Vol:.(1234567890)
European Political Science (2021) 20:566–567 https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-020-00302-w
REVIEW
The authoritarian consequences of alliances between states and religious authorities
Ahmet T. Kuru: Islam, authoritarianism, and underdevelopment:
a global and historical comparison, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2019, 316 pp, ISBN: 978-1108419093
Christopher D. Raymond1
Published online: 23 November 2020
© Springer Nature Limited part of Springer Nature 2020
Why do many Muslim-majority countries suffer from socio-economic underdevel- opment and high levels of political violence under authoritarian regimes? In Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment, Ahmet Kuru argues that these patterns have their origins in the class alignments between the state and a select group of religious leaders (the ulema) that took shape in the eleventh century.
Contrary to ‘essentialist’ arguments claiming that Islamic thought has always been inimical to innovation and prone to violence, Kuru argues that the ideas char- acteristic of many Muslim societies today result from this ulema–state alliance.
Kuru shows that the first several centuries of Islam were characterised by intellec- tual diversity and innovation, which he attributes to the economic freedom charac- teristic of this period and the prominence of merchants who supported a wide range of scholarship. Several economic changes—famines, declining revenues and popula- tions, and excessive state expenditures—enhanced the power of the military rela- tive to the merchants. States sought legitimation by religious leaders, who in turn sought support for the building and maintenance of madrassas following the loss of merchant patrons—which created the authoritarian ulema–state alliances seen today.
This ulema–state alliance allowed a Sunni orthodoxy to form and violently squeeze out dissenting voices among philosophers and those holding competing interpreta- tions of Islam, contributing to intellectual stagnation. Because merchants lost social status and economies have served the interests of the state, property rights have never been secure, and many countries remain socio-economically underdeveloped.
Kuru develops this argument through an historical analysis of state–society relations from the seventh to the twentieth century. Throughout the book, Kuru summarises an impressive body of scholarship, identifying the key figures in the development of
* Christopher D. Raymond C.Raymond@qub.ac.uk
1 Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland
567 The authoritarian consequences of alliances between states…
Islamic political thought. While he takes care to recognise intellectual advances made throughout the history of Islam, Kuru notes how the intellectual stagnation that set in following the formation of the ulema–state alliance resulted in many of these authors’
works being ignored and having little impact on Islamic political and social thought.
After defining the contemporary challenges facing many Muslim-majority societies today in the first three chapters, Kuru analyses the development of state–society rela- tions and Islamic political thought by dividing Islamic history into four chapters. The keystone supporting the argument is chapter four, which analyses the seventh through eleventh centuries. While chapter five demonstrates how the position of the military was strengthened as a result of the Crusades and Mongol invasions, chapter four dem- onstrates that the ulema–state alliance (and the declining status of merchants) had already begun to take shape beginning in the eleventh century. Chapter six shows that these patterns persisted in the Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal empires, while chapter seven shows that colonialism only strengthened these authoritarian tendencies.
Kuru’s analysis of state–society relations and the consequences for the development of political thought is impressive, making a compelling case in support of his argument.
The primary criticism, however, is the fact that the analysis concludes with a brief dis- cussion of the impact of colonialism (relative to the discussion of earlier events), while developments subsequent to the colonial period are wholly ignored. That said, such omissions reflect Kuru’s (well-supported) interpretation of the contemporary state of affairs, as well as his contention that the problems exacerbated by colonialism origi- nated centuries prior. Sceptical readers will, no doubt, contest his dismissal of several alternative hypotheses, but Kuru’s argument and evidence regarding the sequencing of social and political developments anticipate most of these challenges and put critics on the defensive.
This book is a worthy read that will be appreciated by a wide audience. Clearly, Kuru speaks most directly to audiences engaged in the debates regarding the roots of authoritarianism and underdevelopment, particularly as these topics relate to the Islamic world, but the arguments and evidence are relevant to those in the growing field examining the political economy of religion. Kuru’s argument fits within a broader lit- erature examining the impact of religious practices and institutions on economic per- formance and political institutional development (exemplified by the recent book, The Wealth of Religions, by Rachel McCleary and Robert Barro), and should be read by scholars in this field. Anyone looking for a summary of the development of Islamic political thought and the sociopolitical contexts in which these developments occur will also appreciate this book.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Christopher D. Raymond is Lecturer in Politics at Queen’s University Belfast. His research examines the impact of religion and other social cleavages on party systems and voting behaviour.
