There is a rather common view that pits authoritarian nationalism against authoritarian – indeed, political – religionism in west asia/middle east. As if the 2 kind of authoritarianisms are 2 extremes.
* It seems like both adhere to being authoritarian – hence violent.
* It also seems that both nationalism and religionism are not mutually exclusive. Indeed in iran & zionist palestine, the religious nationalism is in power or very darn near it..
Going back to the article – link above – it seems the writer deduced that democracy comes hard for west asiatic people because of two extremes. I can not agree because the “extremes” he is talking about are just sides of a same coin – the authoritarian and violent one.. I’d say that it might be indeed that democracy requires more and more attempts in the middle east because the area is in the grips of violent instead of civil culture.A culture that values power over civility, violent ways of keeping social life, fear and intimidation to solve and resolve difficulties – rather than via civil – often discursive – and fear challenging means.