development of laws and policies. For example, Bhutan’s legal code is based on the Buddhist concept of Tsa Yig, though it functions as a modern secular state.

In summary, while many countries are heavily influenced by religious principles, the most direct application of faith-based law is found in:

• Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Afghanistan for Islamic Law.
• Vatican City for Canon Law.
• The personal status laws for specific religious groups in countries like Israel, India, and Egypt.