Why is the concept of nationalism so difficult for middle eastern cultures to fully understand?

Why is the concept of nationalism so difficult for middle eastern cultures to fully understand?

Attached: EA1E4AF6-0B25-4174-8ECD-9BA6B70FD57D.png (768x743, 735K)

Other urls found in this thread:

vanityfair.com/news/2008/01/middle-east-cultural-political-map
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Well, they've got a hold on it NOW.

When we first introduces the idea, we made it so that they had to expect that butter-side-up and margarine-side-down groups had to treat each other like they had a common ethnic and cultural identity.

Because they havesome very common interests like Anti-Israel and Political Islam. However, they also have national interests to consider. In the Yom Kippur war, the Egyptians and Syrians were mad at each other because Egypt signed a peace agreement with Israel. There is also religious sectarianism. There are also differences due to complex tribal agreements. The idea of a nation state is not reflected in the current political map of the Middle East.

Nation-States can only ermerge among people with strong civic traditions like Europeans(minus Albanians) and Chinese. The Semitic race, on the other hand, is morbidly tribal, the presence of Islam and the Ummah(kind of religious Nation-State) doesn't help either.

>what is Baathism
>what is Zionism
>what is Kurdish separatism

There’s literally a country called Albania which would like to merge with the ethnic Albanian Kosovo.

what is Iran for that matter
and if Pan-Arabism collapsed it was probably because it was Yugoslavia-tier theorycrafted nonsense and not anything that the masses recognized.

>minus Albanians
how assblasted must you be to set those as an exception?

Albania is failed-state plagued with blood-feuds.

How did the USSR so effectively nationalise Turkics though?

Attached: feminine-armed-forces-girls-from-army-of-kazakhstan-9.jpg (1200x795, 130K)

Albanians are tribal though

Hell I remember a guy on /int/ talking about a blood feud between his family and another

Because they might end up like Iraq

Albanians are Indoeuropean, not semitic though

Nationalism eats ass and it ruined everything

>Chinese
>2000 years of living in a fucking Empire.
>Civic traditions.

Because they know better.
>Literally considering absolute fucking strangers, people outside your kinship and tribal bonds, and people from different religions your compatriots because HURDURR MUH RACE, MUH SAME LANGUAGE.

Attached: Armies Of The Muslim Conquest (Back Cover Missing)-28.jpg (2846x2084, 831K)

It's mainly because most of their countries are made up. for example in North Africa, Morocco/Algeria/Tunisia all have histories as states going two thousand years and for that they are the most nationalistic countries in the Middle east and North Africa region
Meanwhile countries like Jordan, Arabia, the gulf states, Iraq, Syria are literally just lines in the sand

>That disgusting Azerbaijan blob
Get fucked OP.

In the same way the Ancient Greeks & Romans were. Being tribal doesn’t preclude national identity.

If you speak the same language, live in the same area, have the same ancestors, and worship the same deities why shouldn’t you be a single country?

I’ve read somewhere that semites identify themselves with major cities, and the dependent surrounding areas

Nationalism involves a nation state, a combination of a people and a politicsl entity. Where do you draw the line at seperating the peoples of the mid east? What unifies what group? Religion, language, ethnicity..? And the to what extent? All arabic speakers or just misr? All muslims or just shia? All turkic people or just Azeris? You get the point. These questions have different answers to different people.
Now considee the basic nation state: France. The french unified early on and solidified their border. No nation state starts perfectly as one people but through a lengthy campaign the french eliminated almost all Patois (other french groups in france) and unified under what can be thought of as pan-francism. They also eliminated majority of nonadherents to the dominant religion, catholicism. Its a nice clean state (historically) of french speakers with french religion in french borders with french history. Go find that in the mid east.

French is a meme ethnicity

Only Zionism worked because they're thoroughly westernized . Lebanon works pretty well too

Russians let them be with varying degree of autonomy.
My country Finland, was part of Sweden over half a millennia and when Russia came and snagged us they made us duchy with local autonomy. We were allowed to have our own coins and stamps, education could be had in Finnish language all though most if not all higher ups jobs, administrative ones etc. required knowledge of Russian or Sweden.
While most Finns won't say it life was overall better under Russian rule than Swedish rule when were just eastern Sweden, place for manpower and taxes with barely any autonomy.

It is kind off admirable how Russia has managed to integrate so many ethnic groups and have quite a stable country.

>Kurdistan
>Israel
You can take the Anglo out of their Perfidious Isle, but you can't take the perfidy out of the Anglo.

Nation-states emerge when cultural, political, and economic elites all gather to declare its constitution, which nearly every Middle Eastern nation saw happen.

They are stable, however, when those elites are concentrated in one capital with one culture. France worked out because Paris was the overwhelming and undisputed capital from which its elites could impose a single law, language, and economic policy. Iraq did not because Baghdad was one of several cities that had been regional capitals in the area and could not suddenly dominate the others just because it was chosen as a British administrative center for a few years.

every nation-state "ethnicity" is a meme ethnicity, it is an artifical national construct which subverts previous genuine local customs and ethnic allegiances to produce a constructed high culture identity

Nationalism is retarded

>Because they havesome very common interests like Anti-Israel and Political Islam. However, they also have national interests to consider. In the Yom Kippur war, the Egyptians and Syrians were mad at each other because Egypt signed a peace agreement with Israel. There is also religious sectarianism. There are also differences due to complex tribal agreements. The idea of a nation state is not reflected in the current political map of the Middle East.

While I get the sentiment:
>In the Yom Kippur war
>Peace Agreement
>Syria mad

Peace agreement happened after the war, in 1978 (war was in 1973). The entire Arab league got pissed at Egypt.

>kikes literally got within 20 miles of Damascus
Would the IDF had a good chance to capture it?

It depends from country to country. Saudi Arabia is still following a tribal nationalism, where one tribe dominates the others. Which isn't like the nationalism of France where the state just says "ok everyone on this plot of land, who looks kinda white, your french and will be represented in government as french".

Then you have Egypt, which decided at some point that anyone worth being provided with services lives in Cairo and Alexandria so the people in the south, in sinai, and the delta can get fucked.

Arabs never really did nationalism. Just military domination over one area.

And 100 miles from Cairo. They probably could have done hella damage, but the supply lines wouldn't have been adequate to conquer either of those areas.

Lol at the "southern tribal area"

Maybe Israel will rename it to Greater Palestine after they steal the rest of the good land.

Where is this picture from?

vanityfair.com/news/2008/01/middle-east-cultural-political-map

>China
>Tibet and the Uygurs will leave if given half a chance, inner Mongolians are barely tolerated and the Hui only stay because they like the idea of serving in a state funded military.

they tried nationalism once and got 10 invasions for their troubles

Because you're not seeing things from a tribal perspective.
>If you speak the same language
"They're still not related to me."
>live in the same area
"Same area? They live on the other side of the river/mountain/the next valley."
>have the same ancestors
"Bullshit. We have no blood ties. My great ancestor Ibn X never married/adopted/have any relations with that tribe."
>and worship the same deities
This is the only thing that ever united Muslim Middle Eastern groups in a large scale.

But then
>Sectarian differences.

Nationalism sucks ass. The middle east needs an Islamic union asap.

Because Islam is against it and they always had tribalism instead.

Attached: 16gmsmh Middle Eastern haplogroups.png (650x597, 164K)

what the fuck is that retarded map?

Arabs dont have any troube understanding nationalism
Doesnt mean they have to agree with it