Well, not half so much as they did so in reaction to the development of capitalism. Modern political thought had been busy developing for three centuries, and it bounced off the ghettos and shtetls like water off a roof. Societies are shaped by human behaviour moreso than by ideas about human behaviour. Western-style states have also failed outside of the Arab world, and are a novelty within "the West", outside of North-Western Europe and a few colonial regions. Without some sort of causation, without an explanation as to what makes Arab-speaking peoples less equipped for democratic or republican government, for civil society, then you really aren't describing anything more than coincidence. The Arab languages do not map particularly well onto liberal political development, no. But neither do the Turkic, Iranian or Sinitic languages. Slavic and Indo-Aryan only half-maps, and Spanish has only started mapping in the last few decades. There's nothing clearly unique about Arabs, as a linguistic group uniquely unsuited for civil society, except that they happen to have a personal distaste for them.