Islam and the Bill of Two Rights

 This https://www.anarchonomicon.com/p/teach-a-man-to-revolt would be ineffective at its stated goal. (Problem: women and Americans are shallow, mesmerized by appearances.) 

 It appears to be praise for Islam, but the buried lede is condemnation. If you create a social order than can maintain order for 1000 years (paging Hitler) you become dead. France or Spain could wake up one day, get a cup of coffee, and simply wipe out the Islamic world. Do Mecca, then start at the bottom of Africa and work their way up until Turkey can fight no more. Muslims exist due to the mercy of Europeans. And Orientals, for that matter - and don't think for a second Muslims aren't aware of this. Muslims would wipe out Europeans and Orientals if they could. They just can't. 

 P.S. Islam wasn't stable before al-Ghazali. It's only Mohammed's religion because Abu here was also named Mohammed. Twice. Of course, Revenge is Sour: Algazel couldn't have cored the vitality out of Islam for all time had Muslims not fundamentally been Satan-worshippers in the first place. Algazel won because he provided articulation for what Muslims had previously been demanding incoherently. 

 What the bill of rights says does matter a little...but only briefly. It doesn't matter what it says above the first amendment. It doesn't matter what it says after the second amendment. So that's it: if you intend for it to be read by peasants, your constitution can have two lines. Any more and it will only matter to scholars, tyrants, and other upper-class types. 

 You have two options:
 1) Islam can have infinity rules because it is primarily by tyrants, for tyranny.
 2) Islam in fact has two rules. I don't know what they are, but if you want you can go and find them. Perhaps [obey the Tyrant] and one other rule. 

 Your polity will become corrupt. It is inevitable. The parasites plain want it more.
 One possible solution is to embrace corruption. If your polity sounds full-throated approval of bribes and treachery, then it can push water downhill. It will push your whole society downhill along with it, but never mind. Aside from being wiped out by superior societies, there is no reason legitimized corruption cannot last indefinitely (India).

 Reminder, my two-line constitution:
    1) Exit. It is legitimate to the extent individuals may leave. The easier and cheaper, the more legitimate.
    2) Have a Pope. Someone must determine who is lying. Know their name and address. 

 If libertarians were real, they would say this: the precise mechanisms of government are none of my business, provided I can leave if I don't like the results. This is because government is not special. I also shouldn't need to know the precise mechanisms of my water treatment plant. I shouldn't have to maintain my own power transformers and HV transmission lines. I shouldn't have to be able to design and build a gasoline pump. I can drink bottled water, light with candles, and move around by walking, which forces these utilities to meet some minimum standard. Government is a solved problem; while it is illegal to use the solutions, tyrants are in fact weak and you can use them anyway. If you have demand for good government as opposed to demand for bad government.