Anderson Reflection

One of the most interesting sections of Anderson’s analysis was when she discussed Kramer (neoconservative foreign policy positions who questioned why Islamist movements couldn’t be placed in the category of democratization) and Mitchell (a progressive who criticized that the languages of political Islam were only seen in Western scholarship through a process of translation). Anderson is explaining how both Mitchell and Kramer criticize how “western discourse” (Anderson 3), disrupts understanding the actual dynamics of Middle East politics.

She also discussed the misconception that Islam is incompatible with democracy. Although she mentions that like other monotheistic religions (Christianity and Judaism), Islam is a flexible and accommodating faith. She mentions how many Middle East scholars disagreed that Islam was incompatible with democracy, but many policy advocates in the West pushed this opinion, especially around September 11, 2001.

Anderson also looks into the relationship between fiscal crisis and political liberalizations in rentier states and discussed the debate that formed over the need to stimulate demand for representation and taxation (using examples of 1982-86 oil prices plummeting). She spoke of the cuts to consumer subsidiaries that led to public unrest and “Bread riots” in Tunisia, Algeria, Jordan, and Egypt. The fact that citizenries have no stake in governmental proceedings and policy formation could lead to consistent unrest.

We can avoid these issues by working to further our understanding of misconceptions about the region through active class engagement and thorough reading. The Arab uprisings of 2010-11 in my opinion demonstrate how rentier states can lead to worsening economies and corruption, which in turn can lead to uprisings.