Jump to content
Mishael

What's with this Pan Arabism?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

This Pan Arabism has destroyed the Middle East with its racist ideology I don't understand the point of it anyways it has done nothing but cause misery to the Middle East which was never Arab historically even today the so called Arab of the Levant and North Africa aren't really Arabs at all they belong to the indigenous inhabitants of the Middle East Arabs come from the Arabian peninsula. This movement has caused so much harm to the non Arabs of the Middle East which I count myself among since I'm Levantine, even non Arab Muslims such as the Kurds and Persians are constantly being attacked by this racist ideology of Saddam and Nasser that is funded by Saudi Arabia and its Gulf friends.

Edited by Mishael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mishael said:

This Pan Arabism has destroyed the Middle East with its racist ideology I don't understand the point of it anyways it has done nothing but cause misery to the Middle East which was never Arab historically even today the so called Arab of the Levant and North Africa aren't really Arabs at all they belong to the indigenous inhabitants of the Middle East Arabs come from the Arabian peninsula. This movement has caused so much harm to the non Arabs of the Middle East which I count myself among since I'm Levantine, even non Arab Muslims such as the Kurds and Persians are constantly being attacked by this racist ideology of Saddam and Nasser that is funded by Saudi Arabia and its Gulf friends.

Well the alternative to this more secular movement has always been the Muslim brotherhood  and groups like Al Nusra, Al Qaeda. Btw Saudi helped Saddam against Iran but they've always been anti-Pan Arabism, they preferred backing Sunni Jihadi groups which were anti-pan Arabism, they believed in their version of Islam over anything else. Pan-Arabism isn't a bad thing if implemented correctly, it could foster unity as long as it doesn't marginalize other people, and gives people equal rights. If it doesn't then it's probably more about leadership than the ideology. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Mishael said:

I've heard Salafis and Islamists claim that Arabs are the superior race because Mohammed and his companions were Arabs and that because Ibn Taymmiyah said so.

Possibly, I'd call Saddam a Salafi for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mishael said:

I've heard Salafis and Islamists claim that Arabs are the superior race because Mohammed and his companions were Arabs and that because Ibn Taymmiyah said so.

l have heard this in a mosque of mixed ethnicity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

The "last" of the Pan-Arabs was Qaddafi in his imitation of Nassr. This lasted until about 2000.

I heard Gaddafi gave up a lot of the things he stood for before come the 21st century. For example cutting welfare, which was one of his main policies before, and recognizing the state of Israel. 

4 hours ago, Mishael said:

I've heard Salafis and Islamists claim that Arabs are the superior race because Mohammed and his companions were Arabs and that because Ibn Taymmiyah said so.

No, they don't say that. Salafis are a quite doverse group actually, we have them from Xinxiang to Zahedan, and from Cairo to Cambodia. Theyre the most anti-nationalist people you will meet.

7 hours ago, Mishael said:

 Kurds 

Thoughts on whats happeming there @Mishael?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mansur Bakhtiari  Qaddafi -and l forget the date- changed from pan-Arabism to Africa-centric in a national broadcast. Policy on lsrael l do not know, but he did work with them a few times.

For info derived from the Clinton emails:

http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2987399/why_qaddafi_had_to_go_african_gold_oil_and_the_challenge_to_monetary_imperialism.html 

From a discovered passport found after his death, his Latinized name is "Gathafi".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I myself am very happy for my Kurdish brothers they finally made their dream come true. I was actually against the western interference in Libya plus they helped Islamist Salafis oust him. The only thing Qaddafi did that I'm against was that he oppressed the indigenous non Arab Berbers and took land from them but in general he had a secular rule with no Islamic law and the west and Saudi ended it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that's my only problem aswell with Bashar Al Assad but in general I'd rather he wins then those Salafis supported by Saudi Ahrar Al Sham, Isis, and Tahrir Al Sham. Bashar follows a less racist and extreme version of the Ba'ath movement I'm currently split between supporting Bashar's government and the Kurds and Syriacs of Syria and I hope for a future agreement between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I personally support any government today, but Kurdistan is just going to cause instability. If Iran is afflicted by western sponsored terror groups, come twenty years Iranian Kurdistan will be pushing for independence. So now a weak country which (surprisingly) isn't majority secular, there are actually many Salafis in Kurdistan, is on Iran's newly created borders. Of course this is a worst case scenario, but nothing good can really come out of a new Kurdistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mishael said:

I've actually heard that there's many Kurds leaving Islam or just growing plain un religious.

The "unreligious" part l have read off-and-on for years. So how much is accurate and how much is parroting l do not know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah this nationalism of Iranians is growing among the Kurds, many Kurds that I've seen online seem to resent Islam and praise Zoroastrianism and Yezidism.

Edited by Mishael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Neither am making "aggressive" claims nor I intend to do so. Didn't Imam Hussain(a.s) invited the entire Muslim nation as a whole?? If only 72 turned up that doesn't means that we always have to fight keeping our number less. Well I know this debate (call it anything) is not going to bear any fruit because we both are rigid on our opinions. So finish this over here. Go and unite with Modern day Akhbaris and continue the tampering of Shiism. I better unite with those who won't tamper Shiism at least (Sunnis).
    • I think it's important to give a gap between kids. I read somewhere that first two years are very important. Kids, who are abused or are neglected during first two years of life are less intelligent. These days we read so many news of mothers killing their own kids. I don't think they are criminals or murderers, I think they are just pressured into having kids and they don't receive any help, so they get stressed out or frustrated. It's hard for me to function if I don't get enough sleep for a day or two. Not getting enough sleep for months or years can drive you crazy. You are more likely to do a better job if you are able to spend more time on each kid.  I am not saying this about OP. I have seen a lot of people who are so loving towards kids but they are cruel with adults. It's crazy because if you are being mean to a kid's mother, it will have some effect on that kid, so you are hurting the kid. But some people become so kind when they are dealing with kids but they don't forgive the slightest weakness in the mother. At the end of the day, that kid will go home with the mother and she may take her frustration out on the kid intentionally or unintentionally. 
    • See, I'm not at all favouring akhbariyat but the comparison between Akhbaris and sunnis is clear cut. I'll be keeping a mile of distance from those who follow the one who oppressed Ahlulbait (ams). While what Akhbari says about those who do not recite shahadat e Salesa is not false but I have met hardcore WFers who says those who do not believe in wilayat-e-Faqih of Ayatullah Khamenei is not Shia. Problem is on both the sides. La'an is a part of tabarrah and the way of Ahlulbait (ams). This is a topic for some other day, some other thread. This has happened and is still happening. You are very naive or acting like one. No one's making anything. Stay some more time on SC and you'll yourself get to know those Shias of Mars. Why not consider same things for other Shia subsects. So you are uniting with sunnis because they are in majority. Interesting!. Gathering a vast number to fight enemies, Really? What have you learnt from Badr, Ohad.. Karbala? I'm not telling you to unite with Akhbaris or sunnis but if you want to united with anyone then subsects of shias are far better to get united than a sunni. I'm done. You can continue with polemics.
    • Modern Day Fake Akhbariyat.  Those who are enemies of Ulemas.   
    • Do you want me to unite with these kind of Akhbaris??  
×