Abstract

This paper offers a comparative analysis of the theories concerning the Islamic State as elaborated by "al-Nahda" and "Hizb al-Tahrir", the two largest Islamist parties in postrevolutionary Tunisia. Through the reconstruction of the political philosophy that represents the backdrop to the respective state models, this essay inscribes the ongoing debate upon the Islamic state, that sparkled in Tunisia after the fall of the former regime, within the wider academic debate on post-Islamism, starting from its definition provided by Oliver Roy. The theoretical analysis is also supported by the analysis of the empirical behavior held by the two parties at different stages of democratic transition. Connecting theory and praxis, this essay defines if and how both Hizb al- Tahrir and al-Nahda are willing to change their theoretical elaborations, moderating their own agendas for gaining electoral support.