Constructing the Political Imaginary: Ibn Khaldun and Machiavelli

This dissertation traces the formative transformations of Islamic and Western political thought in the longue durée by analyzing the body of symbols, metaphors, linguistic practices, and affective attitudes that form the backdrop against which thinking about politics takes place in discrete historical settings. The arguments that can be appealed to within this affective universe are constrained by a range of premises that need not be deemed “rational” in another context. I take this as a starting point to design a methodology for comparative intellectual history that is informed by recent developments in cognitive psychology as well as by more traditional philosophical works on moral psychology. I study how Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) and Machiavelli (1469-1527) tackle the problem of political stability without losing sight of the problem of political vitality. I pay close attention to how their respective retrievals of history, and their understanding of such retrievals, lie at the heart of every serious effort at epistemic justification or political legitimation. And I examine in detail their inquiry into the formidable sway of affective drives and their suggestions as to how they can be sublimated. The comparison between Ibn Khaldun and Machiavelli fills a major gap in the literature despite frequent allusions to their resemblance. The comparative approach that I follow, moreover, lends itself to a range of applications. It throws into relief some of the intractable issues in political theory and peace studies and explains why disagreements between different cultures over otherwise trifling issues (dress code, say, or certain aspects of decorum) should become at times a source of great consternation and discontent. It also sheds light on divergences in deeper issues of value, like standards of fairness, limits of autonomy, sources of prestige and status, and responses to modernization.