Truth Bombs from the A-rabs. Does any of this sound familiar?
Asabiyyah and the cyclical pattern
Let’s look closer at asabiyyah. Derived from the Arabic root asab (to bind), the concept of asabiyyah is one of the most significant concepts in Ibn Khaldun’s writings. Although some suggested keeping the Arabic term, because it cannot be translated adequately, the English translation “group solidarity” comes close in meaning to the original term. Asabiyyah, in Khaldunian terminology, then, is a social bond of cohesion that is used to measure the stability and strength of social groups. The solidarity among group members is mainly due to the constant cooperation and interdependence of its members. In this respect, an individual’s identity is fused into the group of which he or she is a member, and they thus become “one of the others” (Ibn Khaldun 1967, 277).
According to Ibn Khaldun, this bond, asabiyyah, is the most important factor in the development of a society or a civilization from a nomadic tribe to a state. He argued that asabiyyah is strongest in the nomadic phase, and decreases as a civilization advances. The concept of asabiyyah fit under his general scheme of the cyclical process and the rise and fall of civilizations.
From his perspective, every cycle has 5 stages: 1) invasion; 2) summit; 3) tolerance; 4) tyranny; and 5) decadence (decline). In other words, every society is created, approaches perfection, declines, and is replaced by another society. It is a strong sense of asabiyyah that leads to conquest, then to the sedentary urban life; it is, finally, a taste for luxury that leads to societal collapse. Thus, nomads, who once had a strong solidarity among themselves and were known for their bravery and hard-work become less brave, less hard-working, and far more individualistic urban city dwellers under the influence of luxurious habits. Ibn Khaldun summarized the whole process as follows in Muqaddimah:
As a result, the toughness of desert life is lost. Group feeling and courage weaken. Members of the tribe revel in the well-being that God has given them. Their children and offspring grow up too proud to look after themselves or to attend to their own needs. They have disdain also for all the other things that are necessary in connection with group feeling.... Their group feeling and courage decrease in the next generations. Eventually group feeling is altogether destroyed. ... It will be swallowed up by other nations. (Ibn Khaldun 1967, 107)
Ibn Khaldun placed emphasis on the power of religion to keep asabiyyah strong in a society. In his view, religion is not merely a set of moral laws, but determines all relations in a society. He maintained that if piety is replaced by ambition, and if the latter takes over human behavior in a society, then the treacherous desire to gain wealth will permeate people’s hearts. This will make a society and its people capricious, hence the corruption and eventual decline. As an example, he pointed to the time of Harun al-Rashid, and how after it passed, pleasure-seeking and corruption destroyed the strong asabiyyah of earlier Islamic civilization. They had abandoned the path of piety.
Luxury and the cyclical process
Luxury constituted a fundamental theme in the sociology of Ibn Khaldun, for to him it was the main factor distinguishing urban city life from nomadic life. He maintained that luxury in the cities follows certain economic factors. In cities, surplus labor is available to produce luxuries; thus, city people have higher incomes than people in rural areas, and this leads to higher standards of living in housing, clothing, etc.
Although a luxurious lifestyle initially causes prosperity in the city and adds to the civilization’s strength, Ibn Khaldun argued that such luxurious customs eventually become drawbacks. They create many demands and impose so many needs that the individual cannot earn enough to satisfy them. Furthermore, as a result of the additional taxes imposed by the government on such goods, the price of the various goods increases, and this in turn contributes to the cost of living, which consequently reduces the majority of people in the city to poverty. Thus, luxury increases the expenses of both the people and the state and leads, according to Ibn Khaldun, to the bankruptcy of the state.
Ibn Khaldun argued that luxury not only weakens the state economically, but also causes other physical, moral, social, and political disadvantages. Physically, it makes people weak and less immune to diseases, especially “when a drought or famine comes upon them” (Ibn Khaldun 1967, 177-182). Morally, luxury is destructive in the sense that it convinces people to value material comfort above all else and prefer their individual interests over the interests of others. Luxurious practices become indispensable. Desiring and obtaining luxuries eventually results in a degradation of the soul and breeds dishonesty and other immoral behaviors.
Moreover, it also destroys asabiyyah in the group since the pursuit of material comfort becomes the essential aim of most individuals. As a result of the disintegration of the group feeling, the group becomes easy prey for the next conqueror. The state’s leaders become increasingly lax and less disciplined, while also becoming more concerned with maintaining their power and lifestyle. Their ties to the peripheral group loosen, and asabiyyah turns into individualism and factionalism, and thus their political power diminishes. Under these conditions, they are susceptible to political disintegration, especially by the groups at the periphery. Thus, conditions for a new conqueror are ready and the cycle begins anew. Through this center-periphery model, Ibn Khaldun explained how each civilization has within itself the seeds of its own downfall.