Due to the reality that "change" is inevitable (thanks to the Hegelian dialectics), the features of the Arab mind (like all cultural phenomena) have undergone radical change in our time. This change, caused by an approach to modernity, conflicts with a detachment from its history and geography. In parallel, the oil wealth came to slow down the process of the Arab mind’s adopting the values of modernity.
When observing the reality of two important Arab societies, the Emirati and the Saudi societies, we witness a relative “victory” for modernity and a parallel “decline” of the “historical Arab cultural heritage”.
Four decades ago, Egypt signed the first Arab peace treaty with Israel. In reaction, the heads and kings of the Arab countries met and decided to sever their countries' relations with Egypt. No one could have imagined at the time that after forty years, Israel would have ambassadors in the capitals of seven Arab countries: Egypt, Jordan, the Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco and Mauritania.
I am almost certain that the future will witness more victory for modernity in Arabic-speaking societies even if concurrently I see that, during the last half century, these societies have produced an enemy of modernity that cannot be underestimated --political Islam -- which works in all its parts to return its societies (culturally) to pre-medieval nomad mindset and value mechanisms.
_________________________________
Is it permissible for a non-Arab person on the six continents of the world to say: “the problem of the Arab mind is not my problem?” All the evidence says this is practically impossible.
The people of many Arab societies are present in all communities within Europe, North America, and Australia. The ideas of the people of Arab societies play invisible roles on all the continents of the world. It is enough (for example) to take a look at a European society, French society, to see how much this community is affected by the behavior and ideas of citizens who today hold French citizenship but come from Arab societies.
One of the repercussions of globalization is the falling away of the walls between different countries. Consider the Palestinian / Israeli conflict. There is no doubt that its repercussions on the entire region of the Middle East as well as the whole world are negative, the existence of which is impossible to deny.
Major events, such as the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and others, have proved that dealing with the collective mind that produced ideas which are highly hostile to modern civilization through security measures alone was not feasible.
Destructive thought is not fought with a rifle except when one holds a rifle. Even in this case, destructive thought contrary to the values of modern humanity will continue to exist and exert influence.
Why?
There exist only two methods capable of reducing its spread and limiting its impact :
*Education
and
**Culture.
This mission, i.e., combatting the collective mind against the values of modern humanity, has not attracted any attention from the authorities and institutions capable of performing this task. One of the reasons for this negative phenomenon is that this task is inherently "long-term", which contradicts the fact that most politicians are concerned with what is urgent and not what is for the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment