The Idea
This claim assumes that the deterioration described in the text cannot be attributed to internal factors alone, but that external forces are involved as well. The West here is not entirely innocent, because it contributes to supporting regimes or policies that prolong the crisis. The key point is that responsibility is distributed, and that understanding deterioration requires tracing the relationship between the internal and the external together.
Concise Formulation
The West: partially responsible for the deterioration
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
In the book’s argument, this claim expands the framework of political and historical responsibility. It does not shift blame to a single side, but situates deterioration within a network of interconnections between local actors and major powers. It therefore serves the comparative reading that does not separate the history of Arab-Islamic societies from the international context that affected them.
Why It Matters
Its importance lies in the fact that it prevents a justificatory reading that places the entire burden on the self, just as it prevents a comfortable reading that absolves the outside world of its effects. This is consistent with Arkoun’s way of dealing with crises as the result of complex historical relationships. It opens the door to a deeper understanding of responsibility rather than merely assigning blame.
Brief Evidence
And that the West itself is partially responsible for the deterioration And that the West itself is partially responsible for the deterioration because it supports these regimes
Reading Questions
- How does the concept of partial responsibility change the way political deterioration is understood?
- Why is it not enough to explain crises through internal factors alone?
Degree of Documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear passage from the book’s material.