Overstating the Arab state: Politics and Society in the Middle East (Essay Sample)

Name,
Instructor
Course
Date
Response Paper
Main Argument
In principle, Nazih Ayubi’s book titled Overstating the Arab state: Politics and Society in the Middle East is based on explaining the significant differences observed amidst the Arab states that put them at a distinct level from the other parts of the world. Moreover, the main reasons as to why the politics in most of these Arab countries follows the philosophy of socialism or even nationalism, yet the ruling system is mostly non-representative if not narrowly based (Ayubi, pg. 1). Furthermore, even with such countries’ military and political influence, they still fail to penetrate and convince the society of things such as law enforcement and taxation. Concurrently, the author bases his argument from a political economy and culture approach whereby he tries to argue that the two can be reconciled.
Significantly, Ayubi’s argument is that there exist two types of states. In essence, there is a state that coerces and punishes people while there is another that achieves its goals. Concurrently, it is here where he describes one as a hard state and the latter a strong state. On a similar note going with this train of thought all Arab countries such as Syria and Iran are hard states that utilize armies and bureaucracies to preserve themselves in power by force (Ayubi, pg. 3). However, the author argues that these hard states are nonetheless weak states since they lack infrastructure power that is essential for effective society penetration, making it possible for proper taxation, traditional pattern breaking, enforce laws and adapt to the ever-changing environment.
Main Critique
In essence, the chapter propels the argument that the civil society has always been weak when compared to the state in Arab world (Ayubi, pg. 3). Concurrently, this means that the state controls nearly all the crucial economic resources such as land and oil companies (Weiss, pg. 26). Moreover, the author argues that the Arab state’s social control capacity is limited because it does not support economic nor political liberalization, it accepts cultural dispositions that favor authoritarianism, and it is against reforms that may fuel uncontrollable demands for redistribution of resources.
Significantly, Ayubi argues that the sociological concepts such as Weber’s had little influence to the Arab state (Ayubi, pg. 10). However, Max Weber propelled the philosophy of bureaucracy which most Middle East officials identified their roles with not knowing that Weber had coined this ideology from the protestant ethics. Concurrently, on this argument the author is able to show deep knowledge on how Arab state officials divide their roles while at the same time point out how they absorbed the Weber’s idea on bureaucracy to their political structure.
In principle, Ayubi’s point of view is based on actual happenings as he proves this with his diverse evidence. However, he fails to blend the postulated pieces of evidence into one unified framework. In essence, he does not try to give a detailed linkage between the drawn evidence; instead he only points each one out in a scattered manner all across the chapter. Moreover, a reader trying to comprehend the author’s point of view is likely to come out feeling that critical connections have been left unexplained thus, cannot adequately generate the main argument.
According to Marxism, emphasis should be placed on socio-economic and cultural inputs while American political science based its efforts on socio-psychological and cultural inputs (Ayubi, pg. 9). However, Ayubi argues that the two point of views ignore one constant truth about Arab states is that the state is the center of political, economic, and social welfare. In essence, the author’s argument is valid and right since however much one wants to subscribe to the two philosophies, it is hard to ignore the role of the state in the Middle East.
In principle, Ayubi points out that the society and state should be one and the same thing. However, popular belief has contradicted the two with most individuals placing the state above society (Ayubi, pg. 13). In essence, Ayubi’s argument is concrete since the state is merely the structures set to link responsibilities and tasks amidst organs such as the army, political entity, and economy. Moreover, without a society to function in the state cannot exist meaning it is one and the same thing regardless of the intensity people want to debate.
Significantly, Ayubi agrees with Rabi’s ideology, that an Islamic state should be a blending of ethical value and political principles. Moreover, he explains that Rabi rejects the autonomy of the state as a politically based body but believes the role of the state transcends to socio-cultural and economic spheres (Ayubi, pg. 18). Concurrently, one cannot argue with this train of thought for it is based on concrete evidence. Moreover, the state is the most significant body the community can utilize as a noble expression of its socio-economic and cultural needs.
In essence, Ayubu believes that the state cannot only be viewed as a receiver (Ayubi, pg. 15). Furthermore, he argues that though many people are blinded to...