Empire generates the scholarly paradigms that then legitimize its interventions.

Evidence

While Orientalism and modernization theory each had their own research traditions and methods, both shared a polarized view of the world that saw the East as inferior and the West as superior; both were based on deeply racist notions tied to biology and culture. Anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racism relies on biologizing culture to make culture appear natural and inherent. Since neither theory could see change coming about internally in the Global South, both argued for imperial intervention, which they claimed would benefit native/traditional peoples. Overall, few if any questioned the premise that research on the Middle East (and in area studies in general) should be tailored to meet the needs of the US government. In 1958, the National Defense Education Act was passed with the aim of meeting the knowledge needs of the United States in the context of the Cold War, which spurred on area studies programs and these modes of thinking. This was the dominant trend until the 1970s. At that point, various factors, particularly the impact of successful national liberation struggles on the field of Middle East studies, led to a flurry of books and articles critical of both Orientalism and modernization theory. Policy makers found it more challenging to find scholars who fell in line with US imperial aims. This led to the rise of think tanks that established close ties to the US national security state, as Khalil demonstrates. Unmoored from the standards of academic rigor, think tanks would play an instrumental role in furnishing empire with theory and policy. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 263

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Napoleon’s 1798 invasion inaugurated the systematic use of scholarly knowledge to serve empire; Imperial growth and academic study of Islam collaborated to legitimise power — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 187; Political imperialism governs entire fields of study, imagination, and scholarly institutions — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 74 (+9 more)

Broader Connections

• Imperial growth and academic study of Islam collaborated to legitimise power #corroborates (0.92) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 187
• Knowledge-producing disciplines were mobilized in service of imperialist worldviews #corroborates (0.90) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 77
• Imperial political ideology directly shaped which history could be studied #corroborates (0.88) — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 2019
• Political imperialism governs entire fields of study, imagination, and scholarly institutions #expands (0.87) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 74
• The universalized theology of progress makes historians unconsciously reproduce imperial hierarchies #corroborates (0.84) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 209
• States continuously recraft mythologies to legitimize their power #expands (0.80)
• Individual scholarly mastery feeds into imperial desire for rule #corroborates (0.78)
• Counterinsurgency doctrine weaponizes knowledge and empathy as tools of empire. #expands (0.75) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 503
• Empire operates through trained habits of attention and plausibility rules #expands (0.75) — Ann Laura Stoler, Along the Archival Grain_ Epistemic…, 1370
• Every empire legitimizes itself by denying imperial motives #expands (0.75) — Khaled A. Beydoun, The New Crusades_ Islamophobia and the…, 256
• State intervention to secure legitimation generates an ever-deepening need for more legitimation #qualifies (0.72) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 2697