Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment: A Global and Historical Comparison

Do not be fooled by the title of Ahmet Kuru’s book, which at first glance may seem to associate Islam with authoritarianism and underdevelopment. The painting on the cover gives the first taste of the work—the Renaissance artist Giorgione’s The Three Philosophers, depicting a Muslim philosopher in between the ancient and Renaissance philosophers. Readers can anticipate a respite from their fatigue over the long-held debate on Islam and democracy, for Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment is a refreshingly pleasant read and a far cry from the repetitive clichés of this controversy. Not only is it painstakingly well-researched, but it is also an engaging and engaged resource that outlines and challenges established theories—all while simultaneously advancing its own. Kuru has an ambitious and admirable aim. He begins with a simple yet bold question: “Why are Muslim-majority countries less peaceful, less democratic, less developed?” (1). Much ink has been spilled on the compatibility of Islam and democracy, and the debate seems to have only been reinvigorated by the failure of this century’s Arab uprisings, not to mention the tide of authoritarianism in their wake. The enormous volume of work in this field testifies to the intellectual relevance of the question. However, the increasing politicization and polarization around the topic have greatly diminished the possibility of a vibrant and factually grounded public debate, making it difficult for readers to navigate and often pushing them deeper into their ideological cocoons. Kuru’s timely book is unsettling across these divides, pushing readers to abandon convenient assumptions andmove beyond their political, ideological, and methodological comfort zones as he stirs the hornet’s nest and picks a daring fight against essentialist Orientalists and Islamists both, and against postcolonial scholars, probably leaving few content. However, Kuru’s valiant intellectual exercise is rich and nuanced, using a historical perspective to analyze contemporary violence, authoritarianism, and socioeconomic underdevelopment. In a non-Marxist sense, Kuru’s research offers a historical class analysis of the political and economic underdevelopment in Muslim-majority countries. He traces the change in the intergroup developmental progress between religious, political, intellectual, and economic classes (3). At first glance, Kuru’s approach, with its longue durée examination of class relations, reminds the reader of Barrington Moore’s canonical comparative study