Idea
The idea is that some regimes that came after independence did not build their legitimacy on political participation or on the rule of law, but rather turned to Islam as a source of legitimacy. This use does not necessarily elevate religion; instead, it may turn it into a cover for power when the state is run according to the logic of a single party and a single ideology. At that point, religion becomes part of the apparatus of justification rather than a field of critique.
Concise Formulation
Post-independence regimes: use Islam primarily as a basis for legitimacy
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This statement lies at the heart of the book’s critique of political structure, because it shows how religion is summoned into the struggle for power. The argument does not merely describe political deviation; it reveals that the use of Islam in legitimacy contributes to weakening the public sphere. In this way, religion becomes an instrument in a crisis of governance rather than a realm of shared values.
Why It Matters
The idea shows that Arkoun links politics and religion when they become intertwined in a way that empties both of their critical meaning. It matters because it helps explain how a religious symbol can be used to entrench authoritarianism rather than limit it.
Brief Evidence Passage
and used Islam primarily as a basis for legitimacy turned into a single-party and single-ideology state, and used Islam primarily as a basis for legitimacy
Reading Questions
- What is the difference between religion’s presence in society and its use for political legitimacy?
- How does this instrumentalization affect the meaning of the post-independence state?
Degree of Documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear location in the book’s material.