Orientalism and Islam

“Without comparisons to make,” wrote Alexis de Tocqueville, “the mind does not know how to proceed.” Comparative political analysis addresses the similarities and differences in past and present political systems. On the basis of empirical data such analysis searches for existing patterns of behavior and formulates theories, concepts, generalizations, models, and typologies to understand and interpret them. The observation and comparison of political systems together with the study of history is not only an intellectually valuable exercise in its own right but may also be of practical importance, as James Harrington the seventeenth political theorist implied, as the means by which one can learn the craft of the statesman.

An inevitable dilemma in comparative politics, however, is that a model or typology is unlikely to encompass without qualification the multifarious nature of the political and social reality in all places and times. In addition, as the philosopher Karl Popper pointed out, an inherent problem in social science analysis, including that of framing typologies is distinguishing between the essential and accidental aspects of political or social entities and what should be considered pertinent to generalizations about them. Nevertheless, even with awareness of these pitfalls, one can employ the term despotism, sometimes associated and even confused with other terms such as tyranny and dictatorship, to refer to a particular kind of nondemocratic rule or society in any comparative study, and more particularly the term Oriental despotism can be used to refer to that kind of rule prevalent in Eastern countries.