مشان النبي ما تحكي في السياسه لنها ليست من مجالك

isn’t this how most Arab despots found their way to power? need I bring the Arab history book for you to refresh your memory. and no need to get anyone else’s history book but ours.

would love to speak some more on this issue but since I heard you track IPs I will have to say my farewells.

The lack of open channels of discussion and public engagement and the spirit of liberalism amongst the people drives the poles into pro-anti rather than a plethora view, hence everything in the arab world always seems black and white cause we stopped caring about the deeper implications for things since honestly it’s too costly of an investment at a personal level to undertake.

So that makes leadership idolization a direct result of the absence of those factors, and makes it a lot easier to mobilize the populace.

@alurdunialhurr
i’ll try to explain its definition here since i kinda know where ur heading with that…
its liberalism in the classical liberalism sense… which simply stresses personal freedom and lack of governmental intervention. the focus is more on the social than the economical, and the classical sense can’t be confused with the revival of it, the neoliberalism, since it doesn’t hold the same view on social issues or even economical issues.
thats what i mean when i use the term liberalism in that sense void of any prefixes.

If You ask a group of people to divide the following list of leaders into good and bad:

Napoleon, Rommel, Bill Gates Rosa Parks, MLK Jr., Hitler, Ben Gurion, Theo Hertzel, Ehud Barak, Jamal Abdel Nasser, Sadat, Reagan, Nixon, Carter, Lenin, Che, Castro, Bill Gates, Ken Lay……

you will be surprised by the results.

BamBam – I full heartedly agree with you regarding the limits imposed by representative democracy, but what I meant by public engagement was spaces for discussion and debate rather than the public voting for legislation. An example would be the ‘deliberative democratic models’ of governance advanced by green parties as well as other progressive left leaning parties. I also think that this model has echoes in our culture, were the Friday diwaniyat used to allow the citizens to express their problems and concerns collectively, but also be part of brainstorming solutions. This is what I mean by public engagement, more channels for input and feedback from the citizens about the policies affecting their everyday lives.

(However, I want to point out that I do make a distinction between religion and politics, I was referring specifically to ‘political Islam’ which is the backbone of the Muslim brotherhood, Hezbollah and other similar movements)

I also full heartedly agree with you regarding the current dominant ideologies being resilient, timeless, and beyond reason and logic (most of the time), but I do not see that as a deterrent to liberalism. Aren’t we having a discussion that is reasonable, logical and civil? Isn’t that what liberalism is? I think the problem with liberalism is that it is scattered in our countries and has not yet taken a coherent form.. that does not mean it doesn’t exist or can not manifest. But then, I have had a good weekend so I may be overly optimistic today

mjwells … “establishing a united front during a war is overrated”??? Just pick up the newspaper (arabs are the best example) or any history book. Regarding the truths and “untruths”, besides missing the point (i.e. an okay leader looks amazing amongst corrupt self-serving leaders, ahem, Nasrallah), there is not a single thing in this universe which cannot be defined in relative terms (with some exception to light). Even in your argument, midgets, you are speaking relatively (i.e. the tallest midget is still small relative to the average person).

(warning - I’m totally digressing from the main topic - you may want to skip)

In science, we call it Galilean Relativity (and much later, Einstein added to this - the Theory of Relativity). In colloquial terms, it is best explained with examples. Define good without knowing evil. Try explaining red to a person who lives in a blue world. Upon reflection, you’ll find that most things in life are defined in relative terms.

I’ll give you some credit, you’re thinking in terms of an absolute reference frame, which is valid but only part of the picture. This dates back to the pre-1600’s era.

By the way, Netenyahoo will soon become the prime-minister, he will first attack hizballah, then he will attack iran, and Obama will loose the elections How is that for a prediction?ha?

Among some of leftists of today, there is still “Che” worship.

This absolutism and Leader Worship is literally killing us.

Thanks for a very well put post.

and if it gets bambam to comment, then i know i’ve struck a chord somewhere

When it comes to HAssan Nassaralah or Abed el nasser, suddenly the anti-arabism and struggle concept crowd try to use this focus and support for one person as a deficiency even though the opponent pragmatic and liberal stream tries day and night to create those personal symbols with extreme funding on songs, images, slogans … etc carried out by officials here in Jordan or egypt or else where, by laws to enforce the out lighting for person over the concept of state, or maybe connecting loyalty to the land to how many pictures for the man you have in your house or organization.

For me, i dont see it as a problem at all, it never was and never will be. its a form of expression to connect people acceptance and support not to a very wide un-controlled form like socialism or open economy market but to the ideas that is steamed from socialism but within the vision and boundaries of X and Y.

this can be a very mature way to expressing thoughts and stands, its true that concepts and beliefs should stand first but for normal people they cant just support a mere solid idea or program with out personal guarantees. and that should be fine it should contradict the belief in the essence of the thought and idea.

@deena
Although i can full heartedly agree with you about islam (i don’t separate the politics from the religion since they are not separate to begin with) and pan arabic nationalism are based on mobilization around an idol. The most effective form of government is not public engagement since there isn’t a system that can claim public engagement in legislation. the best you can hope for is representative, which is windowed and gift wrapped public engagement.
the problematic issue remains in the fact that we have ideologies that are beyond and over any other ideologies and are not broken by reason or logic, they are resilient and timeless. so unless we manage to tame them, it is pointless to even attempt to look for any liberal manifestation since they will be only skin deep rather than a way of thinking.

however, to nuetron I want to say that it seems as though establishing a united front during a war is overrated. It is precisely during a war that things should be questions, strategies examined. If people are going to die for a cause it better be legit. What is gained by sensationalizing leaders, and war?

Furthermore, a half truth is still an untruth and one who tells untruths is by no means considered an honest man. Even if one is the tallest midget they are still a midget. The word honest is not a relative term, either you are or you are not.

Now, more to the point, there’s no doubt we have a problem and you’re absolutely right - we do generally over romantisize our leaders. However, upon closer observation, it’s apparent that people are far more polarized (and sensationalized) in areas of conflict (Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine). The bottom line, these people are at war, whether idealogically, militarily or politically ($$$). And in times of war there is no room for dissension amongst ranks. One might argue that sensationalization of our leaders during times of conflict is in fact necessary. It helps establish a united front and reduces the likelihood of internal discord.

As an aside, a word of note: in a group of liars, a man who tells half truthes is considered honest.

Other than that exception, I think both the ideology of political Islam, and of Arab nationalism, which are the two most prominent in the region, depend on public ‘mobilization’ (around a leader/cause) rather than public engagement, which is the most sustainable form of government. Sadly, the most likely ideology to achieve that, liberalism, has not yet taken a coherent form anywhere in the Arab world, even in Lebanon, where divides remain sectarian.