Why did Pan-Arabism fail?
>>495139
Because it was a dogshit ideology from the very beginning
But in terms of geopolitics, because not a single major power was interested or will ever be interested in a single state that comprises all, or even a large part of, the Arab World.
>>495139
Because although Arab cultural is freely transmitted there is still ethnic and racial hierarchies that inhibited true solidarity across the North Africans and Middle East landscape.
Sectarianism
Despotism
Monarchism
Interventionism
>>495139
>Western Sahara is just a blank grey space
I bet the Moroccans did this
>>495199
>implying western sahara even exists
>>495139
Because it posed a threat to israel and the House of Saud, both of whom had nearly unlimited budgets and assured Western military defense. The Arab Nationalists only had support from China and the USSR, both of whom were limited in their aid capacity. This alone made the scales quite uneven.
Also, many Baathists were divided by religion, region, and who they secured arms/funding from. For example, Hafez Al-Assad was a Soviet/China-backed Shia Alawite who supported Iran while Saddam Hussein was a Sunni installed by the CIA and started a war against Iran. Gaddafi pointed this out many times, and look what happened to him.
>>495199
>>495213
Fixed it for you bro
>>495139
islam
No seriously, 90% of all the conflicts down there are about technicalities in their holy book rather than tribalism.
Some might argue the same thing happened to christianity with protestants and catholics breaking apart with all these other offshot subgroups popping up like mormonism and anglicanism.
But they managed to make nice into the later ages while arabs are still killing each other over which disciple the prophet picked to this day and age.
In the beginning it managed to unite them and achieve great things for themselves but in the end it split them more apart from each other than any outside force would ever manage.
>>495139
same reason most "I must unite the X peoples under one flag" fail: they don't want to be united under anyone but themselves.
Israel invaded them the moment they started to form a union...
>>495274
>But they managed to make nice into the later ages
After the enlightenment made them grow up.
>while arabs are still killing each other over which disciple the prophet picked to this day and age.
Which Arabs? If it were 1.3 billion fighting each other, the world would look very different.
Because Syria Iraq and Egypt were poor compared to Gulf States. If you were the Saudi King, would you want to unite with Syria and Iraq, knowing you'd have to share all the riches of your country for those millions of starving muslims in Iraq/Syria/Egypt?
>>495317
>Which Arabs?
Oh the saudis and the rest of the gulf states fighting the arabs in yemen.
The war currently in Syria between different arab groups causing millions to flee and involving Lebanon.
The current shit in Iraq also involving different arab groups fighting for territory while they ultimately are actually losing territory to the Kurds.
The conflict in Egypt and Libya currently involving everyones favourite group while Libya also struggles with the southern tribes and Gadaffi loyalists.
No seriously, why the fuck would you even ask that question you dumb shit?
>>495363
You mean Arabs and not Muslims?
And this was the same in the nineteenth century?
>>495139
It collapsed on itself because of group infighting, Islamic fundamentalists gained power after which is why it hasn't came back. Pan-Arabism was relatively secular.
>>495375
>You mean Arabs and not Muslims?
No, I mean arab buddhists you retard. This is all about the shia vs sunni bullshit while even sunni's suffer cause of the wahhabism is wants to impose.
>And this was the same in the nineteenth century?
No cause TURKS and not ARABS controlled pretty much the entire ME before giving up parts to the colonials.
>>495139
Why is Mauritania, Sudan and Somalia included there? They're not Arabs.
>>495395
>No, I mean arab buddhists you retard. This is all about the shia vs sunni bullshit while even sunni's suffer cause of the wahhabism is wants to impose.
You said Arabs, but you included non-Arabs in your description (North Africa, Mesopotamia and the Levant aren't Arab). I guess if you said Muslim you're point about Turkey in a moment wouldn't make sense.
>No cause TURKS and not ARABS controlled pretty much the entire ME before giving up parts to the colonials.
And they were in a state of constant conflict as they are today?
>>495416
Mauritania and Sudan speak Arabic. Somalia idk
>>495317
Christian Europe stopped killing each other over sectarian reason long before the Enlightenment. The re-discovery of the New World and the money to be made, put an end to the sectarian violence.
Because it is based on Islam, which suffers from Wahhabism. The Arabic identity (much like the Western identity) is based on religion. Egypt, for instance, identifies as Arab solely because they are Muslims, it they were still majority Christian, they identify as Europeans.
Just as the rise of Protestantism interfered with pan-Christianity by coming up with the idea of a "white race" that excluded Catholics and Orthodox, Wahhabism and Saudi Arabia are too exclusive for pan-Arabianism to work.
>>495444
>Christian Europe stopped killing each other over sectarian reason long before the Enlightenment. The re-discovery of the New World and the money to be made, put an end to the sectarian violence.
The Thirty Years War happened after that, and it was mostly religious for the planners and the participants. (even if you think some of them were lying and did it for secular reasons)
And there were mass population movements, sectarian violence, and ethnic cleansing in Europe within the last century, within the last generation if you count the Balkans.
>>495420
>North Africa, Mesopotamia and the Levant aren't Arab
They are more Arab then the gulf states every will be since thats were the conquering tribes settled while turning Baghdad into the islamic capital of the world.
Or do you actually admit that arabs didnt provide jack shit during the Golden age of islam and that they are a inferior race? Since EVERY SINGLE Arab scientist, mathematician and scholar was from Egypt, Mesopotamia and the Levante while the Arabian Penninsula didnt provide shit.
>And they were in a state of constant conflict as they are today?
Yes the arab tribes were still fighting each other in SA for dominium over the little lands they had. The Rashidi's were fighting against the Sauds and their wahabbi beliefs which is even more religious bullshit splitting the arabs.
>>495457
>They are more Arab then the gulf states every will be since thats were the conquering tribes settled while turning Baghdad into the islamic capital of the world.
They can all find Arab ancestors, but genetically they're pretty much the same as the people who lived there before Islam.
>Or do you actually admit that arabs didnt provide jack shit during the Golden age of islam and that they are a inferior race? Since EVERY SINGLE Arab scientist, mathematician and scholar was from Egypt, Mesopotamia and the Levante while the Arabian Penninsula didnt provide shit.
I don't see your point. You're saying that it can't count as an Islamic golden age... because those responsible for it were Muslim?
>Yes the arab tribes were still fighting each other in SA for dominium over the little lands they had. The Rashidi's were fighting against the Sauds and their wahabbi beliefs which is even more religious bullshit splitting the arabs.
This was where the Ottomans weren't in charge. Tell me about the conflicts in Syria, Iraq, and Jordan.
It would never work. Islam needs to go through its own Counter Reformation and Enlightenment before such a thing could even be feasible
>but they were united before
No they weren't. Islam split immediately after Mohammed's death, and every pan-Muslim state since then, from Rashidun Caliphate to the Ottoman Empire has been a case of one group dominating all of the others, with not one single instance of the different tribes and sects putting their differences aside and uniting for the greater good. Christianity had this same problem for most of its history: before we expand outward and attempt to defeat our enemies, we must must first be united in one single set of beliefs.
>>495477
>They can all find Arab ancestors, but genetically they're pretty much the same as the people who lived there before Islam.
Off course there will be tracers to the past people living there amongst them, jesus fuck. But that still doesnt change the fact that every fucking conquering tribe left to live there while the shitty ones were left behind in the Arabian penninsula (minus the clerics at Medina).
>I don't see your point. You're saying that it can't count as an Islamic golden age... because those responsible for it were Muslim?
No I am saying that by your logic all that arabs have achieved throughout the ages is to find oil. Since the people conquering Mesopotamia, Persia and the Levante werent Arabs cause they didnt settle in densely populated cities and governated their caliphat from there but went up in a poof of smoke according to you.
>This was where the Ottomans weren't in charge. Tell me about the conflicts in Syria, Iraq, and Jordan.
Are you fucking dense? I said that TURKS were in charge and not ARABS over those areas so there was no conflict. Because TURKS actually know how to implent islam unlike ARABS.
The ones who did suffer were non-muslims like the christian armenians and greeks.
>>495528
>Off course there will be tracers to the past people living there amongst them, jesus fuck. But that still doesnt change the fact that every fucking conquering tribe left to live there while the shitty ones were left behind in the Arabian penninsula (minus the clerics at Medina).
They just didn't replace the peoples of Mesopotamia. Or North Africa.
>No I am saying that by your logic all that arabs have achieved throughout the ages is to find oil. Since the people conquering Mesopotamia, Persia and the Levante werent Arabs cause they didnt settle in densely populated cities and governated their caliphat from there but went up in a poof of smoke according to you.
The Arabs did conquer Mesopotamia and the Levant, they just didn't replace the native populations. Persia was conquered later than that, and they don't have as much Arab ancestry as the other groups mentioned.
>Are you fucking dense? I said that TURKS were in charge and not ARABS over those areas so there was no conflict. Because TURKS actually know how to implent islam unlike ARABS.
So Muslims can peacefully rule the Middle East? Just not Arabs?
Just as well they're only found in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Yemen, and Oman, then.
>>495557
>So Muslims can peacefully rule the Middle East? Just not Arabs?
Seriously? Did you actually miss the entire point of the thread on why pan-arabism cant work and decided to throw a hissy fit cause I happened to say something bad about islam?
>>495568
>Seriously? Did you actually miss the entire point of the thread on why pan-arabism cant work and decided to throw a hissy fit cause I happened to say something bad about islam?
Where did you say something bad about Islam? When you said they were good administrators in the nineteenth century?
Pan-Arabism, considering that it's supposed to include North Africa, Mesopotamia, the Levant, and (from OP's image) parts of East Africa, is clearly not just about Arab nationalism.
>>495578
>Where did you say something bad about Islam? When you said they were good administrators in the nineteenth century?
Maybe the first fucking post in the entire reply chain to why islam tore them apart and making them kill each other.
In which you replied that there are 1.3 billion arabs and it would look bad if they were fighting each other, which pretty much contradicts every argument you had so far with "muh levante, north africa and mesopotamia isnt arab" cause I dont see how you would get to that number with just the penninsula.
>Pan-Arabism, considering that it's supposed to include North Africa, Mesopotamia, the Levant, and (from OP's image) parts of East Africa, is clearly not just about Arab nationalism.
And I never fucking mentioned nationalism so you can stop pulling shit out of your ass.
>>495595
>Maybe the first fucking post in the entire reply chain to why islam tore them apart and making them kill each other.
You give out about Islam in your first post, saying it's the cause of the current problems in the Middle East, and then you contradict your point by saying that Islam was able to rule the area peacefully during the Ottoman Empire, and it's only Arabs who can't run countries.
>In which you replied that there are 1.3 billion arabs and it would look bad if they were fighting each other, which pretty much contradicts every argument you had so far with "muh levante, north africa and mesopotamia isnt arab" cause I dont see how you would get to that number with just the penninsula.
I guess anyone who makes a typo is wrong about everything.
In my defense, you are trying to confuse Arab and Muslim for some reason.
>>495139
Thread related
>>495628
>You give out about Islam in your first post, saying it's the cause of the current problems in the Middle East, and then you contradict your point by saying that Islam was able to rule the area peacefully during the Ottoman Empire, and it's only Arabs who can't run countries.
Jesus fucking shit, you are beyond dense.
I have said over and over again that ISLAM + ARABS = BAD. But ISLAM + OTHER GROUP = GOOD.
Cause when it comes to Arabs and islam there will always be infighting and turmoil. During the abbasid reign we had a number of caliphats popping up all over the place fighting for their own personal deciphers of the holy book.
While Ottoman and even Persian reign was relatively stable.
>In my defense, you are trying to confuse Arab and Muslim for some reason
No I am not, and if you actually fucking understood the first post then we wouldnt have this fuckign reply chain of why you think only the people in the arabian penninsula are real arabs.
>>495640
And yet Arabs are not in Mesopotamia, or Jordan, or any of the places you are talking about, except for Saudi Arabia. And people in Turkey and Persia can trace their ancestry to Arabs as well.
They're the only Arabs that are ethnically Arabs. Or is Arab a polyphyletic group that encompasses more than one ethnicity?
>>495634
Nasser y Perón, un solo corazon <3
>>495646
Why are you still replying?
And also, why did you say there were 1.3 billion Arabs, and then accuse HIM of conflating Arabs with Muslims?
Not the guy you are replying to, btw. That guy is a fucking asshole, but damn bro, you're dense as fuck.
>>495646
>Jordan isnt arabic either now
>lets ignore the Nabataeans living there pre-BC
Alright this is beyond retarded now.
>They're the only Arabs that are ethnically Arabs
>ethnically
>pertaining to or characteristic of a people, especially a group (ethnic group) sharing a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like.
Gee, that sure sounds like every fucking person in the ME that speaks arabic.
>>495139
Arabs aren't one uniform group. There are large cultural differences between all of them, even if they share a language.
There are also very substantial religious differences. Most of them are Sunni, but Oman is Ibadi and Iraq is Shia. Many of the Sunni states also have substantial Christian minorities, especially Lebanon and Syria.
Then, many of the current people in power don't want to give up positions to a unified Arab state, mostly the monarchies, given that the creation of a Pan-Arab union would almost certainly be done under a republic.
Turkey, Iran, and Israel would also all heavily oppose the creation of such a union, and Turkey and Iran alone are probably strong enough to take on the might of a Pan-Arab state all by themselves. Israel functionally can as well, since big daddy America and the rest of NATO will protect them. It is in the interest of all of them to oppose the creation of such a union if it ever managed to gain traction, whether by direct military involvement or just stirring up ethnic and religious tensions.
>>495274
>But they managed to make nice into the later ages while arabs are still killing each other over which disciple the prophet picked to this day and age.
Ireland? Yugoslavia?
